<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_27_2048259</id>
	<title>Has 2.4 GHz Reached Maximum Capacity?</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1264583220000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"There's been a lot of talk lately about the concept of Personal Area Networks.  At CES Intel and Connectify <a href="http://blogs.intel.com/research/2008/04/gary\_martz\_on\_cliffside\_wirele.php">both released software</a> that <a href="http://www.connectify.me/">turns Windows laptops into Access Points</a> for file transfers, wirelessly syncing pictures from cameras, and Internet sharing.  This is good, maybe great, if you're a road warrior, but what about the rest of us holed up in apartment buildings and small neighborhoods?  We already have to deal with the wireless chatter of the 50 or so other Linksys routers in the vicinity.  What will happen when every laptop also acts as a software router?  To add fuel to the fire, Intel and Netgear also announced the <a href="http://ces.cnet.com/8301-31045\_1-10428971-269.html">Push2TV</a> device that allows you to stream your display, including Netflix videos straight to your television.  Isn't this going to kill lower powered 2.4 GHz devices, like Bluetooth mice and headsets?  When does the 2.4 GHz band collapse completely?  <a href="http://wifinetnews.com/archives/2007/01/5\_ghz\_or\_bust.html">Why can't we push all this short range, high bandwidth stuff onto 5 GHz?</a>"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " There 's been a lot of talk lately about the concept of Personal Area Networks .
At CES Intel and Connectify both released software that turns Windows laptops into Access Points for file transfers , wirelessly syncing pictures from cameras , and Internet sharing .
This is good , maybe great , if you 're a road warrior , but what about the rest of us holed up in apartment buildings and small neighborhoods ?
We already have to deal with the wireless chatter of the 50 or so other Linksys routers in the vicinity .
What will happen when every laptop also acts as a software router ?
To add fuel to the fire , Intel and Netgear also announced the Push2TV device that allows you to stream your display , including Netflix videos straight to your television .
Is n't this going to kill lower powered 2.4 GHz devices , like Bluetooth mice and headsets ?
When does the 2.4 GHz band collapse completely ?
Why ca n't we push all this short range , high bandwidth stuff onto 5 GHz ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "There's been a lot of talk lately about the concept of Personal Area Networks.
At CES Intel and Connectify both released software that turns Windows laptops into Access Points for file transfers, wirelessly syncing pictures from cameras, and Internet sharing.
This is good, maybe great, if you're a road warrior, but what about the rest of us holed up in apartment buildings and small neighborhoods?
We already have to deal with the wireless chatter of the 50 or so other Linksys routers in the vicinity.
What will happen when every laptop also acts as a software router?
To add fuel to the fire, Intel and Netgear also announced the Push2TV device that allows you to stream your display, including Netflix videos straight to your television.
Isn't this going to kill lower powered 2.4 GHz devices, like Bluetooth mice and headsets?
When does the 2.4 GHz band collapse completely?
Why can't we push all this short range, high bandwidth stuff onto 5 GHz?
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927250</id>
	<title>Re:your router is yelling and you dont even know i</title>
	<author>jo\_ham</author>
	<datestamp>1264595280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can control the power level on Apple's Airport stations, but not automatically - you have to manually adjust a slider and (I think) reboot the router for it to take effect. It is possible to dial down the level though if you don't need the full strength, and you want to make your network tougher to connect with, or your neighbour is complaining that you are melting her brain with your evil microwave signals.</p><p>It's cheaper than buying her a tinfoil hat, but much less hilarious.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can control the power level on Apple 's Airport stations , but not automatically - you have to manually adjust a slider and ( I think ) reboot the router for it to take effect .
It is possible to dial down the level though if you do n't need the full strength , and you want to make your network tougher to connect with , or your neighbour is complaining that you are melting her brain with your evil microwave signals.It 's cheaper than buying her a tinfoil hat , but much less hilarious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can control the power level on Apple's Airport stations, but not automatically - you have to manually adjust a slider and (I think) reboot the router for it to take effect.
It is possible to dial down the level though if you don't need the full strength, and you want to make your network tougher to connect with, or your neighbour is complaining that you are melting her brain with your evil microwave signals.It's cheaper than buying her a tinfoil hat, but much less hilarious.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925580</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30929702</id>
	<title>Re:Channel 14</title>
	<author>Laser Dan</author>
	<datestamp>1264614480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you're in a place with too much WiFi noise, try using the Japanese-only channel 14 - it doesn't overlap with any other channels, and you're pretty much guaranteed to be the only person using it.</p> </div><p>Unfortunately I'm in Japan, and all channels are completely overloaded. Most people live in apartments, and the majority seem to have a wireless router. The routers all have wireless enabled by default, so although everyone uses cables (the only way to connect)  the channels are still all filled. I can't even connect to my wireless router 2m away most of the time.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're in a place with too much WiFi noise , try using the Japanese-only channel 14 - it does n't overlap with any other channels , and you 're pretty much guaranteed to be the only person using it .
Unfortunately I 'm in Japan , and all channels are completely overloaded .
Most people live in apartments , and the majority seem to have a wireless router .
The routers all have wireless enabled by default , so although everyone uses cables ( the only way to connect ) the channels are still all filled .
I ca n't even connect to my wireless router 2m away most of the time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're in a place with too much WiFi noise, try using the Japanese-only channel 14 - it doesn't overlap with any other channels, and you're pretty much guaranteed to be the only person using it.
Unfortunately I'm in Japan, and all channels are completely overloaded.
Most people live in apartments, and the majority seem to have a wireless router.
The routers all have wireless enabled by default, so although everyone uses cables (the only way to connect)  the channels are still all filled.
I can't even connect to my wireless router 2m away most of the time.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925888</id>
	<title>Re:Channel 14</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264590600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Damn, you're a moron. If there is no just cause that is easy for any run of the mill citizen to research and/or know about, then "illegal" is pretty stupid, don't you think?</p><p>"It's illegal to use this wireless channel to route data around in your house. We won't make it easy to find out why, but just know it is."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Damn , you 're a moron .
If there is no just cause that is easy for any run of the mill citizen to research and/or know about , then " illegal " is pretty stupid , do n't you think ?
" It 's illegal to use this wireless channel to route data around in your house .
We wo n't make it easy to find out why , but just know it is .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Damn, you're a moron.
If there is no just cause that is easy for any run of the mill citizen to research and/or know about, then "illegal" is pretty stupid, don't you think?
"It's illegal to use this wireless channel to route data around in your house.
We won't make it easy to find out why, but just know it is.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925422</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927804</id>
	<title>Re:your router is yelling and you dont even know i</title>
	<author>AB3A</author>
	<datestamp>1264598280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The IEEE-802.15.4 specification defines a way to reduce power, but it does not enshrine this at the MAC layer of this protocol.  Perhaps Zigbee may do this, but it isn't in '15.4 as far as I have read.</p><p>The feature you're talking about is called Clear Channel Assessment (CCA) and it is part of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,most of the wireless specifications. The problem with CCA is that the threshold is shockingly low. And what you hear at the transmitting end isn't necessarily what the receiver hears.  In other words, the receiver could be trashed by another signal too far away for you to hear. I need to remind everyone here, this is not a coaxial cable or a fiber system.  It is radio.  Radios wave systems are not perfect hubs or trunk lines. There are signals on the air that one side may hear that the other doesn't.</p><p>Another issue you might not realize is that it takes at least as much power to run an 802.15.4 receiver as it does the transmitter.  In most cases, the the transmitter is the local oscillator as well.  There isn't much power to be saved.</p><p>So why reduce power?  To reduce the chance that a signal can be received by others with nefarious intent, and to reduce interference as you said.</p><p>I suggest people consider using different channels.  Even though the 802.11 channel passband is over 22 MHz wide, and there are really only three channels that don't overlap, you can still choose an adjacent channel and use the despreading to your advantage.</p><p>I find that the default channel for most of 802.11b/g routers is channel 6.  Use anything but that and you'll probably do OK. Those who can remember the heyday of CB radio, may remember that most of the kiddie walkie talkies used to be on CB channel 14.  That was the one channel you didn't want to be on.  It is interesting that we still haven't learned that lesson even today.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The IEEE-802.15.4 specification defines a way to reduce power , but it does not enshrine this at the MAC layer of this protocol .
Perhaps Zigbee may do this , but it is n't in '15.4 as far as I have read.The feature you 're talking about is called Clear Channel Assessment ( CCA ) and it is part of ,most of the wireless specifications .
The problem with CCA is that the threshold is shockingly low .
And what you hear at the transmitting end is n't necessarily what the receiver hears .
In other words , the receiver could be trashed by another signal too far away for you to hear .
I need to remind everyone here , this is not a coaxial cable or a fiber system .
It is radio .
Radios wave systems are not perfect hubs or trunk lines .
There are signals on the air that one side may hear that the other does n't.Another issue you might not realize is that it takes at least as much power to run an 802.15.4 receiver as it does the transmitter .
In most cases , the the transmitter is the local oscillator as well .
There is n't much power to be saved.So why reduce power ?
To reduce the chance that a signal can be received by others with nefarious intent , and to reduce interference as you said.I suggest people consider using different channels .
Even though the 802.11 channel passband is over 22 MHz wide , and there are really only three channels that do n't overlap , you can still choose an adjacent channel and use the despreading to your advantage.I find that the default channel for most of 802.11b/g routers is channel 6 .
Use anything but that and you 'll probably do OK. Those who can remember the heyday of CB radio , may remember that most of the kiddie walkie talkies used to be on CB channel 14 .
That was the one channel you did n't want to be on .
It is interesting that we still have n't learned that lesson even today .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The IEEE-802.15.4 specification defines a way to reduce power, but it does not enshrine this at the MAC layer of this protocol.
Perhaps Zigbee may do this, but it isn't in '15.4 as far as I have read.The feature you're talking about is called Clear Channel Assessment (CCA) and it is part of ,most of the wireless specifications.
The problem with CCA is that the threshold is shockingly low.
And what you hear at the transmitting end isn't necessarily what the receiver hears.
In other words, the receiver could be trashed by another signal too far away for you to hear.
I need to remind everyone here, this is not a coaxial cable or a fiber system.
It is radio.
Radios wave systems are not perfect hubs or trunk lines.
There are signals on the air that one side may hear that the other doesn't.Another issue you might not realize is that it takes at least as much power to run an 802.15.4 receiver as it does the transmitter.
In most cases, the the transmitter is the local oscillator as well.
There isn't much power to be saved.So why reduce power?
To reduce the chance that a signal can be received by others with nefarious intent, and to reduce interference as you said.I suggest people consider using different channels.
Even though the 802.11 channel passband is over 22 MHz wide, and there are really only three channels that don't overlap, you can still choose an adjacent channel and use the despreading to your advantage.I find that the default channel for most of 802.11b/g routers is channel 6.
Use anything but that and you'll probably do OK. Those who can remember the heyday of CB radio, may remember that most of the kiddie walkie talkies used to be on CB channel 14.
That was the one channel you didn't want to be on.
It is interesting that we still haven't learned that lesson even today.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925580</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927548</id>
	<title>Re:2.4 is relatively unregulated.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264596900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't confuse unlicensed with unregulated. The 2.4GHz (and 5.8Ghz and several others) are regulated in that manufacturers have to have their devices certified and registered with the FCC (in the US, subst. with appropriate agency elsewhere). The users are not required to have licenses to use certified devices (as opposed to the HAM bands where users are required to be licensed, or the TV/Radio/Mobile bands, all three of which have different licensing models).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't confuse unlicensed with unregulated .
The 2.4GHz ( and 5.8Ghz and several others ) are regulated in that manufacturers have to have their devices certified and registered with the FCC ( in the US , subst .
with appropriate agency elsewhere ) .
The users are not required to have licenses to use certified devices ( as opposed to the HAM bands where users are required to be licensed , or the TV/Radio/Mobile bands , all three of which have different licensing models ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't confuse unlicensed with unregulated.
The 2.4GHz (and 5.8Ghz and several others) are regulated in that manufacturers have to have their devices certified and registered with the FCC (in the US, subst.
with appropriate agency elsewhere).
The users are not required to have licenses to use certified devices (as opposed to the HAM bands where users are required to be licensed, or the TV/Radio/Mobile bands, all three of which have different licensing models).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925126</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927008</id>
	<title>Re:your router is yelling and you dont even know i</title>
	<author>skids</author>
	<datestamp>1264594200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, enterprise APs are.</p><p>I run a Cisco LWAPP (now CWAPP) system that auto adjusts channels and power levels.  On the enterprise side the challenge isn't the AP technology, it's the fact that just about every gadget, and even to this day a lot of laptops, do not have a 5GHz radio/antenna.  The customer saves pennies, then ends up competing for bandwidth.</p><p>Also I suspect most drivers are not smart enough to realize that a just-good-enough 5GHz signal should be held onto instead of leaping to a stronger, but crowded, 2.5GHz channel.</p><p>As of this moment at a modern university, 6 out of 7 clients are 2.5GHz -- and that's about the best I've ever seen it, actually.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , enterprise APs are.I run a Cisco LWAPP ( now CWAPP ) system that auto adjusts channels and power levels .
On the enterprise side the challenge is n't the AP technology , it 's the fact that just about every gadget , and even to this day a lot of laptops , do not have a 5GHz radio/antenna .
The customer saves pennies , then ends up competing for bandwidth.Also I suspect most drivers are not smart enough to realize that a just-good-enough 5GHz signal should be held onto instead of leaping to a stronger , but crowded , 2.5GHz channel.As of this moment at a modern university , 6 out of 7 clients are 2.5GHz -- and that 's about the best I 've ever seen it , actually .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, enterprise APs are.I run a Cisco LWAPP (now CWAPP) system that auto adjusts channels and power levels.
On the enterprise side the challenge isn't the AP technology, it's the fact that just about every gadget, and even to this day a lot of laptops, do not have a 5GHz radio/antenna.
The customer saves pennies, then ends up competing for bandwidth.Also I suspect most drivers are not smart enough to realize that a just-good-enough 5GHz signal should be held onto instead of leaping to a stronger, but crowded, 2.5GHz channel.As of this moment at a modern university, 6 out of 7 clients are 2.5GHz -- and that's about the best I've ever seen it, actually.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927524</id>
	<title>Re:But I am on 5 GHz</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264596780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>\_Cool story\_ \_bro\_. \_Keep\_ Typing \_like this\_, it's \_really\_ cool.</htmltext>
<tokenext>\ _Cool story \ _ \ _bro \ _ .
\ _Keep \ _ Typing \ _like this \ _ , it 's \ _really \ _ cool .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>\_Cool story\_ \_bro\_.
\_Keep\_ Typing \_like this\_, it's \_really\_ cool.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925002</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925214</id>
	<title>aircrack</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264588680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Use aircrack to crack \_all\_ the WEP keys.
</p><p>
Share with the cool people (who will all cancel service).
</p><p>
Instant spectrum decongestion.
</p><p>
If that is not enough simply post the list of access points/keys in a public place.
</p><p>
It doesn't matter if people cancel service because they realize they can get it for free or because they've been hacked and become paranoid.
</p><p>
BTW ATT's 2wire modems have the WEP key printed on the bottom (and IIRC the key can't be changed).
</p><p>
If you see a 2wire* network available you have free internet.
</p><p>
I need a booster antenna, but I'm on acreage.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Use aircrack to crack \ _all \ _ the WEP keys .
Share with the cool people ( who will all cancel service ) .
Instant spectrum decongestion .
If that is not enough simply post the list of access points/keys in a public place .
It does n't matter if people cancel service because they realize they can get it for free or because they 've been hacked and become paranoid .
BTW ATT 's 2wire modems have the WEP key printed on the bottom ( and IIRC the key ca n't be changed ) .
If you see a 2wire * network available you have free internet .
I need a booster antenna , but I 'm on acreage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Use aircrack to crack \_all\_ the WEP keys.
Share with the cool people (who will all cancel service).
Instant spectrum decongestion.
If that is not enough simply post the list of access points/keys in a public place.
It doesn't matter if people cancel service because they realize they can get it for free or because they've been hacked and become paranoid.
BTW ATT's 2wire modems have the WEP key printed on the bottom (and IIRC the key can't be changed).
If you see a 2wire* network available you have free internet.
I need a booster antenna, but I'm on acreage.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924802</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925004</id>
	<title>Re:your router is yelling and you dont even know i</title>
	<author>default luser</author>
	<datestamp>1264588020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yup, none of the access points are actually smart enough to switch channels and optimize frequency/power usage.  So you end-up with the problem I encountered this December, when a neighbor across the way got a wireless router, and suddenly my internet stopped working.  You couldn't even *see* my access point anymore, it was just overpowered.</p><p>My access point configuration was set to "Auto," but this just meant it kept trying to use channel 1 like an idiot.  So I forced it to use channel 6, and the problem was solved.</p><p>But this isn't how things should be.  The devices and the protocol should be smart enough to optimize spectrum, both by analyzing the noise at various frequencies and choosing the band with the least automatically, and by playing nice with other devices and dialing-down the power to that needed by the connected device furthest from the access point.</p><p>Too bad the above is just a pipe dream.  I can't imagine how bad it is living in dense residential/apartments, where these users still don't know how to configure things, but there are 2 dozen within range instead of 5.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yup , none of the access points are actually smart enough to switch channels and optimize frequency/power usage .
So you end-up with the problem I encountered this December , when a neighbor across the way got a wireless router , and suddenly my internet stopped working .
You could n't even * see * my access point anymore , it was just overpowered.My access point configuration was set to " Auto , " but this just meant it kept trying to use channel 1 like an idiot .
So I forced it to use channel 6 , and the problem was solved.But this is n't how things should be .
The devices and the protocol should be smart enough to optimize spectrum , both by analyzing the noise at various frequencies and choosing the band with the least automatically , and by playing nice with other devices and dialing-down the power to that needed by the connected device furthest from the access point.Too bad the above is just a pipe dream .
I ca n't imagine how bad it is living in dense residential/apartments , where these users still do n't know how to configure things , but there are 2 dozen within range instead of 5 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yup, none of the access points are actually smart enough to switch channels and optimize frequency/power usage.
So you end-up with the problem I encountered this December, when a neighbor across the way got a wireless router, and suddenly my internet stopped working.
You couldn't even *see* my access point anymore, it was just overpowered.My access point configuration was set to "Auto," but this just meant it kept trying to use channel 1 like an idiot.
So I forced it to use channel 6, and the problem was solved.But this isn't how things should be.
The devices and the protocol should be smart enough to optimize spectrum, both by analyzing the noise at various frequencies and choosing the band with the least automatically, and by playing nice with other devices and dialing-down the power to that needed by the connected device furthest from the access point.Too bad the above is just a pipe dream.
I can't imagine how bad it is living in dense residential/apartments, where these users still don't know how to configure things, but there are 2 dozen within range instead of 5.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926762</id>
	<title>Mouse</title>
	<author>masshuu</author>
	<datestamp>1264593300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is that why my wireless mouse acts up? theres 34 access points within range of my laptop, let alone any other wireless devices.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is that why my wireless mouse acts up ?
theres 34 access points within range of my laptop , let alone any other wireless devices .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is that why my wireless mouse acts up?
theres 34 access points within range of my laptop, let alone any other wireless devices.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925126</id>
	<title>2.4 is relatively unregulated.</title>
	<author>ZippySquirrel</author>
	<datestamp>1264588380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>the reason so many things like 802.11b/g/n, bluetooth, cordless phones, etc are all on the 2.4ghz band is by comparison to other bandwidths, it's largely unregulated, meaning they can do what they want (within reason). Going to 5.8 or 6.0 would be nice, but there are stricter regs on there, and so they can't make / sell features like "extended range" or hi powered antennas, because they're illegal. Until someone manages to invent Wifi over subspace, we're probably screwed.</htmltext>
<tokenext>the reason so many things like 802.11b/g/n , bluetooth , cordless phones , etc are all on the 2.4ghz band is by comparison to other bandwidths , it 's largely unregulated , meaning they can do what they want ( within reason ) .
Going to 5.8 or 6.0 would be nice , but there are stricter regs on there , and so they ca n't make / sell features like " extended range " or hi powered antennas , because they 're illegal .
Until someone manages to invent Wifi over subspace , we 're probably screwed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the reason so many things like 802.11b/g/n, bluetooth, cordless phones, etc are all on the 2.4ghz band is by comparison to other bandwidths, it's largely unregulated, meaning they can do what they want (within reason).
Going to 5.8 or 6.0 would be nice, but there are stricter regs on there, and so they can't make / sell features like "extended range" or hi powered antennas, because they're illegal.
Until someone manages to invent Wifi over subspace, we're probably screwed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925988</id>
	<title>Re:your router is yelling and you dont even know i</title>
	<author>geekmux</author>
	<datestamp>1264590960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Pretty much every manufacturer sets the default power output levels to FUCKING LOUD.</p></div><p>Well, not quite all of them.  One of the main benefits with tinkering with DD-WRT on Linksys b/g hardware is being able to boost the output from the rather puny(but effective for most) factory 28mW to well over 200mW.  Makes for some pretty expansive WDS setups, and a HELL of a lot cheaper than the higher end commercial hardware...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Pretty much every manufacturer sets the default power output levels to FUCKING LOUD.Well , not quite all of them .
One of the main benefits with tinkering with DD-WRT on Linksys b/g hardware is being able to boost the output from the rather puny ( but effective for most ) factory 28mW to well over 200mW .
Makes for some pretty expansive WDS setups , and a HELL of a lot cheaper than the higher end commercial hardware.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pretty much every manufacturer sets the default power output levels to FUCKING LOUD.Well, not quite all of them.
One of the main benefits with tinkering with DD-WRT on Linksys b/g hardware is being able to boost the output from the rather puny(but effective for most) factory 28mW to well over 200mW.
Makes for some pretty expansive WDS setups, and a HELL of a lot cheaper than the higher end commercial hardware...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927868</id>
	<title>Re:your router is yelling and you dont even know i</title>
	<author>AmiMoJo</author>
	<datestamp>1264598760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem is that access point manufacturers will always set their devices to FUCKING LOUD because all they care about is their own product's range and signal strength.</p><p>So what if their router stops the neighbours router working and makes your bluetooth mouse have a fit? At least their product looks good with it's 3 MIMO antennas and TurboBoost which uses all 11 channels and gets you a couple of extra signal bars at the other end of the house. Unfortunately most people won't even realise that interference and too high signal levels are what are making other equipment not work properly, especially if their neighbour is the one with the offending device. All they see is a shitty Bluetooth mouse that doesn't work or a crappy phone which doesn't sync.</p><p>In my house I can't use channel 1 for wifi. It just never works. There are no other APs around that frequency so I presume it must be some other device belonging to my neighbours. I have a feeling if I asked them to check if any of their wireless devices are polluting that part of the spectrum I'd probably just get a blank stare.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is that access point manufacturers will always set their devices to FUCKING LOUD because all they care about is their own product 's range and signal strength.So what if their router stops the neighbours router working and makes your bluetooth mouse have a fit ?
At least their product looks good with it 's 3 MIMO antennas and TurboBoost which uses all 11 channels and gets you a couple of extra signal bars at the other end of the house .
Unfortunately most people wo n't even realise that interference and too high signal levels are what are making other equipment not work properly , especially if their neighbour is the one with the offending device .
All they see is a shitty Bluetooth mouse that does n't work or a crappy phone which does n't sync.In my house I ca n't use channel 1 for wifi .
It just never works .
There are no other APs around that frequency so I presume it must be some other device belonging to my neighbours .
I have a feeling if I asked them to check if any of their wireless devices are polluting that part of the spectrum I 'd probably just get a blank stare .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is that access point manufacturers will always set their devices to FUCKING LOUD because all they care about is their own product's range and signal strength.So what if their router stops the neighbours router working and makes your bluetooth mouse have a fit?
At least their product looks good with it's 3 MIMO antennas and TurboBoost which uses all 11 channels and gets you a couple of extra signal bars at the other end of the house.
Unfortunately most people won't even realise that interference and too high signal levels are what are making other equipment not work properly, especially if their neighbour is the one with the offending device.
All they see is a shitty Bluetooth mouse that doesn't work or a crappy phone which doesn't sync.In my house I can't use channel 1 for wifi.
It just never works.
There are no other APs around that frequency so I presume it must be some other device belonging to my neighbours.
I have a feeling if I asked them to check if any of their wireless devices are polluting that part of the spectrum I'd probably just get a blank stare.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925580</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926736</id>
	<title>Please don't!</title>
	<author>RoboRay</author>
	<datestamp>1264593300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>"Why can't we push all this short range, high bandwidth stuff onto 5GHz?"</i></p><p>I really wish you wouldn't.  I prefer to keep the 5GHz band wide-open for the unimpeded use of my own 5GHz devices.  I bought them specifically to avoid 2.4GHz clutter!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Why ca n't we push all this short range , high bandwidth stuff onto 5GHz ?
" I really wish you would n't .
I prefer to keep the 5GHz band wide-open for the unimpeded use of my own 5GHz devices .
I bought them specifically to avoid 2.4GHz clutter !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Why can't we push all this short range, high bandwidth stuff onto 5GHz?
"I really wish you wouldn't.
I prefer to keep the 5GHz band wide-open for the unimpeded use of my own 5GHz devices.
I bought them specifically to avoid 2.4GHz clutter!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30928384</id>
	<title>Re:your router is yelling and you dont even know i</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264602000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Well, not quite all of them. One of the main benefits with tinkering with DD-WRT on Linksys b/g hardware is being able to boost the output from the rather puny(but effective for most) factory 28mW to well over 200mW.</p></div><p>I hope you checked it on a spectrum analyzer to make sure that your out-of-band radiation was still within legal limits when you cranked up that setting. Over-driving an amplifier can create lots of unwanted harmonics and doesn't necessarily make the intended signal any stronger.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , not quite all of them .
One of the main benefits with tinkering with DD-WRT on Linksys b/g hardware is being able to boost the output from the rather puny ( but effective for most ) factory 28mW to well over 200mW.I hope you checked it on a spectrum analyzer to make sure that your out-of-band radiation was still within legal limits when you cranked up that setting .
Over-driving an amplifier can create lots of unwanted harmonics and does n't necessarily make the intended signal any stronger .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, not quite all of them.
One of the main benefits with tinkering with DD-WRT on Linksys b/g hardware is being able to boost the output from the rather puny(but effective for most) factory 28mW to well over 200mW.I hope you checked it on a spectrum analyzer to make sure that your out-of-band radiation was still within legal limits when you cranked up that setting.
Over-driving an amplifier can create lots of unwanted harmonics and doesn't necessarily make the intended signal any stronger.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925978</id>
	<title>Re:Channel 14</title>
	<author>Raptor851</author>
	<datestamp>1264590900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I believe channels 12-14 are reserved due to them being adjacent to satellite communications frequencies, and can potentially interfere.  14 is illegal to use (it actually overlaps with satellite frequencies) but 12 and 13 actually aren't, they're merely disabled for being too close that they could POTENTIALLY interfere. As long as you're running at fairly low power (no external antenna with linear amplifier), those channels are legal to use and should be near 100\% clear of traffic.
<br> <br>
I would recommend using 12 , it's legal and nobody else will be on them due to only DD-WRT and other modded firmwares being able to set them<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe channels 12-14 are reserved due to them being adjacent to satellite communications frequencies , and can potentially interfere .
14 is illegal to use ( it actually overlaps with satellite frequencies ) but 12 and 13 actually are n't , they 're merely disabled for being too close that they could POTENTIALLY interfere .
As long as you 're running at fairly low power ( no external antenna with linear amplifier ) , those channels are legal to use and should be near 100 \ % clear of traffic .
I would recommend using 12 , it 's legal and nobody else will be on them due to only DD-WRT and other modded firmwares being able to set them : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe channels 12-14 are reserved due to them being adjacent to satellite communications frequencies, and can potentially interfere.
14 is illegal to use (it actually overlaps with satellite frequencies) but 12 and 13 actually aren't, they're merely disabled for being too close that they could POTENTIALLY interfere.
As long as you're running at fairly low power (no external antenna with linear amplifier), those channels are legal to use and should be near 100\% clear of traffic.
I would recommend using 12 , it's legal and nobody else will be on them due to only DD-WRT and other modded firmwares being able to set them :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30929648</id>
	<title>Re:You can't beat a wire for what it does</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264614000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why is it that SlashDot includes so many people who may be technically competent in some niche but have such incorrect ideas?<br>Here's an optical transceiver for $18:<br>http://www.memorydealers.com/fufl1fuco1.html</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is it that SlashDot includes so many people who may be technically competent in some niche but have such incorrect ideas ? Here 's an optical transceiver for $ 18 : http : //www.memorydealers.com/fufl1fuco1.html</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is it that SlashDot includes so many people who may be technically competent in some niche but have such incorrect ideas?Here's an optical transceiver for $18:http://www.memorydealers.com/fufl1fuco1.html</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925030</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30929280</id>
	<title>Re:You can't beat a wire for what it does</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264609980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My previous company had to fold because our 4G fiber channel SFPs had to be under 70 bucks to compete with the taiwannese/chinese. 2G ones were way under $40</p><p>It's not the transceiver that's expensive, it's the guy handing it to you. Cisco sells Gig-E stuff for 50 times what we made them for.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My previous company had to fold because our 4G fiber channel SFPs had to be under 70 bucks to compete with the taiwannese/chinese .
2G ones were way under $ 40It 's not the transceiver that 's expensive , it 's the guy handing it to you .
Cisco sells Gig-E stuff for 50 times what we made them for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My previous company had to fold because our 4G fiber channel SFPs had to be under 70 bucks to compete with the taiwannese/chinese.
2G ones were way under $40It's not the transceiver that's expensive, it's the guy handing it to you.
Cisco sells Gig-E stuff for 50 times what we made them for.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925030</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926672</id>
	<title>Re:Antennas and Rx/Tx architectures</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264593120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why would you think adding antennas would help?  They will both be broadcasting into the same spectrum.  And if they're not, you're just making a "bigger spectrum".   The problem is lack of spectrum.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would you think adding antennas would help ?
They will both be broadcasting into the same spectrum .
And if they 're not , you 're just making a " bigger spectrum " .
The problem is lack of spectrum .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would you think adding antennas would help?
They will both be broadcasting into the same spectrum.
And if they're not, you're just making a "bigger spectrum".
The problem is lack of spectrum.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925590</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30928710</id>
	<title>Re:your router is yelling and you dont even know i</title>
	<author>dtmos</author>
	<datestamp>1264604700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The IEEE-802.15.4 specification defines a way to reduce power, but it does not enshrine this at the MAC layer of this protocol. Perhaps Zigbee may do this, but it isn't in '15.4 as far as I have read.</p></div></blockquote><p>That's correct; as I said, "I don't know of any protocol that does this."  15.4 does do CCA, and yes, it has the limitations you describe.  The <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hidden\_node\_problem" title="wikipedia.org">hidden terminal problem</a> [wikipedia.org] lives.</p><p>We arranged the 15.4 channels so that there would be one between each of the three non-overlapping 802.11 channels, plus a couple above Channel 11, figuring that if any portions of the spectrum were clear, those would be the spots.</p><p>The receiver power consumption in the first 15.4 receiver I designed (still being sold by a major IC house, despite being long in the tooth) was actually higher than that of the transmitter, due to a rather conservatively designed ADC.  This was fixed, in a manner that can only be appreciated by a semiconductor marketing manager, by increasing the rated transmit power until the "right" relationship was attained.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The IEEE-802.15.4 specification defines a way to reduce power , but it does not enshrine this at the MAC layer of this protocol .
Perhaps Zigbee may do this , but it is n't in '15.4 as far as I have read.That 's correct ; as I said , " I do n't know of any protocol that does this .
" 15.4 does do CCA , and yes , it has the limitations you describe .
The hidden terminal problem [ wikipedia.org ] lives.We arranged the 15.4 channels so that there would be one between each of the three non-overlapping 802.11 channels , plus a couple above Channel 11 , figuring that if any portions of the spectrum were clear , those would be the spots.The receiver power consumption in the first 15.4 receiver I designed ( still being sold by a major IC house , despite being long in the tooth ) was actually higher than that of the transmitter , due to a rather conservatively designed ADC .
This was fixed , in a manner that can only be appreciated by a semiconductor marketing manager , by increasing the rated transmit power until the " right " relationship was attained .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The IEEE-802.15.4 specification defines a way to reduce power, but it does not enshrine this at the MAC layer of this protocol.
Perhaps Zigbee may do this, but it isn't in '15.4 as far as I have read.That's correct; as I said, "I don't know of any protocol that does this.
"  15.4 does do CCA, and yes, it has the limitations you describe.
The hidden terminal problem [wikipedia.org] lives.We arranged the 15.4 channels so that there would be one between each of the three non-overlapping 802.11 channels, plus a couple above Channel 11, figuring that if any portions of the spectrum were clear, those would be the spots.The receiver power consumption in the first 15.4 receiver I designed (still being sold by a major IC house, despite being long in the tooth) was actually higher than that of the transmitter, due to a rather conservatively designed ADC.
This was fixed, in a manner that can only be appreciated by a semiconductor marketing manager, by increasing the rated transmit power until the "right" relationship was attained.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927804</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925580</id>
	<title>Re:your router is yelling and you dont even know i</title>
	<author>dtmos</author>
	<datestamp>1264589760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The devices and the protocol should be smart enough to optimize spectrum, both by analyzing the noise at various frequencies and choosing the band with the least automatically[...]</p></div></blockquote><p>You'll be comforted to know that ZigBee devices, and other devices that conform to the IEEE 802.15.4 standard, do this today, and have done so since 2003.</p><p>The second part of your wish, that devices dial-down their power to the minimum needed, is certainly possible, but requires that the receiving device send an RSSI (Received Signal Strength Indication) or, better, an RQI (Received Quality Indication) value back to the transmitting device (perhaps as part of the ACK), and that the transmitting device be capable of lowering its transmit power in the first place (it's an extra expense).  I don't know of any protocol that does this (other than CDMA protocols, for a different reason), although I expect newer protocols will -- but to save power (extend battery life), not to reduce spectral pollution.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The devices and the protocol should be smart enough to optimize spectrum , both by analyzing the noise at various frequencies and choosing the band with the least automatically [ ... ] You 'll be comforted to know that ZigBee devices , and other devices that conform to the IEEE 802.15.4 standard , do this today , and have done so since 2003.The second part of your wish , that devices dial-down their power to the minimum needed , is certainly possible , but requires that the receiving device send an RSSI ( Received Signal Strength Indication ) or , better , an RQI ( Received Quality Indication ) value back to the transmitting device ( perhaps as part of the ACK ) , and that the transmitting device be capable of lowering its transmit power in the first place ( it 's an extra expense ) .
I do n't know of any protocol that does this ( other than CDMA protocols , for a different reason ) , although I expect newer protocols will -- but to save power ( extend battery life ) , not to reduce spectral pollution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The devices and the protocol should be smart enough to optimize spectrum, both by analyzing the noise at various frequencies and choosing the band with the least automatically[...]You'll be comforted to know that ZigBee devices, and other devices that conform to the IEEE 802.15.4 standard, do this today, and have done so since 2003.The second part of your wish, that devices dial-down their power to the minimum needed, is certainly possible, but requires that the receiving device send an RSSI (Received Signal Strength Indication) or, better, an RQI (Received Quality Indication) value back to the transmitting device (perhaps as part of the ACK), and that the transmitting device be capable of lowering its transmit power in the first place (it's an extra expense).
I don't know of any protocol that does this (other than CDMA protocols, for a different reason), although I expect newer protocols will -- but to save power (extend battery life), not to reduce spectral pollution.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927722</id>
	<title>Re:Channel 14</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264597860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/allochrt.PDF says Channel 14 interferes with the space-to-earth segment of the Mobile and Radiodetermination Satellite Services</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/allochrt.PDF says Channel 14 interferes with the space-to-earth segment of the Mobile and Radiodetermination Satellite Services</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/allochrt.PDF says Channel 14 interferes with the space-to-earth segment of the Mobile and Radiodetermination Satellite Services</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925212</id>
	<title>Re:Channel 14</title>
	<author>Facegarden</author>
	<datestamp>1264588620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you're in a place with too much WiFi noise, try using the Japanese-only channel 14 - it doesn't overlap with any other channels, and you're pretty much guaranteed to be the only person using it. DD-WRT and other alternative firmwares will broadcast on 14, and Windows just requires a simple registry hack to receive on 14. Macs, I believe, can connect without hassle. It's technically illegal, but the likelihood of being caught is pretty much nil. I've still never found an explanation for what this frequency is used for in the US, if anything.</p></div><p>I've always considered doing that, but having to do a registry edit every time a guest wants to use my wireless is just not acceptable. I'm the resident techy and my housemates would hate me.<br>-Taylor</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're in a place with too much WiFi noise , try using the Japanese-only channel 14 - it does n't overlap with any other channels , and you 're pretty much guaranteed to be the only person using it .
DD-WRT and other alternative firmwares will broadcast on 14 , and Windows just requires a simple registry hack to receive on 14 .
Macs , I believe , can connect without hassle .
It 's technically illegal , but the likelihood of being caught is pretty much nil .
I 've still never found an explanation for what this frequency is used for in the US , if anything.I 've always considered doing that , but having to do a registry edit every time a guest wants to use my wireless is just not acceptable .
I 'm the resident techy and my housemates would hate me.-Taylor</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're in a place with too much WiFi noise, try using the Japanese-only channel 14 - it doesn't overlap with any other channels, and you're pretty much guaranteed to be the only person using it.
DD-WRT and other alternative firmwares will broadcast on 14, and Windows just requires a simple registry hack to receive on 14.
Macs, I believe, can connect without hassle.
It's technically illegal, but the likelihood of being caught is pretty much nil.
I've still never found an explanation for what this frequency is used for in the US, if anything.I've always considered doing that, but having to do a registry edit every time a guest wants to use my wireless is just not acceptable.
I'm the resident techy and my housemates would hate me.-Taylor
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925002</id>
	<title>But I am on 5 GHz</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264588020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since I \_don't\_ deal with a lot of Windows PCs, I \_am\_ running everything on 5.0 GHz.  Well, OK, there's a "guest WiFi" at 2.4 GHz for friends, but I don't care if that's broken.</p><p>Most PCs I've seen with 802.11n only have the 2.4GHz support, and same with a lot of add-on cards and access points.  The dual-band stuff is starting to be a little easier to get, though still a bit of a price-premium.  Of course, since my machines are either Macs on Wi-Fi or Linux on gigabit copper, I'm already used to a price premium.</p><p>However, there's a good side effect of this: a certain eggy on-line store had a whole bunch of refurbished Netgear 5.0 GHz \_only\_ access points/bridges on for less than $40.  So the couple of devices I have that don't do WAP and/or don't do 5.0 GHz are now using those things.  Similarly, I set up a friend's office to use one so his Macs aren't drowned out by all the 2.4 GHz chatter in the area.  (Downtown, right beside a condo and hotel, across the road from an office building... and almost everyone on channel 1, too.)</p><p>Heck, $40 is less than the price of a USB 802.11n adapter.  So I bought a couple extra just in case.</p><p>So, if everyone else would just \_stay off\_ 5.0 GHz, I'll be very happy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since I \ _do n't \ _ deal with a lot of Windows PCs , I \ _am \ _ running everything on 5.0 GHz .
Well , OK , there 's a " guest WiFi " at 2.4 GHz for friends , but I do n't care if that 's broken.Most PCs I 've seen with 802.11n only have the 2.4GHz support , and same with a lot of add-on cards and access points .
The dual-band stuff is starting to be a little easier to get , though still a bit of a price-premium .
Of course , since my machines are either Macs on Wi-Fi or Linux on gigabit copper , I 'm already used to a price premium.However , there 's a good side effect of this : a certain eggy on-line store had a whole bunch of refurbished Netgear 5.0 GHz \ _only \ _ access points/bridges on for less than $ 40 .
So the couple of devices I have that do n't do WAP and/or do n't do 5.0 GHz are now using those things .
Similarly , I set up a friend 's office to use one so his Macs are n't drowned out by all the 2.4 GHz chatter in the area .
( Downtown , right beside a condo and hotel , across the road from an office building... and almost everyone on channel 1 , too .
) Heck , $ 40 is less than the price of a USB 802.11n adapter .
So I bought a couple extra just in case.So , if everyone else would just \ _stay off \ _ 5.0 GHz , I 'll be very happy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since I \_don't\_ deal with a lot of Windows PCs, I \_am\_ running everything on 5.0 GHz.
Well, OK, there's a "guest WiFi" at 2.4 GHz for friends, but I don't care if that's broken.Most PCs I've seen with 802.11n only have the 2.4GHz support, and same with a lot of add-on cards and access points.
The dual-band stuff is starting to be a little easier to get, though still a bit of a price-premium.
Of course, since my machines are either Macs on Wi-Fi or Linux on gigabit copper, I'm already used to a price premium.However, there's a good side effect of this: a certain eggy on-line store had a whole bunch of refurbished Netgear 5.0 GHz \_only\_ access points/bridges on for less than $40.
So the couple of devices I have that don't do WAP and/or don't do 5.0 GHz are now using those things.
Similarly, I set up a friend's office to use one so his Macs aren't drowned out by all the 2.4 GHz chatter in the area.
(Downtown, right beside a condo and hotel, across the road from an office building... and almost everyone on channel 1, too.
)Heck, $40 is less than the price of a USB 802.11n adapter.
So I bought a couple extra just in case.So, if everyone else would just \_stay off\_ 5.0 GHz, I'll be very happy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30928840</id>
	<title>Re:aircrack</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264605600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>CenturyTel's 2Wire modems are WEP by default, but it can be changed, and easily followed instructions can be found on the 2Wire site.  Directions for changing the WEP key are there as well (but irrelevant if you switch to WPA).  The fact that the default WEP key is on the label on the box isn't a big deal unless someone breaks into your house - then you have bigger problems.  I suppose it's there because the typical customer can't be bothered to keep the key in a safe place, and they'd probably write it on a post-it stuck under the box, just like they do for their computer password at work.</p><p>- T</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>CenturyTel 's 2Wire modems are WEP by default , but it can be changed , and easily followed instructions can be found on the 2Wire site .
Directions for changing the WEP key are there as well ( but irrelevant if you switch to WPA ) .
The fact that the default WEP key is on the label on the box is n't a big deal unless someone breaks into your house - then you have bigger problems .
I suppose it 's there because the typical customer ca n't be bothered to keep the key in a safe place , and they 'd probably write it on a post-it stuck under the box , just like they do for their computer password at work.- T</tokentext>
<sentencetext>CenturyTel's 2Wire modems are WEP by default, but it can be changed, and easily followed instructions can be found on the 2Wire site.
Directions for changing the WEP key are there as well (but irrelevant if you switch to WPA).
The fact that the default WEP key is on the label on the box isn't a big deal unless someone breaks into your house - then you have bigger problems.
I suppose it's there because the typical customer can't be bothered to keep the key in a safe place, and they'd probably write it on a post-it stuck under the box, just like they do for their computer password at work.- T</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924830</id>
	<title>Please stay on 2.4 GHz</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264587480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The more devices will be on 2.4 GHz, the longer I will be alone on my frequency (5.2 GHz) for my appartment's wifi network. 5 GHz hardware is already there. Good for me if most people still choose 2.4 GHz only hardware.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The more devices will be on 2.4 GHz , the longer I will be alone on my frequency ( 5.2 GHz ) for my appartment 's wifi network .
5 GHz hardware is already there .
Good for me if most people still choose 2.4 GHz only hardware .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The more devices will be on 2.4 GHz, the longer I will be alone on my frequency (5.2 GHz) for my appartment's wifi network.
5 GHz hardware is already there.
Good for me if most people still choose 2.4 GHz only hardware.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926900</id>
	<title>There's always a garbage band...</title>
	<author>sillivalley</author>
	<datestamp>1264593840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>...And currently, it's 2.4 GHz.<br> <br>
Before that, it was the 900 MHz band -- until it filled up with cordless crap.<br> <br>
As others have posted, 5 GHz is still pretty clean, so use it while you can.  In our residential area, 2.4 GHz is full (even 14 is in use), but there's little activity on 5 GHz, so that's where our macbooks connect.<br> <br>
Same at work -- dual mode phones, bluetooth, microwave ovens, old laptops and more all on 2.4, with the newer equipment connecting on 5 GHz.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...And currently , it 's 2.4 GHz .
Before that , it was the 900 MHz band -- until it filled up with cordless crap .
As others have posted , 5 GHz is still pretty clean , so use it while you can .
In our residential area , 2.4 GHz is full ( even 14 is in use ) , but there 's little activity on 5 GHz , so that 's where our macbooks connect .
Same at work -- dual mode phones , bluetooth , microwave ovens , old laptops and more all on 2.4 , with the newer equipment connecting on 5 GHz .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...And currently, it's 2.4 GHz.
Before that, it was the 900 MHz band -- until it filled up with cordless crap.
As others have posted, 5 GHz is still pretty clean, so use it while you can.
In our residential area, 2.4 GHz is full (even 14 is in use), but there's little activity on 5 GHz, so that's where our macbooks connect.
Same at work -- dual mode phones, bluetooth, microwave ovens, old laptops and more all on 2.4, with the newer equipment connecting on 5 GHz.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927652</id>
	<title>Re:Channel 14</title>
	<author>dissy</author>
	<datestamp>1264597500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's technically illegal, but the likelihood of being caught is pretty much nil. I've still never found an explanation for what this frequency is used for in the US, if anything.</p></div><p>According to (PDF warning) <a href="http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/allochrt.PDF" title="doc.gov">http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/allochrt.PDF</a> [doc.gov]<br>3rd line from the bottom with the end label '300ghz', with the top label of 2483.5 - 2500 (it is listed as mhz)</p><p>2.484ghz  (what channel 14 centers on) is allocated in the USA to two things: Mobile satellites, and "Radiodetermination satellite"</p><p>The color code indicates "Government / Non-government  shared"</p><p>My guess is the mobile satellite is the non-government bit, and the radio determination satellite is the government controlled part.<br>That last piece appears (from a very hasty google) to be a precursor to GPS, as its function is to use multiple geostationary satellites to locate your position.</p><p>So short of GPS going down and people actually bringing up older positioning hardware, or that mobile company noticing your noise, the odds as you say are nill of being caught.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's technically illegal , but the likelihood of being caught is pretty much nil .
I 've still never found an explanation for what this frequency is used for in the US , if anything.According to ( PDF warning ) http : //www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/allochrt.PDF [ doc.gov ] 3rd line from the bottom with the end label '300ghz ' , with the top label of 2483.5 - 2500 ( it is listed as mhz ) 2.484ghz ( what channel 14 centers on ) is allocated in the USA to two things : Mobile satellites , and " Radiodetermination satellite " The color code indicates " Government / Non-government shared " My guess is the mobile satellite is the non-government bit , and the radio determination satellite is the government controlled part.That last piece appears ( from a very hasty google ) to be a precursor to GPS , as its function is to use multiple geostationary satellites to locate your position.So short of GPS going down and people actually bringing up older positioning hardware , or that mobile company noticing your noise , the odds as you say are nill of being caught .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's technically illegal, but the likelihood of being caught is pretty much nil.
I've still never found an explanation for what this frequency is used for in the US, if anything.According to (PDF warning) http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/allochrt.PDF [doc.gov]3rd line from the bottom with the end label '300ghz', with the top label of 2483.5 - 2500 (it is listed as mhz)2.484ghz  (what channel 14 centers on) is allocated in the USA to two things: Mobile satellites, and "Radiodetermination satellite"The color code indicates "Government / Non-government  shared"My guess is the mobile satellite is the non-government bit, and the radio determination satellite is the government controlled part.That last piece appears (from a very hasty google) to be a precursor to GPS, as its function is to use multiple geostationary satellites to locate your position.So short of GPS going down and people actually bringing up older positioning hardware, or that mobile company noticing your noise, the odds as you say are nill of being caught.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924906</id>
	<title>Re:Apartment Wifi</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264587720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just log into the admin panel of the router and tweak the settings to make it unique. If you Google the router model number you can find the factory default password. I bet dollars to donuts your router (and all your neighbors') is using the default password.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just log into the admin panel of the router and tweak the settings to make it unique .
If you Google the router model number you can find the factory default password .
I bet dollars to donuts your router ( and all your neighbors ' ) is using the default password .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just log into the admin panel of the router and tweak the settings to make it unique.
If you Google the router model number you can find the factory default password.
I bet dollars to donuts your router (and all your neighbors') is using the default password.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924802</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927820</id>
	<title>Has 2.4 GHz Reached Maximum Capacity?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264598460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>OK, in the US, the 2400 to 2500 MHz band is allocated for use by Industrial, Scientific and Medical devices. In this band RF devices may emit signals provided those signals are low power and they do not interfere with licensed users.  These devices are also required to accept interference from other ISM devices and from licensed users.  The only reason WI-Fi works is the probability that there are few if any licensed users in your neighborhood.  I suppose we should all be thankful that Wi-Fi works as well as it does.</p><p>Currently, the licensed users of the 2400 MHz band are:<br>Amateur radio; 2390-2450MHz<br>US goverment radio location; 2417-2450 MHz<br>Fixed communications services; 2450-2483.5 MHz<br>Mobile communications Service; 2450-2483.5 MHz<br>Radiolocation services; 2450-2483.5 MHz<br>Satelite communications; 2483.5-2500 MHz</p><p>As far as the 5GHz band goes, ISM is allocated 5.725-5.875 Ghz.  This band is also subject to the same limitations regarding licensed users.  In the 5GHz band the users are amateur radio, radio location, fixed and mobile communications and satelite communications.  This band is also potentially full too.</p><p>Those of us who use Wi-Fi or 5GHz should be thankful there aren't more licensed users in our neighborhoods.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>OK , in the US , the 2400 to 2500 MHz band is allocated for use by Industrial , Scientific and Medical devices .
In this band RF devices may emit signals provided those signals are low power and they do not interfere with licensed users .
These devices are also required to accept interference from other ISM devices and from licensed users .
The only reason WI-Fi works is the probability that there are few if any licensed users in your neighborhood .
I suppose we should all be thankful that Wi-Fi works as well as it does.Currently , the licensed users of the 2400 MHz band are : Amateur radio ; 2390-2450MHzUS goverment radio location ; 2417-2450 MHzFixed communications services ; 2450-2483.5 MHzMobile communications Service ; 2450-2483.5 MHzRadiolocation services ; 2450-2483.5 MHzSatelite communications ; 2483.5-2500 MHzAs far as the 5GHz band goes , ISM is allocated 5.725-5.875 Ghz .
This band is also subject to the same limitations regarding licensed users .
In the 5GHz band the users are amateur radio , radio location , fixed and mobile communications and satelite communications .
This band is also potentially full too.Those of us who use Wi-Fi or 5GHz should be thankful there are n't more licensed users in our neighborhoods .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OK, in the US, the 2400 to 2500 MHz band is allocated for use by Industrial, Scientific and Medical devices.
In this band RF devices may emit signals provided those signals are low power and they do not interfere with licensed users.
These devices are also required to accept interference from other ISM devices and from licensed users.
The only reason WI-Fi works is the probability that there are few if any licensed users in your neighborhood.
I suppose we should all be thankful that Wi-Fi works as well as it does.Currently, the licensed users of the 2400 MHz band are:Amateur radio; 2390-2450MHzUS goverment radio location; 2417-2450 MHzFixed communications services; 2450-2483.5 MHzMobile communications Service; 2450-2483.5 MHzRadiolocation services; 2450-2483.5 MHzSatelite communications; 2483.5-2500 MHzAs far as the 5GHz band goes, ISM is allocated 5.725-5.875 Ghz.
This band is also subject to the same limitations regarding licensed users.
In the 5GHz band the users are amateur radio, radio location, fixed and mobile communications and satelite communications.
This band is also potentially full too.Those of us who use Wi-Fi or 5GHz should be thankful there aren't more licensed users in our neighborhoods.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926890</id>
	<title>Re:Apartment Wifi</title>
	<author>SQLGuru</author>
	<datestamp>1264593780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can always hang your own router off of the ethernet port of the FiOS router.....just saying.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can always hang your own router off of the ethernet port of the FiOS router.....just saying .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can always hang your own router off of the ethernet port of the FiOS router.....just saying.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924802</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30939506</id>
	<title>Re:But I am on 5 GHz</title>
	<author>RzUpAnmsCwrds</author>
	<datestamp>1264711560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Since I \_don't\_ deal with a lot of Windows PCs</p></div></blockquote><p>There are many, many "Windows PCs" that support 5GHz, including pretty much every PC with an Intel 5100 or 5300 wireless chipset.</p><p>Even many cheap PCs like the Acer 1410 come with Intel 5100; the T400 that I currently use had it as an option for $9 more (the integrated graphics version has it standard).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Since I \ _do n't \ _ deal with a lot of Windows PCsThere are many , many " Windows PCs " that support 5GHz , including pretty much every PC with an Intel 5100 or 5300 wireless chipset.Even many cheap PCs like the Acer 1410 come with Intel 5100 ; the T400 that I currently use had it as an option for $ 9 more ( the integrated graphics version has it standard ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since I \_don't\_ deal with a lot of Windows PCsThere are many, many "Windows PCs" that support 5GHz, including pretty much every PC with an Intel 5100 or 5300 wireless chipset.Even many cheap PCs like the Acer 1410 come with Intel 5100; the T400 that I currently use had it as an option for $9 more (the integrated graphics version has it standard).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925002</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927202</id>
	<title>Re:Channel 14</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264595040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Im not sure about 14 but contrary to popular belief using channels over 11 (I forget which ones) is not illegal but there are different power limits. If you really want to go all out get your ham radio operators licence, specifically the special class, It will allow you to broad cast with ridiculous amounts of power and in ALL channels even if only for "testing purposes" or non commercial use again i don't remember the exact details.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Im not sure about 14 but contrary to popular belief using channels over 11 ( I forget which ones ) is not illegal but there are different power limits .
If you really want to go all out get your ham radio operators licence , specifically the special class , It will allow you to broad cast with ridiculous amounts of power and in ALL channels even if only for " testing purposes " or non commercial use again i do n't remember the exact details .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Im not sure about 14 but contrary to popular belief using channels over 11 (I forget which ones) is not illegal but there are different power limits.
If you really want to go all out get your ham radio operators licence, specifically the special class, It will allow you to broad cast with ridiculous amounts of power and in ALL channels even if only for "testing purposes" or non commercial use again i don't remember the exact details.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927568</id>
	<title>Re:Channel 14</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264597020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You'd still have a lot of overlap with people running on channel 11</p></div><p>The channel overlap is only in 2 channels in each direction.</p><p>So channel 11 only overlaps with 9,10,(11),12,and 13.<br>(I only include 11 in the list to illustrate the two channels in each direction aspect)</p><p>This means 11 does not overlap with any channel below 9, nor any channel above 13.<br>14 is fortunately above 13!</p><p>Technically however, 14 is special.  It isn't allocated in the same way, and is a little bit higher in the frequency range than all the others.  What that means is while all the other channels are 22mhz wide, and roughly 22mhz apart, channel 14 is more than 22mhz away from the next lowest channel, thus the no overlap.</p><p>I'm pretty sure 14 will only overlap with 13 and only partially then.<br>And then anything higher than 14 by much is outside of the 2.4ghz band, passing 2.5xx at that point.</p><p>Also on the illegal part.   According to (PDF warning) <a href="http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/allochrt.PDF" title="doc.gov">http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/allochrt.PDF</a> [doc.gov]<br>2.484ghz  (what channel 14 centers on) is allocated in the USA to two things:  Mobile satellites, and "Radiodetermination satellite" whatever that one is.<br>So in other words, you need to be noticed as a source of interference by one of those two usages.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 'd still have a lot of overlap with people running on channel 11The channel overlap is only in 2 channels in each direction.So channel 11 only overlaps with 9,10 , ( 11 ) ,12,and 13 .
( I only include 11 in the list to illustrate the two channels in each direction aspect ) This means 11 does not overlap with any channel below 9 , nor any channel above 13.14 is fortunately above 13 ! Technically however , 14 is special .
It is n't allocated in the same way , and is a little bit higher in the frequency range than all the others .
What that means is while all the other channels are 22mhz wide , and roughly 22mhz apart , channel 14 is more than 22mhz away from the next lowest channel , thus the no overlap.I 'm pretty sure 14 will only overlap with 13 and only partially then.And then anything higher than 14 by much is outside of the 2.4ghz band , passing 2.5xx at that point.Also on the illegal part .
According to ( PDF warning ) http : //www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/allochrt.PDF [ doc.gov ] 2.484ghz ( what channel 14 centers on ) is allocated in the USA to two things : Mobile satellites , and " Radiodetermination satellite " whatever that one is.So in other words , you need to be noticed as a source of interference by one of those two usages .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You'd still have a lot of overlap with people running on channel 11The channel overlap is only in 2 channels in each direction.So channel 11 only overlaps with 9,10,(11),12,and 13.
(I only include 11 in the list to illustrate the two channels in each direction aspect)This means 11 does not overlap with any channel below 9, nor any channel above 13.14 is fortunately above 13!Technically however, 14 is special.
It isn't allocated in the same way, and is a little bit higher in the frequency range than all the others.
What that means is while all the other channels are 22mhz wide, and roughly 22mhz apart, channel 14 is more than 22mhz away from the next lowest channel, thus the no overlap.I'm pretty sure 14 will only overlap with 13 and only partially then.And then anything higher than 14 by much is outside of the 2.4ghz band, passing 2.5xx at that point.Also on the illegal part.
According to (PDF warning) http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/allochrt.PDF [doc.gov]2.484ghz  (what channel 14 centers on) is allocated in the USA to two things:  Mobile satellites, and "Radiodetermination satellite" whatever that one is.So in other words, you need to be noticed as a source of interference by one of those two usages.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30929438</id>
	<title>5GHz won't be easy</title>
	<author>pcjunky</author>
	<datestamp>1264612020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Manufacturers make there products to produce the best experience for the most people. Most people don't live in multi unit buildings. They live in the burbs where maybe one or two neighbors has WIFI. People want to connect to their AP in the den from their bedroom, maybe two rooms away. 5GHz doesn't penetrate walls/doors nearly as well as 2.4GHz (higher frequencies are more line of sight). 5GHz equipment won't interoperate with older WIFI equipment. It costs more to manufacture also (higher frequency components cost more).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Manufacturers make there products to produce the best experience for the most people .
Most people do n't live in multi unit buildings .
They live in the burbs where maybe one or two neighbors has WIFI .
People want to connect to their AP in the den from their bedroom , maybe two rooms away .
5GHz does n't penetrate walls/doors nearly as well as 2.4GHz ( higher frequencies are more line of sight ) .
5GHz equipment wo n't interoperate with older WIFI equipment .
It costs more to manufacture also ( higher frequency components cost more ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Manufacturers make there products to produce the best experience for the most people.
Most people don't live in multi unit buildings.
They live in the burbs where maybe one or two neighbors has WIFI.
People want to connect to their AP in the den from their bedroom, maybe two rooms away.
5GHz doesn't penetrate walls/doors nearly as well as 2.4GHz (higher frequencies are more line of sight).
5GHz equipment won't interoperate with older WIFI equipment.
It costs more to manufacture also (higher frequency components cost more).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926260</id>
	<title>Re:your router is yelling and you dont even know i</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264591800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is that really true? I have two access points (CH 1 &amp; 6) and I don't seem to have an issue with microwaves, cordless phones, or anything.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is that really true ?
I have two access points ( CH 1 &amp; 6 ) and I do n't seem to have an issue with microwaves , cordless phones , or anything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is that really true?
I have two access points (CH 1 &amp; 6) and I don't seem to have an issue with microwaves, cordless phones, or anything.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924856</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925422</id>
	<title>Re:Channel 14</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264589280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Illegal means ILLEGAL.  The U.S. has yet to grant its citizens the privilege to pick and choose which laws they wish to abide by without consequence.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Illegal means ILLEGAL .
The U.S. has yet to grant its citizens the privilege to pick and choose which laws they wish to abide by without consequence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Illegal means ILLEGAL.
The U.S. has yet to grant its citizens the privilege to pick and choose which laws they wish to abide by without consequence.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925468</id>
	<title>Re:Channel 14</title>
	<author>PPH</author>
	<datestamp>1264589460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's used by the Gundam. You're about to get your ass kicked by a giant robot.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's used by the Gundam .
You 're about to get your ass kicked by a giant robot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's used by the Gundam.
You're about to get your ass kicked by a giant robot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30928490</id>
	<title>Re:Channel 14</title>
	<author>dtmos</author>
	<datestamp>1264602900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I've still never found an explanation for what this frequency is used for in the US, if anything.</p></div></blockquote><p>Wi-Fi Channel 14 is centered on 2484 MHz, and is 22 MHz wide, so it covers 2473-2495 MHz.  Like channels 12 and 13, it's not used in the US because the US ISM band ends at 2483.5 MHz; the channels contain significant energy outside the ISM band.</p><p>In the US, 2483.5&ndash;2500 MHz is allocated to ancillary terrestrial components used in conjunction with mobile-satellite service systems (<a href="http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr\_2009/octqtr/pdf/47cfr25.254.pdf" title="gpo.gov">47 CFR  25.254</a> [gpo.gov]).  These are the terrestrial transmitters used to provide service to mobile low-Earth-orbit satellite service users (think satellite radio, although I don't think XM/Sirius uses this band) when the user is in a tunnel, or the satellite signal is otherwise blocked.</p><p>2450-2500 MHz is also allocated to radidetermination (i.e., direction-finding radar) on both ship and shore, with the proviso that no interference be caused to the fixed and mobile satellite stations mentioned above (<a href="http://cfr.vlex.com/vid/375-radiodetermination-frequencies-19855951" title="vlex.com">47 CFR  80.375(d)</a> [vlex.com]).  (ISM band users, however, must accept any radar interference they receive.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've still never found an explanation for what this frequency is used for in the US , if anything.Wi-Fi Channel 14 is centered on 2484 MHz , and is 22 MHz wide , so it covers 2473-2495 MHz .
Like channels 12 and 13 , it 's not used in the US because the US ISM band ends at 2483.5 MHz ; the channels contain significant energy outside the ISM band.In the US , 2483.5    2500 MHz is allocated to ancillary terrestrial components used in conjunction with mobile-satellite service systems ( 47 CFR 25.254 [ gpo.gov ] ) .
These are the terrestrial transmitters used to provide service to mobile low-Earth-orbit satellite service users ( think satellite radio , although I do n't think XM/Sirius uses this band ) when the user is in a tunnel , or the satellite signal is otherwise blocked.2450-2500 MHz is also allocated to radidetermination ( i.e. , direction-finding radar ) on both ship and shore , with the proviso that no interference be caused to the fixed and mobile satellite stations mentioned above ( 47 CFR 80.375 ( d ) [ vlex.com ] ) .
( ISM band users , however , must accept any radar interference they receive .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've still never found an explanation for what this frequency is used for in the US, if anything.Wi-Fi Channel 14 is centered on 2484 MHz, and is 22 MHz wide, so it covers 2473-2495 MHz.
Like channels 12 and 13, it's not used in the US because the US ISM band ends at 2483.5 MHz; the channels contain significant energy outside the ISM band.In the US, 2483.5–2500 MHz is allocated to ancillary terrestrial components used in conjunction with mobile-satellite service systems (47 CFR  25.254 [gpo.gov]).
These are the terrestrial transmitters used to provide service to mobile low-Earth-orbit satellite service users (think satellite radio, although I don't think XM/Sirius uses this band) when the user is in a tunnel, or the satellite signal is otherwise blocked.2450-2500 MHz is also allocated to radidetermination (i.e., direction-finding radar) on both ship and shore, with the proviso that no interference be caused to the fixed and mobile satellite stations mentioned above (47 CFR  80.375(d) [vlex.com]).
(ISM band users, however, must accept any radar interference they receive.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925706</id>
	<title>Re:Channel 14</title>
	<author>Archangel Michael</author>
	<datestamp>1264590120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unless you're a congressman or President. Then you're possibly exempt, and often are explicitly exempt from the stupid laws you create.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unless you 're a congressman or President .
Then you 're possibly exempt , and often are explicitly exempt from the stupid laws you create .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unless you're a congressman or President.
Then you're possibly exempt, and often are explicitly exempt from the stupid laws you create.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925422</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927028</id>
	<title>No, no, no</title>
	<author>russotto</author>
	<datestamp>1264594260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Leave all that trash on 2.4Ghz.  I want to be able to continue to use 5.1,5.2 and (to a lesser degree, since phones use it too) 5.8.  As soon as we get a proliferation of $25 devices on the 5Ghz spectrum, we'll fill those up too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Leave all that trash on 2.4Ghz .
I want to be able to continue to use 5.1,5.2 and ( to a lesser degree , since phones use it too ) 5.8 .
As soon as we get a proliferation of $ 25 devices on the 5Ghz spectrum , we 'll fill those up too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Leave all that trash on 2.4Ghz.
I want to be able to continue to use 5.1,5.2 and (to a lesser degree, since phones use it too) 5.8.
As soon as we get a proliferation of $25 devices on the 5Ghz spectrum, we'll fill those up too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30932302</id>
	<title>Re:5GHz won't be easy</title>
	<author>hughk</author>
	<datestamp>1264688880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A lot of people do live in the big city in apartment complexes rather than the burbs with space for nice little houses spaced out with a good 50 yards between them. What s the godsend with apartment complexes is there is usually some reinforced concrete at least in the core and between floors (the rebar will absorb some signal).</htmltext>
<tokenext>A lot of people do live in the big city in apartment complexes rather than the burbs with space for nice little houses spaced out with a good 50 yards between them .
What s the godsend with apartment complexes is there is usually some reinforced concrete at least in the core and between floors ( the rebar will absorb some signal ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A lot of people do live in the big city in apartment complexes rather than the burbs with space for nice little houses spaced out with a good 50 yards between them.
What s the godsend with apartment complexes is there is usually some reinforced concrete at least in the core and between floors (the rebar will absorb some signal).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30929438</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926572</id>
	<title>Re:your router is yelling and you dont even know i</title>
	<author>Duradin</author>
	<datestamp>1264592760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So what you're saying is DD-WRT goes to 11?</p><p>I don't see how that helps solve the 'loudness' problem for anyone but yourself, which really doesn't solve the problem at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So what you 're saying is DD-WRT goes to 11 ? I do n't see how that helps solve the 'loudness ' problem for anyone but yourself , which really does n't solve the problem at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So what you're saying is DD-WRT goes to 11?I don't see how that helps solve the 'loudness' problem for anyone but yourself, which really doesn't solve the problem at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924802</id>
	<title>Apartment Wifi</title>
	<author>ViViDboarder</author>
	<datestamp>1264587360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wow, yea.  That's a huge frustration of mine.  I'm in an apartment building and our only internet option is Verizon FiOs and they give you a Wifi Router that you use with your service...  So EVERYONE is using the same device using the same frequencies.  I've had worse experiences with Wifi before, but it is really frustrating at times.  When I browse nearby access points the list is out of control.

<br> <br>Hard wiring is not really an option here either.  Oh well.  At least I got my Xbox plugged in.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , yea .
That 's a huge frustration of mine .
I 'm in an apartment building and our only internet option is Verizon FiOs and they give you a Wifi Router that you use with your service... So EVERYONE is using the same device using the same frequencies .
I 've had worse experiences with Wifi before , but it is really frustrating at times .
When I browse nearby access points the list is out of control .
Hard wiring is not really an option here either .
Oh well .
At least I got my Xbox plugged in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, yea.
That's a huge frustration of mine.
I'm in an apartment building and our only internet option is Verizon FiOs and they give you a Wifi Router that you use with your service...  So EVERYONE is using the same device using the same frequencies.
I've had worse experiences with Wifi before, but it is really frustrating at times.
When I browse nearby access points the list is out of control.
Hard wiring is not really an option here either.
Oh well.
At least I got my Xbox plugged in.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925650</id>
	<title>Re:Channel 14</title>
	<author>dattaway</author>
	<datestamp>1264589940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Atheros wifi card in my Acer One can cover 2.1-2.8GHz, in 58 channels with a simple config.  But I won't do it, because all kinds of things in the sky use slices of those frequencies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Atheros wifi card in my Acer One can cover 2.1-2.8GHz , in 58 channels with a simple config .
But I wo n't do it , because all kinds of things in the sky use slices of those frequencies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Atheros wifi card in my Acer One can cover 2.1-2.8GHz, in 58 channels with a simple config.
But I won't do it, because all kinds of things in the sky use slices of those frequencies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924816</id>
	<title>The problem</title>
	<author>girlintraining</author>
	<datestamp>1264587420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem is each technology is developed without consideration for large numbers of concurrent devices using the same spectrum. Between encryption, poor handshaking, EMI from non-compliant devices, and attempts by manufacturers to overpower their devices with turbo this or ultra that, the end result is that in high device density areas, the technology becomes nearly useless. This is actually the FCC's fault -- they haven't allocated a large chunk of bandwidth exclusively for consumer-based hardware that provided packet-based network services <i>that requires licensing and certification to use</i>. The 2.4GHz band is like CB Radio -- sure, it's illegal to use a 500 watt transmitter on your mobile rig, but since everybody else and their dog uses it, you should too.</p><p>Manufacturers need to come up with protocols that allow the use of strong encryption AND still allow traffic management and QoS. In other words, stop setting up a bazillion different networks: There is one network per channel. Encryption is enabled by default, and that key determines whether which packets can be decrypted. That way, all the header information and link-level stuff that's essential for management is still available, but a reasonable level of privacy is still possible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is each technology is developed without consideration for large numbers of concurrent devices using the same spectrum .
Between encryption , poor handshaking , EMI from non-compliant devices , and attempts by manufacturers to overpower their devices with turbo this or ultra that , the end result is that in high device density areas , the technology becomes nearly useless .
This is actually the FCC 's fault -- they have n't allocated a large chunk of bandwidth exclusively for consumer-based hardware that provided packet-based network services that requires licensing and certification to use .
The 2.4GHz band is like CB Radio -- sure , it 's illegal to use a 500 watt transmitter on your mobile rig , but since everybody else and their dog uses it , you should too.Manufacturers need to come up with protocols that allow the use of strong encryption AND still allow traffic management and QoS .
In other words , stop setting up a bazillion different networks : There is one network per channel .
Encryption is enabled by default , and that key determines whether which packets can be decrypted .
That way , all the header information and link-level stuff that 's essential for management is still available , but a reasonable level of privacy is still possible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is each technology is developed without consideration for large numbers of concurrent devices using the same spectrum.
Between encryption, poor handshaking, EMI from non-compliant devices, and attempts by manufacturers to overpower their devices with turbo this or ultra that, the end result is that in high device density areas, the technology becomes nearly useless.
This is actually the FCC's fault -- they haven't allocated a large chunk of bandwidth exclusively for consumer-based hardware that provided packet-based network services that requires licensing and certification to use.
The 2.4GHz band is like CB Radio -- sure, it's illegal to use a 500 watt transmitter on your mobile rig, but since everybody else and their dog uses it, you should too.Manufacturers need to come up with protocols that allow the use of strong encryption AND still allow traffic management and QoS.
In other words, stop setting up a bazillion different networks: There is one network per channel.
Encryption is enabled by default, and that key determines whether which packets can be decrypted.
That way, all the header information and link-level stuff that's essential for management is still available, but a reasonable level of privacy is still possible.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924796</id>
	<title>Because I have no idea what's going on Marvin</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264587360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I love myself I want you to love me<br>When I feel down I want you above me<br>I search myself I want you to find me<br>I forget myself I want you to remind me</p><p>I don't want anybody else<br>When I think about you I touch myself<br>Ooh I don't want anybody else Oh no, oh no, oh no</p><p>You're the one who makes me come running<br>You're the sun who makes me shine<br>When you're around I'm always laughing<br>I want to make you mine</p><p>I close my eyes And see you before me<br>Think I would die If you were to ignore me<br>A fool could see Just how much I adore you<br>I get down on my knees I do anything for you</p><p>I don't want anybody else<br>When I think about you I touch myself<br>Ooh I don't want anybody else<br>Oh no, oh no, oh no</p><p>I love myslef I want you to love me<br>When i feel down I want you above me<br>I search myself I want you to find me<br>I forget myself I want you to remind me</p><p>I don't want anybody else<br>And when I think about you I touch myself<br>I don't want anybody else<br>Oh no, oh no, oh no</p><p>*spoken*<br>I want you<br>I don't want anybody else<br>and when i think about you I touch myself<br>OO OO OO-OO Ahhhhh</p><p>I don't want anybody else<br>When i think about you I touch myself<br>I don't want anybody else<br>When i think about you I touch myself<br>I touch myself</p><p>I don't anybody else<br>When i think about you I touch myself</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I love myself I want you to love meWhen I feel down I want you above meI search myself I want you to find meI forget myself I want you to remind meI do n't want anybody elseWhen I think about you I touch myselfOoh I do n't want anybody else Oh no , oh no , oh noYou 're the one who makes me come runningYou 're the sun who makes me shineWhen you 're around I 'm always laughingI want to make you mineI close my eyes And see you before meThink I would die If you were to ignore meA fool could see Just how much I adore youI get down on my knees I do anything for youI do n't want anybody elseWhen I think about you I touch myselfOoh I do n't want anybody elseOh no , oh no , oh noI love myslef I want you to love meWhen i feel down I want you above meI search myself I want you to find meI forget myself I want you to remind meI do n't want anybody elseAnd when I think about you I touch myselfI do n't want anybody elseOh no , oh no , oh no * spoken * I want youI do n't want anybody elseand when i think about you I touch myselfOO OO OO-OO AhhhhhI do n't want anybody elseWhen i think about you I touch myselfI do n't want anybody elseWhen i think about you I touch myselfI touch myselfI do n't anybody elseWhen i think about you I touch myself</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love myself I want you to love meWhen I feel down I want you above meI search myself I want you to find meI forget myself I want you to remind meI don't want anybody elseWhen I think about you I touch myselfOoh I don't want anybody else Oh no, oh no, oh noYou're the one who makes me come runningYou're the sun who makes me shineWhen you're around I'm always laughingI want to make you mineI close my eyes And see you before meThink I would die If you were to ignore meA fool could see Just how much I adore youI get down on my knees I do anything for youI don't want anybody elseWhen I think about you I touch myselfOoh I don't want anybody elseOh no, oh no, oh noI love myslef I want you to love meWhen i feel down I want you above meI search myself I want you to find meI forget myself I want you to remind meI don't want anybody elseAnd when I think about you I touch myselfI don't want anybody elseOh no, oh no, oh no*spoken*I want youI don't want anybody elseand when i think about you I touch myselfOO OO OO-OO AhhhhhI don't want anybody elseWhen i think about you I touch myselfI don't want anybody elseWhen i think about you I touch myselfI touch myselfI don't anybody elseWhen i think about you I touch myself</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924928</id>
	<title>All the more...</title>
	<author>SirBigSpur</author>
	<datestamp>1264587780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>To AutoPwn!</htmltext>
<tokenext>To AutoPwn !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To AutoPwn!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925948</id>
	<title>Re:Channel 14</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264590780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's probably used by FEMA/DHS to take over all digital communications equipment during an "emergency."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's probably used by FEMA/DHS to take over all digital communications equipment during an " emergency .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's probably used by FEMA/DHS to take over all digital communications equipment during an "emergency.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30931754</id>
	<title>more channels?</title>
	<author>h00manist</author>
	<datestamp>1264683480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>if a couple hundred channels were available instead of just 14 or so, i think it could work much better.  that would veer off the 2.4ghz frequency i suppose, but it's the only way that i see.  in fact if a whole bunch of stuff was moved onto frequency-hopping we could get more available frequency, and cleaner.</htmltext>
<tokenext>if a couple hundred channels were available instead of just 14 or so , i think it could work much better .
that would veer off the 2.4ghz frequency i suppose , but it 's the only way that i see .
in fact if a whole bunch of stuff was moved onto frequency-hopping we could get more available frequency , and cleaner .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if a couple hundred channels were available instead of just 14 or so, i think it could work much better.
that would veer off the 2.4ghz frequency i suppose, but it's the only way that i see.
in fact if a whole bunch of stuff was moved onto frequency-hopping we could get more available frequency, and cleaner.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924856</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925476</id>
	<title>Re:Why can't we push all this short range...</title>
	<author>jgtg32a</author>
	<datestamp>1264589460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Doesn't 802.11n come with the option of being in 5GHz</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does n't 802.11n come with the option of being in 5GHz</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doesn't 802.11n come with the option of being in 5GHz</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924926</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926164</id>
	<title>Re:Channel 14</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264591500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you're in a place with too much WiFi noise, try using the Japanese-only channel 14 - it doesn't overlap with any other channels, and you're pretty much guaranteed to be the only person using it.</p></div><p>Well, besides all the Japanophiles nearby you torrenting anime 24/7, trying their darndest to saturate the spectrum on "the most Japanese wifi channel in the world!! ^\_^".  I'm certain there won't be any problems with interference there.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're in a place with too much WiFi noise , try using the Japanese-only channel 14 - it does n't overlap with any other channels , and you 're pretty much guaranteed to be the only person using it.Well , besides all the Japanophiles nearby you torrenting anime 24/7 , trying their darndest to saturate the spectrum on " the most Japanese wifi channel in the world ! !
^ \ _ ^ " . I 'm certain there wo n't be any problems with interference there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're in a place with too much WiFi noise, try using the Japanese-only channel 14 - it doesn't overlap with any other channels, and you're pretty much guaranteed to be the only person using it.Well, besides all the Japanophiles nearby you torrenting anime 24/7, trying their darndest to saturate the spectrum on "the most Japanese wifi channel in the world!!
^\_^".  I'm certain there won't be any problems with interference there.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927976</id>
	<title>Re:your router is yelling and you dont even know i</title>
	<author>CAIMLAS</author>
	<datestamp>1264599480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It sure was entertaining to watch my FIL bitch about how I'd broken something on his laptop, because the Internet wasn't working...</p><p>While he was talking on his 2.4GHz phone.</p><p>With the microwave cooking his dinner.</p><p>No, no degree of explanation helps the matter. Most people are like this; they don't get the whole 'frequency' thing at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It sure was entertaining to watch my FIL bitch about how I 'd broken something on his laptop , because the Internet was n't working...While he was talking on his 2.4GHz phone.With the microwave cooking his dinner.No , no degree of explanation helps the matter .
Most people are like this ; they do n't get the whole 'frequency ' thing at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It sure was entertaining to watch my FIL bitch about how I'd broken something on his laptop, because the Internet wasn't working...While he was talking on his 2.4GHz phone.With the microwave cooking his dinner.No, no degree of explanation helps the matter.
Most people are like this; they don't get the whole 'frequency' thing at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925274</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925854</id>
	<title>Re:Channel 14</title>
	<author>vlm</author>
	<datestamp>1264590480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I've still never found an explanation for what this frequency is used for in the US, if anything.</p></div><p>Short summary, nothing important, just other unlicensed ISM stuff.</p><p>ISM is supposed to be for bulk raw stuff like industrial heating, cooking, diathermy, NMR/MRI basically the kind of stuff where the specs need be no tighter than "a couple gigs and a zillion watts".  But wouldn't it be funny to try to use the same band for communications stuff?  Thus Wifi.  A stupid idea from a frequency coordination standpoint, but it was the best solution to a bad situation etc etc.</p><p>Channel 14 is going to cover 2.473-2.495 GHz.  The 2.4G ISM band is 2.4 to 2.5 GHz, so superficially, channel 14 is all good.</p><p>However, the FCC thought it would be fun to regulate the unlicensed ISM spectrum into segments, probably to avoid chaos like pre-rebanded 800 MHz Nextel interference.  Theoretically, it should be possible for wifi and 2.4G wireless mikes and other 2.4G stuff to coexist.  Theoretically.  And channel 14 just happens to live outside the proper band segment, so its not going to cooperate.  The idea is a joke because "Industrial" users like microwave ovens tend to crap all over the entire band, so any interference to a subband is generally blamed on the high power industrial stuff rather than a "mistuned" piece of communications gear.</p><p>So, you won't be knocking out military radar or interfering with satellites, but you will be interfering with other unlicensed ISM users.  Are there any local communications users other than phones and WiFi?  Frankly, probably not.  And the industrial ISM guys are not going to care.</p><p>Wikipedia has links to the CFRs.  Good Luck with reading those.</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISM\_band" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISM\_band</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've still never found an explanation for what this frequency is used for in the US , if anything.Short summary , nothing important , just other unlicensed ISM stuff.ISM is supposed to be for bulk raw stuff like industrial heating , cooking , diathermy , NMR/MRI basically the kind of stuff where the specs need be no tighter than " a couple gigs and a zillion watts " .
But would n't it be funny to try to use the same band for communications stuff ?
Thus Wifi .
A stupid idea from a frequency coordination standpoint , but it was the best solution to a bad situation etc etc.Channel 14 is going to cover 2.473-2.495 GHz .
The 2.4G ISM band is 2.4 to 2.5 GHz , so superficially , channel 14 is all good.However , the FCC thought it would be fun to regulate the unlicensed ISM spectrum into segments , probably to avoid chaos like pre-rebanded 800 MHz Nextel interference .
Theoretically , it should be possible for wifi and 2.4G wireless mikes and other 2.4G stuff to coexist .
Theoretically. And channel 14 just happens to live outside the proper band segment , so its not going to cooperate .
The idea is a joke because " Industrial " users like microwave ovens tend to crap all over the entire band , so any interference to a subband is generally blamed on the high power industrial stuff rather than a " mistuned " piece of communications gear.So , you wo n't be knocking out military radar or interfering with satellites , but you will be interfering with other unlicensed ISM users .
Are there any local communications users other than phones and WiFi ?
Frankly , probably not .
And the industrial ISM guys are not going to care.Wikipedia has links to the CFRs .
Good Luck with reading those.http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISM \ _band [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've still never found an explanation for what this frequency is used for in the US, if anything.Short summary, nothing important, just other unlicensed ISM stuff.ISM is supposed to be for bulk raw stuff like industrial heating, cooking, diathermy, NMR/MRI basically the kind of stuff where the specs need be no tighter than "a couple gigs and a zillion watts".
But wouldn't it be funny to try to use the same band for communications stuff?
Thus Wifi.
A stupid idea from a frequency coordination standpoint, but it was the best solution to a bad situation etc etc.Channel 14 is going to cover 2.473-2.495 GHz.
The 2.4G ISM band is 2.4 to 2.5 GHz, so superficially, channel 14 is all good.However, the FCC thought it would be fun to regulate the unlicensed ISM spectrum into segments, probably to avoid chaos like pre-rebanded 800 MHz Nextel interference.
Theoretically, it should be possible for wifi and 2.4G wireless mikes and other 2.4G stuff to coexist.
Theoretically.  And channel 14 just happens to live outside the proper band segment, so its not going to cooperate.
The idea is a joke because "Industrial" users like microwave ovens tend to crap all over the entire band, so any interference to a subband is generally blamed on the high power industrial stuff rather than a "mistuned" piece of communications gear.So, you won't be knocking out military radar or interfering with satellites, but you will be interfering with other unlicensed ISM users.
Are there any local communications users other than phones and WiFi?
Frankly, probably not.
And the industrial ISM guys are not going to care.Wikipedia has links to the CFRs.
Good Luck with reading those.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISM\_band [wikipedia.org]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925564</id>
	<title>Re:Channel 14</title>
	<author>ShaunC</author>
	<datestamp>1264589760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The U.S. has yet to grant its citizens the privilege to pick and choose which laws they wish to abide by without consequence.</p></div><p>Unless those citizens get elected. Who knows, GP poster might be Dick Cheney.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The U.S. has yet to grant its citizens the privilege to pick and choose which laws they wish to abide by without consequence.Unless those citizens get elected .
Who knows , GP poster might be Dick Cheney .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The U.S. has yet to grant its citizens the privilege to pick and choose which laws they wish to abide by without consequence.Unless those citizens get elected.
Who knows, GP poster might be Dick Cheney.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925422</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30928648</id>
	<title>Re:your router is yelling and you dont even know i</title>
	<author>cgenman</author>
	<datestamp>1264604100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Too bad the above is just a pipe dream. I can't imagine how bad it is living in dense residential/apartments, where these users still don't know how to configure things, but there are 2 dozen within range instead of 5.</i></p><p>Except for that mess-up in the early days of N that would just obliterate everything in range, it's not as bad as you would think.  You're lucky to get 20m range in this apartment complex, but the apartments aren't that big anyway.  Similarly, being in America, the signal degredation brings the transmission rates down to... oh... about the paultry upstream we get from the cable provider anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Too bad the above is just a pipe dream .
I ca n't imagine how bad it is living in dense residential/apartments , where these users still do n't know how to configure things , but there are 2 dozen within range instead of 5.Except for that mess-up in the early days of N that would just obliterate everything in range , it 's not as bad as you would think .
You 're lucky to get 20m range in this apartment complex , but the apartments are n't that big anyway .
Similarly , being in America , the signal degredation brings the transmission rates down to... oh... about the paultry upstream we get from the cable provider anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Too bad the above is just a pipe dream.
I can't imagine how bad it is living in dense residential/apartments, where these users still don't know how to configure things, but there are 2 dozen within range instead of 5.Except for that mess-up in the early days of N that would just obliterate everything in range, it's not as bad as you would think.
You're lucky to get 20m range in this apartment complex, but the apartments aren't that big anyway.
Similarly, being in America, the signal degredation brings the transmission rates down to... oh... about the paultry upstream we get from the cable provider anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926192</id>
	<title>WRONG</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264591620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Besides the FCC specs that WiFi devices meet (which are really a fairly bare minimum to avoid really crappy interference), manufacturers take some time to make sure their devices behave.  You can be certain Cisco pays attention, and other well-regarded makers, because they intend for their enterprise clients to deploy these in a mesh and will definitely suffer if they are out of spec.</p><p>Now, there are plenty of shady outfits, but since everyone pretty much uses the same few radio chipsets, the makers of those chips do their work and produce decent product.  No one wants to take back a few thousand routers because they suck so bad they can't live with anything.  Besides, does anyone buy D-Link routers any more after their NNTP fiasco?  Well, actually, we have short memories, and there is fresh meat being minted every day.</p><p>Claiming this is a technical failure by the manufacturers is bogus.  More likely, the WiFi spec doesn't really accomodate an infestation of routers.  There just aren't enough channel spacing options to solve this in WiFi, and I doubt there is a fix beyond a new spec.</p><p>Hey, that's it, call IEEE!  We need a new 5GHz or higher spec, dudes.  We can wait 4 or 5 years.  get on it, ok?</p><p>Not that going to higher bandwidth will solve range problems.  It's a morass of options and expectations.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Besides the FCC specs that WiFi devices meet ( which are really a fairly bare minimum to avoid really crappy interference ) , manufacturers take some time to make sure their devices behave .
You can be certain Cisco pays attention , and other well-regarded makers , because they intend for their enterprise clients to deploy these in a mesh and will definitely suffer if they are out of spec.Now , there are plenty of shady outfits , but since everyone pretty much uses the same few radio chipsets , the makers of those chips do their work and produce decent product .
No one wants to take back a few thousand routers because they suck so bad they ca n't live with anything .
Besides , does anyone buy D-Link routers any more after their NNTP fiasco ?
Well , actually , we have short memories , and there is fresh meat being minted every day.Claiming this is a technical failure by the manufacturers is bogus .
More likely , the WiFi spec does n't really accomodate an infestation of routers .
There just are n't enough channel spacing options to solve this in WiFi , and I doubt there is a fix beyond a new spec.Hey , that 's it , call IEEE !
We need a new 5GHz or higher spec , dudes .
We can wait 4 or 5 years .
get on it , ok ? Not that going to higher bandwidth will solve range problems .
It 's a morass of options and expectations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Besides the FCC specs that WiFi devices meet (which are really a fairly bare minimum to avoid really crappy interference), manufacturers take some time to make sure their devices behave.
You can be certain Cisco pays attention, and other well-regarded makers, because they intend for their enterprise clients to deploy these in a mesh and will definitely suffer if they are out of spec.Now, there are plenty of shady outfits, but since everyone pretty much uses the same few radio chipsets, the makers of those chips do their work and produce decent product.
No one wants to take back a few thousand routers because they suck so bad they can't live with anything.
Besides, does anyone buy D-Link routers any more after their NNTP fiasco?
Well, actually, we have short memories, and there is fresh meat being minted every day.Claiming this is a technical failure by the manufacturers is bogus.
More likely, the WiFi spec doesn't really accomodate an infestation of routers.
There just aren't enough channel spacing options to solve this in WiFi, and I doubt there is a fix beyond a new spec.Hey, that's it, call IEEE!
We need a new 5GHz or higher spec, dudes.
We can wait 4 or 5 years.
get on it, ok?Not that going to higher bandwidth will solve range problems.
It's a morass of options and expectations.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924816</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30929850</id>
	<title>Beamforming+Cognitive Radio+more spectrum</title>
	<author>sanpitch</author>
	<datestamp>1264616040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A system with M antennas (.11n) can give roughly M times the throughput of a single-antenna system or can cancel roughly M-1 strong interferers. Even if it isn't here now, future systems will do a smart tradeoff between high throughput and interference cancellation, use spectrum sensing ('cognitive radio'), and add more spectrum to give very flexible systems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A system with M antennas ( .11n ) can give roughly M times the throughput of a single-antenna system or can cancel roughly M-1 strong interferers .
Even if it is n't here now , future systems will do a smart tradeoff between high throughput and interference cancellation , use spectrum sensing ( 'cognitive radio ' ) , and add more spectrum to give very flexible systems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A system with M antennas (.11n) can give roughly M times the throughput of a single-antenna system or can cancel roughly M-1 strong interferers.
Even if it isn't here now, future systems will do a smart tradeoff between high throughput and interference cancellation, use spectrum sensing ('cognitive radio'), and add more spectrum to give very flexible systems.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926314</id>
	<title>Re:The problem</title>
	<author>rickb928</author>
	<datestamp>1264591920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>BTW, where I live I get new neighbors every few months, and some of them get new WiFi routers and set them up on my channel.  I changed my channel a few times before I gave up, the local ISPs took to choosing 1, 6, or 11 randomly.  Most of the time I can log into their router and change the channel<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)  Sometimes I just hammer it until their ISP comes and 'fixes' it.  One tech came over on a Saturday morning, banged on my door as I wasleaving for the gym, and announced to me that I was interfering with his customer's service and had to change some settings, which he was happy to do for me, how nice Cable Guy.  I explained how I lived there for 3 years already, his customer had moved in a week ago, and it was 'his problem to work out' as my service was working fine.  Oh, he HAD to change my router, cause changing channels made his customer's router nonstandard and would cause trouble for other techs.  I asked him to have his supervisor tell me this, hopefully with a straight face.  Never heard another word, but the tech comes back pretty regular to undo people's tragic attempts to steal cable, and he won't look me in the eye.  If he does, I will bite him.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>BTW , where I live I get new neighbors every few months , and some of them get new WiFi routers and set them up on my channel .
I changed my channel a few times before I gave up , the local ISPs took to choosing 1 , 6 , or 11 randomly .
Most of the time I can log into their router and change the channel : ) Sometimes I just hammer it until their ISP comes and 'fixes ' it .
One tech came over on a Saturday morning , banged on my door as I wasleaving for the gym , and announced to me that I was interfering with his customer 's service and had to change some settings , which he was happy to do for me , how nice Cable Guy .
I explained how I lived there for 3 years already , his customer had moved in a week ago , and it was 'his problem to work out ' as my service was working fine .
Oh , he HAD to change my router , cause changing channels made his customer 's router nonstandard and would cause trouble for other techs .
I asked him to have his supervisor tell me this , hopefully with a straight face .
Never heard another word , but the tech comes back pretty regular to undo people 's tragic attempts to steal cable , and he wo n't look me in the eye .
If he does , I will bite him .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>BTW, where I live I get new neighbors every few months, and some of them get new WiFi routers and set them up on my channel.
I changed my channel a few times before I gave up, the local ISPs took to choosing 1, 6, or 11 randomly.
Most of the time I can log into their router and change the channel :)  Sometimes I just hammer it until their ISP comes and 'fixes' it.
One tech came over on a Saturday morning, banged on my door as I wasleaving for the gym, and announced to me that I was interfering with his customer's service and had to change some settings, which he was happy to do for me, how nice Cable Guy.
I explained how I lived there for 3 years already, his customer had moved in a week ago, and it was 'his problem to work out' as my service was working fine.
Oh, he HAD to change my router, cause changing channels made his customer's router nonstandard and would cause trouble for other techs.
I asked him to have his supervisor tell me this, hopefully with a straight face.
Never heard another word, but the tech comes back pretty regular to undo people's tragic attempts to steal cable, and he won't look me in the eye.
If he does, I will bite him.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924816</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925590</id>
	<title>Antennas and Rx/Tx architectures</title>
	<author>femto</author>
	<datestamp>1264589820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem is dumb receivers, not lack of spectrum.</p><p>Channel capacity is determined by the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mimo#Mathematical\_description" title="wikipedia.org">MIMO form</a> [wikipedia.org] of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon\%E2\%80\%93Hartley\_theorem" title="wikipedia.org">Shannon's Theorem</a> [wikipedia.org].  Add more antennas and smarter processing in the receivers, and the capacity in a channel with lots of multipath (eg. in an apartment) increases approximately linearly.</p><p>The problem is that most hardware is a decade (or more) behind state of the art, and that people aren't prepared to pay for a more complex, and costly receiver.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is dumb receivers , not lack of spectrum.Channel capacity is determined by the MIMO form [ wikipedia.org ] of Shannon 's Theorem [ wikipedia.org ] .
Add more antennas and smarter processing in the receivers , and the capacity in a channel with lots of multipath ( eg .
in an apartment ) increases approximately linearly.The problem is that most hardware is a decade ( or more ) behind state of the art , and that people are n't prepared to pay for a more complex , and costly receiver .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is dumb receivers, not lack of spectrum.Channel capacity is determined by the MIMO form [wikipedia.org] of Shannon's Theorem [wikipedia.org].
Add more antennas and smarter processing in the receivers, and the capacity in a channel with lots of multipath (eg.
in an apartment) increases approximately linearly.The problem is that most hardware is a decade (or more) behind state of the art, and that people aren't prepared to pay for a more complex, and costly receiver.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927896</id>
	<title>Re:Channel 14</title>
	<author>Malc</author>
	<datestamp>1264598940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wish I could figure out how to get my US laptop to use the two higher channels.  I've moved to London, and our office WAP has dreadful problems due to the interference from so many other WAPs.  We can't get it on to cleaner frequencies because of the crippled American laptops.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wish I could figure out how to get my US laptop to use the two higher channels .
I 've moved to London , and our office WAP has dreadful problems due to the interference from so many other WAPs .
We ca n't get it on to cleaner frequencies because of the crippled American laptops .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wish I could figure out how to get my US laptop to use the two higher channels.
I've moved to London, and our office WAP has dreadful problems due to the interference from so many other WAPs.
We can't get it on to cleaner frequencies because of the crippled American laptops.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925834</id>
	<title>Re:Channel 14</title>
	<author>rubycodez</author>
	<datestamp>1264590420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, illegal in the U.S. means "not adhering to rules of power and money grubbing scum, who are stealing, murdering, abusing power and warmongering to further their self-interests".</p><p>I you want to cram your tongue up to your neck up the ass of such, go right ahead, but some of us find the air cleaner and the taste better far outside.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , illegal in the U.S. means " not adhering to rules of power and money grubbing scum , who are stealing , murdering , abusing power and warmongering to further their self-interests " .I you want to cram your tongue up to your neck up the ass of such , go right ahead , but some of us find the air cleaner and the taste better far outside .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, illegal in the U.S. means "not adhering to rules of power and money grubbing scum, who are stealing, murdering, abusing power and warmongering to further their self-interests".I you want to cram your tongue up to your neck up the ass of such, go right ahead, but some of us find the air cleaner and the taste better far outside.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925422</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924926</id>
	<title>Why can't we push all this short range...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264587780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why can't we push all this short range, high bandwidth stuff onto 5 GHz?</p></div><p>pretty simple really, because people are tight-arses and wont pay extra for the licencing to use non-ism spectrum</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why ca n't we push all this short range , high bandwidth stuff onto 5 GHz ? pretty simple really , because people are tight-arses and wont pay extra for the licencing to use non-ism spectrum</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why can't we push all this short range, high bandwidth stuff onto 5 GHz?pretty simple really, because people are tight-arses and wont pay extra for the licencing to use non-ism spectrum
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924626</id>
	<title>Why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264586880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Becuase your touch yourself at night.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Becuase your touch yourself at night .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Becuase your touch yourself at night.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925900</id>
	<title>Ad Hoc Networks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264590660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How do these "personal area networks" differ from ad hoc networks?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How do these " personal area networks " differ from ad hoc networks ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How do these "personal area networks" differ from ad hoc networks?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30928912</id>
	<title>Re:your router is yelling and you dont even know i</title>
	<author>troll -1</author>
	<datestamp>1264606200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I believe the FCC allows 802.x devices 1mW/channel over ~15 channels. That's what all wireless cards are set to.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe the FCC allows 802.x devices 1mW/channel over ~ 15 channels .
That 's what all wireless cards are set to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe the FCC allows 802.x devices 1mW/channel over ~15 channels.
That's what all wireless cards are set to.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925606</id>
	<title>Re:Channel 14</title>
	<author>Algan</author>
	<datestamp>1264589820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You'd still have a lot of overlap with people running on channel 11</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 'd still have a lot of overlap with people running on channel 11</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You'd still have a lot of overlap with people running on channel 11</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925114</id>
	<title>this is goa)tsex</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264588380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Interest in having seesion and join in morning. Now I have</htmltext>
<tokenext>Interest in having seesion and join in morning .
Now I have</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interest in having seesion and join in morning.
Now I have</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925600</id>
	<title>Re:Channel 14</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264589820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I love slashdot. The post promoting the illegal activity gets a +4 informative while the post saying "be a good citizen! Obey the law!" gets a 2.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I love slashdot .
The post promoting the illegal activity gets a + 4 informative while the post saying " be a good citizen !
Obey the law !
" gets a 2 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love slashdot.
The post promoting the illegal activity gets a +4 informative while the post saying "be a good citizen!
Obey the law!
" gets a 2.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925422</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984</id>
	<title>Channel 14</title>
	<author>Ungulate</author>
	<datestamp>1264587960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you're in a place with too much WiFi noise, try using the Japanese-only channel 14 - it doesn't overlap with any other channels, and you're pretty much guaranteed to be the only person using it. DD-WRT and other alternative firmwares will broadcast on 14, and Windows just requires a simple registry hack to receive on 14. Macs, I believe, can connect without hassle. It's technically illegal, but the likelihood of being caught is pretty much nil. I've still never found an explanation for what this frequency is used for in the US, if anything.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're in a place with too much WiFi noise , try using the Japanese-only channel 14 - it does n't overlap with any other channels , and you 're pretty much guaranteed to be the only person using it .
DD-WRT and other alternative firmwares will broadcast on 14 , and Windows just requires a simple registry hack to receive on 14 .
Macs , I believe , can connect without hassle .
It 's technically illegal , but the likelihood of being caught is pretty much nil .
I 've still never found an explanation for what this frequency is used for in the US , if anything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're in a place with too much WiFi noise, try using the Japanese-only channel 14 - it doesn't overlap with any other channels, and you're pretty much guaranteed to be the only person using it.
DD-WRT and other alternative firmwares will broadcast on 14, and Windows just requires a simple registry hack to receive on 14.
Macs, I believe, can connect without hassle.
It's technically illegal, but the likelihood of being caught is pretty much nil.
I've still never found an explanation for what this frequency is used for in the US, if anything.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925274</id>
	<title>Re:your router is yelling and you dont even know i</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264588920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>It is fun to watch a spectrum analyzer when someone fires up a microwave. Old cordless phones are entertaining too. One is a multi-megaton nuke, the other a tac-nuke.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is fun to watch a spectrum analyzer when someone fires up a microwave .
Old cordless phones are entertaining too .
One is a multi-megaton nuke , the other a tac-nuke .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is fun to watch a spectrum analyzer when someone fires up a microwave.
Old cordless phones are entertaining too.
One is a multi-megaton nuke, the other a tac-nuke.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924856</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925726</id>
	<title>Re:Channel 14</title>
	<author>cjb658</author>
	<datestamp>1264590120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah I've been using it for years and so far the authorities haven't<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>NO CARRIER</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah I 've been using it for years and so far the authorities have n't ...NO CARRIER</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah I've been using it for years and so far the authorities haven't ...NO CARRIER</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925586</id>
	<title>Re:Channel 14</title>
	<author>t0p</author>
	<datestamp>1264589760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>And what are the likely consequences if someone breaks the law and uses channel 14 in the USA?  That they'll have an uncluttered wifi channel.  Yeah, that'll learn 'em.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And what are the likely consequences if someone breaks the law and uses channel 14 in the USA ?
That they 'll have an uncluttered wifi channel .
Yeah , that 'll learn 'em .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And what are the likely consequences if someone breaks the law and uses channel 14 in the USA?
That they'll have an uncluttered wifi channel.
Yeah, that'll learn 'em.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925422</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925030</id>
	<title>You can't beat a wire for what it does</title>
	<author>digitalsushi</author>
	<datestamp>1264588140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ah yes, the quaint wire:  Your own personal air domain, a veritable Ether network.  Copper's getting scarce and we'll never run out of glass, but optical transceivers are still thousands of dollars.  It's getting cramped on this little planet!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ah yes , the quaint wire : Your own personal air domain , a veritable Ether network .
Copper 's getting scarce and we 'll never run out of glass , but optical transceivers are still thousands of dollars .
It 's getting cramped on this little planet !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ah yes, the quaint wire:  Your own personal air domain, a veritable Ether network.
Copper's getting scarce and we'll never run out of glass, but optical transceivers are still thousands of dollars.
It's getting cramped on this little planet!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925008</id>
	<title>How Could You Miss This Important Fact</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264588080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>2.4Ghz raises the temperature of dihydrogen monoxide molecules, so it's also contributing to global warming!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>2.4Ghz raises the temperature of dihydrogen monoxide molecules , so it 's also contributing to global warming !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>2.4Ghz raises the temperature of dihydrogen monoxide molecules, so it's also contributing to global warming!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924822</id>
	<title>Dial-up Please</title>
	<author>G2GAlone</author>
	<datestamp>1264587420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Soon it will be so hammered that we'll all be back to dial-up speeds anyways. That's what we all wanted, isn't it?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Soon it will be so hammered that we 'll all be back to dial-up speeds anyways .
That 's what we all wanted , is n't it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Soon it will be so hammered that we'll all be back to dial-up speeds anyways.
That's what we all wanted, isn't it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925716</id>
	<title>Re:Channel 14</title>
	<author>Zironic</author>
	<datestamp>1264590120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That channel is used for Space to Earth satellite transmission, see:<br><a href="http://books.google.se/books?id=R67HARlhisYC&amp;pg=PP147&amp;lpg=PP147&amp;dq=2483.5-2500+MHz&amp;source=bl&amp;ots=TbVDaKJZzL&amp;sig=tLHZRJzYN90V0OqMkjJ3h4k86AA&amp;hl=en&amp;ei=XLdgS5vfC43b-Qbhls23Cw&amp;sa=X&amp;oi=book\_result&amp;ct=result&amp;resnum=5&amp;ved=0CBUQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&amp;q=2483.5-2500\%20MHz&amp;f=false" title="google.se">http://books.google.se/books?id=R67HARlhisYC&amp;pg=PP147&amp;lpg=PP147&amp;dq=2483.5-2500+MHz&amp;source=bl&amp;ots=TbVDaKJZzL&amp;sig=tLHZRJzYN90V0OqMkjJ3h4k86AA&amp;hl=en&amp;ei=XLdgS5vfC43b-Qbhls23Cw&amp;sa=X&amp;oi=book\_result&amp;ct=result&amp;resnum=5&amp;ved=0CBUQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&amp;q=2483.5-2500\%20MHz&amp;f=false</a> [google.se]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That channel is used for Space to Earth satellite transmission , see : http : //books.google.se/books ? id = R67HARlhisYC&amp;pg = PP147&amp;lpg = PP147&amp;dq = 2483.5-2500 + MHz&amp;source = bl&amp;ots = TbVDaKJZzL&amp;sig = tLHZRJzYN90V0OqMkjJ3h4k86AA&amp;hl = en&amp;ei = XLdgS5vfC43b-Qbhls23Cw&amp;sa = X&amp;oi = book \ _result&amp;ct = result&amp;resnum = 5&amp;ved = 0CBUQ6AEwBA # v = onepage&amp;q = 2483.5-2500 \ % 20MHz&amp;f = false [ google.se ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That channel is used for Space to Earth satellite transmission, see:http://books.google.se/books?id=R67HARlhisYC&amp;pg=PP147&amp;lpg=PP147&amp;dq=2483.5-2500+MHz&amp;source=bl&amp;ots=TbVDaKJZzL&amp;sig=tLHZRJzYN90V0OqMkjJ3h4k86AA&amp;hl=en&amp;ei=XLdgS5vfC43b-Qbhls23Cw&amp;sa=X&amp;oi=book\_result&amp;ct=result&amp;resnum=5&amp;ved=0CBUQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&amp;q=2483.5-2500\%20MHz&amp;f=false [google.se]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30928480</id>
	<title>Router vs Wireless Router</title>
	<author>cciRRus</author>
	<datestamp>1264602840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I hope I'm not being picky here... Routers are not <em>Wireless Routers. I have a couple of Cisco routers and none of them give me WiFi access.</em></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope I 'm not being picky here... Routers are not Wireless Routers .
I have a couple of Cisco routers and none of them give me WiFi access .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope I'm not being picky here... Routers are not Wireless Routers.
I have a couple of Cisco routers and none of them give me WiFi access.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925166</id>
	<title>Impeach Obama</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264588500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Please report some NEWS, not DRIVEL</p><p>Yours In Vladivostok,<br>K. Trout</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Please report some NEWS , not DRIVELYours In Vladivostok,K .
Trout</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please report some NEWS, not DRIVELYours In Vladivostok,K.
Trout</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927472</id>
	<title>Re:Channel 14</title>
	<author>dissy</author>
	<datestamp>1264596480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Illegal means ILLEGAL. The U.S. has yet to grant its citizens the privilege to pick and choose which laws they wish to abide by without consequence.</p></div><p>Mental anguish is also illegal, and you just committed that crime.<br>But as you say, illegal means ILLEGAL.  You criminal scum you<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;}</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Illegal means ILLEGAL .
The U.S. has yet to grant its citizens the privilege to pick and choose which laws they wish to abide by without consequence.Mental anguish is also illegal , and you just committed that crime.But as you say , illegal means ILLEGAL .
You criminal scum you ; }</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Illegal means ILLEGAL.
The U.S. has yet to grant its citizens the privilege to pick and choose which laws they wish to abide by without consequence.Mental anguish is also illegal, and you just committed that crime.But as you say, illegal means ILLEGAL.
You criminal scum you ;}
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925422</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30942988</id>
	<title>Re:your router is yelling and you dont even know i</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264679520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You need a wifi jammer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You need a wifi jammer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You need a wifi jammer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30931806</id>
	<title>Here's the real question...</title>
	<author>Phoenix</author>
	<datestamp>1264684440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, here's a question. How many people are going to use the software router functions? Honestly?</p><p>Apart from say some chap at an airport paying the fee to get access and then sharing it to his friends/coworkers/family members so they can get net access wiithout paying for it...who is going to use that feature all the time?</p><p>Take me for an example. I played with the software for all of 30 minutes. I got my Wii to share my laptop's 3G card and said "Wow! That's Spiffy!" and then turned it off and turned my Comcast connected hardware router back on.</p><p>Why would you need a software router unless you didn't have a hardware router in your house.</p><p>For that matter if you didn't have a hardware router and just happen to be able to get your mitts on a USB Wireless Adaptor for cheap...I could see you using the software...but then you're using no more or less of the 2.4GHz band than some chap WITH the hardware router.</p><p>So, Is it really the fault of the software, or is it a fault of the simple fact that everyone and their grandmother makes wireless devices on 2.4 instead of using the other bands?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , here 's a question .
How many people are going to use the software router functions ?
Honestly ? Apart from say some chap at an airport paying the fee to get access and then sharing it to his friends/coworkers/family members so they can get net access wiithout paying for it...who is going to use that feature all the time ? Take me for an example .
I played with the software for all of 30 minutes .
I got my Wii to share my laptop 's 3G card and said " Wow !
That 's Spiffy !
" and then turned it off and turned my Comcast connected hardware router back on.Why would you need a software router unless you did n't have a hardware router in your house.For that matter if you did n't have a hardware router and just happen to be able to get your mitts on a USB Wireless Adaptor for cheap...I could see you using the software...but then you 're using no more or less of the 2.4GHz band than some chap WITH the hardware router.So , Is it really the fault of the software , or is it a fault of the simple fact that everyone and their grandmother makes wireless devices on 2.4 instead of using the other bands ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, here's a question.
How many people are going to use the software router functions?
Honestly?Apart from say some chap at an airport paying the fee to get access and then sharing it to his friends/coworkers/family members so they can get net access wiithout paying for it...who is going to use that feature all the time?Take me for an example.
I played with the software for all of 30 minutes.
I got my Wii to share my laptop's 3G card and said "Wow!
That's Spiffy!
" and then turned it off and turned my Comcast connected hardware router back on.Why would you need a software router unless you didn't have a hardware router in your house.For that matter if you didn't have a hardware router and just happen to be able to get your mitts on a USB Wireless Adaptor for cheap...I could see you using the software...but then you're using no more or less of the 2.4GHz band than some chap WITH the hardware router.So, Is it really the fault of the software, or is it a fault of the simple fact that everyone and their grandmother makes wireless devices on 2.4 instead of using the other bands?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30932014</id>
	<title>Re:Channel 14</title>
	<author>h00manist</author>
	<datestamp>1264686900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Illegal means ILLEGAL.  The U.S. has yet to grant its citizens the privilege to pick and choose which laws they wish to abide by without consequence.</p></div><p>cross the street off the ped xing, throw your bubble gum on sidewalk, download an mp3, and the red and blue lights will come screeching at you immedietely, carrying the attoney general in person. yup. all laws are immediately enforceable.  especially if you're a senator soliciting sex from teenagers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Illegal means ILLEGAL .
The U.S. has yet to grant its citizens the privilege to pick and choose which laws they wish to abide by without consequence.cross the street off the ped xing , throw your bubble gum on sidewalk , download an mp3 , and the red and blue lights will come screeching at you immedietely , carrying the attoney general in person .
yup. all laws are immediately enforceable .
especially if you 're a senator soliciting sex from teenagers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Illegal means ILLEGAL.
The U.S. has yet to grant its citizens the privilege to pick and choose which laws they wish to abide by without consequence.cross the street off the ped xing, throw your bubble gum on sidewalk, download an mp3, and the red and blue lights will come screeching at you immedietely, carrying the attoney general in person.
yup. all laws are immediately enforceable.
especially if you're a senator soliciting sex from teenagers.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925422</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30929998</id>
	<title>Re:your router is yelling and you dont even know i</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264617840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1,5,9,13, just move to europe, everybody knows any map can be coloured in just 4 frequencies (1,5,8,11) wouldn't be too bad either, but generally just fireup aircrack and find a fairly empty spot, even when i lived in london it wasn't to hard to find one (the fact i could borrow the neighbours if i lost signal helped too (WEP, LOL it's like they wanted me to use it))</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1,5,9,13 , just move to europe , everybody knows any map can be coloured in just 4 frequencies ( 1,5,8,11 ) would n't be too bad either , but generally just fireup aircrack and find a fairly empty spot , even when i lived in london it was n't to hard to find one ( the fact i could borrow the neighbours if i lost signal helped too ( WEP , LOL it 's like they wanted me to use it ) )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1,5,9,13, just move to europe, everybody knows any map can be coloured in just 4 frequencies (1,5,8,11) wouldn't be too bad either, but generally just fireup aircrack and find a fairly empty spot, even when i lived in london it wasn't to hard to find one (the fact i could borrow the neighbours if i lost signal helped too (WEP, LOL it's like they wanted me to use it))</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926676</id>
	<title>Whoa 1980's flashback!!!</title>
	<author>Phizzle</author>
	<datestamp>1264593120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Reminds me of a certain Vice President of Hayes ranting how 9600 baud was the ABSOLUTE LIMIT of copper and how US Robotics pushing 14.4 was not stable or reliable because it was violating the physics of the copper medium.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Reminds me of a certain Vice President of Hayes ranting how 9600 baud was the ABSOLUTE LIMIT of copper and how US Robotics pushing 14.4 was not stable or reliable because it was violating the physics of the copper medium .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reminds me of a certain Vice President of Hayes ranting how 9600 baud was the ABSOLUTE LIMIT of copper and how US Robotics pushing 14.4 was not stable or reliable because it was violating the physics of the copper medium.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927082</id>
	<title>Re:Ad Hoc Networks</title>
	<author>Bigjeff5</author>
	<datestamp>1264594560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Personal Area Network describes the relative distance between each device on the network as it relates to the individuals or groups it is connecting.  It does not refer to how those devices actually connect in any way.  A PAN is basically a network of one individual's personal devices, which is kept distinct from wider area networks like a LAN or a WAN.  The term itself has no relation to any particular technology, it's just a designation for a type of network.</p><p>A PAN is one step more intimate than a LAN, which is in turn one step more intimate than a WAN.  You can and do have PANs with wired connections instead of wireless.  Any time you connect a personal organizer or smartphone to your laptop, for example, you've created a PAN.</p><p>As we use more and more of these devices and as more of them use wireless technologies of various kinds, it makes sense to make the "hub", which is usually an ordinary PC, act as a router among among the different personal devices.</p><p>An ad-hoc wireless network refers to setting up a peer-to-peer wireless LAN, which by definition is not a PAN.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Personal Area Network describes the relative distance between each device on the network as it relates to the individuals or groups it is connecting .
It does not refer to how those devices actually connect in any way .
A PAN is basically a network of one individual 's personal devices , which is kept distinct from wider area networks like a LAN or a WAN .
The term itself has no relation to any particular technology , it 's just a designation for a type of network.A PAN is one step more intimate than a LAN , which is in turn one step more intimate than a WAN .
You can and do have PANs with wired connections instead of wireless .
Any time you connect a personal organizer or smartphone to your laptop , for example , you 've created a PAN.As we use more and more of these devices and as more of them use wireless technologies of various kinds , it makes sense to make the " hub " , which is usually an ordinary PC , act as a router among among the different personal devices.An ad-hoc wireless network refers to setting up a peer-to-peer wireless LAN , which by definition is not a PAN .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Personal Area Network describes the relative distance between each device on the network as it relates to the individuals or groups it is connecting.
It does not refer to how those devices actually connect in any way.
A PAN is basically a network of one individual's personal devices, which is kept distinct from wider area networks like a LAN or a WAN.
The term itself has no relation to any particular technology, it's just a designation for a type of network.A PAN is one step more intimate than a LAN, which is in turn one step more intimate than a WAN.
You can and do have PANs with wired connections instead of wireless.
Any time you connect a personal organizer or smartphone to your laptop, for example, you've created a PAN.As we use more and more of these devices and as more of them use wireless technologies of various kinds, it makes sense to make the "hub", which is usually an ordinary PC, act as a router among among the different personal devices.An ad-hoc wireless network refers to setting up a peer-to-peer wireless LAN, which by definition is not a PAN.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925900</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924712</id>
	<title>your router is yelling and you dont even know it!</title>
	<author>Goalie\_Ca</author>
	<datestamp>1264587120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Pretty much every manufacturer sets the default power output levels to FUCKING LOUD. This means that I can get a clean signal from your router 100m away. Worse yet, most channels have overlapping frequencies with one or two of their neighbours on either side.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Pretty much every manufacturer sets the default power output levels to FUCKING LOUD .
This means that I can get a clean signal from your router 100m away .
Worse yet , most channels have overlapping frequencies with one or two of their neighbours on either side .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pretty much every manufacturer sets the default power output levels to FUCKING LOUD.
This means that I can get a clean signal from your router 100m away.
Worse yet, most channels have overlapping frequencies with one or two of their neighbours on either side.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30941078</id>
	<title>I know what will happen:</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1264672980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>- Me getting massive bandwidth gains trough being able to transmit trough all those forwarding routers.<br>- You losing all your bandwidth.<br>- Me making evil plans and stroking my white cat with my iron glove, while laughing maniacally.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>- Me getting massive bandwidth gains trough being able to transmit trough all those forwarding routers.- You losing all your bandwidth.- Me making evil plans and stroking my white cat with my iron glove , while laughing maniacally .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>- Me getting massive bandwidth gains trough being able to transmit trough all those forwarding routers.- You losing all your bandwidth.- Me making evil plans and stroking my white cat with my iron glove, while laughing maniacally.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30946764</id>
	<title>Re:your router is yelling and you dont even know i</title>
	<author>rastos1</author>
	<datestamp>1264797720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Pretty much every manufacturer sets the default power output levels to FUCKING LOUD. This means that I can get a clean signal from your router 100m away.</p></div></blockquote><p>

Not every place builds houses from <a href="http://www.stuffbyallen.com/images/Spent\%20Summer/BeDo/WallKick2.jpg" title="stuffbyallen.com">wood and paper</a> [stuffbyallen.com]. Over here they are made of steel reinforced concrete and I'm lucky if I get better than "Very low" signal strength between 2 places 10 meters apart within one flat. On the other hand it can be the crappy WiFi router supplied by my ISP.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Pretty much every manufacturer sets the default power output levels to FUCKING LOUD .
This means that I can get a clean signal from your router 100m away .
Not every place builds houses from wood and paper [ stuffbyallen.com ] .
Over here they are made of steel reinforced concrete and I 'm lucky if I get better than " Very low " signal strength between 2 places 10 meters apart within one flat .
On the other hand it can be the crappy WiFi router supplied by my ISP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pretty much every manufacturer sets the default power output levels to FUCKING LOUD.
This means that I can get a clean signal from your router 100m away.
Not every place builds houses from wood and paper [stuffbyallen.com].
Over here they are made of steel reinforced concrete and I'm lucky if I get better than "Very low" signal strength between 2 places 10 meters apart within one flat.
On the other hand it can be the crappy WiFi router supplied by my ISP.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925910</id>
	<title>Re:Channel 14</title>
	<author>vlm</author>
	<datestamp>1264590720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I've always considered doing that, but having to do a registry edit every time a guest wants to use my wireless is just not acceptable. I'm the resident techy and my housemates would hate me.</p></div><p>You use your "special" wifi channel.  Your house guests use your neighbors wifi.  No problemo!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've always considered doing that , but having to do a registry edit every time a guest wants to use my wireless is just not acceptable .
I 'm the resident techy and my housemates would hate me.You use your " special " wifi channel .
Your house guests use your neighbors wifi .
No problemo !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've always considered doing that, but having to do a registry edit every time a guest wants to use my wireless is just not acceptable.
I'm the resident techy and my housemates would hate me.You use your "special" wifi channel.
Your house guests use your neighbors wifi.
No problemo!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925212</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927378</id>
	<title>Re:Channel 14</title>
	<author>suomynonAyletamitlU</author>
	<datestamp>1264595940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While this is factually true, you have to understand that that will only be <i>effectively</i> true as long as the laws can be trusted.  Citizens--including law enforcement--often ignore laws which proscribe punishment for common acts if it seems like the law is too severe or out of touch--unless they get caught and it becomes a public sort of thing, in which case the law has to upheld, even if in a tongue-in-cheek manner.</p><p>In some cases this is a bad thing.  In some cases it is even A Bad Thing.  However, for some things like bandwidth allocation, it's quite possibly just a silly thing, in which case it might only still be law because of institutional inertia.</p><p>In other words, when every law is a law because breaking that law is wrong, then illegal means illegal.  In the meantime, illegal should be considered illegal, even though it isn't always, and even though sometimes you can, should, or even have to break it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While this is factually true , you have to understand that that will only be effectively true as long as the laws can be trusted .
Citizens--including law enforcement--often ignore laws which proscribe punishment for common acts if it seems like the law is too severe or out of touch--unless they get caught and it becomes a public sort of thing , in which case the law has to upheld , even if in a tongue-in-cheek manner.In some cases this is a bad thing .
In some cases it is even A Bad Thing .
However , for some things like bandwidth allocation , it 's quite possibly just a silly thing , in which case it might only still be law because of institutional inertia.In other words , when every law is a law because breaking that law is wrong , then illegal means illegal .
In the meantime , illegal should be considered illegal , even though it is n't always , and even though sometimes you can , should , or even have to break it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While this is factually true, you have to understand that that will only be effectively true as long as the laws can be trusted.
Citizens--including law enforcement--often ignore laws which proscribe punishment for common acts if it seems like the law is too severe or out of touch--unless they get caught and it becomes a public sort of thing, in which case the law has to upheld, even if in a tongue-in-cheek manner.In some cases this is a bad thing.
In some cases it is even A Bad Thing.
However, for some things like bandwidth allocation, it's quite possibly just a silly thing, in which case it might only still be law because of institutional inertia.In other words, when every law is a law because breaking that law is wrong, then illegal means illegal.
In the meantime, illegal should be considered illegal, even though it isn't always, and even though sometimes you can, should, or even have to break it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925422</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926390</id>
	<title>Stick to 2.4!</title>
	<author>clarkn0va</author>
	<datestamp>1264592220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, 802.11n can operate in 2.4, 5.8, or both.</p><p>Parenthetically, I recently purchase a Bullet M and outdoor antenna from Ubiquiti, and wanting to avoid the whole 2.4GHz zoo, I bought the 5GHz version. This was serendipitous, I thought, when I recently had my internet suspended (bad Telus). Not fearing, I got up on the roof with my 802.11n laptop to search for signals from charitable neighbours. Enabling just 2.4GHz mode on the laptop I could pick up around 10 APs. Switching to 5GHz-only mode, not a single one! So yeah, 5GHz appears to be really good for avoiding competition, not so good if you were hoping to easedrop<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , 802.11n can operate in 2.4 , 5.8 , or both.Parenthetically , I recently purchase a Bullet M and outdoor antenna from Ubiquiti , and wanting to avoid the whole 2.4GHz zoo , I bought the 5GHz version .
This was serendipitous , I thought , when I recently had my internet suspended ( bad Telus ) .
Not fearing , I got up on the roof with my 802.11n laptop to search for signals from charitable neighbours .
Enabling just 2.4GHz mode on the laptop I could pick up around 10 APs .
Switching to 5GHz-only mode , not a single one !
So yeah , 5GHz appears to be really good for avoiding competition , not so good if you were hoping to easedrop : (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, 802.11n can operate in 2.4, 5.8, or both.Parenthetically, I recently purchase a Bullet M and outdoor antenna from Ubiquiti, and wanting to avoid the whole 2.4GHz zoo, I bought the 5GHz version.
This was serendipitous, I thought, when I recently had my internet suspended (bad Telus).
Not fearing, I got up on the roof with my 802.11n laptop to search for signals from charitable neighbours.
Enabling just 2.4GHz mode on the laptop I could pick up around 10 APs.
Switching to 5GHz-only mode, not a single one!
So yeah, 5GHz appears to be really good for avoiding competition, not so good if you were hoping to easedrop :(</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925476</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30936918</id>
	<title>Re:Channel 14</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264705260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>technically though there is some degree of overlap with channel 11,</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>technically though there is some degree of overlap with channel 11,</tokentext>
<sentencetext>technically though there is some degree of overlap with channel 11,</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30930808</id>
	<title>Re:aircrack</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264671240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The WEP key can be changed on 2wire units, it's actually easier than the speedstream modems of yesterday.  The default is, yes, WEP (if I ever met the dude that made that decision, I'd sit down with him for a nice chat after feeding him the fluid out of a lead-acid battery...I bet the last word his tongue would gurgle would be something like "compababiwidee!").  64-bit WEP?  Really? Woohoo for defaults.  These things can be changed to WPA2, it just takes more than a single brain cell to do it...which, of course, means that only shmucks like us will do it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The WEP key can be changed on 2wire units , it 's actually easier than the speedstream modems of yesterday .
The default is , yes , WEP ( if I ever met the dude that made that decision , I 'd sit down with him for a nice chat after feeding him the fluid out of a lead-acid battery...I bet the last word his tongue would gurgle would be something like " compababiwidee ! " ) .
64-bit WEP ?
Really ? Woohoo for defaults .
These things can be changed to WPA2 , it just takes more than a single brain cell to do it...which , of course , means that only shmucks like us will do it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The WEP key can be changed on 2wire units, it's actually easier than the speedstream modems of yesterday.
The default is, yes, WEP (if I ever met the dude that made that decision, I'd sit down with him for a nice chat after feeding him the fluid out of a lead-acid battery...I bet the last word his tongue would gurgle would be something like "compababiwidee!").
64-bit WEP?
Really? Woohoo for defaults.
These things can be changed to WPA2, it just takes more than a single brain cell to do it...which, of course, means that only shmucks like us will do it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30930970</id>
	<title>Re:your router is yelling and you dont even know i</title>
	<author>L4t3r4lu5</author>
	<datestamp>1264673580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When I moved to where I am now, I had very intermittent wireless signal due to poor neighbouring configs. I pushed a short pamphlet through some local letterboxes regarding wireless channels and how to get maximum signal strength without crippling everyone elses connections after Netstumbler found 6 access points using channels 4 to 9 around me. I guess they were binned, as after a week nothing had changed.<br> <br>After a week of channel-hopping with a borrowed +15dBi antenna, I had some folks come and ask me about proper wireless configs. Sometimes a mallet to the skull really is the only way to teach some people...</htmltext>
<tokenext>When I moved to where I am now , I had very intermittent wireless signal due to poor neighbouring configs .
I pushed a short pamphlet through some local letterboxes regarding wireless channels and how to get maximum signal strength without crippling everyone elses connections after Netstumbler found 6 access points using channels 4 to 9 around me .
I guess they were binned , as after a week nothing had changed .
After a week of channel-hopping with a borrowed + 15dBi antenna , I had some folks come and ask me about proper wireless configs .
Sometimes a mallet to the skull really is the only way to teach some people.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I moved to where I am now, I had very intermittent wireless signal due to poor neighbouring configs.
I pushed a short pamphlet through some local letterboxes regarding wireless channels and how to get maximum signal strength without crippling everyone elses connections after Netstumbler found 6 access points using channels 4 to 9 around me.
I guess they were binned, as after a week nothing had changed.
After a week of channel-hopping with a borrowed +15dBi antenna, I had some folks come and ask me about proper wireless configs.
Sometimes a mallet to the skull really is the only way to teach some people...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924856</id>
	<title>Re:your router is yelling and you dont even know i</title>
	<author>Scutter</author>
	<datestamp>1264587540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>God help you if you want to use your microwave.  You'll kill the connection to every device in your house.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>God help you if you want to use your microwave .
You 'll kill the connection to every device in your house .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>God help you if you want to use your microwave.
You'll kill the connection to every device in your house.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926602</id>
	<title>Re:Channel 14</title>
	<author>ViViDboarder</author>
	<datestamp>1264592880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How about with a PS3, iPhone, or Blackberry?  I'm assuming it's doable on a Linux desktop<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D</htmltext>
<tokenext>How about with a PS3 , iPhone , or Blackberry ?
I 'm assuming it 's doable on a Linux desktop : D</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about with a PS3, iPhone, or Blackberry?
I'm assuming it's doable on a Linux desktop :D</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926672
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925590
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30929280
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925030
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30928912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925706
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925422
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30928840
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924802
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927202
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925900
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30932014
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925422
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925564
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925422
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924802
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30936918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926602
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927250
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925580
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30942988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926260
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924856
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30928480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927524
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925002
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927722
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925650
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926314
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924816
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927008
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925834
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925422
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926192
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924816
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30931754
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924856
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30930808
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924802
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925586
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925422
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925212
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927378
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925422
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927896
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30946764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925888
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925422
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925948
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30928710
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927804
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925580
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925422
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30929998
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927652
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30929648
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925030
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30928384
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30930970
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30932302
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30929438
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924926
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926890
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924802
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30929702
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925716
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30928648
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927976
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924856
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927548
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925126
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927568
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925606
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925726
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30939506
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925002
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30928490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925600
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925422
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925580
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_2048259_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925468
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_2048259.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924926
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925476
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926390
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_2048259.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924712
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925988
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30928384
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926572
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925004
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925580
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927868
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927804
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30928710
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927250
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30930970
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927008
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30928648
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30942988
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30946764
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30928480
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30928912
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924856
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926260
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30931754
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925274
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927976
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30929998
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_2048259.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927028
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_2048259.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924822
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_2048259.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925166
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_2048259.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925590
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926672
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_2048259.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30929438
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30932302
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_2048259.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925126
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927548
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_2048259.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924626
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_2048259.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925030
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30929648
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30929280
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_2048259.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924816
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926192
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926314
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_2048259.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926900
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_2048259.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926762
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_2048259.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925002
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927524
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30939506
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_2048259.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924984
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925716
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927896
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926602
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925650
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926164
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30928490
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927652
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925212
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925910
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925468
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925726
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925948
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925978
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30936918
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30929702
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925854
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927202
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925422
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925834
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927472
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925706
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925888
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925564
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30932014
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925586
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927378
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925600
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925606
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927568
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927722
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_2048259.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925900
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30927082
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_2048259.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925008
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_2048259.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924802
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30925214
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30930808
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30928840
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30926890
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_2048259.30924906
</commentlist>
</conversation>
