<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_25_2241200</id>
	<title>Thomas Edison's Kindle</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1264422780000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>harrymcc writes <i>"In 1911, Thomas Edison bragged that he could make a 40,000-page book by printing the pages on thin pieces of metal. In the mid-1930s, newspapers experimented with transmitting special editions into homes via early fax machines. In 1956, Chrysler tried to sell Americans on buying 7-inch records that could only be played on a tiny turntable built into its cars' dashboards. Over at Technologizer, I rounded up these and a dozen other <a href="http://technologizer.com/2010/01/24/edisons-kindle/">fascinating, forgotten gadget ideas that didn't work out</a> &mdash; but which foreshadowed products and technologies that eventually became a big deal."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>harrymcc writes " In 1911 , Thomas Edison bragged that he could make a 40,000-page book by printing the pages on thin pieces of metal .
In the mid-1930s , newspapers experimented with transmitting special editions into homes via early fax machines .
In 1956 , Chrysler tried to sell Americans on buying 7-inch records that could only be played on a tiny turntable built into its cars ' dashboards .
Over at Technologizer , I rounded up these and a dozen other fascinating , forgotten gadget ideas that did n't work out    but which foreshadowed products and technologies that eventually became a big deal .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>harrymcc writes "In 1911, Thomas Edison bragged that he could make a 40,000-page book by printing the pages on thin pieces of metal.
In the mid-1930s, newspapers experimented with transmitting special editions into homes via early fax machines.
In 1956, Chrysler tried to sell Americans on buying 7-inch records that could only be played on a tiny turntable built into its cars' dashboards.
Over at Technologizer, I rounded up these and a dozen other fascinating, forgotten gadget ideas that didn't work out — but which foreshadowed products and technologies that eventually became a big deal.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898806</id>
	<title>Re:hmmm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264427880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do you lop off your fingers when handling Christmas tinsel?  How about aluminium ("tin") foil?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you lop off your fingers when handling Christmas tinsel ?
How about aluminium ( " tin " ) foil ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you lop off your fingers when handling Christmas tinsel?
How about aluminium ("tin") foil?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898610</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30905078</id>
	<title>Re:Mail-in mainframe access</title>
	<author>marcosdumay</author>
	<datestamp>1264524180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, that is still better than 42... I guess.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , that is still better than 42... I guess .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, that is still better than 42... I guess.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899110</id>
	<title>Antikythera</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264430160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's amazing how far backwards we managed to go.</p><p>Shame on the Dark Ages for, erm, being dark and on the Greek for not making their knowledge public.</p><p>They probably had laws against export of secrets... bummer!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's amazing how far backwards we managed to go.Shame on the Dark Ages for , erm , being dark and on the Greek for not making their knowledge public.They probably had laws against export of secrets... bummer !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's amazing how far backwards we managed to go.Shame on the Dark Ages for, erm, being dark and on the Greek for not making their knowledge public.They probably had laws against export of secrets... bummer!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898620</id>
	<title>Success is timing as much as great ideas</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264426860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Success is timing as much as great ideas. Your customers have to be ready for it. It happens on the macro level, with mass produced products, and on the micro: I learned long ago that if my clients aren't ready to adapt a new technology, it is a waste of time to push it on them. Usually they come around to it a few years later.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>'Ready' usually means that it is a small mental step forward and they see a pressing need for it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Success is timing as much as great ideas .
Your customers have to be ready for it .
It happens on the macro level , with mass produced products , and on the micro : I learned long ago that if my clients are n't ready to adapt a new technology , it is a waste of time to push it on them .
Usually they come around to it a few years later .
: ) 'Ready ' usually means that it is a small mental step forward and they see a pressing need for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Success is timing as much as great ideas.
Your customers have to be ready for it.
It happens on the macro level, with mass produced products, and on the micro: I learned long ago that if my clients aren't ready to adapt a new technology, it is a waste of time to push it on them.
Usually they come around to it a few years later.
:)'Ready' usually means that it is a small mental step forward and they see a pressing need for it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30909668</id>
	<title>Re:TFA gets it completely wrong on the 'Kindle'</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264499460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're missing the part where everyone is nit-picking, nay-saying or simply laughing at the technology of those times.  If presented with the Buck Rogers comic anthology, these same people wouldn't make it past the first page because (1) the technology is "then" and not "now", and (2) there are no references to not-so-discrete body parts.  This includes the guy writing the "fly in the ointment" pronouncements.</p><p>Look around the web, and no one is truly speculating about future technology beyond what Apple might release next year.  If it sounds "too hard", no one will fund it.  If you can't multitask it while driving the car, no one will buy it.  Our school children cannot conceive of a future without "green" in the name, nor one without government involvement, as limiting as those concepts can be.</p><p>Likewise the healthcare debate: all congress cares about is how to pay for it.  No one talked about capturing patent rights to things like bone-mending technology or nanobots that can do surgery or deliver medicine from the blood stream, let alone discussing how to restart the nuclear medicine supply pipeline.</p><p>When you read that blog, try to see the problems being solved, not the solutions employed.  You will realize that good solutions never occur on the first attempt, only by years-long, patient perseverance in the face of those that have both short-term memory and short-term goals.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're missing the part where everyone is nit-picking , nay-saying or simply laughing at the technology of those times .
If presented with the Buck Rogers comic anthology , these same people would n't make it past the first page because ( 1 ) the technology is " then " and not " now " , and ( 2 ) there are no references to not-so-discrete body parts .
This includes the guy writing the " fly in the ointment " pronouncements.Look around the web , and no one is truly speculating about future technology beyond what Apple might release next year .
If it sounds " too hard " , no one will fund it .
If you ca n't multitask it while driving the car , no one will buy it .
Our school children can not conceive of a future without " green " in the name , nor one without government involvement , as limiting as those concepts can be.Likewise the healthcare debate : all congress cares about is how to pay for it .
No one talked about capturing patent rights to things like bone-mending technology or nanobots that can do surgery or deliver medicine from the blood stream , let alone discussing how to restart the nuclear medicine supply pipeline.When you read that blog , try to see the problems being solved , not the solutions employed .
You will realize that good solutions never occur on the first attempt , only by years-long , patient perseverance in the face of those that have both short-term memory and short-term goals .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're missing the part where everyone is nit-picking, nay-saying or simply laughing at the technology of those times.
If presented with the Buck Rogers comic anthology, these same people wouldn't make it past the first page because (1) the technology is "then" and not "now", and (2) there are no references to not-so-discrete body parts.
This includes the guy writing the "fly in the ointment" pronouncements.Look around the web, and no one is truly speculating about future technology beyond what Apple might release next year.
If it sounds "too hard", no one will fund it.
If you can't multitask it while driving the car, no one will buy it.
Our school children cannot conceive of a future without "green" in the name, nor one without government involvement, as limiting as those concepts can be.Likewise the healthcare debate: all congress cares about is how to pay for it.
No one talked about capturing patent rights to things like bone-mending technology or nanobots that can do surgery or deliver medicine from the blood stream, let alone discussing how to restart the nuclear medicine supply pipeline.When you read that blog, try to see the problems being solved, not the solutions employed.
You will realize that good solutions never occur on the first attempt, only by years-long, patient perseverance in the face of those that have both short-term memory and short-term goals.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898670</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899492</id>
	<title>Edison</title>
	<author>feesa</author>
	<datestamp>1264433940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>He seems to be still coming into the picture every day</htmltext>
<tokenext>He seems to be still coming into the picture every day</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He seems to be still coming into the picture every day</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30904918</id>
	<title>Re:hmmm</title>
	<author>marcosdumay</author>
	<datestamp>1264523460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You are replacing shelves of paper with a 2 inches block of nickel.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You are replacing shelves of paper with a 2 inches block of nickel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are replacing shelves of paper with a 2 inches block of nickel.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30900194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30902636</id>
	<title>Re:hmmm</title>
	<author>vlm</author>
	<datestamp>1264512900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The other problem is that layers of printing ink have thickness. It doesn't matter a whole lot with paper (for most inks, anyway) because paper is so thick relative to the ink, but relative to 1.27 micron metal leaf, it's another matter altogether.</p></div><p>Electroplated gold?  Gold leaf seems to run about a tenth of a gram per square inch... Compared to the cost of making the nickel "paper", the gold "ink" will be pretty cheap.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The other problem is that layers of printing ink have thickness .
It does n't matter a whole lot with paper ( for most inks , anyway ) because paper is so thick relative to the ink , but relative to 1.27 micron metal leaf , it 's another matter altogether.Electroplated gold ?
Gold leaf seems to run about a tenth of a gram per square inch... Compared to the cost of making the nickel " paper " , the gold " ink " will be pretty cheap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The other problem is that layers of printing ink have thickness.
It doesn't matter a whole lot with paper (for most inks, anyway) because paper is so thick relative to the ink, but relative to 1.27 micron metal leaf, it's another matter altogether.Electroplated gold?
Gold leaf seems to run about a tenth of a gram per square inch... Compared to the cost of making the nickel "paper", the gold "ink" will be pretty cheap.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899908</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898862</id>
	<title>First Web Browser!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264428240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Telenewspaper and Electric Writer described in the article is the first imagining I have ever seen of what we now consider the browsing experience!  It look slike it is alst Two-Way as the console has the ability to send information out as well.</p><p>Cool...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Telenewspaper and Electric Writer described in the article is the first imagining I have ever seen of what we now consider the browsing experience !
It look slike it is alst Two-Way as the console has the ability to send information out as well.Cool.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Telenewspaper and Electric Writer described in the article is the first imagining I have ever seen of what we now consider the browsing experience!
It look slike it is alst Two-Way as the console has the ability to send information out as well.Cool...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899366</id>
	<title>how many blades?</title>
	<author>jollyreaper</author>
	<datestamp>1264432560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In 1911, Thomas Edison bragged that he could make a 40,000-page book by printing the pages on thin pieces of metal</p></div><p>Man, how many blades? That Gillette guy is gonna shit himself.</p><p><a href="http://www.theonion.com/content/node/33930" title="theonion.com">http://www.theonion.com/content/node/33930</a> [theonion.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In 1911 , Thomas Edison bragged that he could make a 40,000-page book by printing the pages on thin pieces of metalMan , how many blades ?
That Gillette guy is gon na shit himself.http : //www.theonion.com/content/node/33930 [ theonion.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In 1911, Thomas Edison bragged that he could make a 40,000-page book by printing the pages on thin pieces of metalMan, how many blades?
That Gillette guy is gonna shit himself.http://www.theonion.com/content/node/33930 [theonion.com]
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898890</id>
	<title>Hellschreiber</title>
	<author>leighklotz</author>
	<datestamp>1264428480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hellscrhreiber was used in the 1930's.  It uses a font to send text over a wire (or radio) link, as off-on pulses for pixels.<br><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hellschreiber" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hellschreiber</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>Some hams still use it, for kicks.  It's got good performance in noise (weak signal mode).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hellscrhreiber was used in the 1930 's .
It uses a font to send text over a wire ( or radio ) link , as off-on pulses for pixels.http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hellschreiber [ wikipedia.org ] Some hams still use it , for kicks .
It 's got good performance in noise ( weak signal mode ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hellscrhreiber was used in the 1930's.
It uses a font to send text over a wire (or radio) link, as off-on pulses for pixels.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hellschreiber [wikipedia.org]Some hams still use it, for kicks.
It's got good performance in noise (weak signal mode).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30918736</id>
	<title>Re:hmmm</title>
	<author>Deefburger</author>
	<datestamp>1264613040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's the DRM part of the idea!</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's the DRM part of the idea !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's the DRM part of the idea!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899020</id>
	<title>Re:hmmm</title>
	<author>TBoon</author>
	<datestamp>1264429560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd imagine it to be so thin it would be quite soft. In fact so soft that it would either tear, or get crumbled up and unsuable.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd imagine it to be so thin it would be quite soft .
In fact so soft that it would either tear , or get crumbled up and unsuable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd imagine it to be so thin it would be quite soft.
In fact so soft that it would either tear, or get crumbled up and unsuable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898610</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30900660</id>
	<title>In dash records</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264444560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I listened to a lot of tunes in a friend's car way back when, that had an in dash record player. It was in a 64 (IIRC) Buick "deuce and a quarter" or 225. Worked OK, did skip on really nasty bumps, but less then what you might think.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I listened to a lot of tunes in a friend 's car way back when , that had an in dash record player .
It was in a 64 ( IIRC ) Buick " deuce and a quarter " or 225 .
Worked OK , did skip on really nasty bumps , but less then what you might think .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I listened to a lot of tunes in a friend's car way back when, that had an in dash record player.
It was in a 64 (IIRC) Buick "deuce and a quarter" or 225.
Worked OK, did skip on really nasty bumps, but less then what you might think.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30901918</id>
	<title>Re:hmmm</title>
	<author>michaelhood</author>
	<datestamp>1264504920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Do you lop off your fingers when handling Christmas tinsel?  How about aluminium ("tin") foil?</p></div><p>you would if it was brittle enough to keep a relatively wrinkle-free page.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you lop off your fingers when handling Christmas tinsel ?
How about aluminium ( " tin " ) foil ? you would if it was brittle enough to keep a relatively wrinkle-free page .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you lop off your fingers when handling Christmas tinsel?
How about aluminium ("tin") foil?you would if it was brittle enough to keep a relatively wrinkle-free page.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898806</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30903730</id>
	<title>Re:hmmm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264519140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Tinsel isn't metal. You don't typically handle the edges of foil, the way you would have to in order to flip pages of a book.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Tinsel is n't metal .
You do n't typically handle the edges of foil , the way you would have to in order to flip pages of a book .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tinsel isn't metal.
You don't typically handle the edges of foil, the way you would have to in order to flip pages of a book.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898806</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30901608</id>
	<title>How old is the author?</title>
	<author>mabinogi</author>
	<datestamp>1264500180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How old is the author of this article?<br>They seem to think that all of these things only finally got workable in the 90s, yet in many of the cases there was a perfectly working substitute in place in the 80s, 70s, or even earlier.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How old is the author of this article ? They seem to think that all of these things only finally got workable in the 90s , yet in many of the cases there was a perfectly working substitute in place in the 80s , 70s , or even earlier .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How old is the author of this article?They seem to think that all of these things only finally got workable in the 90s, yet in many of the cases there was a perfectly working substitute in place in the 80s, 70s, or even earlier.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898628</id>
	<title>Thomas Edison's Kindle?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264426920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sounds kind of like Ayn Rand's slashdot.org. Oh wait, we already have that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds kind of like Ayn Rand 's slashdot.org .
Oh wait , we already have that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds kind of like Ayn Rand's slashdot.org.
Oh wait, we already have that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899908</id>
	<title>Re:hmmm</title>
	<author>Angst Badger</author>
	<datestamp>1264437420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's not the real problem. Nickel pages 1.27 microns thick simply don't have enough stiffness for you to be able to pick up a page without crinkling it, never mind any risk to the skin on your fingers, which is quite resilient by comparison. What Mr. Edison wasn't thinking about -- I assume he was speaking off the cuff to the interviewer, as he certainly had the technical knowledge -- was the <i>tensile strength</i> of nickel. If you think it's hard to handle a sheet of aluminum foil without getting it crinkled, good luck with nickel leaf.</p><p>The other problem is that layers of printing ink have thickness. It doesn't matter a whole lot with paper (for most inks, anyway) because paper is so thick relative to the ink, but relative to 1.27 micron metal leaf, it's another matter altogether. Bear in mind that most of the ink sits on or near the surface of the paper -- if it soaked in too much it would cause the outlines of the letters to blur. And with paper, there is actually lots of empty space in the fibers for the pigment particles (mostly carbon) and the binder to settle in. Nickel leaf, on the other hand, is not fibrous, and while I suppose it might eventually be possible to cheaply mass produce sheets of nanoscale nickel fibers, it's not possible now and sure as heck wasn't in Edison's day.</p><p>The idea of using nickel isn't an entirely bad one, though printing isn't the way to go. <a href="http://www.longnow.org/events/02000/jul/30/10000-year-library-conference/" title="longnow.org">The Long Now Foundation</a> [longnow.org] -- the current project of Stewart Brand, the guy who gave us the classic hippie <i>Whole Earth Catalog</i> -- is working on using an excimer laser to etch 350,000 pages onto 2.8-inch nickel discs. This will be actual, unencoded, human-readable text -- if the human in question has a student-grade microscope capable of 650x magnification. The required technology already exists; the main problem, aside from the sheer expense of the equipment, is that it takes a day and a half to etch a single disc this way. I can't help but think that Brand would be better off using a chip fab to crank out more or less the same thing using the same technology we use for making tiny circuits.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's not the real problem .
Nickel pages 1.27 microns thick simply do n't have enough stiffness for you to be able to pick up a page without crinkling it , never mind any risk to the skin on your fingers , which is quite resilient by comparison .
What Mr. Edison was n't thinking about -- I assume he was speaking off the cuff to the interviewer , as he certainly had the technical knowledge -- was the tensile strength of nickel .
If you think it 's hard to handle a sheet of aluminum foil without getting it crinkled , good luck with nickel leaf.The other problem is that layers of printing ink have thickness .
It does n't matter a whole lot with paper ( for most inks , anyway ) because paper is so thick relative to the ink , but relative to 1.27 micron metal leaf , it 's another matter altogether .
Bear in mind that most of the ink sits on or near the surface of the paper -- if it soaked in too much it would cause the outlines of the letters to blur .
And with paper , there is actually lots of empty space in the fibers for the pigment particles ( mostly carbon ) and the binder to settle in .
Nickel leaf , on the other hand , is not fibrous , and while I suppose it might eventually be possible to cheaply mass produce sheets of nanoscale nickel fibers , it 's not possible now and sure as heck was n't in Edison 's day.The idea of using nickel is n't an entirely bad one , though printing is n't the way to go .
The Long Now Foundation [ longnow.org ] -- the current project of Stewart Brand , the guy who gave us the classic hippie Whole Earth Catalog -- is working on using an excimer laser to etch 350,000 pages onto 2.8-inch nickel discs .
This will be actual , unencoded , human-readable text -- if the human in question has a student-grade microscope capable of 650x magnification .
The required technology already exists ; the main problem , aside from the sheer expense of the equipment , is that it takes a day and a half to etch a single disc this way .
I ca n't help but think that Brand would be better off using a chip fab to crank out more or less the same thing using the same technology we use for making tiny circuits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's not the real problem.
Nickel pages 1.27 microns thick simply don't have enough stiffness for you to be able to pick up a page without crinkling it, never mind any risk to the skin on your fingers, which is quite resilient by comparison.
What Mr. Edison wasn't thinking about -- I assume he was speaking off the cuff to the interviewer, as he certainly had the technical knowledge -- was the tensile strength of nickel.
If you think it's hard to handle a sheet of aluminum foil without getting it crinkled, good luck with nickel leaf.The other problem is that layers of printing ink have thickness.
It doesn't matter a whole lot with paper (for most inks, anyway) because paper is so thick relative to the ink, but relative to 1.27 micron metal leaf, it's another matter altogether.
Bear in mind that most of the ink sits on or near the surface of the paper -- if it soaked in too much it would cause the outlines of the letters to blur.
And with paper, there is actually lots of empty space in the fibers for the pigment particles (mostly carbon) and the binder to settle in.
Nickel leaf, on the other hand, is not fibrous, and while I suppose it might eventually be possible to cheaply mass produce sheets of nanoscale nickel fibers, it's not possible now and sure as heck wasn't in Edison's day.The idea of using nickel isn't an entirely bad one, though printing isn't the way to go.
The Long Now Foundation [longnow.org] -- the current project of Stewart Brand, the guy who gave us the classic hippie Whole Earth Catalog -- is working on using an excimer laser to etch 350,000 pages onto 2.8-inch nickel discs.
This will be actual, unencoded, human-readable text -- if the human in question has a student-grade microscope capable of 650x magnification.
The required technology already exists; the main problem, aside from the sheer expense of the equipment, is that it takes a day and a half to etch a single disc this way.
I can't help but think that Brand would be better off using a chip fab to crank out more or less the same thing using the same technology we use for making tiny circuits.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898610</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30903522</id>
	<title>Cold weld?</title>
	<author>proverbialcow</author>
	<datestamp>1264518300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Um..yeah, I'd like to return this book. I was making a cake, and the recipe spreads over opposite sides of a page, and as you can clearly see, the pages stick together from 'Mix dry ingredients together in large bowl' all the way through to the Book of Revelations. Unfortunately, I didn't realize this until after I'd already added the brimstone and the lake of burning sulphur, and it was the worst birthday my five-year-old ever had."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Um..yeah , I 'd like to return this book .
I was making a cake , and the recipe spreads over opposite sides of a page , and as you can clearly see , the pages stick together from 'Mix dry ingredients together in large bowl ' all the way through to the Book of Revelations .
Unfortunately , I did n't realize this until after I 'd already added the brimstone and the lake of burning sulphur , and it was the worst birthday my five-year-old ever had .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Um..yeah, I'd like to return this book.
I was making a cake, and the recipe spreads over opposite sides of a page, and as you can clearly see, the pages stick together from 'Mix dry ingredients together in large bowl' all the way through to the Book of Revelations.
Unfortunately, I didn't realize this until after I'd already added the brimstone and the lake of burning sulphur, and it was the worst birthday my five-year-old ever had.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898670</id>
	<title>TFA gets it completely wrong on the 'Kindle'</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264427100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The author of TFA seems to have misunderstood what he has posted:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>    Even the pages of books may be made of steel, though Edison regards nickel as a better substitute for paper&rdquo;Why not?&rdquo; asks Edison. &ldquo;Nickel will absorb printer&rsquo;s ink. A sheet of nickel one twenty-thousandth of an inch thick is cheaper, tougher, and more flexible than an ordinary sheet of book-paper. A nickel book, two inches thick, would contain 40,000 pages. Such a book would weigh only a pound. I can make a pound of nickel sheets for a dollar and a quarter.&rdquo;</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Hereis a prospect of real culture for the masses Forty thousand pages in a volume! A single volume the equivalent in printing space of two hundred paper-leaved books of two hundred pages each! What a library might be placed between two steel covers and sold for, perhaps, two dollars!</p></div><p>He wasn't talking about having a small device that could 'download' content remotely. He was just talking about using nickel as a substitute for paper, but the book would still essentially be a printed one and the content would be 'hard coded' in ink, albeit you'd still get a lot more pages in there.</p><p>Either that or I'm missing something.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The author of TFA seems to have misunderstood what he has posted : Even the pages of books may be made of steel , though Edison regards nickel as a better substitute for paper    Why not ?    asks Edison .
   Nickel will absorb printer    s ink .
A sheet of nickel one twenty-thousandth of an inch thick is cheaper , tougher , and more flexible than an ordinary sheet of book-paper .
A nickel book , two inches thick , would contain 40,000 pages .
Such a book would weigh only a pound .
I can make a pound of nickel sheets for a dollar and a quarter.            Hereis a prospect of real culture for the masses Forty thousand pages in a volume !
A single volume the equivalent in printing space of two hundred paper-leaved books of two hundred pages each !
What a library might be placed between two steel covers and sold for , perhaps , two dollars ! He was n't talking about having a small device that could 'download ' content remotely .
He was just talking about using nickel as a substitute for paper , but the book would still essentially be a printed one and the content would be 'hard coded ' in ink , albeit you 'd still get a lot more pages in there.Either that or I 'm missing something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The author of TFA seems to have misunderstood what he has posted:    Even the pages of books may be made of steel, though Edison regards nickel as a better substitute for paper”Why not?” asks Edison.
“Nickel will absorb printer’s ink.
A sheet of nickel one twenty-thousandth of an inch thick is cheaper, tougher, and more flexible than an ordinary sheet of book-paper.
A nickel book, two inches thick, would contain 40,000 pages.
Such a book would weigh only a pound.
I can make a pound of nickel sheets for a dollar and a quarter.”
        Hereis a prospect of real culture for the masses Forty thousand pages in a volume!
A single volume the equivalent in printing space of two hundred paper-leaved books of two hundred pages each!
What a library might be placed between two steel covers and sold for, perhaps, two dollars!He wasn't talking about having a small device that could 'download' content remotely.
He was just talking about using nickel as a substitute for paper, but the book would still essentially be a printed one and the content would be 'hard coded' in ink, albeit you'd still get a lot more pages in there.Either that or I'm missing something.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30900104</id>
	<title>I noticed Kindle wasn't in the list.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264439400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>maybe next year, when Linux is ready for the desktop. </p><div><p>/ducks/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>maybe next year , when Linux is ready for the desktop .
/ducks/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>maybe next year, when Linux is ready for the desktop.
/ducks/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30906150</id>
	<title>Re:Another Idea that will not catch on (hopefully)</title>
	<author>CompMD</author>
	<datestamp>1264527960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In Soviet Russia, blog hypes yo...wait a second...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In Soviet Russia , blog hypes yo...wait a second.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Soviet Russia, blog hypes yo...wait a second...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898846</id>
	<title>Another Idea that will not catch on (hopefully)</title>
	<author>icebike</author>
	<datestamp>1264428120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Using Slashdot to hype your own damn blog!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Using Slashdot to hype your own damn blog !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Using Slashdot to hype your own damn blog!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898636</id>
	<title>oops!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264426980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't forget the iPod and iPhone!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't forget the iPod and iPhone !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't forget the iPod and iPhone!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30900248</id>
	<title>C0m</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264440900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">would like to 486/66 with 8 THE REAPER IN A platform for the serve5 to reinforce is dying and its Market share. Red has significantly person.  Ask your</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>would like to 486/66 with 8 THE REAPER IN A platform for the serve5 to reinforce is dying and its Market share .
Red has significantly person .
Ask your [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>would like to 486/66 with 8 THE REAPER IN A platform for the serve5 to reinforce is dying and its Market share.
Red has significantly person.
Ask your [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899556</id>
	<title>Re:hmmm</title>
	<author>amoeba1911</author>
	<datestamp>1264434360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This takes "paper cut" to a whole new level.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This takes " paper cut " to a whole new level .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This takes "paper cut" to a whole new level.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898610</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899644</id>
	<title>"No, that's paper, sir."</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264435260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Hey, is this metal? I've got a bet with Joe."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Hey , is this metal ?
I 've got a bet with Joe .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Hey, is this metal?
I've got a bet with Joe.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30900194</id>
	<title>Re:hmmm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264440420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just a naive question: no matter how thin each deadly blade is, would not you essentially have something two inches thick made of steel or nickle? How could this much metal be lighter than paper?
</p><p>From what <a href="http://www.reade.com/resources/reference-charts-particle-property-briefings/89-weight-per-cubic-foot-and-specific-gravity" title="reade.com">I can find out</a> [reade.com], Normal paper weighs 75 lb / cubic foot; steel 490 lb/cf, and nickel 541 lb/cf.
</p><p> What am I missing here?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just a naive question : no matter how thin each deadly blade is , would not you essentially have something two inches thick made of steel or nickle ?
How could this much metal be lighter than paper ?
From what I can find out [ reade.com ] , Normal paper weighs 75 lb / cubic foot ; steel 490 lb/cf , and nickel 541 lb/cf .
What am I missing here ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just a naive question: no matter how thin each deadly blade is, would not you essentially have something two inches thick made of steel or nickle?
How could this much metal be lighter than paper?
From what I can find out [reade.com], Normal paper weighs 75 lb / cubic foot; steel 490 lb/cf, and nickel 541 lb/cf.
What am I missing here?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898610</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899940</id>
	<title>Re:TFA gets it completely wrong on the 'Kindle'</title>
	<author>m.ducharme</author>
	<datestamp>1264437840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Either that or I'm missing something.</p></div><p>Just an ear for metaphor and simile.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Either that or I 'm missing something.Just an ear for metaphor and simile .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Either that or I'm missing something.Just an ear for metaphor and simile.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898670</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898854</id>
	<title>Re:TFA gets it completely wrong on the 'Kindle'</title>
	<author>dlenmn</author>
	<datestamp>1264428240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>He wasn't talking about having a small device that could 'download' content remotely.</p></div><p>Where did the author say that he was? I think the author's comparison to the kindle is just because they can store a lot of words in a little space. Whether that is a valid comparison is another issue.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>He was n't talking about having a small device that could 'download ' content remotely.Where did the author say that he was ?
I think the author 's comparison to the kindle is just because they can store a lot of words in a little space .
Whether that is a valid comparison is another issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He wasn't talking about having a small device that could 'download' content remotely.Where did the author say that he was?
I think the author's comparison to the kindle is just because they can store a lot of words in a little space.
Whether that is a valid comparison is another issue.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898670</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30913650</id>
	<title>Finger Saver Version of Edison Kindle</title>
	<author>bjs555</author>
	<datestamp>1264527840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Roll the printed metal into a cylinder and enclose it in a open-faced box with scrolling wheels at the top and bottom. Mechanically switch to a high gear ratio for fast forward / reverse.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Roll the printed metal into a cylinder and enclose it in a open-faced box with scrolling wheels at the top and bottom .
Mechanically switch to a high gear ratio for fast forward / reverse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Roll the printed metal into a cylinder and enclose it in a open-faced box with scrolling wheels at the top and bottom.
Mechanically switch to a high gear ratio for fast forward / reverse.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30901678</id>
	<title>Re:Mail-in mainframe access</title>
	<author>commodoresloat</author>
	<datestamp>1264501080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>eventually, politically motivated hackers break into his mailbox and start publishing his letters to his friends talking smack about some other guy's climate modeling program....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>eventually , politically motivated hackers break into his mailbox and start publishing his letters to his friends talking smack about some other guy 's climate modeling program... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>eventually, politically motivated hackers break into his mailbox and start publishing his letters to his friends talking smack about some other guy's climate modeling program....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30900046</id>
	<title>"Fiche" technology</title>
	<author>Tablizer</author>
	<datestamp>1264438740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Article: When did the basic idea become practical? In the late 1960s and early 1970s, libraries got excited about PCMI and similar technologies-collectively known as "ultrafiche"-and began using them to cram massive amounts of information into small spaces. But the trend lasted only a few years. By then, I assume, it became clear that the future was digitization, not miniaturization.</p></div></blockquote><p>That's not entirely accurate. Variations of "fiche" technology were quite common in university libraries. When doing reports with newspaper citations, "Microfiche" (flat film plates) and/or "Microfilm" (scrolled film) were quite common into the mid 1990's. This was cheaper than storing gajillion actual newspapers and magazines, especially in bigger cities where floor-space is a premium.</p><p>Thus, "the trend only lasted a few years" is off because it had about a <b>25-year run</b> and was quite successful in its heyday.</p><p>An interesting variation that allows computerized retrieval is the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aperture\_card" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">aperture card</a> [wikipedia.org]. However, it's not as compact.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Article : When did the basic idea become practical ?
In the late 1960s and early 1970s , libraries got excited about PCMI and similar technologies-collectively known as " ultrafiche " -and began using them to cram massive amounts of information into small spaces .
But the trend lasted only a few years .
By then , I assume , it became clear that the future was digitization , not miniaturization.That 's not entirely accurate .
Variations of " fiche " technology were quite common in university libraries .
When doing reports with newspaper citations , " Microfiche " ( flat film plates ) and/or " Microfilm " ( scrolled film ) were quite common into the mid 1990 's .
This was cheaper than storing gajillion actual newspapers and magazines , especially in bigger cities where floor-space is a premium.Thus , " the trend only lasted a few years " is off because it had about a 25-year run and was quite successful in its heyday.An interesting variation that allows computerized retrieval is the aperture card [ wikipedia.org ] .
However , it 's not as compact .
       </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Article: When did the basic idea become practical?
In the late 1960s and early 1970s, libraries got excited about PCMI and similar technologies-collectively known as "ultrafiche"-and began using them to cram massive amounts of information into small spaces.
But the trend lasted only a few years.
By then, I assume, it became clear that the future was digitization, not miniaturization.That's not entirely accurate.
Variations of "fiche" technology were quite common in university libraries.
When doing reports with newspaper citations, "Microfiche" (flat film plates) and/or "Microfilm" (scrolled film) were quite common into the mid 1990's.
This was cheaper than storing gajillion actual newspapers and magazines, especially in bigger cities where floor-space is a premium.Thus, "the trend only lasted a few years" is off because it had about a 25-year run and was quite successful in its heyday.An interesting variation that allows computerized retrieval is the aperture card [wikipedia.org].
However, it's not as compact.
       
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899310</id>
	<title>Mail-in mainframe access</title>
	<author>Brett Johnson</author>
	<datestamp>1264432080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Side note: Popular Science used the article to introduce a service in which readers could get access to mainframe programs by filling out forms with input data and mailing them to PopSci, which would then run [the] program and send the results back in a S.A.S.E. the reader had supplied. It may have been the least real-time approach to computing in the history of the universe.</p></div></blockquote><p>Edward waits impatiently for the letter carrier to arrive.  "Where is he?", Edward musses, checking his watch.</p><p>Every day this week, Edward had rifled through the mail as soon as it had arrived, hoping to see that special envelope.  And every day this week, the postman brought only bills and grocery store circulars.</p><p>But today - certainly today - would be the day he would receive the results of his climate modeling simulation.  It just had to come today!</p><p>Edward sees the postman coming down the street.  His mailbag seems a bit heavier today<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... Could it be?  Why doesn't he walk faster!?</p><p>Finally, the mailman reaches Edward's house and pulls out a bundle of letters.  Edward anxiously grabs the lot from the hands of the postman.  One of the envelopes is notably thick; Edward pulls it out and checks the return address.  "YES!", he exclaims, seeing it was from Popular Science.  He hands back the rest of the pile and dashes up the stairs with his precious packet.</p><p>Edward gives himself a paper cut opening the envelope, but is oblivious to the pain.  His mind is focused on one thing - the test results: "Is global warming real?"  Surely these results will show it beyond any reasonable doubt!</p><p>Examining the first page, Edward's heart sinks...</p><blockquote><div><p> <tt>climate.c: In function 'main':<br>climate.c:75: error: syntax error before '}' token</tt></p></div> </blockquote><p>
"FFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU...."</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Side note : Popular Science used the article to introduce a service in which readers could get access to mainframe programs by filling out forms with input data and mailing them to PopSci , which would then run [ the ] program and send the results back in a S.A.S.E .
the reader had supplied .
It may have been the least real-time approach to computing in the history of the universe.Edward waits impatiently for the letter carrier to arrive .
" Where is he ?
" , Edward musses , checking his watch.Every day this week , Edward had rifled through the mail as soon as it had arrived , hoping to see that special envelope .
And every day this week , the postman brought only bills and grocery store circulars.But today - certainly today - would be the day he would receive the results of his climate modeling simulation .
It just had to come today ! Edward sees the postman coming down the street .
His mailbag seems a bit heavier today ... Could it be ?
Why does n't he walk faster !
? Finally , the mailman reaches Edward 's house and pulls out a bundle of letters .
Edward anxiously grabs the lot from the hands of the postman .
One of the envelopes is notably thick ; Edward pulls it out and checks the return address .
" YES ! " , he exclaims , seeing it was from Popular Science .
He hands back the rest of the pile and dashes up the stairs with his precious packet.Edward gives himself a paper cut opening the envelope , but is oblivious to the pain .
His mind is focused on one thing - the test results : " Is global warming real ?
" Surely these results will show it beyond any reasonable doubt ! Examining the first page , Edward 's heart sinks... climate.c : In function 'main ' : climate.c : 75 : error : syntax error before ' } ' token " FFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU.... "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Side note: Popular Science used the article to introduce a service in which readers could get access to mainframe programs by filling out forms with input data and mailing them to PopSci, which would then run [the] program and send the results back in a S.A.S.E.
the reader had supplied.
It may have been the least real-time approach to computing in the history of the universe.Edward waits impatiently for the letter carrier to arrive.
"Where is he?
", Edward musses, checking his watch.Every day this week, Edward had rifled through the mail as soon as it had arrived, hoping to see that special envelope.
And every day this week, the postman brought only bills and grocery store circulars.But today - certainly today - would be the day he would receive the results of his climate modeling simulation.
It just had to come today!Edward sees the postman coming down the street.
His mailbag seems a bit heavier today ... Could it be?
Why doesn't he walk faster!
?Finally, the mailman reaches Edward's house and pulls out a bundle of letters.
Edward anxiously grabs the lot from the hands of the postman.
One of the envelopes is notably thick; Edward pulls it out and checks the return address.
"YES!", he exclaims, seeing it was from Popular Science.
He hands back the rest of the pile and dashes up the stairs with his precious packet.Edward gives himself a paper cut opening the envelope, but is oblivious to the pain.
His mind is focused on one thing - the test results: "Is global warming real?
"  Surely these results will show it beyond any reasonable doubt!Examining the first page, Edward's heart sinks... climate.c: In function 'main':climate.c:75: error: syntax error before '}' token 
"FFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU...."
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898610</id>
	<title>hmmm</title>
	<author>nomadic</author>
	<datestamp>1264426800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Pages 1/20,000th of an inch thick?  What exactly keeps you from lopping off your fingers?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Pages 1/20,000th of an inch thick ?
What exactly keeps you from lopping off your fingers ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pages 1/20,000th of an inch thick?
What exactly keeps you from lopping off your fingers?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898760</id>
	<title>Re:hmmm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264427580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Pages 1/20,000th of an inch thick?  What exactly keeps you from lopping off your fingers?</p></div><p>And if you dropped it in your lap....</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Pages 1/20,000th of an inch thick ?
What exactly keeps you from lopping off your fingers ? And if you dropped it in your lap... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pages 1/20,000th of an inch thick?
What exactly keeps you from lopping off your fingers?And if you dropped it in your lap....
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898610</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898998</id>
	<title>Re:There was an early fax machine in the 1860s</title>
	<author>icepick72</author>
	<datestamp>1264429440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>On that page, the background image and faded foreground text are clearly meant to slow down reading and comprehension so we can savor the article.</htmltext>
<tokenext>On that page , the background image and faded foreground text are clearly meant to slow down reading and comprehension so we can savor the article .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On that page, the background image and faded foreground text are clearly meant to slow down reading and comprehension so we can savor the article.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898646</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899062</id>
	<title>Re:hmmm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264429800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nowadsys Tinsel is made of plastic.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nowadsys Tinsel is made of plastic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nowadsys Tinsel is made of plastic.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898806</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899300</id>
	<title>Re:hmmm</title>
	<author>failedlogic</author>
	<datestamp>1264431900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You have it all wrong. COPY PROTECTION. That is it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You have it all wrong .
COPY PROTECTION .
That is it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have it all wrong.
COPY PROTECTION.
That is it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898610</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30902082</id>
	<title>Re:Mail-in mainframe access</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264506720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We offered that at my university in the late 1980s. Students from some jungle overseas could post in forms with mainframe code on them (COBOL rather than C of course), they would be typed in, run, and the listings posted back to them. This was a painstaking way to get a correspondance degree in Computer Science. Some time later, having a personal computer was made a requirement of the course.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We offered that at my university in the late 1980s .
Students from some jungle overseas could post in forms with mainframe code on them ( COBOL rather than C of course ) , they would be typed in , run , and the listings posted back to them .
This was a painstaking way to get a correspondance degree in Computer Science .
Some time later , having a personal computer was made a requirement of the course .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We offered that at my university in the late 1980s.
Students from some jungle overseas could post in forms with mainframe code on them (COBOL rather than C of course), they would be typed in, run, and the listings posted back to them.
This was a painstaking way to get a correspondance degree in Computer Science.
Some time later, having a personal computer was made a requirement of the course.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30914096</id>
	<title>"Early" FAX Machine? I think not.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264532760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The FAX machine was invented in 1843. How a 1930's FAX machine could be considered "early" escapes me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The FAX machine was invented in 1843 .
How a 1930 's FAX machine could be considered " early " escapes me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The FAX machine was invented in 1843.
How a 1930's FAX machine could be considered "early" escapes me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30902302</id>
	<title>Prior art there</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264509600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lots of prior art to many things here. How many US patents does this lot invalidate?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lots of prior art to many things here .
How many US patents does this lot invalidate ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lots of prior art to many things here.
How many US patents does this lot invalidate?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30902914</id>
	<title>Inflation bullshit</title>
	<author>professorguy</author>
	<datestamp>1264515180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Anyone else notice that they give 2 examples of 1965 prices and their 2010 equivalents?  From TFA:<p><div class="quote"><p>The portable TV is $200 ($1400 in 2010 dollars).  The VCR is $400 ($2700 in 2010 dollars).</p></div><p>Um, anyone else think it's funny that the average car cost $2,650 in 1965 and $26,500 in 2010, a median home cost $21,000 in 1965 and $210,000 in 2010 and yet the government figures claim prices rose <b>7</b> times?
<br> <br>
How'd they do that?  That's because in 1965 you bought a car.  But in 2010 you bought a car, an airbag (which is counted as extra because it wasn't on the 1965 version), and anti-lock brakes, and long lasting tires, and etc, etc.  There's a technical term for this money-saving (and people-screwing) accounting trick, it's called 'LYING LIKE A RUG.'</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone else notice that they give 2 examples of 1965 prices and their 2010 equivalents ?
From TFA : The portable TV is $ 200 ( $ 1400 in 2010 dollars ) .
The VCR is $ 400 ( $ 2700 in 2010 dollars ) .Um , anyone else think it 's funny that the average car cost $ 2,650 in 1965 and $ 26,500 in 2010 , a median home cost $ 21,000 in 1965 and $ 210,000 in 2010 and yet the government figures claim prices rose 7 times ?
How 'd they do that ?
That 's because in 1965 you bought a car .
But in 2010 you bought a car , an airbag ( which is counted as extra because it was n't on the 1965 version ) , and anti-lock brakes , and long lasting tires , and etc , etc .
There 's a technical term for this money-saving ( and people-screwing ) accounting trick , it 's called 'LYING LIKE A RUG .
'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone else notice that they give 2 examples of 1965 prices and their 2010 equivalents?
From TFA:The portable TV is $200 ($1400 in 2010 dollars).
The VCR is $400 ($2700 in 2010 dollars).Um, anyone else think it's funny that the average car cost $2,650 in 1965 and $26,500 in 2010, a median home cost $21,000 in 1965 and $210,000 in 2010 and yet the government figures claim prices rose 7 times?
How'd they do that?
That's because in 1965 you bought a car.
But in 2010 you bought a car, an airbag (which is counted as extra because it wasn't on the 1965 version), and anti-lock brakes, and long lasting tires, and etc, etc.
There's a technical term for this money-saving (and people-screwing) accounting trick, it's called 'LYING LIKE A RUG.
'
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30902800</id>
	<title>Re:TFA gets it completely wrong on the 'Kindle'</title>
	<author>elronxenu</author>
	<datestamp>1264514400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
The problem is that selling two hundred books for $2 does not provide an adequate income for the
publisher. Even if the manufacturing cost was only $1, and the publisher is nominally making 100\%
profit, they're making a lot less revenue than if they could sell, say, 200 books individually for $2 per book.
</p><p>
So I expect that was one reason the idea was never developed. If it had been, the publishers would
never have supported it. They might have tried to make it illegal. The product would have become
popular only when readers could print on it for themselves, and the industry would continue to fight
against such practices with slogans like "Home scribing is killing literature" and "Don't copy that<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... hard<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... copy".
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is that selling two hundred books for $ 2 does not provide an adequate income for the publisher .
Even if the manufacturing cost was only $ 1 , and the publisher is nominally making 100 \ % profit , they 're making a lot less revenue than if they could sell , say , 200 books individually for $ 2 per book .
So I expect that was one reason the idea was never developed .
If it had been , the publishers would never have supported it .
They might have tried to make it illegal .
The product would have become popular only when readers could print on it for themselves , and the industry would continue to fight against such practices with slogans like " Home scribing is killing literature " and " Do n't copy that ... hard ... copy " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
The problem is that selling two hundred books for $2 does not provide an adequate income for the
publisher.
Even if the manufacturing cost was only $1, and the publisher is nominally making 100\%
profit, they're making a lot less revenue than if they could sell, say, 200 books individually for $2 per book.
So I expect that was one reason the idea was never developed.
If it had been, the publishers would
never have supported it.
They might have tried to make it illegal.
The product would have become
popular only when readers could print on it for themselves, and the industry would continue to fight
against such practices with slogans like "Home scribing is killing literature" and "Don't copy that ... hard ... copy".
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898670</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898646</id>
	<title>There was an early fax machine in the 1860s</title>
	<author>rolfwind</author>
	<datestamp>1264426980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In France, by a guy named Caselli, called a Pantelegraph:<br><a href="http://www.telephonecollecting.org/caselli.htm" title="telephonecollecting.org">http://www.telephonecollecting.org/caselli.htm</a> [telephonecollecting.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In France , by a guy named Caselli , called a Pantelegraph : http : //www.telephonecollecting.org/caselli.htm [ telephonecollecting.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In France, by a guy named Caselli, called a Pantelegraph:http://www.telephonecollecting.org/caselli.htm [telephonecollecting.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898796</id>
	<title>Re:There was an early fax machine in the 1860s</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264427880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's the worst excuse for a limerick I've ever heard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's the worst excuse for a limerick I 've ever heard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's the worst excuse for a limerick I've ever heard.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898646</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898590</id>
	<title>fust</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264426680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>furst post</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>furst post</tokentext>
<sentencetext>furst post</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899258</id>
	<title>EXTREME READING</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264431480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But this could create a whole new extreme sport : EXTREME READING!</p><p>This would be fantastic with fantasy books like LOTR.  Now you too can have your own fingers chopped off JUST BY READING!  AWWE-!</p><p>This book turns it beyond 11, one stare at this book and your eyeballs will explode with so much awesome that you'll create another universe.</p><p>captcha: glazing.  See, because even Slashdot agrees.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But this could create a whole new extreme sport : EXTREME READING ! This would be fantastic with fantasy books like LOTR .
Now you too can have your own fingers chopped off JUST BY READING !
AWWE- ! This book turns it beyond 11 , one stare at this book and your eyeballs will explode with so much awesome that you 'll create another universe.captcha : glazing .
See , because even Slashdot agrees .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But this could create a whole new extreme sport : EXTREME READING!This would be fantastic with fantasy books like LOTR.
Now you too can have your own fingers chopped off JUST BY READING!
AWWE-!This book turns it beyond 11, one stare at this book and your eyeballs will explode with so much awesome that you'll create another universe.captcha: glazing.
See, because even Slashdot agrees.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898610</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30902314</id>
	<title>Re:Mail-in mainframe access</title>
	<author>niks42</author>
	<datestamp>1264509840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not so different from so-called cafeteria systems of the 60s and 70s, when we poor students used to submit our deck of punch cards at the Ops counter in the machine room, and pick the deck up and associated printout from our pigeon hole the following morning. Even after terminals arrived, we still picked up printout from Ops well into the 80s. When IBM started cost reducing in the UK, more remote locations didn't have a laser printer, so anything printed nicely was delivered in the mail.
<p>
Compilers for cafeteria systems often had a quick first pass phase that threw out jobs with syntax errors; most student programs failed that step, so it saved on CPU time when it was precious.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not so different from so-called cafeteria systems of the 60s and 70s , when we poor students used to submit our deck of punch cards at the Ops counter in the machine room , and pick the deck up and associated printout from our pigeon hole the following morning .
Even after terminals arrived , we still picked up printout from Ops well into the 80s .
When IBM started cost reducing in the UK , more remote locations did n't have a laser printer , so anything printed nicely was delivered in the mail .
Compilers for cafeteria systems often had a quick first pass phase that threw out jobs with syntax errors ; most student programs failed that step , so it saved on CPU time when it was precious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not so different from so-called cafeteria systems of the 60s and 70s, when we poor students used to submit our deck of punch cards at the Ops counter in the machine room, and pick the deck up and associated printout from our pigeon hole the following morning.
Even after terminals arrived, we still picked up printout from Ops well into the 80s.
When IBM started cost reducing in the UK, more remote locations didn't have a laser printer, so anything printed nicely was delivered in the mail.
Compilers for cafeteria systems often had a quick first pass phase that threw out jobs with syntax errors; most student programs failed that step, so it saved on CPU time when it was precious.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898726</id>
	<title>Another invention that didn't work out</title>
	<author>MrEricSir</author>
	<datestamp>1264427400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...was breaking up your article into four arbitrary pages on the web.</p><p>Or at least, I *hope* that's what people will think in the future.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...was breaking up your article into four arbitrary pages on the web.Or at least , I * hope * that 's what people will think in the future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...was breaking up your article into four arbitrary pages on the web.Or at least, I *hope* that's what people will think in the future.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899874</id>
	<title>What's The First One Gonna Be?</title>
	<author>The Wild Norseman</author>
	<datestamp>1264437120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>First thought that popped into my mind when I read about the Edison book was the Orange Catholic Bible.<br><br>Which brings up a related question for me.  A bible the size of the OC Bible couldn't be physically thumped, so you can't call Orange Catholics "bible thumpers."  "Bible plinkers" maybe?</htmltext>
<tokenext>First thought that popped into my mind when I read about the Edison book was the Orange Catholic Bible.Which brings up a related question for me .
A bible the size of the OC Bible could n't be physically thumped , so you ca n't call Orange Catholics " bible thumpers .
" " Bible plinkers " maybe ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First thought that popped into my mind when I read about the Edison book was the Orange Catholic Bible.Which brings up a related question for me.
A bible the size of the OC Bible couldn't be physically thumped, so you can't call Orange Catholics "bible thumpers.
"  "Bible plinkers" maybe?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30902508</id>
	<title>Re:Success is timing as much as great ideas</title>
	<author>Elektroschock</author>
	<datestamp>1264511700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In Fritz Lang's movie Metropolis <a href="http://www.switched.com/gallery/video-phones-throughout-time/540594/#540594" title="switched.com">Feder talks with the worker over a video telephone</a> [switched.com]. The technology was operational in the thirties and presented, it just didn't happen. When cable TV was introduced the concept of a return channel was discussed, e.g. for home shopping.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In Fritz Lang 's movie Metropolis Feder talks with the worker over a video telephone [ switched.com ] .
The technology was operational in the thirties and presented , it just did n't happen .
When cable TV was introduced the concept of a return channel was discussed , e.g .
for home shopping .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Fritz Lang's movie Metropolis Feder talks with the worker over a video telephone [switched.com].
The technology was operational in the thirties and presented, it just didn't happen.
When cable TV was introduced the concept of a return channel was discussed, e.g.
for home shopping.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898620</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_2241200_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899300
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898610
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_2241200_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30903730
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898610
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_2241200_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898760
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898610
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_2241200_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30909668
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_2241200_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30904918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30900194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898610
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_2241200_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30906150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_2241200_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898998
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898646
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_2241200_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30905078
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899310
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_2241200_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898610
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_2241200_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30901918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898610
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_2241200_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899940
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_2241200_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898610
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_2241200_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30902082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899310
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_2241200_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30901678
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899310
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_2241200_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_2241200_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30918736
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898610
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_2241200_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30902508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898620
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_2241200_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898796
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898646
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_2241200_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30902314
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899310
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_2241200_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30902636
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899908
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898610
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_2241200_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898610
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_2241200_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30902800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_2241200.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898628
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_2241200.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898846
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30906150
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_2241200.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898610
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30900194
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30904918
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899556
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898760
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899020
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30918736
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899258
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898806
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30901918
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899062
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30903730
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899300
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899908
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30902636
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_2241200.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898620
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30902508
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_2241200.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30901608
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_2241200.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899110
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_2241200.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898636
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_2241200.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898670
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898854
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30909668
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30902800
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899940
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_2241200.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898890
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_2241200.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899310
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30905078
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30902082
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30902314
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30901678
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_2241200.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898646
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898998
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30898796
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_2241200.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_2241200.30899644
</commentlist>
</conversation>
