<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_28_1443224</id>
	<title>Ballmer Defends Microsoft In China</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1264694520000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"Mr. Ballmer has recently posted on the <a href="http://blogs.technet.com/microsoft\_blog/archive/2010/01/27/microsoft-internet-freedom.aspx">official Microsoft blog</a> discussing future business in China and defending Microsoft's stance of cooperating with the government even as other large IT companies have begun making public condemnations (Google and Twitter being the most prominent). Couple this with Bill Gate's speech on China's censorship being <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/jan/25/bill-gates-web-censorship-china">not all that bad</a> (a speech very well received by Chinese media) and you've got people wondering: Is Microsoft aiming to take Google's place in China?"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " Mr. Ballmer has recently posted on the official Microsoft blog discussing future business in China and defending Microsoft 's stance of cooperating with the government even as other large IT companies have begun making public condemnations ( Google and Twitter being the most prominent ) .
Couple this with Bill Gate 's speech on China 's censorship being not all that bad ( a speech very well received by Chinese media ) and you 've got people wondering : Is Microsoft aiming to take Google 's place in China ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "Mr. Ballmer has recently posted on the official Microsoft blog discussing future business in China and defending Microsoft's stance of cooperating with the government even as other large IT companies have begun making public condemnations (Google and Twitter being the most prominent).
Couple this with Bill Gate's speech on China's censorship being not all that bad (a speech very well received by Chinese media) and you've got people wondering: Is Microsoft aiming to take Google's place in China?
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30938040</id>
	<title>Re:Hey, maybe it's a good thing!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264707960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We dont whant 1.4 Billion chineses to be asimilated. That will be to much to deal with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We dont whant 1.4 Billion chineses to be asimilated .
That will be to much to deal with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We dont whant 1.4 Billion chineses to be asimilated.
That will be to much to deal with.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30939056</id>
	<title>No it isn't</title>
	<author>Kupfernigk</author>
	<datestamp>1264710360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The GDP of China is overtaking Japan, which has a twelfth of the population. It is nowhere near the EU or the US, and its profligate and uneconomic use of resources suggests that it will before long be limited by its own inefficiencies. We do not know how much of the Chinese claimed growth is real, because the figures are produced by a State which consistently lies. The fact that bankers and investors believe something proves nothing: those dimwits were taken in by the property bubble in the English-speaking world. We know they are incompetent at finding inconvenient facts.<p>China <i>may</i> become the world's biggest economy. In 1939 a lot of people thought that Germany would become the world's biggest economy. But saying it "is" is unsupported by any real evidence.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The GDP of China is overtaking Japan , which has a twelfth of the population .
It is nowhere near the EU or the US , and its profligate and uneconomic use of resources suggests that it will before long be limited by its own inefficiencies .
We do not know how much of the Chinese claimed growth is real , because the figures are produced by a State which consistently lies .
The fact that bankers and investors believe something proves nothing : those dimwits were taken in by the property bubble in the English-speaking world .
We know they are incompetent at finding inconvenient facts.China may become the world 's biggest economy .
In 1939 a lot of people thought that Germany would become the world 's biggest economy .
But saying it " is " is unsupported by any real evidence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The GDP of China is overtaking Japan, which has a twelfth of the population.
It is nowhere near the EU or the US, and its profligate and uneconomic use of resources suggests that it will before long be limited by its own inefficiencies.
We do not know how much of the Chinese claimed growth is real, because the figures are produced by a State which consistently lies.
The fact that bankers and investors believe something proves nothing: those dimwits were taken in by the property bubble in the English-speaking world.
We know they are incompetent at finding inconvenient facts.China may become the world's biggest economy.
In 1939 a lot of people thought that Germany would become the world's biggest economy.
But saying it "is" is unsupported by any real evidence.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935044</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30952612</id>
	<title>SCOTUS Sez</title>
	<author>nightcats</author>
	<datestamp>1264792500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If as SCOTUS determined this week, the corporation is a person with 1st amendment rights, then it must also have a conscience. Can't have one without the other, I should think. That goes for MS and for <a href="http://dailyrevolution.net/?p=9157" title="dailyrevolution.net" rel="nofollow">Intel too.</a> [dailyrevolution.net]</htmltext>
<tokenext>If as SCOTUS determined this week , the corporation is a person with 1st amendment rights , then it must also have a conscience .
Ca n't have one without the other , I should think .
That goes for MS and for Intel too .
[ dailyrevolution.net ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If as SCOTUS determined this week, the corporation is a person with 1st amendment rights, then it must also have a conscience.
Can't have one without the other, I should think.
That goes for MS and for Intel too.
[dailyrevolution.net]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30936044</id>
	<title>Being Evil - Just Part of the Business Plan</title>
	<author>careysub</author>
	<datestamp>1264702740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With Google "Don't be evil" is a shibboleth that sets an aspirational goal which, as so often happens in the real world, may only be honored in the breech.</p><p>With Microsoft "being evil" is, and has always been, at the core of their whole business model.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With Google " Do n't be evil " is a shibboleth that sets an aspirational goal which , as so often happens in the real world , may only be honored in the breech.With Microsoft " being evil " is , and has always been , at the core of their whole business model .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With Google "Don't be evil" is a shibboleth that sets an aspirational goal which, as so often happens in the real world, may only be honored in the breech.With Microsoft "being evil" is, and has always been, at the core of their whole business model.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935190</id>
	<title>Microsoft is desperate for new revenue...</title>
	<author>QuietLagoon</author>
	<datestamp>1264700520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>and is willing to sell the corporate soul to obtain it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>and is willing to sell the corporate soul to obtain it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and is willing to sell the corporate soul to obtain it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935340</id>
	<title>Re:i will remember this</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264700880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>MS is a business, not a freedom fighter in the human rights movement.  I supposed Ballmer could come out and take a stand and stop doing business with China.  Only to see their stock price plummet.  Then he'd be shown the door.
<p>
A lot of companies were overjoyed by Google's stand in China.  It'll open the door for more business.  This is just the first move in an orchestrated PR campaign to kiss China's ass.
</p><p>
Am I proud of the whoring, evil profit-above-all motives of our companies?  Not especially...  I noticed the other day that Google's founders are <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2010/01/22/technology/Google\_founders\_stock\_sale/index.htm" title="cnn.com">selling off their shares</a> [cnn.com] and could lose control of Google.  I am terrified to think of what Google will become in the hands of Wall Street.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>MS is a business , not a freedom fighter in the human rights movement .
I supposed Ballmer could come out and take a stand and stop doing business with China .
Only to see their stock price plummet .
Then he 'd be shown the door .
A lot of companies were overjoyed by Google 's stand in China .
It 'll open the door for more business .
This is just the first move in an orchestrated PR campaign to kiss China 's ass .
Am I proud of the whoring , evil profit-above-all motives of our companies ?
Not especially... I noticed the other day that Google 's founders are selling off their shares [ cnn.com ] and could lose control of Google .
I am terrified to think of what Google will become in the hands of Wall Street .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MS is a business, not a freedom fighter in the human rights movement.
I supposed Ballmer could come out and take a stand and stop doing business with China.
Only to see their stock price plummet.
Then he'd be shown the door.
A lot of companies were overjoyed by Google's stand in China.
It'll open the door for more business.
This is just the first move in an orchestrated PR campaign to kiss China's ass.
Am I proud of the whoring, evil profit-above-all motives of our companies?
Not especially...  I noticed the other day that Google's founders are selling off their shares [cnn.com] and could lose control of Google.
I am terrified to think of what Google will become in the hands of Wall Street.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934684</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30937562</id>
	<title>Re:Censorship? Really?</title>
	<author>MozeeToby</author>
	<datestamp>1264706880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Even if the mainstream media never covered it, the difference is still enormous.  For one thing, you can <b>still find</b> those articles on the internet, something you wouldn't be able to do in China if it were the Chinese government.  For another thing, the writers of those articles aren't arrested, kidnapped, torchured, killed, or <b>harvested for organds</b>.  If you really don't see the difference... I don't even know what to say.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Even if the mainstream media never covered it , the difference is still enormous .
For one thing , you can still find those articles on the internet , something you would n't be able to do in China if it were the Chinese government .
For another thing , the writers of those articles are n't arrested , kidnapped , torchured , killed , or harvested for organds .
If you really do n't see the difference... I do n't even know what to say .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even if the mainstream media never covered it, the difference is still enormous.
For one thing, you can still find those articles on the internet, something you wouldn't be able to do in China if it were the Chinese government.
For another thing, the writers of those articles aren't arrested, kidnapped, torchured, killed, or harvested for organds.
If you really don't see the difference... I don't even know what to say.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30936248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30939496</id>
	<title>Re:Censorship? Really?</title>
	<author>TeknoHog</author>
	<datestamp>1264711560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I think American crossed the line into full-scale hipocracy(sp!!)</p></div><p>
I believe the correct spelling is "hippocracy", if you mean a nation ruled by large semi-aquatic mammals.
</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think American crossed the line into full-scale hipocracy ( sp ! !
) I believe the correct spelling is " hippocracy " , if you mean a nation ruled by large semi-aquatic mammals .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think American crossed the line into full-scale hipocracy(sp!!
)
I believe the correct spelling is "hippocracy", if you mean a nation ruled by large semi-aquatic mammals.

	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30936248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30936824</id>
	<title>Re:More than likely.</title>
	<author>soupd</author>
	<datestamp>1264704960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm no fan of Microsoft but whatever your ideology or beliefs, commercial realities remain and China is, and will continue to be, big business. Kudos to Google perhaps, but if I were a Microsoft shareholder I would want Microsoft to be wanting to make inroads in to this market. Morals do not pay the bills. As an individual would you (not the parent) be happy to content to contribute half your income for the rest of your life if it meant China was truly free and democratic? I doubt many would.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm no fan of Microsoft but whatever your ideology or beliefs , commercial realities remain and China is , and will continue to be , big business .
Kudos to Google perhaps , but if I were a Microsoft shareholder I would want Microsoft to be wanting to make inroads in to this market .
Morals do not pay the bills .
As an individual would you ( not the parent ) be happy to content to contribute half your income for the rest of your life if it meant China was truly free and democratic ?
I doubt many would .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm no fan of Microsoft but whatever your ideology or beliefs, commercial realities remain and China is, and will continue to be, big business.
Kudos to Google perhaps, but if I were a Microsoft shareholder I would want Microsoft to be wanting to make inroads in to this market.
Morals do not pay the bills.
As an individual would you (not the parent) be happy to content to contribute half your income for the rest of your life if it meant China was truly free and democratic?
I doubt many would.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934384</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934552</id>
	<title>google's "do no evil" was ....</title>
	<author>h00manist</author>
	<datestamp>1264698720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>... in contrast to who, and what attitude, did you think?  ms always plays everything to get ahead, to it's advantage, legal, moral, ethical, technically smart, agreements compliant,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... or not.</htmltext>
<tokenext>... in contrast to who , and what attitude , did you think ?
ms always plays everything to get ahead , to it 's advantage , legal , moral , ethical , technically smart , agreements compliant , ... or not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... in contrast to who, and what attitude, did you think?
ms always plays everything to get ahead, to it's advantage, legal, moral, ethical, technically smart, agreements compliant, ... or not.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30936852</id>
	<title>Re:I don't buy it.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264705080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>But a CAPITALIST that embraces a non-capitalist environtemt and makes a profit is NOT a hypocrite.</htmltext>
<tokenext>But a CAPITALIST that embraces a non-capitalist environtemt and makes a profit is NOT a hypocrite .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But a CAPITALIST that embraces a non-capitalist environtemt and makes a profit is NOT a hypocrite.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935614</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935032</id>
	<title>It's quite simple.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264700100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ballmer's favorite tool, his Herman Miller Aeron Graphite Chair (medium size, C, if you are curious) has a frame developed in China.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ballmer 's favorite tool , his Herman Miller Aeron Graphite Chair ( medium size , C , if you are curious ) has a frame developed in China .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ballmer's favorite tool, his Herman Miller Aeron Graphite Chair (medium size, C, if you are curious) has a frame developed in China.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30941218</id>
	<title>USA public, stop being hypocrites.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264673340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm going to rip into how the USA citizenry are absolute hypocrites about this. But first I'll take Microsoft and Google to task, only to provide the foundation take away John Q. America's moral high horse to ride on.</p><p>Gates said "You've got to decide: do you want to obey the laws of the countries you're in or not? If not, you may not end up doing business there,"</p><p>Oh really? Then where is the justification MS has for breaking many antitrust laws in the USA, in the EU? What ever happened to "obeying the laws" of the USA? If you can obey them in China, you can obey them in the USA. There shouldn't be moral selectivity here.</p><p>Same with you Google. You current stance might be laudable, but before that, you were in the same hypocrisy boat. In fact your current complaining actually makes me hear the worlds tiniest violin. I really don't give a shit. You know damn well the Chinese government would probably pull a stunt like this. That they waited so long, that's the real surprise.</p><p>And now you, citizens of the USA. You have no problem buying oil from oppressive Middle Eastern states. You have no problem buying cheap clothes from China. You have no problem buying NARCOTIC DRUGS from South American despots. Your participation in purchasing items from such regimes is beyond tacit admission, it is active encouragement for them to act the way they do. AND YOU FUND IT!!!! You eagerly toss your money at them! So for John Q. Public to bash Microsoft and Google for their deeds (while mainlining their South American cocaine in cheap Chinese clothes while driving in a car fueled by Middle Eastern oil) is the absolute height of hypocrisy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm going to rip into how the USA citizenry are absolute hypocrites about this .
But first I 'll take Microsoft and Google to task , only to provide the foundation take away John Q. America 's moral high horse to ride on.Gates said " You 've got to decide : do you want to obey the laws of the countries you 're in or not ?
If not , you may not end up doing business there , " Oh really ?
Then where is the justification MS has for breaking many antitrust laws in the USA , in the EU ?
What ever happened to " obeying the laws " of the USA ?
If you can obey them in China , you can obey them in the USA .
There should n't be moral selectivity here.Same with you Google .
You current stance might be laudable , but before that , you were in the same hypocrisy boat .
In fact your current complaining actually makes me hear the worlds tiniest violin .
I really do n't give a shit .
You know damn well the Chinese government would probably pull a stunt like this .
That they waited so long , that 's the real surprise.And now you , citizens of the USA .
You have no problem buying oil from oppressive Middle Eastern states .
You have no problem buying cheap clothes from China .
You have no problem buying NARCOTIC DRUGS from South American despots .
Your participation in purchasing items from such regimes is beyond tacit admission , it is active encouragement for them to act the way they do .
AND YOU FUND IT ! ! ! !
You eagerly toss your money at them !
So for John Q. Public to bash Microsoft and Google for their deeds ( while mainlining their South American cocaine in cheap Chinese clothes while driving in a car fueled by Middle Eastern oil ) is the absolute height of hypocrisy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm going to rip into how the USA citizenry are absolute hypocrites about this.
But first I'll take Microsoft and Google to task, only to provide the foundation take away John Q. America's moral high horse to ride on.Gates said "You've got to decide: do you want to obey the laws of the countries you're in or not?
If not, you may not end up doing business there,"Oh really?
Then where is the justification MS has for breaking many antitrust laws in the USA, in the EU?
What ever happened to "obeying the laws" of the USA?
If you can obey them in China, you can obey them in the USA.
There shouldn't be moral selectivity here.Same with you Google.
You current stance might be laudable, but before that, you were in the same hypocrisy boat.
In fact your current complaining actually makes me hear the worlds tiniest violin.
I really don't give a shit.
You know damn well the Chinese government would probably pull a stunt like this.
That they waited so long, that's the real surprise.And now you, citizens of the USA.
You have no problem buying oil from oppressive Middle Eastern states.
You have no problem buying cheap clothes from China.
You have no problem buying NARCOTIC DRUGS from South American despots.
Your participation in purchasing items from such regimes is beyond tacit admission, it is active encouragement for them to act the way they do.
AND YOU FUND IT!!!!
You eagerly toss your money at them!
So for John Q. Public to bash Microsoft and Google for their deeds (while mainlining their South American cocaine in cheap Chinese clothes while driving in a car fueled by Middle Eastern oil) is the absolute height of hypocrisy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30947062</id>
	<title>Re:I don't buy it.</title>
	<author>u38cg</author>
	<datestamp>1264758060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In fact, I don't think people in most Asian nations place value on personal freedoms to the extent Americans do.</p></div><p>This is tendentious bullshit.  They haven't been asked, ut still they get jailed and executed for pushing for it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In fact , I do n't think people in most Asian nations place value on personal freedoms to the extent Americans do.This is tendentious bullshit .
They have n't been asked , ut still they get jailed and executed for pushing for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In fact, I don't think people in most Asian nations place value on personal freedoms to the extent Americans do.This is tendentious bullshit.
They haven't been asked, ut still they get jailed and executed for pushing for it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30936944</id>
	<title>The corporate foolishness</title>
	<author>tjstork</author>
	<datestamp>1264705380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is that, the Communist Revolution in China is essentially lawless.  The whole idea of a corporation requires that laws actually exist and be consistently enforced.  You have to have property rights, speech rights, indeed, human rights for corporations to happen, otherwise, they too can be randomly jailed and seized - witness what's going on in Venezuela.  So, really, Microsoft and Walmart and other China collaborators are really just hoping that the current personalities in China will be consistent, and they are foolish if they think those hopes are anything more than risky hopes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is that , the Communist Revolution in China is essentially lawless .
The whole idea of a corporation requires that laws actually exist and be consistently enforced .
You have to have property rights , speech rights , indeed , human rights for corporations to happen , otherwise , they too can be randomly jailed and seized - witness what 's going on in Venezuela .
So , really , Microsoft and Walmart and other China collaborators are really just hoping that the current personalities in China will be consistent , and they are foolish if they think those hopes are anything more than risky hopes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is that, the Communist Revolution in China is essentially lawless.
The whole idea of a corporation requires that laws actually exist and be consistently enforced.
You have to have property rights, speech rights, indeed, human rights for corporations to happen, otherwise, they too can be randomly jailed and seized - witness what's going on in Venezuela.
So, really, Microsoft and Walmart and other China collaborators are really just hoping that the current personalities in China will be consistent, and they are foolish if they think those hopes are anything more than risky hopes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30944876</id>
	<title>Re:More than likely.</title>
	<author>cynicist</author>
	<datestamp>1264691580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Morals do not pay the bills. As an individual would you (not the parent) be happy to content to contribute half your income for the rest of your life if it meant China was truly free and democratic? I doubt many would.</p></div><p>Some people realize there are more important things in this world than money.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Morals do not pay the bills .
As an individual would you ( not the parent ) be happy to content to contribute half your income for the rest of your life if it meant China was truly free and democratic ?
I doubt many would.Some people realize there are more important things in this world than money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Morals do not pay the bills.
As an individual would you (not the parent) be happy to content to contribute half your income for the rest of your life if it meant China was truly free and democratic?
I doubt many would.Some people realize there are more important things in this world than money.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30936824</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934398</id>
	<title>Of course</title>
	<author>Sarten-X</author>
	<datestamp>1264698300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course. Microsoft wants to take Google's place everywhere.</p><p>In China specifically, Microsoft can't pack up and leave like Google did. China's already a big target for their anti-piracy efforts  Their only option is to play nice with the government and get cooperation, no matter how bad it really is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course .
Microsoft wants to take Google 's place everywhere.In China specifically , Microsoft ca n't pack up and leave like Google did .
China 's already a big target for their anti-piracy efforts Their only option is to play nice with the government and get cooperation , no matter how bad it really is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course.
Microsoft wants to take Google's place everywhere.In China specifically, Microsoft can't pack up and leave like Google did.
China's already a big target for their anti-piracy efforts  Their only option is to play nice with the government and get cooperation, no matter how bad it really is.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935992</id>
	<title>Re:More than likely.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264702500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd like to put a tag "bottomfeeder" to this article (can an Anonymous Coward put a tag on this article)?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd like to put a tag " bottomfeeder " to this article ( can an Anonymous Coward put a tag on this article ) ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd like to put a tag "bottomfeeder" to this article (can an Anonymous Coward put a tag on this article)?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934384</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934770</id>
	<title>Hey, maybe it's a good thing!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264699380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know Microsoft's strategy of embrace, extend, extinguish? Microsoft is embracing China's censorship and lack of social liberties. Let's hope they get to the "extinguish" phase, quick!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know Microsoft 's strategy of embrace , extend , extinguish ?
Microsoft is embracing China 's censorship and lack of social liberties .
Let 's hope they get to the " extinguish " phase , quick !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know Microsoft's strategy of embrace, extend, extinguish?
Microsoft is embracing China's censorship and lack of social liberties.
Let's hope they get to the "extinguish" phase, quick!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935614</id>
	<title>Re:I don't buy it.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264701540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The mindset of their culture is somewhat irrelevant. If a person has an ideology they have an obligation to adhere to it. A libertarian business owner who runs an authoritarian hierarchy at his workplace is a hypocrite. Likewise a libertarian who runs an authoritarian household, where he dictates his politics, religion, etc., to his children or is excessively controlling of them and/or his wife is also a hypocrite.</p><p>And finally, a libertarian business that profits by supporting non-libertarian ideologies when dealing with other countries is also a hypocrite.</p><p>All I'm saying is, if you believe in something, you support it regardless of whether the people you deal with support it or not. A christian shouldn't become a buddhist just because he is in a buddhist country, and a American shouldn't support the lack of freedoms in Asia even if Asians don't want said freedoms. Principles shouldn't be for sale to the highest bidder as that makes them no principles at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The mindset of their culture is somewhat irrelevant .
If a person has an ideology they have an obligation to adhere to it .
A libertarian business owner who runs an authoritarian hierarchy at his workplace is a hypocrite .
Likewise a libertarian who runs an authoritarian household , where he dictates his politics , religion , etc. , to his children or is excessively controlling of them and/or his wife is also a hypocrite.And finally , a libertarian business that profits by supporting non-libertarian ideologies when dealing with other countries is also a hypocrite.All I 'm saying is , if you believe in something , you support it regardless of whether the people you deal with support it or not .
A christian should n't become a buddhist just because he is in a buddhist country , and a American should n't support the lack of freedoms in Asia even if Asians do n't want said freedoms .
Principles should n't be for sale to the highest bidder as that makes them no principles at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The mindset of their culture is somewhat irrelevant.
If a person has an ideology they have an obligation to adhere to it.
A libertarian business owner who runs an authoritarian hierarchy at his workplace is a hypocrite.
Likewise a libertarian who runs an authoritarian household, where he dictates his politics, religion, etc., to his children or is excessively controlling of them and/or his wife is also a hypocrite.And finally, a libertarian business that profits by supporting non-libertarian ideologies when dealing with other countries is also a hypocrite.All I'm saying is, if you believe in something, you support it regardless of whether the people you deal with support it or not.
A christian shouldn't become a buddhist just because he is in a buddhist country, and a American shouldn't support the lack of freedoms in Asia even if Asians don't want said freedoms.
Principles shouldn't be for sale to the highest bidder as that makes them no principles at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30939372</id>
	<title>Oblig grammar troll</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264711200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who is Bill Gate and what is his authority on Chinese censorship?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who is Bill Gate and what is his authority on Chinese censorship ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who is Bill Gate and what is his authority on Chinese censorship?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30959978</id>
	<title>Re:More than likely.</title>
	<author>ps2os2</author>
	<datestamp>1264794300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well I think that MS is going to get burned on this sooner or later. Their wink wink licensing issues are only going to get worse *AND* I suspect that the government will figure out a way to put some kind of bug in MS software that will prevent the average Chinese citizen from doing anything the government doesn't want them to do.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well I think that MS is going to get burned on this sooner or later .
Their wink wink licensing issues are only going to get worse * AND * I suspect that the government will figure out a way to put some kind of bug in MS software that will prevent the average Chinese citizen from doing anything the government does n't want them to do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well I think that MS is going to get burned on this sooner or later.
Their wink wink licensing issues are only going to get worse *AND* I suspect that the government will figure out a way to put some kind of bug in MS software that will prevent the average Chinese citizen from doing anything the government doesn't want them to do.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934384</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935068</id>
	<title>Re:MS+China</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264700160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't hate China, I just severely with a passion dislike their unethical business practices, tyrannical government, disregard for international law, shoddy craftsmanship and use of poisonous materials, all of which puts the lives of many people in danger, not just in China, but all over the world!!! ARGHHHH!!!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/me wants to throw a chair!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't hate China , I just severely with a passion dislike their unethical business practices , tyrannical government , disregard for international law , shoddy craftsmanship and use of poisonous materials , all of which puts the lives of many people in danger , not just in China , but all over the world ! ! !
ARGHHHH ! ! ! /me wants to throw a chair ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't hate China, I just severely with a passion dislike their unethical business practices, tyrannical government, disregard for international law, shoddy craftsmanship and use of poisonous materials, all of which puts the lives of many people in danger, not just in China, but all over the world!!!
ARGHHHH!!! /me wants to throw a chair!!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30942956</id>
	<title>google is no better</title>
	<author>Shompol</author>
	<datestamp>1264679400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So while Chinese govt has to hack their way in to fish for dissidents, US Govt can just waltz in and get any records they want (read: no warrant required).
<br> <br>
Eric Schmidt: "If you have something [to hide], maybe you shouldn't be doing it"
<br> <br>
<a href="http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=983717" title="ycombinator.com" rel="nofollow">http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=983717</a> [ycombinator.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>So while Chinese govt has to hack their way in to fish for dissidents , US Govt can just waltz in and get any records they want ( read : no warrant required ) .
Eric Schmidt : " If you have something [ to hide ] , maybe you should n't be doing it " http : //news.ycombinator.com/item ? id = 983717 [ ycombinator.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So while Chinese govt has to hack their way in to fish for dissidents, US Govt can just waltz in and get any records they want (read: no warrant required).
Eric Schmidt: "If you have something [to hide], maybe you shouldn't be doing it"
 
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=983717 [ycombinator.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935044</id>
	<title>It's the smart thing to do</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264700100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>China is well on its way to being the largest market on the planet, and there doesn't seem to be much if anything on the horizon to challenge their ascendancy.  Getting on board with them is just plain smart.<p>

For more strategic advice, refer to Armand Hammer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>China is well on its way to being the largest market on the planet , and there does n't seem to be much if anything on the horizon to challenge their ascendancy .
Getting on board with them is just plain smart .
For more strategic advice , refer to Armand Hammer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>China is well on its way to being the largest market on the planet, and there doesn't seem to be much if anything on the horizon to challenge their ascendancy.
Getting on board with them is just plain smart.
For more strategic advice, refer to Armand Hammer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935234</id>
	<title>Stupid use of the word...</title>
	<author>IANAAC</author>
	<datestamp>1264700580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> <i>
that's just bordering on treason.</i></p></div> </blockquote><p>
A corporation, particularly multinational, has no concept of the word.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>that 's just bordering on treason .
A corporation , particularly multinational , has no concept of the word .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> 
that's just bordering on treason.
A corporation, particularly multinational, has no concept of the word.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934684</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934652</id>
	<title>Re:Of course</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264699020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"China's already a big target for their anti-piracy efforts"</p><p>I think the whole piracy issue in China is a marketing plot.  A Chinese friend once told me Bill Gates said something like "As long as they (Chinese) are pirating our software, it is ok." </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" China 's already a big target for their anti-piracy efforts " I think the whole piracy issue in China is a marketing plot .
A Chinese friend once told me Bill Gates said something like " As long as they ( Chinese ) are pirating our software , it is ok. "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"China's already a big target for their anti-piracy efforts"I think the whole piracy issue in China is a marketing plot.
A Chinese friend once told me Bill Gates said something like "As long as they (Chinese) are pirating our software, it is ok." </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30954986</id>
	<title>The sad thing is</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264759380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Argue whatever you want, one got to have moral backbone to earn respect. Money and power never not buy you respect, it buys evny and adulation.<br>Is the director being held gunpoint to comply with things he is unwilling to do? no.<br>Is the corporation at the point where immoral deeds have to be done to survive? no.</p><p>So why? It's greed, and not just simple greed, but excessive greed, where you put money and power before everything else.</p><p>I am an outsider, a foreigner. It may not be my position to comment anything Americans do.<br>However, the way I see it, moral of the story is, THIS IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF WHY AMERICA (and all the other G-whatever nations) IS GOING DOWNHILL!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Argue whatever you want , one got to have moral backbone to earn respect .
Money and power never not buy you respect , it buys evny and adulation.Is the director being held gunpoint to comply with things he is unwilling to do ?
no.Is the corporation at the point where immoral deeds have to be done to survive ?
no.So why ?
It 's greed , and not just simple greed , but excessive greed , where you put money and power before everything else.I am an outsider , a foreigner .
It may not be my position to comment anything Americans do.However , the way I see it , moral of the story is , THIS IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF WHY AMERICA ( and all the other G-whatever nations ) IS GOING DOWNHILL !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Argue whatever you want, one got to have moral backbone to earn respect.
Money and power never not buy you respect, it buys evny and adulation.Is the director being held gunpoint to comply with things he is unwilling to do?
no.Is the corporation at the point where immoral deeds have to be done to survive?
no.So why?
It's greed, and not just simple greed, but excessive greed, where you put money and power before everything else.I am an outsider, a foreigner.
It may not be my position to comment anything Americans do.However, the way I see it, moral of the story is, THIS IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF WHY AMERICA (and all the other G-whatever nations) IS GOING DOWNHILL!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935450</id>
	<title>i thought communism was anti-american</title>
	<author>brezel</author>
	<datestamp>1264701120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ah no wait, that was linux.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ah no wait , that was linux .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ah no wait, that was linux.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934396</id>
	<title>Are you kidding?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264698300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>you've got people wondering: Is Microsoft aiming to take Google's place in China?"<br></i><br>Of course they are! What a dumb question.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you 've got people wondering : Is Microsoft aiming to take Google 's place in China ?
" Of course they are !
What a dumb question .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you've got people wondering: Is Microsoft aiming to take Google's place in China?
"Of course they are!
What a dumb question.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30943384</id>
	<title>Name change for Chinese capital.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264681560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In an unrelated announcement the Chinese government has decided to change the name of the capital to Bing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In an unrelated announcement the Chinese government has decided to change the name of the capital to Bing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In an unrelated announcement the Chinese government has decided to change the name of the capital to Bing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935796</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264701960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If Google decides not to censor results, then it implies MS will censor results.</p><p>Which search engine would people most likely use?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If Google decides not to censor results , then it implies MS will censor results.Which search engine would people most likely use ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Google decides not to censor results, then it implies MS will censor results.Which search engine would people most likely use?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30936248</id>
	<title>Censorship?  Really?</title>
	<author>mpapet</author>
	<datestamp>1264703280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Microsoft will cooperate as long as they have a shot at public sector revenue.  This is hardly unique to China.  If  the nation of Venezuela wanted Microsoft products, they'd take their money.</p><p>I think American crossed the line into full-scale hipocracy(sp!!) by calling China out on censorship.  The Chinese are more overt, but the effects are the same.</p><p>How about killing prisoners at Guantanamo?  <a href="http://harpers.org/archive/2010/01/hbc-90006368" title="harpers.org">http://harpers.org/archive/2010/01/hbc-90006368</a> [harpers.org]  How was that story handled??  I'd argue that's a pretty serious situation and yet, somehow the mainstream media won't touch it.  The title AP gave it was "Harper's questions three Guantanamo deaths."  Somehow, prisoners under 24/7 observation are able to stuff rags down their throats AND THEN hang themselves?  There's room for 'a question?'  <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2010-01-18-guantanamo-deaths\_N.htm?csp=34" title="usatoday.com">http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2010-01-18-guantanamo-deaths\_N.htm?csp=34</a> [usatoday.com]</p><p>How about the *massive* transfer of weath orchestrated by the Fed and Treasury?  It's a 'bailout.' Maiden Lane 3 somehow generates profits in a way obvious to exactly no one.  GM's debt holders got barely pennies on the dollar depending on their debt senority and yet AIG's counter parties got every single cent back.  And the headline is "this is troubling" ??  <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/jan2010/db2010018\_994080.htm" title="businessweek.com">http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/jan2010/db2010018\_994080.htm</a> [businessweek.com]</p><p>Let's go back a few years to Sibel Edmonds story that *no* media would touch.</p><p>I missed the part where the American Republic was a bastion of Freedom.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft will cooperate as long as they have a shot at public sector revenue .
This is hardly unique to China .
If the nation of Venezuela wanted Microsoft products , they 'd take their money.I think American crossed the line into full-scale hipocracy ( sp ! !
) by calling China out on censorship .
The Chinese are more overt , but the effects are the same.How about killing prisoners at Guantanamo ?
http : //harpers.org/archive/2010/01/hbc-90006368 [ harpers.org ] How was that story handled ? ?
I 'd argue that 's a pretty serious situation and yet , somehow the mainstream media wo n't touch it .
The title AP gave it was " Harper 's questions three Guantanamo deaths .
" Somehow , prisoners under 24/7 observation are able to stuff rags down their throats AND THEN hang themselves ?
There 's room for 'a question ?
' http : //www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2010-01-18-guantanamo-deaths \ _N.htm ? csp = 34 [ usatoday.com ] How about the * massive * transfer of weath orchestrated by the Fed and Treasury ?
It 's a 'bailout .
' Maiden Lane 3 somehow generates profits in a way obvious to exactly no one .
GM 's debt holders got barely pennies on the dollar depending on their debt senority and yet AIG 's counter parties got every single cent back .
And the headline is " this is troubling " ? ?
http : //www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/jan2010/db2010018 \ _994080.htm [ businessweek.com ] Let 's go back a few years to Sibel Edmonds story that * no * media would touch.I missed the part where the American Republic was a bastion of Freedom .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft will cooperate as long as they have a shot at public sector revenue.
This is hardly unique to China.
If  the nation of Venezuela wanted Microsoft products, they'd take their money.I think American crossed the line into full-scale hipocracy(sp!!
) by calling China out on censorship.
The Chinese are more overt, but the effects are the same.How about killing prisoners at Guantanamo?
http://harpers.org/archive/2010/01/hbc-90006368 [harpers.org]  How was that story handled??
I'd argue that's a pretty serious situation and yet, somehow the mainstream media won't touch it.
The title AP gave it was "Harper's questions three Guantanamo deaths.
"  Somehow, prisoners under 24/7 observation are able to stuff rags down their throats AND THEN hang themselves?
There's room for 'a question?
'  http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2010-01-18-guantanamo-deaths\_N.htm?csp=34 [usatoday.com]How about the *massive* transfer of weath orchestrated by the Fed and Treasury?
It's a 'bailout.
' Maiden Lane 3 somehow generates profits in a way obvious to exactly no one.
GM's debt holders got barely pennies on the dollar depending on their debt senority and yet AIG's counter parties got every single cent back.
And the headline is "this is troubling" ??
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/jan2010/db2010018\_994080.htm [businessweek.com]Let's go back a few years to Sibel Edmonds story that *no* media would touch.I missed the part where the American Republic was a bastion of Freedom.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30940506</id>
	<title>Re:i will remember this</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1264671420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Only to see their stock price plummet. "</p><p>Based on what? Google's stock didn't.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Only to see their stock price plummet .
" Based on what ?
Google 's stock did n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Only to see their stock price plummet.
"Based on what?
Google's stock didn't.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934648</id>
	<title>Re:Ubuntu's alignment with MS's search engine</title>
	<author>arevos</author>
	<datestamp>1264699020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I wonder if this will have any impact Ubuntu's recent announcement that they are switching to use Yahoo (which is Microsoft Bing underneath) as the default search engine in their next release.</p></div><p>Yahoo already has a history of <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/4221538.stm" title="bbc.co.uk">rolling over for the Chinese government</a> [bbc.co.uk]. If Canonical doesn't mind associating with a company that helps oppressive regimes track down dissidents, I don't think Microsoft's announcement is going to make much difference.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder if this will have any impact Ubuntu 's recent announcement that they are switching to use Yahoo ( which is Microsoft Bing underneath ) as the default search engine in their next release.Yahoo already has a history of rolling over for the Chinese government [ bbc.co.uk ] .
If Canonical does n't mind associating with a company that helps oppressive regimes track down dissidents , I do n't think Microsoft 's announcement is going to make much difference .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder if this will have any impact Ubuntu's recent announcement that they are switching to use Yahoo (which is Microsoft Bing underneath) as the default search engine in their next release.Yahoo already has a history of rolling over for the Chinese government [bbc.co.uk].
If Canonical doesn't mind associating with a company that helps oppressive regimes track down dissidents, I don't think Microsoft's announcement is going to make much difference.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934432</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934684</id>
	<title>i will remember this</title>
	<author>h00manist</author>
	<datestamp>1264699140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>that's just immoral.  up to now i had mostly technical reasons i disliked microsoft.  now, i have stonger ethical and moral reasons as well. i won't forget. that's just bordering on treason.</htmltext>
<tokenext>that 's just immoral .
up to now i had mostly technical reasons i disliked microsoft .
now , i have stonger ethical and moral reasons as well .
i wo n't forget .
that 's just bordering on treason .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that's just immoral.
up to now i had mostly technical reasons i disliked microsoft.
now, i have stonger ethical and moral reasons as well.
i won't forget.
that's just bordering on treason.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935602</id>
	<title>In China there are people and dollars</title>
	<author>uassholes</author>
	<datestamp>1264701540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
M$ says: "Give us the dollars; fuck the people".
</p><p>
OK, fine.  That's business.
</p><p>
Except that corporations (from Latin <em>corpus</em> meaning "body") enjoy a legal status as an entity, like a person.  It should be possible for this legal entity ("body") to have a conscience. Some seem too, via the actions of their bosses.  Maybe Google actually does.
</p><p>
M$ has shown time and time again that it does not.
</p><p>
I want to make an anology with Union Carbide.  This is from Wikipedia, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal\_disaster" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal\_disaster</a> [wikipedia.org]:
</p><p>
<em>
The Bhopal disaster was an industrial catastrophe that took place at a pesticide plant owned and operated by Union Carbide India Limited (UCIL) in Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India on December 3, 1984. Around 12 AM, the plant released methyl isocyanate (MIC) gas and other toxins, resulting in the exposure of over 500,000 people. Estimates vary on the death toll. The official immediate death toll was 2259 and the government of Madhya Pradesh has confirmed a total of 3787 deaths related to the gas release.  Other government agencies estimate 15,000 deaths.  Others estimate 8000 to 10,000 died within 72 hours and 25,000 have since died from gas-related diseases.
</em></p><p><em>
Some 25 years after the gas leak, 390 tonnes of toxic chemicals abandoned at the UCIL plant continue to leak and pollute the groundwater in the region and affect thousands of Bhopal residents who depend on it, though there is some dispute as to whether the chemicals still stored at the site pose any continuing health hazard. There are currently civil and criminal cases related to the disaster ongoing in the United States District Court, Manhattan and the District Court of Bhopal, India against Union Carbide, now owned by Dow Chemical Company, with an Indian arrest warrant pending against Warren Anderson, CEO of Union Carbide at the time of the disaster. No one has yet been prosecuted.
</em>
</p><p>
Wikipedia also has an article on "corporate social responsibility":   <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate\_social\_responsibility" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate\_social\_responsibility</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>M $ says : " Give us the dollars ; fuck the people " .
OK , fine .
That 's business .
Except that corporations ( from Latin corpus meaning " body " ) enjoy a legal status as an entity , like a person .
It should be possible for this legal entity ( " body " ) to have a conscience .
Some seem too , via the actions of their bosses .
Maybe Google actually does .
M $ has shown time and time again that it does not .
I want to make an anology with Union Carbide .
This is from Wikipedia , http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal \ _disaster [ wikipedia.org ] : The Bhopal disaster was an industrial catastrophe that took place at a pesticide plant owned and operated by Union Carbide India Limited ( UCIL ) in Bhopal , Madhya Pradesh , India on December 3 , 1984 .
Around 12 AM , the plant released methyl isocyanate ( MIC ) gas and other toxins , resulting in the exposure of over 500,000 people .
Estimates vary on the death toll .
The official immediate death toll was 2259 and the government of Madhya Pradesh has confirmed a total of 3787 deaths related to the gas release .
Other government agencies estimate 15,000 deaths .
Others estimate 8000 to 10,000 died within 72 hours and 25,000 have since died from gas-related diseases .
Some 25 years after the gas leak , 390 tonnes of toxic chemicals abandoned at the UCIL plant continue to leak and pollute the groundwater in the region and affect thousands of Bhopal residents who depend on it , though there is some dispute as to whether the chemicals still stored at the site pose any continuing health hazard .
There are currently civil and criminal cases related to the disaster ongoing in the United States District Court , Manhattan and the District Court of Bhopal , India against Union Carbide , now owned by Dow Chemical Company , with an Indian arrest warrant pending against Warren Anderson , CEO of Union Carbide at the time of the disaster .
No one has yet been prosecuted .
Wikipedia also has an article on " corporate social responsibility " : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate \ _social \ _responsibility [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
M$ says: "Give us the dollars; fuck the people".
OK, fine.
That's business.
Except that corporations (from Latin corpus meaning "body") enjoy a legal status as an entity, like a person.
It should be possible for this legal entity ("body") to have a conscience.
Some seem too, via the actions of their bosses.
Maybe Google actually does.
M$ has shown time and time again that it does not.
I want to make an anology with Union Carbide.
This is from Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal\_disaster [wikipedia.org]:


The Bhopal disaster was an industrial catastrophe that took place at a pesticide plant owned and operated by Union Carbide India Limited (UCIL) in Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India on December 3, 1984.
Around 12 AM, the plant released methyl isocyanate (MIC) gas and other toxins, resulting in the exposure of over 500,000 people.
Estimates vary on the death toll.
The official immediate death toll was 2259 and the government of Madhya Pradesh has confirmed a total of 3787 deaths related to the gas release.
Other government agencies estimate 15,000 deaths.
Others estimate 8000 to 10,000 died within 72 hours and 25,000 have since died from gas-related diseases.
Some 25 years after the gas leak, 390 tonnes of toxic chemicals abandoned at the UCIL plant continue to leak and pollute the groundwater in the region and affect thousands of Bhopal residents who depend on it, though there is some dispute as to whether the chemicals still stored at the site pose any continuing health hazard.
There are currently civil and criminal cases related to the disaster ongoing in the United States District Court, Manhattan and the District Court of Bhopal, India against Union Carbide, now owned by Dow Chemical Company, with an Indian arrest warrant pending against Warren Anderson, CEO of Union Carbide at the time of the disaster.
No one has yet been prosecuted.
Wikipedia also has an article on "corporate social responsibility":   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate\_social\_responsibility [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30937506</id>
	<title>mod uP</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264706760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Very own shiiter,</htmltext>
<tokenext>Very own shiiter,</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Very own shiiter,</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934432</id>
	<title>Ubuntu's alignment with MS's search engine</title>
	<author>JohnFluxx</author>
	<datestamp>1264698420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wonder if this will have any impact Ubuntu's recent announcement that they are switching to use Yahoo (which is Microsoft Bing underneath) as the default search engine in their next release.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder if this will have any impact Ubuntu 's recent announcement that they are switching to use Yahoo ( which is Microsoft Bing underneath ) as the default search engine in their next release .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder if this will have any impact Ubuntu's recent announcement that they are switching to use Yahoo (which is Microsoft Bing underneath) as the default search engine in their next release.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30937780</id>
	<title>Re:I don't buy it.</title>
	<author>ThatsNotPudding</author>
	<datestamp>1264707240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>China in many ways has more of a free market economy than the US does</p></div></blockquote><p>Their environmental and public health records prove this to be true.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>China in many ways has more of a free market economy than the US doesTheir environmental and public health records prove this to be true .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>China in many ways has more of a free market economy than the US doesTheir environmental and public health records prove this to be true.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934942</id>
	<title>Re:MS+China</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264699860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>we will call it chindows</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>we will call it chindows</tokentext>
<sentencetext>we will call it chindows</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30940560</id>
	<title>Re:More than likely.</title>
	<author>init100</author>
	<datestamp>1264671540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>if I were a Microsoft shareholder I would want Microsoft to be wanting to make inroads in to this market. Morals do not pay the bills.</p></div><p>Is there any limit to this? Let's take this a couple of steps further: If you were a shareholder in a company that sold torture devices you knew were used on the citizens of the buying country, or maybe tabulating machines you knew were used in a genocide, would you still choose money over morals, knowing that your company is actively supplying tools used to kill and/or mutilate people every day?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>if I were a Microsoft shareholder I would want Microsoft to be wanting to make inroads in to this market .
Morals do not pay the bills.Is there any limit to this ?
Let 's take this a couple of steps further : If you were a shareholder in a company that sold torture devices you knew were used on the citizens of the buying country , or maybe tabulating machines you knew were used in a genocide , would you still choose money over morals , knowing that your company is actively supplying tools used to kill and/or mutilate people every day ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if I were a Microsoft shareholder I would want Microsoft to be wanting to make inroads in to this market.
Morals do not pay the bills.Is there any limit to this?
Let's take this a couple of steps further: If you were a shareholder in a company that sold torture devices you knew were used on the citizens of the buying country, or maybe tabulating machines you knew were used in a genocide, would you still choose money over morals, knowing that your company is actively supplying tools used to kill and/or mutilate people every day?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30936824</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30936208</id>
	<title>not all that bad</title>
	<author>countertrolling</author>
	<datestamp>1264703160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah really... they're not killing anybody, just breaking their kneecaps. I mean c'mon!</p><p><i>Do you want me to slow down?? Or do you want me to stop?!</i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah really... they 're not killing anybody , just breaking their kneecaps .
I mean c'mon ! Do you want me to slow down ? ?
Or do you want me to stop ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah really... they're not killing anybody, just breaking their kneecaps.
I mean c'mon!Do you want me to slow down??
Or do you want me to stop?
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934586</id>
	<title>maybe Ballmer sees his reflection in China</title>
	<author>Locutus</author>
	<datestamp>1264698840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Microsoft's business tactics and China's public policies have some overlap. Microsoft probably sees little wrong with how the Chinese government runs the country as shown by the Gates and Ballmer statements. They resemble each other.<br><br>LoB</htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft 's business tactics and China 's public policies have some overlap .
Microsoft probably sees little wrong with how the Chinese government runs the country as shown by the Gates and Ballmer statements .
They resemble each other.LoB</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft's business tactics and China's public policies have some overlap.
Microsoft probably sees little wrong with how the Chinese government runs the country as shown by the Gates and Ballmer statements.
They resemble each other.LoB</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935038</id>
	<title>MS is right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264700100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Companies shouldn't meddle in international politics.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Companies should n't meddle in international politics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Companies shouldn't meddle in international politics.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935794</id>
	<title>Bing is also a Chinese personal name</title>
	<author>ElmoGonzo</author>
	<datestamp>1264701960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Other than that it's just a way to remember the insurance salesman from Groundhog Day</htmltext>
<tokenext>Other than that it 's just a way to remember the insurance salesman from Groundhog Day</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Other than that it's just a way to remember the insurance salesman from Groundhog Day</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934722</id>
	<title>Re:Of course</title>
	<author>Rogerborg</author>
	<datestamp>1264699200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Microsoft wants to take <b>everyone's everything everywhere forever, by absolutely any means possible</b></p></div> </blockquote><p>Fixed that for you.

</p><p>Microsoft have "no option" other than to obey ze orders, you say?  I call <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg\_Principles#Principle\_IV" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Godwin</a> [wikipedia.org] on that.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft wants to take everyone 's everything everywhere forever , by absolutely any means possible Fixed that for you .
Microsoft have " no option " other than to obey ze orders , you say ?
I call Godwin [ wikipedia.org ] on that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft wants to take everyone's everything everywhere forever, by absolutely any means possible Fixed that for you.
Microsoft have "no option" other than to obey ze orders, you say?
I call Godwin [wikipedia.org] on that.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30938546</id>
	<title>Re:i will remember this</title>
	<author>Nemyst</author>
	<datestamp>1264709160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't think business and ethics absolutely are mutually exclusive.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think business and ethics absolutely are mutually exclusive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think business and ethics absolutely are mutually exclusive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30937462</id>
	<title>If you know your history...</title>
	<author>Lead Butthead</author>
	<datestamp>1264706640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am sure IBM didn't see anything wrong with Nazi Germany either.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am sure IBM did n't see anything wrong with Nazi Germany either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am sure IBM didn't see anything wrong with Nazi Germany either.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934430</id>
	<title>Panda Express ranked higher on Bing than Google!</title>
	<author>Orga</author>
	<datestamp>1264698420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>MS is bribing senior Chinese officials by sticking MSG like code into their software</htmltext>
<tokenext>MS is bribing senior Chinese officials by sticking MSG like code into their software</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MS is bribing senior Chinese officials by sticking MSG like code into their software</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30942054</id>
	<title>Plantation owners defended their slaves too.</title>
	<author>edfardos</author>
	<datestamp>1264676100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Exploiting the population of communist totalitarianism is the slavery of the new millennium.  The cotton plantation owners said the exact same thing when it came to defending their slaves.  I hope 200,000 americans don't die as we repeat this cycle of history.

Please end free-trade with non-free countries.

--edfardos</htmltext>
<tokenext>Exploiting the population of communist totalitarianism is the slavery of the new millennium .
The cotton plantation owners said the exact same thing when it came to defending their slaves .
I hope 200,000 americans do n't die as we repeat this cycle of history .
Please end free-trade with non-free countries .
--edfardos</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exploiting the population of communist totalitarianism is the slavery of the new millennium.
The cotton plantation owners said the exact same thing when it came to defending their slaves.
I hope 200,000 americans don't die as we repeat this cycle of history.
Please end free-trade with non-free countries.
--edfardos</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934384</id>
	<title>More than likely.</title>
	<author>AllyGreen</author>
	<datestamp>1264698300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sounds like typical MS style. Plus they've got to great lengths before to get the chinese gov to use their software. Don't see whats changed from their point of view.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like typical MS style .
Plus they 've got to great lengths before to get the chinese gov to use their software .
Do n't see whats changed from their point of view .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like typical MS style.
Plus they've got to great lengths before to get the chinese gov to use their software.
Don't see whats changed from their point of view.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934584</id>
	<title>MS+China</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264698840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can there be a sweeter target than this? Microsoft + China, two most hated entity here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can there be a sweeter target than this ?
Microsoft + China , two most hated entity here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can there be a sweeter target than this?
Microsoft + China, two most hated entity here.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30941698</id>
	<title>Re:I don't buy it.</title>
	<author>Yaa 101</author>
	<datestamp>1264674960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Chinese government is one big cesspool of nepotism, ask many Chinese that were actually deported because their house was on a spot that was lucrative to the sons and daughters of the communist party officials.</p><p>China will break into a large and long lasting civil war sooner or later.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Chinese government is one big cesspool of nepotism , ask many Chinese that were actually deported because their house was on a spot that was lucrative to the sons and daughters of the communist party officials.China will break into a large and long lasting civil war sooner or later .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Chinese government is one big cesspool of nepotism, ask many Chinese that were actually deported because their house was on a spot that was lucrative to the sons and daughters of the communist party officials.China will break into a large and long lasting civil war sooner or later.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935842</id>
	<title>Re:i will remember this</title>
	<author>Colonel Korn</author>
	<datestamp>1264702140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>that's just immoral.  up to now i had mostly technical reasons i disliked microsoft.  now, i have stonger ethical and moral reasons as well. i won't forget. that's just bordering on treason.</p></div><p>I'm sort of with you, but remember that Google hasn't done anything about leaving China - they've made a public statement that they might leave and then done nothing while it's been pointed out that their Chinese revenues are almost zero.  For now, judging by their actions, Google and MS are in the same boat.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>that 's just immoral .
up to now i had mostly technical reasons i disliked microsoft .
now , i have stonger ethical and moral reasons as well .
i wo n't forget .
that 's just bordering on treason.I 'm sort of with you , but remember that Google has n't done anything about leaving China - they 've made a public statement that they might leave and then done nothing while it 's been pointed out that their Chinese revenues are almost zero .
For now , judging by their actions , Google and MS are in the same boat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that's just immoral.
up to now i had mostly technical reasons i disliked microsoft.
now, i have stonger ethical and moral reasons as well.
i won't forget.
that's just bordering on treason.I'm sort of with you, but remember that Google hasn't done anything about leaving China - they've made a public statement that they might leave and then done nothing while it's been pointed out that their Chinese revenues are almost zero.
For now, judging by their actions, Google and MS are in the same boat.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934684</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934916</id>
	<title>I don't buy it.</title>
	<author>MaWeiTao</author>
	<datestamp>1264699800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The important thing to keep in mind here is that Chinese by and large don't share the same mindset as Americans, that being that personal freedoms are more important than anything else. In fact, I don't think people in most Asian nations place value on personal freedoms to the extent Americans do. They'd much rather have a secure, stable society than appease to every little whim. China is no longer the absolute disaster that it was under Mao and China in many was has more of a free market economy than the US does. But in general limits on social freedoms is very consistent with Chinese and asian culture.</p><p>There have been politicians in Hong Kong fighting increased Chinese control over the territory and several have resigned in protest. It makes sense since Hong Kong was exposed to the West so extensively for so long. That said, I'm curious to know if the average citizen even cares. Taiwan, which surveys have found to have among the most open-minded people in Asia, share many of these same beliefs. Certainly, exposure to Western culture is slowly eroding some of these long-held ideals.</p><p>I do find it ridiculous that Sergey Brin would somehow be touched by this cause considering that the situation in China is nothing at all like the situation was in the USSR. The Chinese government today is communist in name only. It makes me wonder if Google isn't making all this up to avoid discussion of the real reasons for their leaving China.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The important thing to keep in mind here is that Chinese by and large do n't share the same mindset as Americans , that being that personal freedoms are more important than anything else .
In fact , I do n't think people in most Asian nations place value on personal freedoms to the extent Americans do .
They 'd much rather have a secure , stable society than appease to every little whim .
China is no longer the absolute disaster that it was under Mao and China in many was has more of a free market economy than the US does .
But in general limits on social freedoms is very consistent with Chinese and asian culture.There have been politicians in Hong Kong fighting increased Chinese control over the territory and several have resigned in protest .
It makes sense since Hong Kong was exposed to the West so extensively for so long .
That said , I 'm curious to know if the average citizen even cares .
Taiwan , which surveys have found to have among the most open-minded people in Asia , share many of these same beliefs .
Certainly , exposure to Western culture is slowly eroding some of these long-held ideals.I do find it ridiculous that Sergey Brin would somehow be touched by this cause considering that the situation in China is nothing at all like the situation was in the USSR .
The Chinese government today is communist in name only .
It makes me wonder if Google is n't making all this up to avoid discussion of the real reasons for their leaving China .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The important thing to keep in mind here is that Chinese by and large don't share the same mindset as Americans, that being that personal freedoms are more important than anything else.
In fact, I don't think people in most Asian nations place value on personal freedoms to the extent Americans do.
They'd much rather have a secure, stable society than appease to every little whim.
China is no longer the absolute disaster that it was under Mao and China in many was has more of a free market economy than the US does.
But in general limits on social freedoms is very consistent with Chinese and asian culture.There have been politicians in Hong Kong fighting increased Chinese control over the territory and several have resigned in protest.
It makes sense since Hong Kong was exposed to the West so extensively for so long.
That said, I'm curious to know if the average citizen even cares.
Taiwan, which surveys have found to have among the most open-minded people in Asia, share many of these same beliefs.
Certainly, exposure to Western culture is slowly eroding some of these long-held ideals.I do find it ridiculous that Sergey Brin would somehow be touched by this cause considering that the situation in China is nothing at all like the situation was in the USSR.
The Chinese government today is communist in name only.
It makes me wonder if Google isn't making all this up to avoid discussion of the real reasons for their leaving China.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30943652</id>
	<title>Re:Are you kidding?</title>
	<author>sam0737</author>
	<datestamp>1264683180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>steveb: It is my space, not just in China! Google was trying to take that. Well, nice try dude!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>steveb : It is my space , not just in China !
Google was trying to take that .
Well , nice try dude !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>steveb: It is my space, not just in China!
Google was trying to take that.
Well, nice try dude!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30938636</id>
	<title>Sorry, that is a lie</title>
	<author>SmallFurryCreature</author>
	<datestamp>1264709340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>MS is NOT selling its soul in China for revenue. You cannot sell what you do not have. Ballmer and Gates have no morals. Oh, they are not evil, that takes a commitment. They just have absolutely no moral compass whatsoever. Look at how Bill Gates does his charity work, always with an angle to somehow better MS. It is the way he thinks.
</p><p>And before you defend him, remember that is a LOT easier to have morals if you are rich. If MS pulled out of China what would happen to these two guys? Absolutely nothing. They ain't doing this to survive, they are doing it for yet another billion whose difference they will never ever notice.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>MS is NOT selling its soul in China for revenue .
You can not sell what you do not have .
Ballmer and Gates have no morals .
Oh , they are not evil , that takes a commitment .
They just have absolutely no moral compass whatsoever .
Look at how Bill Gates does his charity work , always with an angle to somehow better MS. It is the way he thinks .
And before you defend him , remember that is a LOT easier to have morals if you are rich .
If MS pulled out of China what would happen to these two guys ?
Absolutely nothing .
They ai n't doing this to survive , they are doing it for yet another billion whose difference they will never ever notice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MS is NOT selling its soul in China for revenue.
You cannot sell what you do not have.
Ballmer and Gates have no morals.
Oh, they are not evil, that takes a commitment.
They just have absolutely no moral compass whatsoever.
Look at how Bill Gates does his charity work, always with an angle to somehow better MS. It is the way he thinks.
And before you defend him, remember that is a LOT easier to have morals if you are rich.
If MS pulled out of China what would happen to these two guys?
Absolutely nothing.
They ain't doing this to survive, they are doing it for yet another billion whose difference they will never ever notice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935190</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935290</id>
	<title>Not at all like the USSR. Really!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264700760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>"nothing at all like the situation was in the USSR".  Yeah, right.  There is no similarity whatsoever between the USSR and the PRC in the restrictions on freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, and freedom of association.  Not the tiniest bit of similarity.  As different as night and day.  Chinese censorship is not at all like Soviet censorship.  Brin must be certifiably insane if he perceives a parallel between the two.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" nothing at all like the situation was in the USSR " .
Yeah , right .
There is no similarity whatsoever between the USSR and the PRC in the restrictions on freedom of speech , freedom of the press , freedom of religion , and freedom of association .
Not the tiniest bit of similarity .
As different as night and day .
Chinese censorship is not at all like Soviet censorship .
Brin must be certifiably insane if he perceives a parallel between the two .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"nothing at all like the situation was in the USSR".
Yeah, right.
There is no similarity whatsoever between the USSR and the PRC in the restrictions on freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, and freedom of association.
Not the tiniest bit of similarity.
As different as night and day.
Chinese censorship is not at all like Soviet censorship.
Brin must be certifiably insane if he perceives a parallel between the two.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30940188</id>
	<title>Re:Not at all like the USSR. Really!</title>
	<author>MaWeiTao</author>
	<datestamp>1264670580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Say what you will, but most Chinese will disagree with you.</p><p>By no means am I suggesting it's all roses in China. But it's quite a stretch to suggest that China engages in anything on the level the Soviets did. China did plenty of that in the 50s and 60s and if they were still doing it they wouldn't be enjoying this economic boom.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Say what you will , but most Chinese will disagree with you.By no means am I suggesting it 's all roses in China .
But it 's quite a stretch to suggest that China engages in anything on the level the Soviets did .
China did plenty of that in the 50s and 60s and if they were still doing it they would n't be enjoying this economic boom .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Say what you will, but most Chinese will disagree with you.By no means am I suggesting it's all roses in China.
But it's quite a stretch to suggest that China engages in anything on the level the Soviets did.
China did plenty of that in the 50s and 60s and if they were still doing it they wouldn't be enjoying this economic boom.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935290</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30937042</id>
	<title>Re:Censorship? Really?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264705680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How was that story handled?? I'd argue that's a pretty serious situation and yet, somehow the mainstream media won't touch it.</p></div><p>I certainly could be wrong, but I feel that the censorship that occurs in America by the media isn't really caused by government interference. I think it's more a matter of tribalism. People don't like to air their own dirty laundry. It's much easier to distract away from it by airing someone else's.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How was that story handled ? ?
I 'd argue that 's a pretty serious situation and yet , somehow the mainstream media wo n't touch it.I certainly could be wrong , but I feel that the censorship that occurs in America by the media is n't really caused by government interference .
I think it 's more a matter of tribalism .
People do n't like to air their own dirty laundry .
It 's much easier to distract away from it by airing someone else 's .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How was that story handled??
I'd argue that's a pretty serious situation and yet, somehow the mainstream media won't touch it.I certainly could be wrong, but I feel that the censorship that occurs in America by the media isn't really caused by government interference.
I think it's more a matter of tribalism.
People don't like to air their own dirty laundry.
It's much easier to distract away from it by airing someone else's.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30936248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30937904</id>
	<title>Re:I don't buy it.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264707660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>They'd much rather have a secure, stable society than appease to every little whim. </i></p><p>This is a fallacy. Authoritarian government do not promote secure, stable societies. They repress. They oppress. They don't allow people with grievances to air them or to hold the government accountable for their actions.</p><p>Authoritarian governments CREATE instability because they eliminate the safety valves that prevent small grievances from becoming revolts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 'd much rather have a secure , stable society than appease to every little whim .
This is a fallacy .
Authoritarian government do not promote secure , stable societies .
They repress .
They oppress .
They do n't allow people with grievances to air them or to hold the government accountable for their actions.Authoritarian governments CREATE instability because they eliminate the safety valves that prevent small grievances from becoming revolts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They'd much rather have a secure, stable society than appease to every little whim.
This is a fallacy.
Authoritarian government do not promote secure, stable societies.
They repress.
They oppress.
They don't allow people with grievances to air them or to hold the government accountable for their actions.Authoritarian governments CREATE instability because they eliminate the safety valves that prevent small grievances from becoming revolts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934916</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_28_1443224_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30938636
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935190
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_28_1443224_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934648
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934432
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_28_1443224_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30936852
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934916
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_28_1443224_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30939496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30936248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_28_1443224_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935992
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934384
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_28_1443224_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30937780
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934916
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_28_1443224_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30940560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30936824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934384
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_28_1443224_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30938040
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_28_1443224_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30941698
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934916
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_28_1443224_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30947062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934916
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_28_1443224_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_28_1443224_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30937042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30936248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_28_1443224_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30940506
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934684
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_28_1443224_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935068
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_28_1443224_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30943652
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_28_1443224_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30938546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934684
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_28_1443224_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934722
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_28_1443224_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30937904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934916
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_28_1443224_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30937562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30936248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_28_1443224_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30944876
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30936824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934384
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_28_1443224_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935234
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934684
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_28_1443224_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30940188
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935290
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934916
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_28_1443224_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934652
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_28_1443224_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30959978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934384
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_28_1443224_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30939056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935044
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_28_1443224_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934684
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_28_1443224.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934398
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934722
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934652
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_28_1443224.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935190
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30938636
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_28_1443224.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935044
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30939056
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_28_1443224.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934430
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_28_1443224.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30942956
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_28_1443224.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934432
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934648
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_28_1443224.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934916
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30941698
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30937904
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935614
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30936852
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30937780
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30947062
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935290
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30940188
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_28_1443224.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934586
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_28_1443224.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935032
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_28_1443224.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30936044
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_28_1443224.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934770
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30938040
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_28_1443224.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934584
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934942
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935068
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_28_1443224.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30952612
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_28_1443224.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934396
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30943652
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_28_1443224.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934684
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935340
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30940506
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30938546
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935234
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935842
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_28_1443224.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30934384
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935992
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30936824
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30944876
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30940560
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30959978
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_28_1443224.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30935796
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_28_1443224.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30936248
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30937042
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30937562
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_28_1443224.30939496
</commentlist>
</conversation>
