<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_21_0323238</id>
	<title>New Study Shows Youth Plugged In Most of the Day</title>
	<author>samzenpus</author>
	<datestamp>1264100880000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"The amount of time youngsters are spending on the web has ballooned to <a href="http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/20100120/youth-plugged-nearly-most-day-study.htm">exceed the average adult's full working week</a>, according to a new study. A few years ago, the same researchers thought that teens and tweens were consuming about as much media as possible in the hours available. But now they've have found a way to pack in even more. Young people now devote an average of <a href="http://www.kff.org/entmedia/8010.cfm">seven hours and 38 minutes to daily media use</a>, or about 53 hours a week according to Kaiser Family Foundation findings released today."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " The amount of time youngsters are spending on the web has ballooned to exceed the average adult 's full working week , according to a new study .
A few years ago , the same researchers thought that teens and tweens were consuming about as much media as possible in the hours available .
But now they 've have found a way to pack in even more .
Young people now devote an average of seven hours and 38 minutes to daily media use , or about 53 hours a week according to Kaiser Family Foundation findings released today .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "The amount of time youngsters are spending on the web has ballooned to exceed the average adult's full working week, according to a new study.
A few years ago, the same researchers thought that teens and tweens were consuming about as much media as possible in the hours available.
But now they've have found a way to pack in even more.
Young people now devote an average of seven hours and 38 minutes to daily media use, or about 53 hours a week according to Kaiser Family Foundation findings released today.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843870</id>
	<title>Re:Your taxes at work</title>
	<author>Sulphur</author>
	<datestamp>1264071000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't blame the teachers either.</p><p>A good administration would get rid of bad teachers.</p><p>A bad administration would harass good teachers and keep the bad ones.</p><p>Within limits, money is not the issue; however, shared vision is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't blame the teachers either.A good administration would get rid of bad teachers.A bad administration would harass good teachers and keep the bad ones.Within limits , money is not the issue ; however , shared vision is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't blame the teachers either.A good administration would get rid of bad teachers.A bad administration would harass good teachers and keep the bad ones.Within limits, money is not the issue; however, shared vision is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843392</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30845778</id>
	<title>Re:For those too lazy</title>
	<author>vxice</author>
	<datestamp>1264088940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"TV 4:29 - Almost entirely negative, I suspect; surely the overwhelming advertisements alone cancel out any benefits the few educational shows."

"Print 0:38 - I'm surprised this number even exists. I assume the majority of it is beneficial in some ways -- exposure to articulating an idea in writing, if nothing else."

So you are assuming that print is good and tv bad by default?  I have seen some pretty awful things in print and there are good things on tv.  Also I would question why advertisements cancel out anything that would be learned.  I mostly ignore them and with many people having a tivo how often do you have to watch many commercials anyways?  My own favorite shows on tv include Modern Marvels, Daily Show, any decent news, Scrubs and Sons of Anarchy.  It is not all about education sometimes people just want some entertainment.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" TV 4 : 29 - Almost entirely negative , I suspect ; surely the overwhelming advertisements alone cancel out any benefits the few educational shows .
" " Print 0 : 38 - I 'm surprised this number even exists .
I assume the majority of it is beneficial in some ways -- exposure to articulating an idea in writing , if nothing else .
" So you are assuming that print is good and tv bad by default ?
I have seen some pretty awful things in print and there are good things on tv .
Also I would question why advertisements cancel out anything that would be learned .
I mostly ignore them and with many people having a tivo how often do you have to watch many commercials anyways ?
My own favorite shows on tv include Modern Marvels , Daily Show , any decent news , Scrubs and Sons of Anarchy .
It is not all about education sometimes people just want some entertainment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"TV 4:29 - Almost entirely negative, I suspect; surely the overwhelming advertisements alone cancel out any benefits the few educational shows.
"

"Print 0:38 - I'm surprised this number even exists.
I assume the majority of it is beneficial in some ways -- exposure to articulating an idea in writing, if nothing else.
"

So you are assuming that print is good and tv bad by default?
I have seen some pretty awful things in print and there are good things on tv.
Also I would question why advertisements cancel out anything that would be learned.
I mostly ignore them and with many people having a tivo how often do you have to watch many commercials anyways?
My own favorite shows on tv include Modern Marvels, Daily Show, any decent news, Scrubs and Sons of Anarchy.
It is not all about education sometimes people just want some entertainment.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843328</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844750</id>
	<title>Re:Kids...</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1264082460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not sure how old you are, so at 27 I may well fall into the kids-who-need-to-get-off-your-lawn demographic, but I can barely remember how to use a pen.  I post more words on Slashdot alone every day than I write with a pen in a year.  I write under a hundred words per month with a pen, and about the only time that I use one is when I need to sign for something.  Last month, my second book was published.  I don't think you can correlate ability to use a pen with command of the English language.  </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure how old you are , so at 27 I may well fall into the kids-who-need-to-get-off-your-lawn demographic , but I can barely remember how to use a pen .
I post more words on Slashdot alone every day than I write with a pen in a year .
I write under a hundred words per month with a pen , and about the only time that I use one is when I need to sign for something .
Last month , my second book was published .
I do n't think you can correlate ability to use a pen with command of the English language .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure how old you are, so at 27 I may well fall into the kids-who-need-to-get-off-your-lawn demographic, but I can barely remember how to use a pen.
I post more words on Slashdot alone every day than I write with a pen in a year.
I write under a hundred words per month with a pen, and about the only time that I use one is when I need to sign for something.
Last month, my second book was published.
I don't think you can correlate ability to use a pen with command of the English language.  </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843338</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843444</id>
	<title>Re:Kids...</title>
	<author>derGoldstein</author>
	<datestamp>1264065360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>There is another way to look at this: They're optimizing. Reporters often have shorthand text (or at least had, when they needed to use a pen), it's a faster way to log information. If all you really need to do is relay the information that you'll be at the park, then this isn't that tragic. As for spell checkers, I find that over time they improve my spelling (I know there's a big debate over this particular thing, I'm just pointing out that there's more than one outcome).<br> <br>
So what if they're not as fast/accurate with a pen as you were at their age? Do/will they need to be?<br> <br>

The one thing I hope they don't drop is books. Hell, even audiobooks. They get plenty of chance to just parse words when they're online, but what they're probably less used to is consuming large, contiguous streams of information.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is another way to look at this : They 're optimizing .
Reporters often have shorthand text ( or at least had , when they needed to use a pen ) , it 's a faster way to log information .
If all you really need to do is relay the information that you 'll be at the park , then this is n't that tragic .
As for spell checkers , I find that over time they improve my spelling ( I know there 's a big debate over this particular thing , I 'm just pointing out that there 's more than one outcome ) .
So what if they 're not as fast/accurate with a pen as you were at their age ?
Do/will they need to be ?
The one thing I hope they do n't drop is books .
Hell , even audiobooks .
They get plenty of chance to just parse words when they 're online , but what they 're probably less used to is consuming large , contiguous streams of information .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is another way to look at this: They're optimizing.
Reporters often have shorthand text (or at least had, when they needed to use a pen), it's a faster way to log information.
If all you really need to do is relay the information that you'll be at the park, then this isn't that tragic.
As for spell checkers, I find that over time they improve my spelling (I know there's a big debate over this particular thing, I'm just pointing out that there's more than one outcome).
So what if they're not as fast/accurate with a pen as you were at their age?
Do/will they need to be?
The one thing I hope they don't drop is books.
Hell, even audiobooks.
They get plenty of chance to just parse words when they're online, but what they're probably less used to is consuming large, contiguous streams of information.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843338</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844806</id>
	<title>Re:So, what else would you have them do?</title>
	<author>wjc\_25</author>
	<datestamp>1264083120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Speaking as a college first-year, I'm sure I get well above that number, if we're counting generously. Nearly all my profs use Powerpoint, so that's a few hours of media usage right there. And then I tend to leave Facebook and Gmail open as I study, whether I'm using the computer or not, so there's a few more hours. When I hang out with the others at my hall, almost inevitably there's a TV on or someone's playing Wii or Madden. I'd say the only time I'm not connected to some sort of media is when I'm sleeping or out walking.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Speaking as a college first-year , I 'm sure I get well above that number , if we 're counting generously .
Nearly all my profs use Powerpoint , so that 's a few hours of media usage right there .
And then I tend to leave Facebook and Gmail open as I study , whether I 'm using the computer or not , so there 's a few more hours .
When I hang out with the others at my hall , almost inevitably there 's a TV on or someone 's playing Wii or Madden .
I 'd say the only time I 'm not connected to some sort of media is when I 'm sleeping or out walking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Speaking as a college first-year, I'm sure I get well above that number, if we're counting generously.
Nearly all my profs use Powerpoint, so that's a few hours of media usage right there.
And then I tend to leave Facebook and Gmail open as I study, whether I'm using the computer or not, so there's a few more hours.
When I hang out with the others at my hall, almost inevitably there's a TV on or someone's playing Wii or Madden.
I'd say the only time I'm not connected to some sort of media is when I'm sleeping or out walking.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843636</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843860</id>
	<title>When the internet bred overtake the TV bred.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264070820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Better the internet than the TV. The internet is interactive and encourages critical thinking and problem solving. I think it will produce a much more informed and engaged public than the TV generations of old. The internet has an ever increasing influence on political and philosophical thought. We have yet to see the full potential of an entire population raised by the internet. I'm optimistic.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Better the internet than the TV .
The internet is interactive and encourages critical thinking and problem solving .
I think it will produce a much more informed and engaged public than the TV generations of old .
The internet has an ever increasing influence on political and philosophical thought .
We have yet to see the full potential of an entire population raised by the internet .
I 'm optimistic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Better the internet than the TV.
The internet is interactive and encourages critical thinking and problem solving.
I think it will produce a much more informed and engaged public than the TV generations of old.
The internet has an ever increasing influence on political and philosophical thought.
We have yet to see the full potential of an entire population raised by the internet.
I'm optimistic.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30846648</id>
	<title>Re:NEWS FLASH: New Discovery!!</title>
	<author>newdsfornerds</author>
	<datestamp>1264092840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Heh. Yeah. Those studies they used to do where they'd ask ppl to keep a journal of everything they had eaten for a week were notoriously inaccurate. People simply "forgot" about the dozen Fig Newtons that scarfed down each night.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Heh .
Yeah. Those studies they used to do where they 'd ask ppl to keep a journal of everything they had eaten for a week were notoriously inaccurate .
People simply " forgot " about the dozen Fig Newtons that scarfed down each night .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Heh.
Yeah. Those studies they used to do where they'd ask ppl to keep a journal of everything they had eaten for a week were notoriously inaccurate.
People simply "forgot" about the dozen Fig Newtons that scarfed down each night.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843168</id>
	<title>I love stories like this that make me feel young.</title>
	<author>PoliTech</author>
	<datestamp>1264105140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's good to know that the youth of today are taking advantage of the advances in technology as I always have. It also good to know that I've been keeping up!</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's good to know that the youth of today are taking advantage of the advances in technology as I always have .
It also good to know that I 've been keeping up !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's good to know that the youth of today are taking advantage of the advances in technology as I always have.
It also good to know that I've been keeping up!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843392</id>
	<title>Your taxes at work</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264064640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't blame the children.<br>They are not the ones that decide to pay less on education and that ebonics or it's more recent equivalent is good enough.<br>It's not just Texas and California now with cheap schools that produce students equipt to do little more than say "do you want fries with that?".</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't blame the children.They are not the ones that decide to pay less on education and that ebonics or it 's more recent equivalent is good enough.It 's not just Texas and California now with cheap schools that produce students equipt to do little more than say " do you want fries with that ?
" .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't blame the children.They are not the ones that decide to pay less on education and that ebonics or it's more recent equivalent is good enough.It's not just Texas and California now with cheap schools that produce students equipt to do little more than say "do you want fries with that?
".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843338</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30857838</id>
	<title>Re:Your taxes at work</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264160580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This can easily be explained by population growth and inflation.</p><p>I'd personally like to see some kind of breakdown on money spend today vs. 20 years ago, taking inflation into account.</p><p>It's either really high, or really low. And probably shocking either way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This can easily be explained by population growth and inflation.I 'd personally like to see some kind of breakdown on money spend today vs. 20 years ago , taking inflation into account.It 's either really high , or really low .
And probably shocking either way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This can easily be explained by population growth and inflation.I'd personally like to see some kind of breakdown on money spend today vs. 20 years ago, taking inflation into account.It's either really high, or really low.
And probably shocking either way.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30846002</id>
	<title>Re:more reading, less doing.</title>
	<author>Paul Rose</author>
	<datestamp>1264089960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Asimov on this topic from <i>Foundation</i>:
<br>
<br>
Hardin remained silent for a short while. Then he said, "When did Lameth write his book?"
<br>
<br>
"Oh--I should say about eight hundwed yeahs ago. Of cohse, he has based it lahgely on the pwevious wuhk of Gleen."
<br>
<br>
"Then why rely on him? Why not go to Arcturus and study the remains for yourself?"
<br>
<br>
Lord Dorwin raised his eyebrows and took a pinch of snuff hurriedly. "Why, whatevah foah, my deah fellow?"
<br>
<br>
"To get the information firsthand, of course."
<br>
<br>
"But wheah's the necessity? It seems an uncommonly woundabout and hopelessly wigmawolish method of getting anywheahs. Look heah, now, I've got the wuhks of all the old mastahs--the gweat ahchaeologists of the past. I wigh them against each othah--balance the disagweements--analyze the conflicting statements--decide which is pwobably cowwect--and come to a conclusion. That is the scientific method. At least"--patronizingly--"as I see it. How insuffewably cwude it would be to go to Ahctuwus, oah to Sol, foah instance, and blundah about, when the old mastahs have covahed the gwound so much moah effectually than we could possibly hope to do."</htmltext>
<tokenext>Asimov on this topic from Foundation : Hardin remained silent for a short while .
Then he said , " When did Lameth write his book ?
" " Oh--I should say about eight hundwed yeahs ago .
Of cohse , he has based it lahgely on the pwevious wuhk of Gleen .
" " Then why rely on him ?
Why not go to Arcturus and study the remains for yourself ?
" Lord Dorwin raised his eyebrows and took a pinch of snuff hurriedly .
" Why , whatevah foah , my deah fellow ?
" " To get the information firsthand , of course .
" " But wheah 's the necessity ?
It seems an uncommonly woundabout and hopelessly wigmawolish method of getting anywheahs .
Look heah , now , I 've got the wuhks of all the old mastahs--the gweat ahchaeologists of the past .
I wigh them against each othah--balance the disagweements--analyze the conflicting statements--decide which is pwobably cowwect--and come to a conclusion .
That is the scientific method .
At least " --patronizingly-- " as I see it .
How insuffewably cwude it would be to go to Ahctuwus , oah to Sol , foah instance , and blundah about , when the old mastahs have covahed the gwound so much moah effectually than we could possibly hope to do .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Asimov on this topic from Foundation:


Hardin remained silent for a short while.
Then he said, "When did Lameth write his book?
"


"Oh--I should say about eight hundwed yeahs ago.
Of cohse, he has based it lahgely on the pwevious wuhk of Gleen.
"


"Then why rely on him?
Why not go to Arcturus and study the remains for yourself?
"


Lord Dorwin raised his eyebrows and took a pinch of snuff hurriedly.
"Why, whatevah foah, my deah fellow?
"


"To get the information firsthand, of course.
"


"But wheah's the necessity?
It seems an uncommonly woundabout and hopelessly wigmawolish method of getting anywheahs.
Look heah, now, I've got the wuhks of all the old mastahs--the gweat ahchaeologists of the past.
I wigh them against each othah--balance the disagweements--analyze the conflicting statements--decide which is pwobably cowwect--and come to a conclusion.
That is the scientific method.
At least"--patronizingly--"as I see it.
How insuffewably cwude it would be to go to Ahctuwus, oah to Sol, foah instance, and blundah about, when the old mastahs have covahed the gwound so much moah effectually than we could possibly hope to do.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843636</id>
	<title>So, what else would you have them do?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264067940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>All this tells us is that people are filling their spare time.
<p>
An individual spends a certain amount of time asleep, a certain amount at school or working (or housekeeping, or whatever), a certain amount eating, washing(!), travelling and all the other miscelleanea of living. Then they have some time spare - is that such a surprise?
</p><p>
All this study does is tell those people who believe studies what those individuals spend their time doing. Would you prefer they spend that time drinking, instead?
</p><p>
Oh yes, that thing about multi-tasking media. All that tells us is how unfulfilling sources like TV are - people don't actually *watch* it, they just have it on in the background (while doing something more interesting) just in case something worthy of their attention does happen. That's all TV is today - whatever age you are.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All this tells us is that people are filling their spare time .
An individual spends a certain amount of time asleep , a certain amount at school or working ( or housekeeping , or whatever ) , a certain amount eating , washing ( !
) , travelling and all the other miscelleanea of living .
Then they have some time spare - is that such a surprise ?
All this study does is tell those people who believe studies what those individuals spend their time doing .
Would you prefer they spend that time drinking , instead ?
Oh yes , that thing about multi-tasking media .
All that tells us is how unfulfilling sources like TV are - people do n't actually * watch * it , they just have it on in the background ( while doing something more interesting ) just in case something worthy of their attention does happen .
That 's all TV is today - whatever age you are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All this tells us is that people are filling their spare time.
An individual spends a certain amount of time asleep, a certain amount at school or working (or housekeeping, or whatever), a certain amount eating, washing(!
), travelling and all the other miscelleanea of living.
Then they have some time spare - is that such a surprise?
All this study does is tell those people who believe studies what those individuals spend their time doing.
Would you prefer they spend that time drinking, instead?
Oh yes, that thing about multi-tasking media.
All that tells us is how unfulfilling sources like TV are - people don't actually *watch* it, they just have it on in the background (while doing something more interesting) just in case something worthy of their attention does happen.
That's all TV is today - whatever age you are.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30845982</id>
	<title>Impact on Education</title>
	<author>Storchei</author>
	<datestamp>1264089840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In my opinion, <b>this has a direct impact on education</b> of young people.<br>
I think that, for education to be successful, it's required a period of assimilation of knowledge which depends on the amount of time spent in thinking (thinking requires ourselves to be unplugged, of course).<br>
I've observed that <b>less time is spent on watching around us and wondering how things work</b>, in opposition to dozens of years ago. This issue has direct incidence on the way we act in our lives.<br>
It's interesting to see how, in general, middle education has experienced a significant downgrade while we're proud of "progress". In my opinion, technology and consumerism have to be taken with care. Nowadays we're experiencing an excess of technology; why? mainly due to consumerism, I believe. We are overwhelmed by so many things we tend to forget about simple/important things.<br>
<b>I'm not saying technology is bad!! I'm saying technology must be used with measure.</b> <br>
On the other hand, I think the problem of "youth plugged in most of the day" is intimately related to education received by each young man at home. <br> <br>
In summary and in general, I think there's an excessive use of technology.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In my opinion , this has a direct impact on education of young people .
I think that , for education to be successful , it 's required a period of assimilation of knowledge which depends on the amount of time spent in thinking ( thinking requires ourselves to be unplugged , of course ) .
I 've observed that less time is spent on watching around us and wondering how things work , in opposition to dozens of years ago .
This issue has direct incidence on the way we act in our lives .
It 's interesting to see how , in general , middle education has experienced a significant downgrade while we 're proud of " progress " .
In my opinion , technology and consumerism have to be taken with care .
Nowadays we 're experiencing an excess of technology ; why ?
mainly due to consumerism , I believe .
We are overwhelmed by so many things we tend to forget about simple/important things .
I 'm not saying technology is bad ! !
I 'm saying technology must be used with measure .
On the other hand , I think the problem of " youth plugged in most of the day " is intimately related to education received by each young man at home .
In summary and in general , I think there 's an excessive use of technology .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my opinion, this has a direct impact on education of young people.
I think that, for education to be successful, it's required a period of assimilation of knowledge which depends on the amount of time spent in thinking (thinking requires ourselves to be unplugged, of course).
I've observed that less time is spent on watching around us and wondering how things work, in opposition to dozens of years ago.
This issue has direct incidence on the way we act in our lives.
It's interesting to see how, in general, middle education has experienced a significant downgrade while we're proud of "progress".
In my opinion, technology and consumerism have to be taken with care.
Nowadays we're experiencing an excess of technology; why?
mainly due to consumerism, I believe.
We are overwhelmed by so many things we tend to forget about simple/important things.
I'm not saying technology is bad!!
I'm saying technology must be used with measure.
On the other hand, I think the problem of "youth plugged in most of the day" is intimately related to education received by each young man at home.
In summary and in general, I think there's an excessive use of technology.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843816</id>
	<title>It is true!</title>
	<author>santax</author>
	<datestamp>1264070340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My girlfriend is 12 years younger than me and it is true. She is getting plugged most of the day.

Hey, can you blame me?</htmltext>
<tokenext>My girlfriend is 12 years younger than me and it is true .
She is getting plugged most of the day .
Hey , can you blame me ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My girlfriend is 12 years younger than me and it is true.
She is getting plugged most of the day.
Hey, can you blame me?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30857804</id>
	<title>Really?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264160160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is this really a valuable use of their time?<br>Maybe they should go ahead and check if Pluto is a planet again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is this really a valuable use of their time ? Maybe they should go ahead and check if Pluto is a planet again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is this really a valuable use of their time?Maybe they should go ahead and check if Pluto is a planet again.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843216</id>
	<title>more reading, less doing.</title>
	<author>bronney</author>
	<datestamp>1264105620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What concerns me most is that the next generation might spend more time reading about something and not have the time to actually DO them.  I find the information overload very annoying already at work.  Mostly emails.  And I feel myself slowly being trained into ASKING for the info rather than experimenting and have your own observation in things.</p><p>Don't know how to put it in better words.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What concerns me most is that the next generation might spend more time reading about something and not have the time to actually DO them .
I find the information overload very annoying already at work .
Mostly emails .
And I feel myself slowly being trained into ASKING for the info rather than experimenting and have your own observation in things.Do n't know how to put it in better words .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What concerns me most is that the next generation might spend more time reading about something and not have the time to actually DO them.
I find the information overload very annoying already at work.
Mostly emails.
And I feel myself slowly being trained into ASKING for the info rather than experimenting and have your own observation in things.Don't know how to put it in better words.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843206</id>
	<title>That's all?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264105500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Amateurs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Amateurs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Amateurs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844006</id>
	<title>the people will destroy what the people love</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264073100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>whatever it is, it's a problem, not the "way of the future," not something that could be leveraged for a good result</p><p>it's a problem with the internet and the cure will be in destroying something that people enjoy</p><p>that's the way it always goes</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>whatever it is , it 's a problem , not the " way of the future , " not something that could be leveraged for a good resultit 's a problem with the internet and the cure will be in destroying something that people enjoythat 's the way it always goes</tokentext>
<sentencetext>whatever it is, it's a problem, not the "way of the future," not something that could be leveraged for a good resultit's a problem with the internet and the cure will be in destroying something that people enjoythat's the way it always goes</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844034</id>
	<title>Great!</title>
	<author>Col Bat Guano</author>
	<datestamp>1264073520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now they'll be too busy to get on my lawn!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now they 'll be too busy to get on my lawn !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now they'll be too busy to get on my lawn!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844824</id>
	<title>Re:Kids...</title>
	<author>AbRASiON</author>
	<datestamp>1264083360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Im going 2 da park" wouldn't be so common if god damned SMS messages weren't so expensive and twitter had more than 140 chars.<br>Efficiency is king and even I find myself re-writing a 140char tweet for 2 minutes sometimes to fit it in the optimal space, as for SMS less so nowadays but it frustrates me that good english can't be applied to it.</p><p>That being said it comes with age, I grew up with the beginnings of the 2 cool 4 school lol crowd and we all used shorthand back in the BBS and ICQ days but the vast majority of us grew up and adjusted our use of language online, none the less "2" vs "too" is sorely tempting when I'm dying for some characters nowadays. (Instead I opt for &amp; rather than and)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Im going 2 da park " would n't be so common if god damned SMS messages were n't so expensive and twitter had more than 140 chars.Efficiency is king and even I find myself re-writing a 140char tweet for 2 minutes sometimes to fit it in the optimal space , as for SMS less so nowadays but it frustrates me that good english ca n't be applied to it.That being said it comes with age , I grew up with the beginnings of the 2 cool 4 school lol crowd and we all used shorthand back in the BBS and ICQ days but the vast majority of us grew up and adjusted our use of language online , none the less " 2 " vs " too " is sorely tempting when I 'm dying for some characters nowadays .
( Instead I opt for &amp; rather than and )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Im going 2 da park" wouldn't be so common if god damned SMS messages weren't so expensive and twitter had more than 140 chars.Efficiency is king and even I find myself re-writing a 140char tweet for 2 minutes sometimes to fit it in the optimal space, as for SMS less so nowadays but it frustrates me that good english can't be applied to it.That being said it comes with age, I grew up with the beginnings of the 2 cool 4 school lol crowd and we all used shorthand back in the BBS and ICQ days but the vast majority of us grew up and adjusted our use of language online, none the less "2" vs "too" is sorely tempting when I'm dying for some characters nowadays.
(Instead I opt for &amp; rather than and)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843338</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843328</id>
	<title>Re:For those too lazy</title>
	<author>red\_blue\_yellow</author>
	<datestamp>1264107060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Although the article does contain some overtones of negativity, I think this quote does really present the key importance of the issue:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>"When children are spending this much time doing anything, we need to understand how it's affecting them -- for good and bad,"  Drew Altman, president and chief executive of the foundation.</p></div><p>Here are my thoughts on each item:</p><p>TV 4:29 - Almost entirely negative, I suspect; surely the overwhelming advertisements alone cancel out any benefits the few educational shows.</p><p>Music/Audio 2:31 - As a musician, I have a hard time knocking this.  Premature deafness from blasting those headphones is no good, though.</p><p>Computer 1:29 - As a computer scientist, well, let's just say I'm about 10x this.  It can range from really good (research) to horrible (4chan).</p><p>Video Games 1:13 - I think this is a healthy dose.  Games with physical activity and (gasp) sunlight are better, but this could be worse.</p><p>Print 0:38 - I'm surprised this number even exists.  I assume the majority of it is beneficial in some ways -- exposure to articulating an idea in writing, if nothing else.</p><p>Movies 0:25 - Movies are usually a bit more thought provoking than TV.  A slight negative here, but it's still a small number.</p><p>Overall, I do believe there is reason for concern, but not outright panic.  Let the psychologists do their work and we will only understand the effects of this better.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Although the article does contain some overtones of negativity , I think this quote does really present the key importance of the issue : " When children are spending this much time doing anything , we need to understand how it 's affecting them -- for good and bad , " Drew Altman , president and chief executive of the foundation.Here are my thoughts on each item : TV 4 : 29 - Almost entirely negative , I suspect ; surely the overwhelming advertisements alone cancel out any benefits the few educational shows.Music/Audio 2 : 31 - As a musician , I have a hard time knocking this .
Premature deafness from blasting those headphones is no good , though.Computer 1 : 29 - As a computer scientist , well , let 's just say I 'm about 10x this .
It can range from really good ( research ) to horrible ( 4chan ) .Video Games 1 : 13 - I think this is a healthy dose .
Games with physical activity and ( gasp ) sunlight are better , but this could be worse.Print 0 : 38 - I 'm surprised this number even exists .
I assume the majority of it is beneficial in some ways -- exposure to articulating an idea in writing , if nothing else.Movies 0 : 25 - Movies are usually a bit more thought provoking than TV .
A slight negative here , but it 's still a small number.Overall , I do believe there is reason for concern , but not outright panic .
Let the psychologists do their work and we will only understand the effects of this better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Although the article does contain some overtones of negativity, I think this quote does really present the key importance of the issue:"When children are spending this much time doing anything, we need to understand how it's affecting them -- for good and bad,"  Drew Altman, president and chief executive of the foundation.Here are my thoughts on each item:TV 4:29 - Almost entirely negative, I suspect; surely the overwhelming advertisements alone cancel out any benefits the few educational shows.Music/Audio 2:31 - As a musician, I have a hard time knocking this.
Premature deafness from blasting those headphones is no good, though.Computer 1:29 - As a computer scientist, well, let's just say I'm about 10x this.
It can range from really good (research) to horrible (4chan).Video Games 1:13 - I think this is a healthy dose.
Games with physical activity and (gasp) sunlight are better, but this could be worse.Print 0:38 - I'm surprised this number even exists.
I assume the majority of it is beneficial in some ways -- exposure to articulating an idea in writing, if nothing else.Movies 0:25 - Movies are usually a bit more thought provoking than TV.
A slight negative here, but it's still a small number.Overall, I do believe there is reason for concern, but not outright panic.
Let the psychologists do their work and we will only understand the effects of this better.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843142</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844526</id>
	<title>Re:Kids...</title>
	<author>dunkelfalke</author>
	<datestamp>1264080000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unfortunately, the only people who really try to learn higher level things are those who try to spell properly because those who don't, don't bother to learn at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately , the only people who really try to learn higher level things are those who try to spell properly because those who do n't , do n't bother to learn at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately, the only people who really try to learn higher level things are those who try to spell properly because those who don't, don't bother to learn at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30857910</id>
	<title>Re:Kids...</title>
	<author>lewko</author>
	<datestamp>1264161480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I honestly don't recall spending any hours memorizing spelling and suspect the only people who do are entrants in spelling bee contests.</p><p>I simply made a conscious effort to learn and when spelling errors were pointed out, I'd learn from that as well.</p><p>The totally lazy approach of the younger generation is such that I frequently receive resumes via email, in MS Word format from technically proficient candidates, with spelling errors. Not only are they bad spellers, they are so friggin' lazy or stupid they don't even right click on the red wavy underline. On a goddamned job application!</p><p>My office is generally paperless, but I usually print those ones out so I can enjoy throwing them in the waste paper bin.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I honestly do n't recall spending any hours memorizing spelling and suspect the only people who do are entrants in spelling bee contests.I simply made a conscious effort to learn and when spelling errors were pointed out , I 'd learn from that as well.The totally lazy approach of the younger generation is such that I frequently receive resumes via email , in MS Word format from technically proficient candidates , with spelling errors .
Not only are they bad spellers , they are so friggin ' lazy or stupid they do n't even right click on the red wavy underline .
On a goddamned job application ! My office is generally paperless , but I usually print those ones out so I can enjoy throwing them in the waste paper bin .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I honestly don't recall spending any hours memorizing spelling and suspect the only people who do are entrants in spelling bee contests.I simply made a conscious effort to learn and when spelling errors were pointed out, I'd learn from that as well.The totally lazy approach of the younger generation is such that I frequently receive resumes via email, in MS Word format from technically proficient candidates, with spelling errors.
Not only are they bad spellers, they are so friggin' lazy or stupid they don't even right click on the red wavy underline.
On a goddamned job application!My office is generally paperless, but I usually print those ones out so I can enjoy throwing them in the waste paper bin.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843308</id>
	<title>Re:For those too lazy</title>
	<author>derGoldstein</author>
	<datestamp>1264106820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I actually *am* surprised -- by the time they spend in front of a TV. The "kids" I know think TVs are a relic -- the idea of making an appointment with your media seems absurd to them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I actually * am * surprised -- by the time they spend in front of a TV .
The " kids " I know think TVs are a relic -- the idea of making an appointment with your media seems absurd to them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I actually *am* surprised -- by the time they spend in front of a TV.
The "kids" I know think TVs are a relic -- the idea of making an appointment with your media seems absurd to them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843142</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30845152</id>
	<title>Re:For those too lazy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264085760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I doubt most kids in our day were reading for almost 40 minutes a day in their spare time. Who would have thought the internet might be a boon for literacy... aw who am I kidding, kthxcyazl8r</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I doubt most kids in our day were reading for almost 40 minutes a day in their spare time .
Who would have thought the internet might be a boon for literacy... aw who am I kidding , kthxcyazl8r</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I doubt most kids in our day were reading for almost 40 minutes a day in their spare time.
Who would have thought the internet might be a boon for literacy... aw who am I kidding, kthxcyazl8r</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843142</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30848756</id>
	<title>Re:Kids...</title>
	<author>Khashishi</author>
	<datestamp>1264101600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm pretty sure the kids don't know better when they spell lose loose.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm pretty sure the kids do n't know better when they spell lose loose .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm pretty sure the kids don't know better when they spell lose loose.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844530</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843812</id>
	<title>My Lawn</title>
	<author>ozdeadman</author>
	<datestamp>1264070280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>damn kids, get off my lawn</htmltext>
<tokenext>damn kids , get off my lawn</tokentext>
<sentencetext>damn kids, get off my lawn</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30849332</id>
	<title>Re:Kids...</title>
	<author>BJ\_Covert\_Action</author>
	<datestamp>1264104300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't know that it's entirely a bad thing. Granted, it gets very annoying to stumble upon posts and jibber jabber that has half spelled words and garbled nonsense in it. But in some ways, pidgin speak is quite interesting. As another poster pointed out, it is quickly developing as a new form of shorthand. Another interesting take on it is that it forces folk to parse language with more critical thinking. If the communicator's message is unclear and a bit garbled, then people have to focus harder on trying to figure out what he or she is saying. As a result, they have to read a little more attentively. Furthermore, I've noticed that kids who communicate in this standard regularly (meaning some of my younger cousins and such) tend to look more for intention within a message than literal meaning. Now, sometimes that is good and sometimes it is bad. For instance, when it involves an emotional issue (love, relationships, passionate topics in general) it tends to be bad. However, it also helps the communicator sometimes if he or she has trouble putting into words (or half words) the message. In other words, intuition helps get points across sometimes.
<br> <br>
Also, I wonder if pidgin speak could become a form of art one day, kind of like slam poetry. As it blends and becomes a part of our society (accepted or not) it could find a place as a subcultural form of expression. This would be similar to the way ebonics went from being something looked down upon to being a form of communication used to express identity and cultural messages within a niche culture (African Americans). Ebonics has, in essence, become both a joke that a lot of folk can shrug off, as well as a key component of popular arts such as rap and hip hop. I could see pidgin becoming the same. Just like rappers embraced ebonics, punk rockers embraced shock-and-appall language, some internet subcultures embrace pidgin. Hell, MC Lars has already rapped about emoticons in his song, 'iGeneration.' Perhaps we are seeing the early beginnings of a new form of expression. While it is certainly no iambic pentameter, dismissing it outright as dumb and naive seems shortsighted.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know that it 's entirely a bad thing .
Granted , it gets very annoying to stumble upon posts and jibber jabber that has half spelled words and garbled nonsense in it .
But in some ways , pidgin speak is quite interesting .
As another poster pointed out , it is quickly developing as a new form of shorthand .
Another interesting take on it is that it forces folk to parse language with more critical thinking .
If the communicator 's message is unclear and a bit garbled , then people have to focus harder on trying to figure out what he or she is saying .
As a result , they have to read a little more attentively .
Furthermore , I 've noticed that kids who communicate in this standard regularly ( meaning some of my younger cousins and such ) tend to look more for intention within a message than literal meaning .
Now , sometimes that is good and sometimes it is bad .
For instance , when it involves an emotional issue ( love , relationships , passionate topics in general ) it tends to be bad .
However , it also helps the communicator sometimes if he or she has trouble putting into words ( or half words ) the message .
In other words , intuition helps get points across sometimes .
Also , I wonder if pidgin speak could become a form of art one day , kind of like slam poetry .
As it blends and becomes a part of our society ( accepted or not ) it could find a place as a subcultural form of expression .
This would be similar to the way ebonics went from being something looked down upon to being a form of communication used to express identity and cultural messages within a niche culture ( African Americans ) .
Ebonics has , in essence , become both a joke that a lot of folk can shrug off , as well as a key component of popular arts such as rap and hip hop .
I could see pidgin becoming the same .
Just like rappers embraced ebonics , punk rockers embraced shock-and-appall language , some internet subcultures embrace pidgin .
Hell , MC Lars has already rapped about emoticons in his song , 'iGeneration .
' Perhaps we are seeing the early beginnings of a new form of expression .
While it is certainly no iambic pentameter , dismissing it outright as dumb and naive seems shortsighted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know that it's entirely a bad thing.
Granted, it gets very annoying to stumble upon posts and jibber jabber that has half spelled words and garbled nonsense in it.
But in some ways, pidgin speak is quite interesting.
As another poster pointed out, it is quickly developing as a new form of shorthand.
Another interesting take on it is that it forces folk to parse language with more critical thinking.
If the communicator's message is unclear and a bit garbled, then people have to focus harder on trying to figure out what he or she is saying.
As a result, they have to read a little more attentively.
Furthermore, I've noticed that kids who communicate in this standard regularly (meaning some of my younger cousins and such) tend to look more for intention within a message than literal meaning.
Now, sometimes that is good and sometimes it is bad.
For instance, when it involves an emotional issue (love, relationships, passionate topics in general) it tends to be bad.
However, it also helps the communicator sometimes if he or she has trouble putting into words (or half words) the message.
In other words, intuition helps get points across sometimes.
Also, I wonder if pidgin speak could become a form of art one day, kind of like slam poetry.
As it blends and becomes a part of our society (accepted or not) it could find a place as a subcultural form of expression.
This would be similar to the way ebonics went from being something looked down upon to being a form of communication used to express identity and cultural messages within a niche culture (African Americans).
Ebonics has, in essence, become both a joke that a lot of folk can shrug off, as well as a key component of popular arts such as rap and hip hop.
I could see pidgin becoming the same.
Just like rappers embraced ebonics, punk rockers embraced shock-and-appall language, some internet subcultures embrace pidgin.
Hell, MC Lars has already rapped about emoticons in his song, 'iGeneration.
' Perhaps we are seeing the early beginnings of a new form of expression.
While it is certainly no iambic pentameter, dismissing it outright as dumb and naive seems shortsighted.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843338</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30848390</id>
	<title>Re:Kids...</title>
	<author>Landshark17</author>
	<datestamp>1264099980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not using a pen and paper may atrophy one's penmanship, but it has nothing to do with the ability to express a coherent thought on a page. I have been typing everything I hand in in school since about sixth grade. My handwriting sucks, but my writing hasn't suffered for it, the same goes for most of my friends my age (22).<br> <br>Technology is merely a tool. It doesn't make people and dumber or any smarter. Like everything else, it all depends on how it's used. To paraphrase an old saying, "The technology opens the door, but the user must step through."<br> <br>The wealth of knowledge available through technology gives us the opportunity to become collectively smarter than any other time in human history. Printing presses gave way to libraries and now literacy is expected when once it was a mark of wealth and privilege. Computers gave way to the Internet which gave way to a faster and easier method of sharing information. The increased computer literacy makes us more resistant to Skynet</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not using a pen and paper may atrophy one 's penmanship , but it has nothing to do with the ability to express a coherent thought on a page .
I have been typing everything I hand in in school since about sixth grade .
My handwriting sucks , but my writing has n't suffered for it , the same goes for most of my friends my age ( 22 ) .
Technology is merely a tool .
It does n't make people and dumber or any smarter .
Like everything else , it all depends on how it 's used .
To paraphrase an old saying , " The technology opens the door , but the user must step through .
" The wealth of knowledge available through technology gives us the opportunity to become collectively smarter than any other time in human history .
Printing presses gave way to libraries and now literacy is expected when once it was a mark of wealth and privilege .
Computers gave way to the Internet which gave way to a faster and easier method of sharing information .
The increased computer literacy makes us more resistant to Skynet</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not using a pen and paper may atrophy one's penmanship, but it has nothing to do with the ability to express a coherent thought on a page.
I have been typing everything I hand in in school since about sixth grade.
My handwriting sucks, but my writing hasn't suffered for it, the same goes for most of my friends my age (22).
Technology is merely a tool.
It doesn't make people and dumber or any smarter.
Like everything else, it all depends on how it's used.
To paraphrase an old saying, "The technology opens the door, but the user must step through.
" The wealth of knowledge available through technology gives us the opportunity to become collectively smarter than any other time in human history.
Printing presses gave way to libraries and now literacy is expected when once it was a mark of wealth and privilege.
Computers gave way to the Internet which gave way to a faster and easier method of sharing information.
The increased computer literacy makes us more resistant to Skynet</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843338</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844108</id>
	<title>less than 8 hours a day?</title>
	<author>OrangeTide</author>
	<datestamp>1264074240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Try watching a 30 hour Monty Python marathon sometime(the only breaks are commercial breaks), that's real dedication to your media.</p><p>I suppose you could just watch the DVDs straight through and only take breaks to pee, but no sleeping, that would be cheating.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Try watching a 30 hour Monty Python marathon sometime ( the only breaks are commercial breaks ) , that 's real dedication to your media.I suppose you could just watch the DVDs straight through and only take breaks to pee , but no sleeping , that would be cheating .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Try watching a 30 hour Monty Python marathon sometime(the only breaks are commercial breaks), that's real dedication to your media.I suppose you could just watch the DVDs straight through and only take breaks to pee, but no sleeping, that would be cheating.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30846622</id>
	<title>your sig</title>
	<author>newdsfornerds</author>
	<datestamp>1264092660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Your sig tells me you're semiliterate, therefore I'm less likely to be influenced by anything you post.
Learning how to use punctuation will not make you less cool.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Your sig tells me you 're semiliterate , therefore I 'm less likely to be influenced by anything you post .
Learning how to use punctuation will not make you less cool .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your sig tells me you're semiliterate, therefore I'm less likely to be influenced by anything you post.
Learning how to use punctuation will not make you less cool.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843260</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843142</id>
	<title>For those too lazy</title>
	<author>Misanthrope</author>
	<datestamp>1264104720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To click through and download the PDF<br>TV 4:29<br>Music/Audio 2:31<br>Computer 1:29<br>Video Games 1:13<br>Print<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:38<br>Movies<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:25</p><p>With a 29\% multitasking cut, so from 10:45 total it comes down to 7:38</p><p>Not really sure this is all that surprising to me, it's hard for me to feel alarmed over the print and music portions of the time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To click through and download the PDFTV 4 : 29Music/Audio 2 : 31Computer 1 : 29Video Games 1 : 13Print : 38Movies : 25With a 29 \ % multitasking cut , so from 10 : 45 total it comes down to 7 : 38Not really sure this is all that surprising to me , it 's hard for me to feel alarmed over the print and music portions of the time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To click through and download the PDFTV 4:29Music/Audio 2:31Computer 1:29Video Games 1:13Print :38Movies :25With a 29\% multitasking cut, so from 10:45 total it comes down to 7:38Not really sure this is all that surprising to me, it's hard for me to feel alarmed over the print and music portions of the time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844066</id>
	<title>Only 7:38?</title>
	<author>Khyber</author>
	<datestamp>1264073880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Christ, son, I have that much streaming in NOW. When one goal is to archive the internets useful shit, you come across this problem often. Hell, I burned five roboboards just trying to handle so many incoming 56K streams.</p><p>Rank amateurs, I tell you. Are these kids just learning how to utilize a computer in this study?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Christ , son , I have that much streaming in NOW .
When one goal is to archive the internets useful shit , you come across this problem often .
Hell , I burned five roboboards just trying to handle so many incoming 56K streams.Rank amateurs , I tell you .
Are these kids just learning how to utilize a computer in this study ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Christ, son, I have that much streaming in NOW.
When one goal is to archive the internets useful shit, you come across this problem often.
Hell, I burned five roboboards just trying to handle so many incoming 56K streams.Rank amateurs, I tell you.
Are these kids just learning how to utilize a computer in this study?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30845090</id>
	<title>Not much.....</title>
	<author>Ralz</author>
	<datestamp>1264085340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Do these figures include the time that they are at school etc.? As 1:29 using computers is pretty low, do they not study any IT at all?<br>
Including work time I usually spend about 14-15 hours at a computer each week day.<br> <br>
My usage would look something like this:<br>
TV 0:20<br>
Music/Audio 5:00<br>
Computer 15:00<br>
Games 1:30<br>
Print 0:05<br>
Movies 0:30<br> <br>
But a lot of that overlaps as I watch TV/Movies, listen to music and play games all on my computer.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do these figures include the time that they are at school etc. ?
As 1 : 29 using computers is pretty low , do they not study any IT at all ?
Including work time I usually spend about 14-15 hours at a computer each week day .
My usage would look something like this : TV 0 : 20 Music/Audio 5 : 00 Computer 15 : 00 Games 1 : 30 Print 0 : 05 Movies 0 : 30 But a lot of that overlaps as I watch TV/Movies , listen to music and play games all on my computer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do these figures include the time that they are at school etc.?
As 1:29 using computers is pretty low, do they not study any IT at all?
Including work time I usually spend about 14-15 hours at a computer each week day.
My usage would look something like this:
TV 0:20
Music/Audio 5:00
Computer 15:00
Games 1:30
Print 0:05
Movies 0:30 
But a lot of that overlaps as I watch TV/Movies, listen to music and play games all on my computer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844842</id>
	<title>Re:more reading, less doing.</title>
	<author>NekSnappa</author>
	<datestamp>1264083480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Kind of like the 'ractives' (interactive videos) in Stephensons' "The Diamond Age"</htmltext>
<tokenext>Kind of like the 'ractives ' ( interactive videos ) in Stephensons ' " The Diamond Age "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Kind of like the 'ractives' (interactive videos) in Stephensons' "The Diamond Age"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30849688</id>
	<title>Re:For those too lazy</title>
	<author>YenTheFirst</author>
	<datestamp>1264105740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>TV 4:29 - Almost entirely negative, I suspect; surely the overwhelming advertisements alone cancel out any benefits the few educational shows.</p></div><p>What benefits of educational shows? I made the mistake of watching an "educational" show on the Discovery Channel, on the Nazca lines.</p><p>About 15 minutes in, the host claimed he had shown dousing to be viable. About 45 minutes in, he was taking low-grade hallucinogenics. Not to worry, though, he's being "Supervised by an experienced shaman"</p><p>(The hallucinogenics, by the way, didn't end up telling him anything about the Nazca lines. In his own words)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>TV 4 : 29 - Almost entirely negative , I suspect ; surely the overwhelming advertisements alone cancel out any benefits the few educational shows.What benefits of educational shows ?
I made the mistake of watching an " educational " show on the Discovery Channel , on the Nazca lines.About 15 minutes in , the host claimed he had shown dousing to be viable .
About 45 minutes in , he was taking low-grade hallucinogenics .
Not to worry , though , he 's being " Supervised by an experienced shaman " ( The hallucinogenics , by the way , did n't end up telling him anything about the Nazca lines .
In his own words )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>TV 4:29 - Almost entirely negative, I suspect; surely the overwhelming advertisements alone cancel out any benefits the few educational shows.What benefits of educational shows?
I made the mistake of watching an "educational" show on the Discovery Channel, on the Nazca lines.About 15 minutes in, the host claimed he had shown dousing to be viable.
About 45 minutes in, he was taking low-grade hallucinogenics.
Not to worry, though, he's being "Supervised by an experienced shaman"(The hallucinogenics, by the way, didn't end up telling him anything about the Nazca lines.
In his own words)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843328</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843214</id>
	<title>NEWS FLASH: New Discovery!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264105560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Researchers have recently discovered gamblers like money, scholars spend lots of time reading and fishermen are often on boats.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Researchers have recently discovered gamblers like money , scholars spend lots of time reading and fishermen are often on boats .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Researchers have recently discovered gamblers like money, scholars spend lots of time reading and fishermen are often on boats.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30845826</id>
	<title>Kids...</title>
	<author>orsty3001</author>
	<datestamp>1264089240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nothing a kid does will be praised by adults. Every single generation was supposed to be the downfall of mankind, with their swinging hips, their rock and roll music, their spirographs and their sagging pants.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nothing a kid does will be praised by adults .
Every single generation was supposed to be the downfall of mankind , with their swinging hips , their rock and roll music , their spirographs and their sagging pants .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nothing a kid does will be praised by adults.
Every single generation was supposed to be the downfall of mankind, with their swinging hips, their rock and roll music, their spirographs and their sagging pants.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844800</id>
	<title>Its not consumption</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264083060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A person consumes a hamburger, it no longer exists as a hamburger. People watch videos or listen to music. The video and music still exist after they have finished. The items can be viewed or listened to again and again. It is not consumption. Unless of course you are talking about people actually eating 16 mm film for example or chewing on CDs, in which case I agree that this would be consumption.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A person consumes a hamburger , it no longer exists as a hamburger .
People watch videos or listen to music .
The video and music still exist after they have finished .
The items can be viewed or listened to again and again .
It is not consumption .
Unless of course you are talking about people actually eating 16 mm film for example or chewing on CDs , in which case I agree that this would be consumption .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A person consumes a hamburger, it no longer exists as a hamburger.
People watch videos or listen to music.
The video and music still exist after they have finished.
The items can be viewed or listened to again and again.
It is not consumption.
Unless of course you are talking about people actually eating 16 mm film for example or chewing on CDs, in which case I agree that this would be consumption.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30845124</id>
	<title>Re:Your taxes at work</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264085580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>We are paying more than we were 20 years ago yet children are doing worse in school.</p></div><p>That's bull.  In the early 80s all that Reganomic tax cut crap like Proposition 13 and Measure 5 and all that went into effect, pretty much destroying funding for public schooling.  Now that there's a republican in the governor's office the state budget for education is slashed year after year.</p><p>When I was a kid, parents didn't have to bring in a ream of paper every month to help keep the school running.  Teachers didn't have to buy their own chalk, textbooks, and other supplies out of their meager salaries.  Kids had access to school bus services back then, but now do not.  Talented and gifted programs actually involved offering some extra education to the kids, and now the "program" is just a way for the school to get a budget bump while providing nothing to the gifted kids.</p><p>Paying more than we were 20 years ago?  Hah.</p><p>The people who've been whining about taxes for 20 years didn't just destroy your childrens' education.  They destroyed the institution's capability to educate.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>We are paying more than we were 20 years ago yet children are doing worse in school.That 's bull .
In the early 80s all that Reganomic tax cut crap like Proposition 13 and Measure 5 and all that went into effect , pretty much destroying funding for public schooling .
Now that there 's a republican in the governor 's office the state budget for education is slashed year after year.When I was a kid , parents did n't have to bring in a ream of paper every month to help keep the school running .
Teachers did n't have to buy their own chalk , textbooks , and other supplies out of their meager salaries .
Kids had access to school bus services back then , but now do not .
Talented and gifted programs actually involved offering some extra education to the kids , and now the " program " is just a way for the school to get a budget bump while providing nothing to the gifted kids.Paying more than we were 20 years ago ?
Hah.The people who 've been whining about taxes for 20 years did n't just destroy your childrens ' education .
They destroyed the institution 's capability to educate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We are paying more than we were 20 years ago yet children are doing worse in school.That's bull.
In the early 80s all that Reganomic tax cut crap like Proposition 13 and Measure 5 and all that went into effect, pretty much destroying funding for public schooling.
Now that there's a republican in the governor's office the state budget for education is slashed year after year.When I was a kid, parents didn't have to bring in a ream of paper every month to help keep the school running.
Teachers didn't have to buy their own chalk, textbooks, and other supplies out of their meager salaries.
Kids had access to school bus services back then, but now do not.
Talented and gifted programs actually involved offering some extra education to the kids, and now the "program" is just a way for the school to get a budget bump while providing nothing to the gifted kids.Paying more than we were 20 years ago?
Hah.The people who've been whining about taxes for 20 years didn't just destroy your childrens' education.
They destroyed the institution's capability to educate.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30845552</id>
	<title>Re:Kids...</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1264087980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Your typical teenager probably doesn't even use a pen</i></p><p>Your typical adult Slashdotter probably doesn't even use a pen...</p><p>Do you have evidence that (a) spelling is in decline, and (b) there is a causative link due to computers and the Internet? Or are you just pushing "Get off my lawn" arguments without evidence?</p><p><i>Is it really that much more efficient to type "Im going 2 da park"?</i></p><p>In most cases no, but it is for people paying per 140 characters in a text, or people on most low end or older phones who haven't mastered the text prediction option. And <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/8468351.stm" title="bbc.co.uk" rel="nofollow">counter argument</a> [bbc.co.uk].</p><p><i>As technology gets smarter, we as a society will be getting dumber.</i></p><p>Well, perhaps people are more likely to post claims without evidence<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... so citation please?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your typical teenager probably does n't even use a penYour typical adult Slashdotter probably does n't even use a pen...Do you have evidence that ( a ) spelling is in decline , and ( b ) there is a causative link due to computers and the Internet ?
Or are you just pushing " Get off my lawn " arguments without evidence ? Is it really that much more efficient to type " Im going 2 da park " ? In most cases no , but it is for people paying per 140 characters in a text , or people on most low end or older phones who have n't mastered the text prediction option .
And counter argument [ bbc.co.uk ] .As technology gets smarter , we as a society will be getting dumber.Well , perhaps people are more likely to post claims without evidence ... so citation please ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your typical teenager probably doesn't even use a penYour typical adult Slashdotter probably doesn't even use a pen...Do you have evidence that (a) spelling is in decline, and (b) there is a causative link due to computers and the Internet?
Or are you just pushing "Get off my lawn" arguments without evidence?Is it really that much more efficient to type "Im going 2 da park"?In most cases no, but it is for people paying per 140 characters in a text, or people on most low end or older phones who haven't mastered the text prediction option.
And counter argument [bbc.co.uk].As technology gets smarter, we as a society will be getting dumber.Well, perhaps people are more likely to post claims without evidence ... so citation please?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843338</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844116</id>
	<title>Ironically</title>
	<author>Hognoxious</author>
	<datestamp>1264074300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most adults also spend their entire working week on teh intarwebs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most adults also spend their entire working week on teh intarwebs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most adults also spend their entire working week on teh intarwebs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30847394</id>
	<title>Re:When the internet bred overtake the TV bred.</title>
	<author>ImprovOmega</author>
	<datestamp>1264095960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The internet has an ever increasing influence on political and philosophical thought.</p></div><p>Oh God help us.</p><p>I'm moving to Mars the day I see the candidate from the "4chan" party taking an oath of office.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The internet has an ever increasing influence on political and philosophical thought.Oh God help us.I 'm moving to Mars the day I see the candidate from the " 4chan " party taking an oath of office .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The internet has an ever increasing influence on political and philosophical thought.Oh God help us.I'm moving to Mars the day I see the candidate from the "4chan" party taking an oath of office.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843860</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30847348</id>
	<title>Re:Your taxes at work</title>
	<author>ImprovOmega</author>
	<datestamp>1264095840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't blame the teachers for that, all of that crap is state-mandated.  I promise you, most teachers are just as upset about this as you are, but their hands are tied.<br> <br>Ironically, the states then blame the teachers for poor performing students and then clamp down further in their preventing the teachers from giving a good education by handing down more mandates.  It's the circle of life.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't blame the teachers for that , all of that crap is state-mandated .
I promise you , most teachers are just as upset about this as you are , but their hands are tied .
Ironically , the states then blame the teachers for poor performing students and then clamp down further in their preventing the teachers from giving a good education by handing down more mandates .
It 's the circle of life .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't blame the teachers for that, all of that crap is state-mandated.
I promise you, most teachers are just as upset about this as you are, but their hands are tied.
Ironically, the states then blame the teachers for poor performing students and then clamp down further in their preventing the teachers from giving a good education by handing down more mandates.
It's the circle of life.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30845848</id>
	<title>Re:Our kids</title>
	<author>tixxit</author>
	<datestamp>1264089360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, it says ~40m for "print." I imagine that number is balanced between kids who read 1-2h a day and those who don't read at all.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , it says ~ 40m for " print .
" I imagine that number is balanced between kids who read 1-2h a day and those who do n't read at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, it says ~40m for "print.
" I imagine that number is balanced between kids who read 1-2h a day and those who don't read at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843452</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843646</id>
	<title>Re:more reading, less doing.</title>
	<author>jandersen</author>
	<datestamp>1264068060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It certainly sounds dramatic, but I think there may be a positive note to add, because where a decade ago children engaged mostly in passively being entertained, the trend now is that they take part, ie are active. A recent study has shown that the main factor explaining why boys in particular don't seem to learn English very well, found that the trick is to get them write more; and that while writing essays is seen as boring and pointless, blogging is seen as cool and meaningful.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It certainly sounds dramatic , but I think there may be a positive note to add , because where a decade ago children engaged mostly in passively being entertained , the trend now is that they take part , ie are active .
A recent study has shown that the main factor explaining why boys in particular do n't seem to learn English very well , found that the trick is to get them write more ; and that while writing essays is seen as boring and pointless , blogging is seen as cool and meaningful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It certainly sounds dramatic, but I think there may be a positive note to add, because where a decade ago children engaged mostly in passively being entertained, the trend now is that they take part, ie are active.
A recent study has shown that the main factor explaining why boys in particular don't seem to learn English very well, found that the trick is to get them write more; and that while writing essays is seen as boring and pointless, blogging is seen as cool and meaningful.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30846206</id>
	<title>Re:That's all?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264090800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Neo?  Neo!  Young man, you get right back in here and jack back into the future!</p><p>We are trained to know the price of everything and understand the value of nothing.  (It sounds so Zen; it must be right.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Neo ?
Neo ! Young man , you get right back in here and jack back into the future ! We are trained to know the price of everything and understand the value of nothing .
( It sounds so Zen ; it must be right .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Neo?
Neo!  Young man, you get right back in here and jack back into the future!We are trained to know the price of everything and understand the value of nothing.
(It sounds so Zen; it must be right.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843206</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30845296</id>
	<title>Re:For those too lazy</title>
	<author>Landshark17</author>
	<datestamp>1264086720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm 22 now, and in the last five years, I've almost completely stopped watching TV, but I was never bothered by the appointment with the media. Freshman year of college, knowing my night would end with The Daily Show was something to look forward to. More recently, How I Met Your Mother became a staple of my Monday nights. The problem I have is the advertising. I still watch plenty of shows, from DVDs mostly, and they're without the advertising that was a part of the original broadcast. When I watch something on TV now, I get angry when a show gets broken up by ads. I can barely make it through a full episode of anything before my loathing for the advertising drives me to do something else. Like I said before, the appointment doesn't bother me, but when it can get something on my own time with no ads, I'm going to take it over any other option.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm 22 now , and in the last five years , I 've almost completely stopped watching TV , but I was never bothered by the appointment with the media .
Freshman year of college , knowing my night would end with The Daily Show was something to look forward to .
More recently , How I Met Your Mother became a staple of my Monday nights .
The problem I have is the advertising .
I still watch plenty of shows , from DVDs mostly , and they 're without the advertising that was a part of the original broadcast .
When I watch something on TV now , I get angry when a show gets broken up by ads .
I can barely make it through a full episode of anything before my loathing for the advertising drives me to do something else .
Like I said before , the appointment does n't bother me , but when it can get something on my own time with no ads , I 'm going to take it over any other option .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm 22 now, and in the last five years, I've almost completely stopped watching TV, but I was never bothered by the appointment with the media.
Freshman year of college, knowing my night would end with The Daily Show was something to look forward to.
More recently, How I Met Your Mother became a staple of my Monday nights.
The problem I have is the advertising.
I still watch plenty of shows, from DVDs mostly, and they're without the advertising that was a part of the original broadcast.
When I watch something on TV now, I get angry when a show gets broken up by ads.
I can barely make it through a full episode of anything before my loathing for the advertising drives me to do something else.
Like I said before, the appointment doesn't bother me, but when it can get something on my own time with no ads, I'm going to take it over any other option.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843308</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843780</id>
	<title>Re:For those too lazy</title>
	<author>w0mprat</author>
	<datestamp>1264069740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Multitasking is not examined in TFS.
<br> <br>
Or maybe it does, I'm too lazy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Multitasking is not examined in TFS .
Or maybe it does , I 'm too lazy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Multitasking is not examined in TFS.
Or maybe it does, I'm too lazy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843142</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30848972</id>
	<title>Re:For those too lazy</title>
	<author>BJ\_Covert\_Action</author>
	<datestamp>1264102740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Okay, I have to pick apart this post:<p><div class="quote"><p>How is this news? In an average day, excluding the 7.5 hours I spend in front of a computer at work, I still manage to pack in a lot of "media"-time.</p></div><p>
Notice exhibit A: the condescending introduction, "How is this news?" It is as if the poster is saying, "I already know this, everyone else should know it too! I mean you all know as much as I know right? *wink wink*</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Of course, my multitasking factor is probably higher than these lame kids'. Laptop is always on, always on the table in front of me so I can chat, surf, perhaps program a little.</p></div><p>
Exhibit B: "I am so multifaceted that I can run three or four kinds of consumer electronics at once. I don't need to explain how much relevant attention I can give to any one said device because that is an irrelevant detail. But look at me, I can do four things. And, just to ensure that I don't sound like a consumer whore, I will put a plug in there that I sometimes program too so that it sounds like I do a lot more than consume shallow, vapid media culture."</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The TV is for the most part on as well, except that part of the evening where the most interesting program is Oprah.</p></div><p>
Exhibit C: Knocking a powerful, popular, cultural icon so as to induce in the reader a sense of independence and individuality.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>News? Hardly.News to the Slashdot crowd..? Definitely not. Scaremongering for technophobic parents? Yes.</p></div><p>
Exhibit D: Another show of condescension, this time with an appeal of brotherly interests. "See, I know all of this stuff already, so do the rest of us techno gurus on slashdot because we are all cool like that. Right guys? You're with me in feeling better than the 'normal reader' of this article. Right?"
<br> <br>
General conclusion: This post seems to be an artful act of ego stroking and attention gathering with very little, if any, insight into anything (except perhaps your own ego and the need for attention).
<br> <br>
Granted, I am being a troll and a complete asshat here. I do not claim to be benevolent or kind in this posting. But I really do have to ask (and I hope I get an answer). Why the hell would you waste your time posting this? I cannot say that I am not a hypocrit. I post personal anecdotes on here all the time, but usually I at least hope to convey some sort of lesson or theme or humor through the post. What was the point of this though plastbox? I am genuinely curious about why you would post this. Is there any other motivation than just waving around your shiny peacock feathers?
<br> <br>
Yes, I expect to be downmodded. Yes, I expect to be mocked and scolded for a personal attack. But really, I want to know. Why did you spend the time posting this?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Okay , I have to pick apart this post : How is this news ?
In an average day , excluding the 7.5 hours I spend in front of a computer at work , I still manage to pack in a lot of " media " -time .
Notice exhibit A : the condescending introduction , " How is this news ?
" It is as if the poster is saying , " I already know this , everyone else should know it too !
I mean you all know as much as I know right ?
* wink wink * Of course , my multitasking factor is probably higher than these lame kids' .
Laptop is always on , always on the table in front of me so I can chat , surf , perhaps program a little .
Exhibit B : " I am so multifaceted that I can run three or four kinds of consumer electronics at once .
I do n't need to explain how much relevant attention I can give to any one said device because that is an irrelevant detail .
But look at me , I can do four things .
And , just to ensure that I do n't sound like a consumer whore , I will put a plug in there that I sometimes program too so that it sounds like I do a lot more than consume shallow , vapid media culture .
" The TV is for the most part on as well , except that part of the evening where the most interesting program is Oprah .
Exhibit C : Knocking a powerful , popular , cultural icon so as to induce in the reader a sense of independence and individuality.News ?
Hardly.News to the Slashdot crowd.. ?
Definitely not .
Scaremongering for technophobic parents ?
Yes . Exhibit D : Another show of condescension , this time with an appeal of brotherly interests .
" See , I know all of this stuff already , so do the rest of us techno gurus on slashdot because we are all cool like that .
Right guys ?
You 're with me in feeling better than the 'normal reader ' of this article .
Right ? " General conclusion : This post seems to be an artful act of ego stroking and attention gathering with very little , if any , insight into anything ( except perhaps your own ego and the need for attention ) .
Granted , I am being a troll and a complete asshat here .
I do not claim to be benevolent or kind in this posting .
But I really do have to ask ( and I hope I get an answer ) .
Why the hell would you waste your time posting this ?
I can not say that I am not a hypocrit .
I post personal anecdotes on here all the time , but usually I at least hope to convey some sort of lesson or theme or humor through the post .
What was the point of this though plastbox ?
I am genuinely curious about why you would post this .
Is there any other motivation than just waving around your shiny peacock feathers ?
Yes , I expect to be downmodded .
Yes , I expect to be mocked and scolded for a personal attack .
But really , I want to know .
Why did you spend the time posting this ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Okay, I have to pick apart this post:How is this news?
In an average day, excluding the 7.5 hours I spend in front of a computer at work, I still manage to pack in a lot of "media"-time.
Notice exhibit A: the condescending introduction, "How is this news?
" It is as if the poster is saying, "I already know this, everyone else should know it too!
I mean you all know as much as I know right?
*wink wink*Of course, my multitasking factor is probably higher than these lame kids'.
Laptop is always on, always on the table in front of me so I can chat, surf, perhaps program a little.
Exhibit B: "I am so multifaceted that I can run three or four kinds of consumer electronics at once.
I don't need to explain how much relevant attention I can give to any one said device because that is an irrelevant detail.
But look at me, I can do four things.
And, just to ensure that I don't sound like a consumer whore, I will put a plug in there that I sometimes program too so that it sounds like I do a lot more than consume shallow, vapid media culture.
"The TV is for the most part on as well, except that part of the evening where the most interesting program is Oprah.
Exhibit C: Knocking a powerful, popular, cultural icon so as to induce in the reader a sense of independence and individuality.News?
Hardly.News to the Slashdot crowd..?
Definitely not.
Scaremongering for technophobic parents?
Yes.
Exhibit D: Another show of condescension, this time with an appeal of brotherly interests.
"See, I know all of this stuff already, so do the rest of us techno gurus on slashdot because we are all cool like that.
Right guys?
You're with me in feeling better than the 'normal reader' of this article.
Right?"
 
General conclusion: This post seems to be an artful act of ego stroking and attention gathering with very little, if any, insight into anything (except perhaps your own ego and the need for attention).
Granted, I am being a troll and a complete asshat here.
I do not claim to be benevolent or kind in this posting.
But I really do have to ask (and I hope I get an answer).
Why the hell would you waste your time posting this?
I cannot say that I am not a hypocrit.
I post personal anecdotes on here all the time, but usually I at least hope to convey some sort of lesson or theme or humor through the post.
What was the point of this though plastbox?
I am genuinely curious about why you would post this.
Is there any other motivation than just waving around your shiny peacock feathers?
Yes, I expect to be downmodded.
Yes, I expect to be mocked and scolded for a personal attack.
But really, I want to know.
Why did you spend the time posting this?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843714</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843794</id>
	<title>Re:Your taxes at work</title>
	<author>JackieBrown</author>
	<datestamp>1264070040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Don't blame the children.<br>They are not the ones that decide to pay less on education and that ebonics or it's more recent equivalent is good enough.</p></div><p>We are paying more than we were 20 years ago yet children are doing worse in school.</p><p>The problem isn't with the money (maybe in some districts) but the way they teach kids now.</p><p>My daughter was not taught how to read using phonics, she was taught using "sight words."  I asked the teacher she wasn't learning the multiplication table and the teacher said that it was not taught anymore because they prefered 'concepts.'  As a result, my daughter does multiplication (not addition but multiplication!!!!) using her fingers.  She reads well now due to the time I have spent with her but her writing is still terrible (but it looks pretty.)</p><p>Now I fully admit that I should have taken the  time to have taught her myself instead of relying on the school system.  But I do remember being taught these things when I went to school.  And passing out a multiplication table or phonics sheet is not expensive.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't blame the children.They are not the ones that decide to pay less on education and that ebonics or it 's more recent equivalent is good enough.We are paying more than we were 20 years ago yet children are doing worse in school.The problem is n't with the money ( maybe in some districts ) but the way they teach kids now.My daughter was not taught how to read using phonics , she was taught using " sight words .
" I asked the teacher she was n't learning the multiplication table and the teacher said that it was not taught anymore because they prefered 'concepts .
' As a result , my daughter does multiplication ( not addition but multiplication ! ! ! !
) using her fingers .
She reads well now due to the time I have spent with her but her writing is still terrible ( but it looks pretty .
) Now I fully admit that I should have taken the time to have taught her myself instead of relying on the school system .
But I do remember being taught these things when I went to school .
And passing out a multiplication table or phonics sheet is not expensive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't blame the children.They are not the ones that decide to pay less on education and that ebonics or it's more recent equivalent is good enough.We are paying more than we were 20 years ago yet children are doing worse in school.The problem isn't with the money (maybe in some districts) but the way they teach kids now.My daughter was not taught how to read using phonics, she was taught using "sight words.
"  I asked the teacher she wasn't learning the multiplication table and the teacher said that it was not taught anymore because they prefered 'concepts.
'  As a result, my daughter does multiplication (not addition but multiplication!!!!
) using her fingers.
She reads well now due to the time I have spent with her but her writing is still terrible (but it looks pretty.
)Now I fully admit that I should have taken the  time to have taught her myself instead of relying on the school system.
But I do remember being taught these things when I went to school.
And passing out a multiplication table or phonics sheet is not expensive.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843392</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843284</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264106580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IBF WE ARE BORG</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IBF WE ARE BORG</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IBF WE ARE BORG</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843398</id>
	<title>Re:Kids...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264064640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why should we spend time learning how to spell everything perfectly if we have a computer that can automatically correct the small errors for us?  Not spending hours memorizing the exact spelling of words frees up more time for humans to spend time learning other higher level things.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why should we spend time learning how to spell everything perfectly if we have a computer that can automatically correct the small errors for us ?
Not spending hours memorizing the exact spelling of words frees up more time for humans to spend time learning other higher level things .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why should we spend time learning how to spell everything perfectly if we have a computer that can automatically correct the small errors for us?
Not spending hours memorizing the exact spelling of words frees up more time for humans to spend time learning other higher level things.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843338</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843338</id>
	<title>Kids...</title>
	<author>lewko</author>
	<datestamp>1264107120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No wonder they can't find time to spell properly.</p><p>Your typical teenager probably doesn't even use a pen, and the majority of their communication would be on a device with a built-in spell checker. IT is as though they go out of their way to spell like an idiot. Is it really that much more efficient to type "Im going 2 da park"?</p><p>As technology gets smarter, we as a society will be getting dumber. We are setting ourselves up to be completely pwnd by Skynet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No wonder they ca n't find time to spell properly.Your typical teenager probably does n't even use a pen , and the majority of their communication would be on a device with a built-in spell checker .
IT is as though they go out of their way to spell like an idiot .
Is it really that much more efficient to type " Im going 2 da park " ? As technology gets smarter , we as a society will be getting dumber .
We are setting ourselves up to be completely pwnd by Skynet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No wonder they can't find time to spell properly.Your typical teenager probably doesn't even use a pen, and the majority of their communication would be on a device with a built-in spell checker.
IT is as though they go out of their way to spell like an idiot.
Is it really that much more efficient to type "Im going 2 da park"?As technology gets smarter, we as a society will be getting dumber.
We are setting ourselves up to be completely pwnd by Skynet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844676</id>
	<title>It's culture, not medium.</title>
	<author>Nebulious</author>
	<datestamp>1264081680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>When you see kids insisting on incorrect spelling/grammar online, it's not necessarily because the medium encourages bastardizing the language in every instance.  It's a desire to cool by being anti-intellectual.  In their minds, only a nerd and an adult takes out the times to make everything they type in informal settings 'perfect.'  We even do it here in sophisticated places like Slashdot.  When someone brings up or wants to enforce the subtle differences between affect and effect, we just hand-wave it, call them grammar Nazis, and move on.  It's the same thing.  So next time you feel like blindly criticizing the next generation, why not try holding that critical lens to yourself as well?</htmltext>
<tokenext>When you see kids insisting on incorrect spelling/grammar online , it 's not necessarily because the medium encourages bastardizing the language in every instance .
It 's a desire to cool by being anti-intellectual .
In their minds , only a nerd and an adult takes out the times to make everything they type in informal settings 'perfect .
' We even do it here in sophisticated places like Slashdot .
When someone brings up or wants to enforce the subtle differences between affect and effect , we just hand-wave it , call them grammar Nazis , and move on .
It 's the same thing .
So next time you feel like blindly criticizing the next generation , why not try holding that critical lens to yourself as well ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When you see kids insisting on incorrect spelling/grammar online, it's not necessarily because the medium encourages bastardizing the language in every instance.
It's a desire to cool by being anti-intellectual.
In their minds, only a nerd and an adult takes out the times to make everything they type in informal settings 'perfect.
'  We even do it here in sophisticated places like Slashdot.
When someone brings up or wants to enforce the subtle differences between affect and effect, we just hand-wave it, call them grammar Nazis, and move on.
It's the same thing.
So next time you feel like blindly criticizing the next generation, why not try holding that critical lens to yourself as well?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843338</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843720</id>
	<title>Re:more reading, less doing.</title>
	<author>Alwin Henseler</author>
	<datestamp>1264069140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
True, and somehow mankind will adapt (as a species) to deal with this. Some people will be better in coping with this, and be more successful in life than people who are not. Better in filtering/ignoring crap, seeking out the good stuff, deciding what's most important etc. And over time, natural selection will make sure that humans are better equipped to deal with their new surroundings. Electronic gadgets &amp; information everywhere, always-connected, buildings filled with smart sensor networks, electronic records kept of everything etc.
</p><p>
I'm not sure I would entirely like such a 'brave new world' though... some aspects yes, some aspects not so much.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>True , and somehow mankind will adapt ( as a species ) to deal with this .
Some people will be better in coping with this , and be more successful in life than people who are not .
Better in filtering/ignoring crap , seeking out the good stuff , deciding what 's most important etc .
And over time , natural selection will make sure that humans are better equipped to deal with their new surroundings .
Electronic gadgets &amp; information everywhere , always-connected , buildings filled with smart sensor networks , electronic records kept of everything etc .
I 'm not sure I would entirely like such a 'brave new world ' though... some aspects yes , some aspects not so much .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
True, and somehow mankind will adapt (as a species) to deal with this.
Some people will be better in coping with this, and be more successful in life than people who are not.
Better in filtering/ignoring crap, seeking out the good stuff, deciding what's most important etc.
And over time, natural selection will make sure that humans are better equipped to deal with their new surroundings.
Electronic gadgets &amp; information everywhere, always-connected, buildings filled with smart sensor networks, electronic records kept of everything etc.
I'm not sure I would entirely like such a 'brave new world' though... some aspects yes, some aspects not so much.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843480</id>
	<title>This just in</title>
	<author>Korbeau</author>
	<datestamp>1264065900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>American media cover daily struggle in life 24/24, and Americans tune in.</p><p>Daily struggle at 4.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>American media cover daily struggle in life 24/24 , and Americans tune in.Daily struggle at 4 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>American media cover daily struggle in life 24/24, and Americans tune in.Daily struggle at 4.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844052</id>
	<title>Re:It is true!</title>
	<author>precariousgray</author>
	<datestamp>1264073760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>My girlfriend is 12 years younger than me and it is true. She is getting plugged most of the day.

Hey, can you blame me?</p></div><p>No, I wouldn't blame you, as long as you're the one plugging her.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>My girlfriend is 12 years younger than me and it is true .
She is getting plugged most of the day .
Hey , can you blame me ? No , I would n't blame you , as long as you 're the one plugging her .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My girlfriend is 12 years younger than me and it is true.
She is getting plugged most of the day.
Hey, can you blame me?No, I wouldn't blame you, as long as you're the one plugging her.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843816</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844754</id>
	<title>Quall</title>
	<author>quall</author>
	<datestamp>1264082520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am not surprised either. In fact, it is preparing them for the world outside of high-school. I am an adult in my mid 20s and I spend practically the whole day in front of media. I spend about 8 hours at work on a computer, i listen to music in my car when I go to and from work, and in the evening I watch tv. I spend probably 11 or 12 hours in front of media as an adult. The weekends are the only times where I spend very little of my time on media.

According to that study, kids who spend a lot of time on media are generally stressed and depressed. I wonder if that is an cause for the media time consumption and not an affect. At least they will know how to use those things. It is practically required in the working class these days.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am not surprised either .
In fact , it is preparing them for the world outside of high-school .
I am an adult in my mid 20s and I spend practically the whole day in front of media .
I spend about 8 hours at work on a computer , i listen to music in my car when I go to and from work , and in the evening I watch tv .
I spend probably 11 or 12 hours in front of media as an adult .
The weekends are the only times where I spend very little of my time on media .
According to that study , kids who spend a lot of time on media are generally stressed and depressed .
I wonder if that is an cause for the media time consumption and not an affect .
At least they will know how to use those things .
It is practically required in the working class these days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am not surprised either.
In fact, it is preparing them for the world outside of high-school.
I am an adult in my mid 20s and I spend practically the whole day in front of media.
I spend about 8 hours at work on a computer, i listen to music in my car when I go to and from work, and in the evening I watch tv.
I spend probably 11 or 12 hours in front of media as an adult.
The weekends are the only times where I spend very little of my time on media.
According to that study, kids who spend a lot of time on media are generally stressed and depressed.
I wonder if that is an cause for the media time consumption and not an affect.
At least they will know how to use those things.
It is practically required in the working class these days.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843260</id>
	<title>Re:That's all?</title>
	<author>polar red</author>
	<datestamp>1264106100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>jup. less than 16 hours a day is for sissies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>jup .
less than 16 hours a day is for sissies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>jup.
less than 16 hours a day is for sissies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843206</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844530</id>
	<title>Re:Kids...</title>
	<author>-kyz</author>
	<datestamp>1264080000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They <i>can</i> spell properly. Kids <b>choose</b> to spell like idiots because it makes them different from their parents.</p><p>It's the same reason they listen to music that's "unlistenable noise" if you ask their parents. In fact, a friend of mine complained his kids were into noisecore. Ha! He grew up being into heavy metal, which annoyed his parents who preferred the Beatles.</p><p>Texting doesn't make you a worse speller, because you have to know how to spell something properly before you can make it shorter for text-speak. <a href="http://david-crystal.blogspot.com/2008/08/on-txtng-reactions.html" title="blogspot.com">Ask a linguistics professor about it sometime</a> [blogspot.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They can spell properly .
Kids choose to spell like idiots because it makes them different from their parents.It 's the same reason they listen to music that 's " unlistenable noise " if you ask their parents .
In fact , a friend of mine complained his kids were into noisecore .
Ha ! He grew up being into heavy metal , which annoyed his parents who preferred the Beatles.Texting does n't make you a worse speller , because you have to know how to spell something properly before you can make it shorter for text-speak .
Ask a linguistics professor about it sometime [ blogspot.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They can spell properly.
Kids choose to spell like idiots because it makes them different from their parents.It's the same reason they listen to music that's "unlistenable noise" if you ask their parents.
In fact, a friend of mine complained his kids were into noisecore.
Ha! He grew up being into heavy metal, which annoyed his parents who preferred the Beatles.Texting doesn't make you a worse speller, because you have to know how to spell something properly before you can make it shorter for text-speak.
Ask a linguistics professor about it sometime [blogspot.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843338</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843346</id>
	<title>Re:more reading, less doing.</title>
	<author>poor\_boi</author>
	<datestamp>1264107240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's OK to build on the foundations of others' work.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's OK to build on the foundations of others ' work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's OK to build on the foundations of others' work.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30849382</id>
	<title>Re:So, what else would you have them do?</title>
	<author>BJ\_Covert\_Action</author>
	<datestamp>1264104480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They could spend their time crafting or building something. Things like that enrich a community. Its always nice having a neighbor that will knit you a cap or a pair of slippers if you agree to repair their broken cabinet door for them. Also, making explosives out of home chemicals and lighting things on fire (while generally a terrible and unsafe idea) is a hell of a lot of fun. It's much more of a rush than the virtual explosions found in movie theatres =D
<br> <br>
Not that I am encouraging that kind of behavior....</htmltext>
<tokenext>They could spend their time crafting or building something .
Things like that enrich a community .
Its always nice having a neighbor that will knit you a cap or a pair of slippers if you agree to repair their broken cabinet door for them .
Also , making explosives out of home chemicals and lighting things on fire ( while generally a terrible and unsafe idea ) is a hell of a lot of fun .
It 's much more of a rush than the virtual explosions found in movie theatres = D Not that I am encouraging that kind of behavior... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They could spend their time crafting or building something.
Things like that enrich a community.
Its always nice having a neighbor that will knit you a cap or a pair of slippers if you agree to repair their broken cabinet door for them.
Also, making explosives out of home chemicals and lighting things on fire (while generally a terrible and unsafe idea) is a hell of a lot of fun.
It's much more of a rush than the virtual explosions found in movie theatres =D
 
Not that I am encouraging that kind of behavior....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843636</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843714</id>
	<title>Re:For those too lazy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264069020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How is this news? In an average day, excluding the 7.5 hours I spend in front of a computer at work, I still manage to pack in a lot of "media"-time.</p><p>
TV: 5<br>
Music/Audio: 1.5 - 2<br>
Computer: 7<br>
Video Games: 1<br>
Print: &lt;1 - 2 (I do reading stints, where I consume much more, but on average..)<br>
Movies: 0.3</p><p>Of course, my multitasking factor is probably higher than these lame kids'. Laptop is always on, always on the table in front of me so I can chat, surf, perhaps program a little. The TV is for the most part on as well, except that part of the evening where the most interesting program is Oprah. I read on the bus to and from work while listening to music, and naturally "TV Games" pretty much has to overlap 100\% with either "Computer" or "TV" (disregarding portables, which I don't own).</p><p>News? Hardly.News to the Slashdot crowd..? Definitely not. Scaremongering for technophobic parents? Yes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How is this news ?
In an average day , excluding the 7.5 hours I spend in front of a computer at work , I still manage to pack in a lot of " media " -time .
TV : 5 Music/Audio : 1.5 - 2 Computer : 7 Video Games : 1 Print : Movies : 0.3Of course , my multitasking factor is probably higher than these lame kids' .
Laptop is always on , always on the table in front of me so I can chat , surf , perhaps program a little .
The TV is for the most part on as well , except that part of the evening where the most interesting program is Oprah .
I read on the bus to and from work while listening to music , and naturally " TV Games " pretty much has to overlap 100 \ % with either " Computer " or " TV " ( disregarding portables , which I do n't own ) .News ?
Hardly.News to the Slashdot crowd.. ?
Definitely not .
Scaremongering for technophobic parents ?
Yes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is this news?
In an average day, excluding the 7.5 hours I spend in front of a computer at work, I still manage to pack in a lot of "media"-time.
TV: 5
Music/Audio: 1.5 - 2
Computer: 7
Video Games: 1
Print: 
Movies: 0.3Of course, my multitasking factor is probably higher than these lame kids'.
Laptop is always on, always on the table in front of me so I can chat, surf, perhaps program a little.
The TV is for the most part on as well, except that part of the evening where the most interesting program is Oprah.
I read on the bus to and from work while listening to music, and naturally "TV Games" pretty much has to overlap 100\% with either "Computer" or "TV" (disregarding portables, which I don't own).News?
Hardly.News to the Slashdot crowd..?
Definitely not.
Scaremongering for technophobic parents?
Yes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843142</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30857086</id>
	<title>Re:Your taxes at work</title>
	<author>JackieBrown</author>
	<datestamp>1264191480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How often do you read using phonics?</p></div><p>It was useful when I was younger and their where a lot of new word for me to discover.</p><p>Sometimes a definition of a word that I had not read (but had heard) before wouldn't come to me until after I spoke (or thought) what it sounded like.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How often do you read using phonics ? It was useful when I was younger and their where a lot of new word for me to discover.Sometimes a definition of a word that I had not read ( but had heard ) before would n't come to me until after I spoke ( or thought ) what it sounded like .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How often do you read using phonics?It was useful when I was younger and their where a lot of new word for me to discover.Sometimes a definition of a word that I had not read (but had heard) before wouldn't come to me until after I spoke (or thought) what it sounded like.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30848622</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843316</id>
	<title>I'm Shocked!</title>
	<author>cyberzephyr</author>
	<datestamp>1264107000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>/. readers already know this.  For 10 years i have almost always laughed at the fact we see it here before they, (The uninformed public) do. </p><p>
&nbsp; Look at the network news and see the slide.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>/ .
readers already know this .
For 10 years i have almost always laughed at the fact we see it here before they , ( The uninformed public ) do .
  Look at the network news and see the slide .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>/.
readers already know this.
For 10 years i have almost always laughed at the fact we see it here before they, (The uninformed public) do.
  Look at the network news and see the slide.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843708</id>
	<title>Well I'm 20</title>
	<author>enter to exit</author>
	<datestamp>1264068900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>well I'm 20 and for most of the people i know thats a underestimation.</p><p>
Everyone has FB/twitter on their phones with basic www access. I don't buy a newspaper unless they are giving away a free shirt or something, I check the news on my phone and sometimes pay the 15c an article during the break/commute (honestly, the headings are enough most of the time).</p><p>
My job description involves the internet mainly email, a voIP setup we use for phoning people and an online database. My phone has an ebook that i use sometimes (but i find it difficult to deditate a decent amount of time to just reading a book, especially with my phone buzzing status updates and messages). I only go to my local libary to leech the free wireless access (like everyone else there).</p><p>
I go home and turn on my laptop and stream TV shows onto my plasma while reading slashdot/BBC/forums, shows very often not on local TV (curb your enthusiasm, for one). There is not a moment i am not the internet. It's always in my pocket. <br>

This site needs to include UBB code or WYSIWYG, i spend 10 minutes trying to get the formatting right with HTML.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>well I 'm 20 and for most of the people i know thats a underestimation .
Everyone has FB/twitter on their phones with basic www access .
I do n't buy a newspaper unless they are giving away a free shirt or something , I check the news on my phone and sometimes pay the 15c an article during the break/commute ( honestly , the headings are enough most of the time ) .
My job description involves the internet mainly email , a voIP setup we use for phoning people and an online database .
My phone has an ebook that i use sometimes ( but i find it difficult to deditate a decent amount of time to just reading a book , especially with my phone buzzing status updates and messages ) .
I only go to my local libary to leech the free wireless access ( like everyone else there ) .
I go home and turn on my laptop and stream TV shows onto my plasma while reading slashdot/BBC/forums , shows very often not on local TV ( curb your enthusiasm , for one ) .
There is not a moment i am not the internet .
It 's always in my pocket .
This site needs to include UBB code or WYSIWYG , i spend 10 minutes trying to get the formatting right with HTML .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>well I'm 20 and for most of the people i know thats a underestimation.
Everyone has FB/twitter on their phones with basic www access.
I don't buy a newspaper unless they are giving away a free shirt or something, I check the news on my phone and sometimes pay the 15c an article during the break/commute (honestly, the headings are enough most of the time).
My job description involves the internet mainly email, a voIP setup we use for phoning people and an online database.
My phone has an ebook that i use sometimes (but i find it difficult to deditate a decent amount of time to just reading a book, especially with my phone buzzing status updates and messages).
I only go to my local libary to leech the free wireless access (like everyone else there).
I go home and turn on my laptop and stream TV shows onto my plasma while reading slashdot/BBC/forums, shows very often not on local TV (curb your enthusiasm, for one).
There is not a moment i am not the internet.
It's always in my pocket.
This site needs to include UBB code or WYSIWYG, i spend 10 minutes trying to get the formatting right with HTML.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843160</id>
	<title>This stat is rather curious</title>
	<author>Paktu</author>
	<datestamp>1264105080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>The survey taker's school "doesn't use grades" for 0\% of heavy users, 3\% of medium users, and 10\% of light users.  This statistic by itself makes me unconvinced about the overall findings...do you mean to tell me that 0\% of heavy internet users attend schools that don't give grades?  What the hell is the sample size, anyway???</htmltext>
<tokenext>The survey taker 's school " does n't use grades " for 0 \ % of heavy users , 3 \ % of medium users , and 10 \ % of light users .
This statistic by itself makes me unconvinced about the overall findings...do you mean to tell me that 0 \ % of heavy internet users attend schools that do n't give grades ?
What the hell is the sample size , anyway ? ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The survey taker's school "doesn't use grades" for 0\% of heavy users, 3\% of medium users, and 10\% of light users.
This statistic by itself makes me unconvinced about the overall findings...do you mean to tell me that 0\% of heavy internet users attend schools that don't give grades?
What the hell is the sample size, anyway??
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30846654</id>
	<title>Re:For those too lazy</title>
	<author>joocemann</author>
	<datestamp>1264092840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I like your breakdown of the categories.  Right on.</p><p>I agree --- no cause for alarm here.</p><p>Cultures are changing.  This is how life goes, especially in these rapidly changing times.</p><p>Really, the only major downfall of much of this is the fact that you're generally sedentary during computer/media use.  But if kids were to ensure good workout schedules as well they could negate that concern.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I like your breakdown of the categories .
Right on.I agree --- no cause for alarm here.Cultures are changing .
This is how life goes , especially in these rapidly changing times.Really , the only major downfall of much of this is the fact that you 're generally sedentary during computer/media use .
But if kids were to ensure good workout schedules as well they could negate that concern .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like your breakdown of the categories.
Right on.I agree --- no cause for alarm here.Cultures are changing.
This is how life goes, especially in these rapidly changing times.Really, the only major downfall of much of this is the fact that you're generally sedentary during computer/media use.
But if kids were to ensure good workout schedules as well they could negate that concern.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843328</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843452</id>
	<title>Our kids</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264065420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>TV (pay channels): about 1 hour<br>
Playstation: 1-2 hours<br>
Computer (mostly web): 1-2 hours<br>
MP3 &amp; suchlike: less than 1 hour<br>
Reading (overlaps with MP3, and includes homework): 2-4 hours
<br> <br>
The Playstation games are nonviolent or relatively low violence (Afrika, LittleBigPlanet, a few Ratchet&amp;Clank). Reading time does not include PC time. They also get 2-4 hours of outside playing or at various hobby activities. This is the routine that we have right now, based largely on the kids' preferences.
<br> <br>
It seems that the kids in the survey don't have much time left over for hobbies or being outside, or even for reading books...</htmltext>
<tokenext>TV ( pay channels ) : about 1 hour Playstation : 1-2 hours Computer ( mostly web ) : 1-2 hours MP3 &amp; suchlike : less than 1 hour Reading ( overlaps with MP3 , and includes homework ) : 2-4 hours The Playstation games are nonviolent or relatively low violence ( Afrika , LittleBigPlanet , a few Ratchet&amp;Clank ) .
Reading time does not include PC time .
They also get 2-4 hours of outside playing or at various hobby activities .
This is the routine that we have right now , based largely on the kids ' preferences .
It seems that the kids in the survey do n't have much time left over for hobbies or being outside , or even for reading books.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>TV (pay channels): about 1 hour
Playstation: 1-2 hours
Computer (mostly web): 1-2 hours
MP3 &amp; suchlike: less than 1 hour
Reading (overlaps with MP3, and includes homework): 2-4 hours
 
The Playstation games are nonviolent or relatively low violence (Afrika, LittleBigPlanet, a few Ratchet&amp;Clank).
Reading time does not include PC time.
They also get 2-4 hours of outside playing or at various hobby activities.
This is the routine that we have right now, based largely on the kids' preferences.
It seems that the kids in the survey don't have much time left over for hobbies or being outside, or even for reading books...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843142</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843652</id>
	<title>Re:more reading, less doing.</title>
	<author>dushkin</author>
	<datestamp>1264068180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And I feel myself slowly being trained into ASKING for the info rather than experimenting and have your own observation in things.</p><p>Don't know how to put it in better words.</p></div><p>Me neither. Can anyone think of a good way?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And I feel myself slowly being trained into ASKING for the info rather than experimenting and have your own observation in things.Do n't know how to put it in better words.Me neither .
Can anyone think of a good way ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And I feel myself slowly being trained into ASKING for the info rather than experimenting and have your own observation in things.Don't know how to put it in better words.Me neither.
Can anyone think of a good way?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843174</id>
	<title>Is this really a surprise?</title>
	<author>Third Position</author>
	<datestamp>1264105140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't really see how anyone could be surprised by this. As more media options become available and more convenient to access, it seems like a logical progression. Also, you're media consumption devices are more flexible, you can consume from more sources of media concurrently. Your cell phone can likely provide you with verbal communication, music, social networks, even movies and radio. And that's probably the simplest device at your disposal these days.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't really see how anyone could be surprised by this .
As more media options become available and more convenient to access , it seems like a logical progression .
Also , you 're media consumption devices are more flexible , you can consume from more sources of media concurrently .
Your cell phone can likely provide you with verbal communication , music , social networks , even movies and radio .
And that 's probably the simplest device at your disposal these days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't really see how anyone could be surprised by this.
As more media options become available and more convenient to access, it seems like a logical progression.
Also, you're media consumption devices are more flexible, you can consume from more sources of media concurrently.
Your cell phone can likely provide you with verbal communication, music, social networks, even movies and radio.
And that's probably the simplest device at your disposal these days.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30845446</id>
	<title>Re:For those too lazy</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1264087440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree there's no need for panic. But even for TV:</p><p><i>Almost entirely negative</i></p><p>It may be positive, but does that make it negative? And I bet many adults spend a few hours everyday watching TV in the evening, probably more so for older people, as they don't use the Internet instead.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree there 's no need for panic .
But even for TV : Almost entirely negativeIt may be positive , but does that make it negative ?
And I bet many adults spend a few hours everyday watching TV in the evening , probably more so for older people , as they do n't use the Internet instead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree there's no need for panic.
But even for TV:Almost entirely negativeIt may be positive, but does that make it negative?
And I bet many adults spend a few hours everyday watching TV in the evening, probably more so for older people, as they don't use the Internet instead.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843328</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30845008</id>
	<title>Study shows: Youth at home, most of the day.</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1264084680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>News at 11.</p><p>Really, what&rsquo;s the point of turning the computer off when at home?<br>That would mean no music, no movies, no quick search on wikipedia or something, no way of seeing if friends are at home.<br>If you do not prefer to be alone and bored, but don&rsquo;t want or can&rsquo;t to drive to your friends, then the choice is obvious.</p><p>Doesn&rsquo;t mean one also <em>is</em> alone and actually sits in front of the thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>News at 11.Really , what    s the point of turning the computer off when at home ? That would mean no music , no movies , no quick search on wikipedia or something , no way of seeing if friends are at home.If you do not prefer to be alone and bored , but don    t want or can    t to drive to your friends , then the choice is obvious.Doesn    t mean one also is alone and actually sits in front of the thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>News at 11.Really, what’s the point of turning the computer off when at home?That would mean no music, no movies, no quick search on wikipedia or something, no way of seeing if friends are at home.If you do not prefer to be alone and bored, but don’t want or can’t to drive to your friends, then the choice is obvious.Doesn’t mean one also is alone and actually sits in front of the thing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844808</id>
	<title>Re:For those too lazy</title>
	<author>AbRASiON</author>
	<datestamp>1264083120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm 32 and it seems absurd to me, appointment with my media. LOL<br>Sorry can't think of a better word to summarise it but lol, it's so archaic, who has the time? It's 2010 not 1987.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm 32 and it seems absurd to me , appointment with my media .
LOLSorry ca n't think of a better word to summarise it but lol , it 's so archaic , who has the time ?
It 's 2010 not 1987 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm 32 and it seems absurd to me, appointment with my media.
LOLSorry can't think of a better word to summarise it but lol, it's so archaic, who has the time?
It's 2010 not 1987.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843308</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843712</id>
	<title>Re:Kids...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264068960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Is it really that much more efficient to type "Im going 2 da park"?</p></div><p>Yes, if you write that with the standard cell phone keypad.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is it really that much more efficient to type " Im going 2 da park " ? Yes , if you write that with the standard cell phone keypad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is it really that much more efficient to type "Im going 2 da park"?Yes, if you write that with the standard cell phone keypad.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843338</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30847586</id>
	<title>To Paraphrase the Matrix</title>
	<author>lobiusmoop</author>
	<datestamp>1264096680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Media is a system... built to keep us under control... in order to turn a human being... into <a href="http://www.sxc.hu/pic/m/u/uk/ukapala/307203\_toy\_sheep.jpg" title="www.sxc.hu">this</a> [www.sxc.hu]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Media is a system... built to keep us under control... in order to turn a human being... into this [ www.sxc.hu ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Media is a system... built to keep us under control... in order to turn a human being... into this [www.sxc.hu]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844538</id>
	<title>Of course they're plugged in.</title>
	<author>machine321</author>
	<datestamp>1264080060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you don't plug them in, how are you going to charge them?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you do n't plug them in , how are you going to charge them ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you don't plug them in, how are you going to charge them?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30847940</id>
	<title>Tweens</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264098060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Besides the teens, the researchers looked at motion and shape tweens from the upcoming Flash CS5 software package. We are unsure about how exactly this is related to how much time teens spend "on the web" but the researchers must know better.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Besides the teens , the researchers looked at motion and shape tweens from the upcoming Flash CS5 software package .
We are unsure about how exactly this is related to how much time teens spend " on the web " but the researchers must know better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Besides the teens, the researchers looked at motion and shape tweens from the upcoming Flash CS5 software package.
We are unsure about how exactly this is related to how much time teens spend "on the web" but the researchers must know better.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843762</id>
	<title>Re:For those too lazy</title>
	<author>w0mprat</author>
	<datestamp>1264069620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Computer 1:29 - As a computer scientist, well, let's just say I'm about 10x this. It can range from really good (research) to horrible (4chan).</p></div><p>Slashdot somewhere in that range? Or was that to beyond horrible to mention?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Computer 1 : 29 - As a computer scientist , well , let 's just say I 'm about 10x this .
It can range from really good ( research ) to horrible ( 4chan ) .Slashdot somewhere in that range ?
Or was that to beyond horrible to mention ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Computer 1:29 - As a computer scientist, well, let's just say I'm about 10x this.
It can range from really good (research) to horrible (4chan).Slashdot somewhere in that range?
Or was that to beyond horrible to mention?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843328</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30848622</id>
	<title>Re:Your taxes at work</title>
	<author>Doctor Faustus</author>
	<datestamp>1264101000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>My daughter was not taught how to read using phonics, she was taught using "sight words."</i><br>How often do you read using phonics?  If you are consciously sounding out words, people generally interpret that as "can't read".</p><p>English spelling is based on half a dozen different sets of phonics rules (English, Latin, Greek, French, and probably others).  I don't know about you, but I only learned the very simplest of them when I was in first grade in 1982.  Getting a feel for the rest came from just seeing words that looked similar.</p><p><i>I asked the teacher she wasn't learning the multiplication table and the teacher said that it was not taught anymore because they prefered 'concepts.'</i><br>Right, because those apply to things that are still important.  My son is in 7th grade, and not as good at long multiplication and division as I was then, but he's learning geometry and algebra I didn't get until 9th and 10th grade.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My daughter was not taught how to read using phonics , she was taught using " sight words .
" How often do you read using phonics ?
If you are consciously sounding out words , people generally interpret that as " ca n't read " .English spelling is based on half a dozen different sets of phonics rules ( English , Latin , Greek , French , and probably others ) .
I do n't know about you , but I only learned the very simplest of them when I was in first grade in 1982 .
Getting a feel for the rest came from just seeing words that looked similar.I asked the teacher she was n't learning the multiplication table and the teacher said that it was not taught anymore because they prefered 'concepts .
'Right , because those apply to things that are still important .
My son is in 7th grade , and not as good at long multiplication and division as I was then , but he 's learning geometry and algebra I did n't get until 9th and 10th grade .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My daughter was not taught how to read using phonics, she was taught using "sight words.
"How often do you read using phonics?
If you are consciously sounding out words, people generally interpret that as "can't read".English spelling is based on half a dozen different sets of phonics rules (English, Latin, Greek, French, and probably others).
I don't know about you, but I only learned the very simplest of them when I was in first grade in 1982.
Getting a feel for the rest came from just seeing words that looked similar.I asked the teacher she wasn't learning the multiplication table and the teacher said that it was not taught anymore because they prefered 'concepts.
'Right, because those apply to things that are still important.
My son is in 7th grade, and not as good at long multiplication and division as I was then, but he's learning geometry and algebra I didn't get until 9th and 10th grade.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843794</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843338
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30845552
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843338
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843346
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843762
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30857910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843398
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843338
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843338
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30845446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30845124
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843392
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843338
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30849382
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843636
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843720
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30845778
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30847348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843392
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843338
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30846622
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843260
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843206
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30846002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30848756
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844530
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843338
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844750
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843338
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30846648
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843214
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30849688
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30848972
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843714
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30845848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843452
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30846206
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843206
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30857086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30848622
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843392
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843338
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30846654
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843338
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843392
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843338
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844052
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843816
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843780
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30847394
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843860
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30848390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843338
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844676
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843338
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30849332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843338
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30845296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843652
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843636
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30857838
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843392
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843338
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844808
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30845152
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_0323238_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844526
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843398
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843338
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_21_0323238.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843316
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_21_0323238.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843142
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843452
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30845848
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30845152
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843780
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843308
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844808
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30845296
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843328
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843762
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30849688
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30846654
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30845778
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30845446
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843714
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30848972
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_21_0323238.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843214
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30846648
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_21_0323238.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843636
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30849382
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844806
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_21_0323238.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843338
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844676
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843712
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843392
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843870
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843794
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30845124
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30857838
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30847348
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30848622
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30857086
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843444
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30848390
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30845552
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843398
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844526
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30857910
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844530
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30848756
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30849332
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844750
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844824
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_21_0323238.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843206
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30846206
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843260
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30846622
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_21_0323238.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843708
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_21_0323238.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30845982
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_21_0323238.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30845008
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_21_0323238.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843216
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843720
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843652
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843346
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844842
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843646
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30846002
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_21_0323238.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843860
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30847394
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_21_0323238.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843160
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_21_0323238.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30843816
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_0323238.30844052
</commentlist>
</conversation>
