<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_05_1925203</id>
	<title>DARPA Aims for Synthetic Life With a Kill Switch</title>
	<author>ScuttleMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1265358360000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>jkinney3 writes to mention that DARPA's mad scientists have undertaken a new program designed to create synthetic organisms, complete with a "kill switch."  The project, dubbed BioDesign, is dumping $6 million into "<a href="http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/02/pentagon-looks-to-breed-immortal-synthetic-organisms-molecular-kill-switch-included/">removing the randomness of evolutionary advancement</a>" by creating genetically engineered masterpieces.  <i>"Of course, Darpa's got to prevent the super-species from being swayed to do enemy work &mdash; so they'll encode loyalty right into DNA, by developing genetically programmed locks to create 'tamper proof' cells. Plus, the synthetic organism will be traceable, using some kind of DNA manipulation, 'similar to a serial number on a handgun.' And if that doesn't work, don't worry. In case Darpa's plan somehow goes horribly awry, they're also tossing in a last-resort, genetically-coded kill switch."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>jkinney3 writes to mention that DARPA 's mad scientists have undertaken a new program designed to create synthetic organisms , complete with a " kill switch .
" The project , dubbed BioDesign , is dumping $ 6 million into " removing the randomness of evolutionary advancement " by creating genetically engineered masterpieces .
" Of course , Darpa 's got to prevent the super-species from being swayed to do enemy work    so they 'll encode loyalty right into DNA , by developing genetically programmed locks to create 'tamper proof ' cells .
Plus , the synthetic organism will be traceable , using some kind of DNA manipulation , 'similar to a serial number on a handgun .
' And if that does n't work , do n't worry .
In case Darpa 's plan somehow goes horribly awry , they 're also tossing in a last-resort , genetically-coded kill switch .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>jkinney3 writes to mention that DARPA's mad scientists have undertaken a new program designed to create synthetic organisms, complete with a "kill switch.
"  The project, dubbed BioDesign, is dumping $6 million into "removing the randomness of evolutionary advancement" by creating genetically engineered masterpieces.
"Of course, Darpa's got to prevent the super-species from being swayed to do enemy work — so they'll encode loyalty right into DNA, by developing genetically programmed locks to create 'tamper proof' cells.
Plus, the synthetic organism will be traceable, using some kind of DNA manipulation, 'similar to a serial number on a handgun.
' And if that doesn't work, don't worry.
In case Darpa's plan somehow goes horribly awry, they're also tossing in a last-resort, genetically-coded kill switch.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31041024</id>
	<title>Re:Hey, old man</title>
	<author>Sheepmage</author>
	<datestamp>1265372700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Without regulations, companies have no reason not to charge you outrageously for everything, since the cost you're willing to pay to live his virtually no limit.</p></div><p>This line of reasoning is problematic for two reasons. First, there's capitalism. In an unregulated economy, if doctor A believed that the procedure to save my life would take 2 two hours of his time and that my life was worth all the money I had in the bank <b>to me</b>, then he could try to charge me that amount. Of course, without any money to pay for food or my house or future procedures, the life I'd be living after the procedure might not be worth all that much to me, in which case I could just say "no" to the doctor. On the other hand, doctor B might realize that he could also perform the procedure, and actually leave me with enough money to live a decent life after the surgery. That doctor might also benefit from future services that he could provide me and my family, given that he didn't just bankrupt us on one procedure. In an unregulated economy, that doctor can choose to provide his service at a cost lower than doctor A, and that will likely be a better proposition for him and me (it'll also have the side effect of forcing doctor A to lower his prices in order to stay in business). With 100 doctors in the mix, prices would normally be driven down even further. Note that this is opposite the trend we're seeing in our current system (and the hypothesis for why that is the case is basically that our health care system is not unregulated, but rather, very regulated.) Note that the competition not only drives down the cost of services provided, but will also drive down the cost of the medical technology available to all of us as well.</p><p>The second reason is that there are usually multiple treatments to a given condition, all resulting in a different quality of life afterward and all requiring differing amounts of time and resources on the part of the doctor. For example, if one procedure will cure me with a 10\% chance of death, vs another with a 20\%, and the cost of the first procedure is 1000 times more than the cost of the second, who should make the decision regarding which procedure I should get? Should the doctor automatically pick the one that's in his best interest? That seems like a bad idea. Should the government be picking the option that's in its best interest? If you believe that the government should pick the option in the <i>patient's</i> best interest, how can the government, which is footing the bill, fairly decide what's in its patient's best interest when it's resources are finite and split between 100,000,000 different people? I propose that the fairest solution is to let the decision be based on the patient's values, priorities, and resources.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Without regulations , companies have no reason not to charge you outrageously for everything , since the cost you 're willing to pay to live his virtually no limit.This line of reasoning is problematic for two reasons .
First , there 's capitalism .
In an unregulated economy , if doctor A believed that the procedure to save my life would take 2 two hours of his time and that my life was worth all the money I had in the bank to me , then he could try to charge me that amount .
Of course , without any money to pay for food or my house or future procedures , the life I 'd be living after the procedure might not be worth all that much to me , in which case I could just say " no " to the doctor .
On the other hand , doctor B might realize that he could also perform the procedure , and actually leave me with enough money to live a decent life after the surgery .
That doctor might also benefit from future services that he could provide me and my family , given that he did n't just bankrupt us on one procedure .
In an unregulated economy , that doctor can choose to provide his service at a cost lower than doctor A , and that will likely be a better proposition for him and me ( it 'll also have the side effect of forcing doctor A to lower his prices in order to stay in business ) .
With 100 doctors in the mix , prices would normally be driven down even further .
Note that this is opposite the trend we 're seeing in our current system ( and the hypothesis for why that is the case is basically that our health care system is not unregulated , but rather , very regulated .
) Note that the competition not only drives down the cost of services provided , but will also drive down the cost of the medical technology available to all of us as well.The second reason is that there are usually multiple treatments to a given condition , all resulting in a different quality of life afterward and all requiring differing amounts of time and resources on the part of the doctor .
For example , if one procedure will cure me with a 10 \ % chance of death , vs another with a 20 \ % , and the cost of the first procedure is 1000 times more than the cost of the second , who should make the decision regarding which procedure I should get ?
Should the doctor automatically pick the one that 's in his best interest ?
That seems like a bad idea .
Should the government be picking the option that 's in its best interest ?
If you believe that the government should pick the option in the patient 's best interest , how can the government , which is footing the bill , fairly decide what 's in its patient 's best interest when it 's resources are finite and split between 100,000,000 different people ?
I propose that the fairest solution is to let the decision be based on the patient 's values , priorities , and resources .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Without regulations, companies have no reason not to charge you outrageously for everything, since the cost you're willing to pay to live his virtually no limit.This line of reasoning is problematic for two reasons.
First, there's capitalism.
In an unregulated economy, if doctor A believed that the procedure to save my life would take 2 two hours of his time and that my life was worth all the money I had in the bank to me, then he could try to charge me that amount.
Of course, without any money to pay for food or my house or future procedures, the life I'd be living after the procedure might not be worth all that much to me, in which case I could just say "no" to the doctor.
On the other hand, doctor B might realize that he could also perform the procedure, and actually leave me with enough money to live a decent life after the surgery.
That doctor might also benefit from future services that he could provide me and my family, given that he didn't just bankrupt us on one procedure.
In an unregulated economy, that doctor can choose to provide his service at a cost lower than doctor A, and that will likely be a better proposition for him and me (it'll also have the side effect of forcing doctor A to lower his prices in order to stay in business).
With 100 doctors in the mix, prices would normally be driven down even further.
Note that this is opposite the trend we're seeing in our current system (and the hypothesis for why that is the case is basically that our health care system is not unregulated, but rather, very regulated.
) Note that the competition not only drives down the cost of services provided, but will also drive down the cost of the medical technology available to all of us as well.The second reason is that there are usually multiple treatments to a given condition, all resulting in a different quality of life afterward and all requiring differing amounts of time and resources on the part of the doctor.
For example, if one procedure will cure me with a 10\% chance of death, vs another with a 20\%, and the cost of the first procedure is 1000 times more than the cost of the second, who should make the decision regarding which procedure I should get?
Should the doctor automatically pick the one that's in his best interest?
That seems like a bad idea.
Should the government be picking the option that's in its best interest?
If you believe that the government should pick the option in the patient's best interest, how can the government, which is footing the bill, fairly decide what's in its patient's best interest when it's resources are finite and split between 100,000,000 different people?
I propose that the fairest solution is to let the decision be based on the patient's values, priorities, and resources.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040012</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039174</id>
	<title>They named it wrong.</title>
	<author>140Mandak262Jamuna</author>
	<datestamp>1265363460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They should have named it, D.A.R.Y.L</htmltext>
<tokenext>They should have named it , D.A.R.Y.L</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They should have named it, D.A.R.Y.L</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039400</id>
	<title>Re:Does your tax money go where you want?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265364420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>U.S. government: Any amount of money for killing people (DARPA [darpa.mil]), but can't fix the terribly abusive, broken health system.</i> </p><p>It is sad that you kids today are so bad at math.</p><p>DARPA's budget is only about one percent of what we spend on Medicare and Medicaid.  Of course the U.S. government "can't fix the terribly abusive, broken health system".  They CAUSED the "terribly abusive, broken health system".  Before the government got involved, health care in the US was affordable to even the poor.  Doctors used to even come to a house if a family member was sufficiently sick and didn't feel like going to his office, for an additional cost of about 50 cents.  I have lived through the destruction of the US medical financing system, and at every step government has been the source of the problems.  Certainly the medicine is better now, but that is a function of technology, not government.</p><p>There is something supremely retarded about you kids.  You see government fail miserably at almost everything it does, yet you somehow believe the solution is more government control.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>U.S. government : Any amount of money for killing people ( DARPA [ darpa.mil ] ) , but ca n't fix the terribly abusive , broken health system .
It is sad that you kids today are so bad at math.DARPA 's budget is only about one percent of what we spend on Medicare and Medicaid .
Of course the U.S. government " ca n't fix the terribly abusive , broken health system " .
They CAUSED the " terribly abusive , broken health system " .
Before the government got involved , health care in the US was affordable to even the poor .
Doctors used to even come to a house if a family member was sufficiently sick and did n't feel like going to his office , for an additional cost of about 50 cents .
I have lived through the destruction of the US medical financing system , and at every step government has been the source of the problems .
Certainly the medicine is better now , but that is a function of technology , not government.There is something supremely retarded about you kids .
You see government fail miserably at almost everything it does , yet you somehow believe the solution is more government control .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>U.S. government: Any amount of money for killing people (DARPA [darpa.mil]), but can't fix the terribly abusive, broken health system.
It is sad that you kids today are so bad at math.DARPA's budget is only about one percent of what we spend on Medicare and Medicaid.
Of course the U.S. government "can't fix the terribly abusive, broken health system".
They CAUSED the "terribly abusive, broken health system".
Before the government got involved, health care in the US was affordable to even the poor.
Doctors used to even come to a house if a family member was sufficiently sick and didn't feel like going to his office, for an additional cost of about 50 cents.
I have lived through the destruction of the US medical financing system, and at every step government has been the source of the problems.
Certainly the medicine is better now, but that is a function of technology, not government.There is something supremely retarded about you kids.
You see government fail miserably at almost everything it does, yet you somehow believe the solution is more government control.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039130</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039054</id>
	<title>Are we mature enough as a species for this ?</title>
	<author>OldEarthResident</author>
	<datestamp>1265362920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I start seeing developments like this, I wonder if we as a species are developing faster technologically than we are maturing as a civilisation.</p><p>Are we wise enough to use such a technology, if it were developed to it's full potential ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I start seeing developments like this , I wonder if we as a species are developing faster technologically than we are maturing as a civilisation.Are we wise enough to use such a technology , if it were developed to it 's full potential ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I start seeing developments like this, I wonder if we as a species are developing faster technologically than we are maturing as a civilisation.Are we wise enough to use such a technology, if it were developed to it's full potential ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31045078</id>
	<title>Sensible</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265466360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's certainly a lot more sensible to spend money on bioengineering war monsters than on some kind of communist plot to improve health care.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's certainly a lot more sensible to spend money on bioengineering war monsters than on some kind of communist plot to improve health care .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's certainly a lot more sensible to spend money on bioengineering war monsters than on some kind of communist plot to improve health care.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31044568</id>
	<title>Re:Luckily...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265457600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The primary reason for the success of cows is the fact that the recipe for steak is encoded in their DNA. They also spend most of their usable energy towards making more steak."</p><p>Ugghh... the points you make are a bit... wrong.</p><p>You are correct of course - but only until we take into account that cows of today are a result of a long, long breeding process.</p><p>Cow's don't have the "recepie for steaks" in their DNA. They are awesome for steaks (and milk, but that's a different breed) because we have spend centuries BREEDING them to be that way (and the last decades of that were quite, quite sophisticated).</p><p>That something like that becomes "insightful" instead of "funny" is beyond me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The primary reason for the success of cows is the fact that the recipe for steak is encoded in their DNA .
They also spend most of their usable energy towards making more steak. " Ugghh.. .
the points you make are a bit... wrong.You are correct of course - but only until we take into account that cows of today are a result of a long , long breeding process.Cow 's do n't have the " recepie for steaks " in their DNA .
They are awesome for steaks ( and milk , but that 's a different breed ) because we have spend centuries BREEDING them to be that way ( and the last decades of that were quite , quite sophisticated ) .That something like that becomes " insightful " instead of " funny " is beyond me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The primary reason for the success of cows is the fact that the recipe for steak is encoded in their DNA.
They also spend most of their usable energy towards making more steak."Ugghh...
the points you make are a bit... wrong.You are correct of course - but only until we take into account that cows of today are a result of a long, long breeding process.Cow's don't have the "recepie for steaks" in their DNA.
They are awesome for steaks (and milk, but that's a different breed) because we have spend centuries BREEDING them to be that way (and the last decades of that were quite, quite sophisticated).That something like that becomes "insightful" instead of "funny" is beyond me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040576</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039090</id>
	<title>whatcouldpossiblygowrong</title>
	<author>SanityInAnarchy</author>
	<datestamp>1265363100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's the obvious tag.</p><p>Seeing as they seem to be going for something biological, I'm going to guess they'll regret <a href="http://lesswrong.com/lw/l8/conjuring\_an\_evolution\_to\_serve\_you/" title="lesswrong.com">summoning Azathoth</a> [lesswrong.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's the obvious tag.Seeing as they seem to be going for something biological , I 'm going to guess they 'll regret summoning Azathoth [ lesswrong.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's the obvious tag.Seeing as they seem to be going for something biological, I'm going to guess they'll regret summoning Azathoth [lesswrong.com].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040576</id>
	<title>Re:Luckily...</title>
	<author>paeanblack</author>
	<datestamp>1265370000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Cows haven't managed to evolve into anything other than steak.</i></p><p>There are approximately 1.5 billion cows in the world, which is orders of magnitude more than anything else in their weight class. In terms of biomass, they are one of the most successful land animals ever to exist on earth. Cow DNA will be replicating for a very long time.</p><p>The primary reason for the success of cows is the fact that the recipe for steak is encoded in their DNA. They also spend most of their usable energy towards making more steak.</p><p>Evolutionary success does not mean being on top of the food chain. High-level predators are usually, as a species, much more vulnerable to extinction.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cows have n't managed to evolve into anything other than steak.There are approximately 1.5 billion cows in the world , which is orders of magnitude more than anything else in their weight class .
In terms of biomass , they are one of the most successful land animals ever to exist on earth .
Cow DNA will be replicating for a very long time.The primary reason for the success of cows is the fact that the recipe for steak is encoded in their DNA .
They also spend most of their usable energy towards making more steak.Evolutionary success does not mean being on top of the food chain .
High-level predators are usually , as a species , much more vulnerable to extinction .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cows haven't managed to evolve into anything other than steak.There are approximately 1.5 billion cows in the world, which is orders of magnitude more than anything else in their weight class.
In terms of biomass, they are one of the most successful land animals ever to exist on earth.
Cow DNA will be replicating for a very long time.The primary reason for the success of cows is the fact that the recipe for steak is encoded in their DNA.
They also spend most of their usable energy towards making more steak.Evolutionary success does not mean being on top of the food chain.
High-level predators are usually, as a species, much more vulnerable to extinction.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039032</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31046350</id>
	<title>Say no to bio-engineered clones</title>
	<author>Yvan256</author>
	<datestamp>1265479800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Say no to bio-engineered clones, always adopt.</p><p>A message from the Society for the Protection of Humans.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Say no to bio-engineered clones , always adopt.A message from the Society for the Protection of Humans .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Say no to bio-engineered clones, always adopt.A message from the Society for the Protection of Humans.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039130</id>
	<title>Does your tax money go where you want?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265363220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>U.S. government: Any amount of money for killing people (<a href="http://www.darpa.mil/" title="darpa.mil" rel="nofollow">DARPA</a> [darpa.mil]), but can't fix the terribly abusive, broken health system.</htmltext>
<tokenext>U.S. government : Any amount of money for killing people ( DARPA [ darpa.mil ] ) , but ca n't fix the terribly abusive , broken health system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>U.S. government: Any amount of money for killing people (DARPA [darpa.mil]), but can't fix the terribly abusive, broken health system.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039456</id>
	<title>Another Typical Over Kill for A Simple Solution</title>
	<author>LifesABeach</author>
	<datestamp>1265364720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If DARPA wants to follow movie themes, maybe a light review of the SyFi Series "Caprica".  The basic concept is that when one dies, their memories are downloaded into a clone, the clone is "animated" and there you are, ready for the morning rush hour.  Arnold Schwarzenegger starred in another movie variation of this concept, "The 6th Day".  If the Bad Guys can't kill you, then elementary solvable problems like Toyota's can be effectively discounted.  But if DARPA wants to get snotty with the bad guys, then develop a Mutagen that maintains average skin tissue to be as resilent as when a person was in their early 20's.  Nothing makes a Bad Guy look ugly like a good looking victim.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If DARPA wants to follow movie themes , maybe a light review of the SyFi Series " Caprica " .
The basic concept is that when one dies , their memories are downloaded into a clone , the clone is " animated " and there you are , ready for the morning rush hour .
Arnold Schwarzenegger starred in another movie variation of this concept , " The 6th Day " .
If the Bad Guys ca n't kill you , then elementary solvable problems like Toyota 's can be effectively discounted .
But if DARPA wants to get snotty with the bad guys , then develop a Mutagen that maintains average skin tissue to be as resilent as when a person was in their early 20 's .
Nothing makes a Bad Guy look ugly like a good looking victim .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If DARPA wants to follow movie themes, maybe a light review of the SyFi Series "Caprica".
The basic concept is that when one dies, their memories are downloaded into a clone, the clone is "animated" and there you are, ready for the morning rush hour.
Arnold Schwarzenegger starred in another movie variation of this concept, "The 6th Day".
If the Bad Guys can't kill you, then elementary solvable problems like Toyota's can be effectively discounted.
But if DARPA wants to get snotty with the bad guys, then develop a Mutagen that maintains average skin tissue to be as resilent as when a person was in their early 20's.
Nothing makes a Bad Guy look ugly like a good looking victim.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039724</id>
	<title>Re:Does your tax money go where you want?</title>
	<author>Red Flayer</author>
	<datestamp>1265365920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Before the government got involved, health care in the US was affordable to even the poor.</p></div> </blockquote><p>[citation needed]<br> <br>There's a reason Medicare and Medicaid exist, and it's precisely because the poor *could NOT* afford health care.<br> <br>The idiots who look at the past through rose-colored glasses really piss me off -- there were no "good old days".  The government programs we have today were largely the result of a problem needing to be addressed.  What, you think that the magical budget fairy appeared and said, "Hey everybody!  Let's give money for health care to people who can already afford it!"</p><blockquote><div><p>There is something supremely retarded about you kids. You see government fail miserably at almost everything it does, yet you somehow believe the solution is more government control.</p></div></blockquote><p>And there is something fundamentally retarded about someone who believes that an unregulated system would result in a better outcome.  Newsflash, retard -- when entities are allowed to act completely in their own self-interest, they do so, to the detriment of others.  The insurance industry is a private tax on health care (a portion of everything lines someone's pockets).  Why shouldn't the beneficiary be the general public (via a federal system) instead of a small group of extremely wealthy people?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Before the government got involved , health care in the US was affordable to even the poor .
[ citation needed ] There 's a reason Medicare and Medicaid exist , and it 's precisely because the poor * could NOT * afford health care .
The idiots who look at the past through rose-colored glasses really piss me off -- there were no " good old days " .
The government programs we have today were largely the result of a problem needing to be addressed .
What , you think that the magical budget fairy appeared and said , " Hey everybody !
Let 's give money for health care to people who can already afford it !
" There is something supremely retarded about you kids .
You see government fail miserably at almost everything it does , yet you somehow believe the solution is more government control.And there is something fundamentally retarded about someone who believes that an unregulated system would result in a better outcome .
Newsflash , retard -- when entities are allowed to act completely in their own self-interest , they do so , to the detriment of others .
The insurance industry is a private tax on health care ( a portion of everything lines someone 's pockets ) .
Why should n't the beneficiary be the general public ( via a federal system ) instead of a small group of extremely wealthy people ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Before the government got involved, health care in the US was affordable to even the poor.
[citation needed] There's a reason Medicare and Medicaid exist, and it's precisely because the poor *could NOT* afford health care.
The idiots who look at the past through rose-colored glasses really piss me off -- there were no "good old days".
The government programs we have today were largely the result of a problem needing to be addressed.
What, you think that the magical budget fairy appeared and said, "Hey everybody!
Let's give money for health care to people who can already afford it!
"There is something supremely retarded about you kids.
You see government fail miserably at almost everything it does, yet you somehow believe the solution is more government control.And there is something fundamentally retarded about someone who believes that an unregulated system would result in a better outcome.
Newsflash, retard -- when entities are allowed to act completely in their own self-interest, they do so, to the detriment of others.
The insurance industry is a private tax on health care (a portion of everything lines someone's pockets).
Why shouldn't the beneficiary be the general public (via a federal system) instead of a small group of extremely wealthy people?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039400</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039884</id>
	<title>Re:Does your tax money go where you want?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265366760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And now we get off your lawn...</p><p>Seriously though, I wish I saw more comments like that online.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And now we get off your lawn...Seriously though , I wish I saw more comments like that online .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And now we get off your lawn...Seriously though, I wish I saw more comments like that online.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039400</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039432</id>
	<title>Re:Luckily...</title>
	<author>dkleinsc</author>
	<datestamp>1265364600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's OK. As a safeguard, we'll give these things preset kill limits.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's OK. As a safeguard , we 'll give these things preset kill limits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's OK. As a safeguard, we'll give these things preset kill limits.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040828</id>
	<title>Re:Hey, old man</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265371500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>100\% spot on. I can imagine how many Americans are going to get upset at this. But they are wrong, and the rest of the western world is right.</p><p>Why support human health through socialism when machines and artificial organisms can replace us through market forces? It costs too much to keep you alive.</p><p>But these morons are likely to exterminate their own consciousness in this very way - who needs the executive control of an ethical human consciousness when you can outsource it to Indian call centers?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>100 \ % spot on .
I can imagine how many Americans are going to get upset at this .
But they are wrong , and the rest of the western world is right.Why support human health through socialism when machines and artificial organisms can replace us through market forces ?
It costs too much to keep you alive.But these morons are likely to exterminate their own consciousness in this very way - who needs the executive control of an ethical human consciousness when you can outsource it to Indian call centers ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>100\% spot on.
I can imagine how many Americans are going to get upset at this.
But they are wrong, and the rest of the western world is right.Why support human health through socialism when machines and artificial organisms can replace us through market forces?
It costs too much to keep you alive.But these morons are likely to exterminate their own consciousness in this very way - who needs the executive control of an ethical human consciousness when you can outsource it to Indian call centers?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040012</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31041158</id>
	<title>Replicators!</title>
	<author>Mahalalel</author>
	<datestamp>1265373600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wait, didn't a genetically programmed kill switch fail to work in Stargate Atlantis?! Does Rodney know about this?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait , did n't a genetically programmed kill switch fail to work in Stargate Atlantis ? !
Does Rodney know about this ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait, didn't a genetically programmed kill switch fail to work in Stargate Atlantis?!
Does Rodney know about this?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040158</id>
	<title>Re:Junk DNA</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1265367840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Stop it with that old &ldquo;junk DNA&rdquo; hat!</p><p>That DNA is long proven not to be junk! Your information is deprecated.<br>No, those who parrot it anyway, over and over again, are not right.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Stop it with that old    junk DNA    hat ! That DNA is long proven not to be junk !
Your information is deprecated.No , those who parrot it anyway , over and over again , are not right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stop it with that old “junk DNA” hat!That DNA is long proven not to be junk!
Your information is deprecated.No, those who parrot it anyway, over and over again, are not right.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039284</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039786</id>
	<title>Re:Does your tax money go where you want?</title>
	<author>2obvious4u</author>
	<datestamp>1265366220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was going to mod you up, but the mod system only goes to 5.  This post deserves an 11.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was going to mod you up , but the mod system only goes to 5 .
This post deserves an 11 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was going to mod you up, but the mod system only goes to 5.
This post deserves an 11.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039400</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039804</id>
	<title>But...but..</title>
	<author>OpenSourced</author>
	<datestamp>1265366280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Haven't they seen ANY film at all?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have n't they seen ANY film at all ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Haven't they seen ANY film at all?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039212</id>
	<title>Dark Angel</title>
	<author>zero0ne</author>
	<datestamp>1265363640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If this synthetic life ends up looking anything like Max, am I able to place an order for a few?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If this synthetic life ends up looking anything like Max , am I able to place an order for a few ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If this synthetic life ends up looking anything like Max, am I able to place an order for a few?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039594</id>
	<title>Re:Does your tax money go where you want?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265365380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course!  Death is a vital part of evolution, and 'keeping people healthy' just gets in the way.  Us Gov't: more death for a better tomorrow!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course !
Death is a vital part of evolution , and 'keeping people healthy ' just gets in the way .
Us Gov't : more death for a better tomorrow !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course!
Death is a vital part of evolution, and 'keeping people healthy' just gets in the way.
Us Gov't: more death for a better tomorrow!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039130</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040038</id>
	<title>Re:Does your tax money go where you want?</title>
	<author>toastar</author>
	<datestamp>1265367360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FYI,<br>Darpa's Budget is about $3 Billion<br><a href="http://www.darpa.mil/Docs/FY2011PresBudget28Jan10\%20Final.pdf" title="darpa.mil" rel="nofollow">http://www.darpa.mil/Docs/FY2011PresBudget28Jan10\%20Final.pdf</a> [darpa.mil]</p><p>Just in comparison Nasa's budget is about $18 billion</p><p>The NSF (National science fund) is about $7.5-8 Billion.</p><p>Also for the cost of the bank bailout($700Billion) we could of gone to mars and back($55Billion) about 13-14 times</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FYI,Darpa 's Budget is about $ 3 Billionhttp : //www.darpa.mil/Docs/FY2011PresBudget28Jan10 \ % 20Final.pdf [ darpa.mil ] Just in comparison Nasa 's budget is about $ 18 billionThe NSF ( National science fund ) is about $ 7.5-8 Billion.Also for the cost of the bank bailout ( $ 700Billion ) we could of gone to mars and back ( $ 55Billion ) about 13-14 times</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FYI,Darpa's Budget is about $3 Billionhttp://www.darpa.mil/Docs/FY2011PresBudget28Jan10\%20Final.pdf [darpa.mil]Just in comparison Nasa's budget is about $18 billionThe NSF (National science fund) is about $7.5-8 Billion.Also for the cost of the bank bailout($700Billion) we could of gone to mars and back($55Billion) about 13-14 times</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039400</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039746</id>
	<title>What is life?</title>
	<author>dvh.tosomja</author>
	<datestamp>1265365980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What is life?<br>Sexually transmitted disease with 100\% mortality.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What is life ? Sexually transmitted disease with 100 \ % mortality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is life?Sexually transmitted disease with 100\% mortality.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31047254</id>
	<title>Re:Hey, old man</title>
	<author>BeanThere</author>
	<datestamp>1265487540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Without regulations, companies have no reason not to charge you outrageously for everything, since the cost you're willing to pay to live his virtually no limit.</p></div><p>Uh, competition?</p><p>How about starting by abolishing regulations such as those that prevent health insurers from selling their services across a state line.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Without regulations , companies have no reason not to charge you outrageously for everything , since the cost you 're willing to pay to live his virtually no limit.Uh , competition ? How about starting by abolishing regulations such as those that prevent health insurers from selling their services across a state line .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Without regulations, companies have no reason not to charge you outrageously for everything, since the cost you're willing to pay to live his virtually no limit.Uh, competition?How about starting by abolishing regulations such as those that prevent health insurers from selling their services across a state line.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040012</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040664</id>
	<title>Re:Are we mature enough as a species for this ?</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1265370360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah. I also think about the thing I've seen a BILLION TIMES in every sci-fi medium ever.</p><p>The answer is: since people have been worrying about this since the 19th century, and we haven't destroyed ourselves yet, we're perfectly fine.</p><p>Also: watch less cliched sci-fi.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah .
I also think about the thing I 've seen a BILLION TIMES in every sci-fi medium ever.The answer is : since people have been worrying about this since the 19th century , and we have n't destroyed ourselves yet , we 're perfectly fine.Also : watch less cliched sci-fi .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah.
I also think about the thing I've seen a BILLION TIMES in every sci-fi medium ever.The answer is: since people have been worrying about this since the 19th century, and we haven't destroyed ourselves yet, we're perfectly fine.Also: watch less cliched sci-fi.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039054</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039032</id>
	<title>Re:Luckily...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265362740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>History has no evidence of any organism managing to evolve away from a lethal or maladaptive feature.</p></div><p>Well, you're more right than you know. Baby seals haven't evolved to withstand harder clubs. Cows haven't managed to evolve into anything other than steak. Us humans haven't manage evolve away from war.</p><p>So yeah, I don't see why a killswitch would fail.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>History has no evidence of any organism managing to evolve away from a lethal or maladaptive feature.Well , you 're more right than you know .
Baby seals have n't evolved to withstand harder clubs .
Cows have n't managed to evolve into anything other than steak .
Us humans have n't manage evolve away from war.So yeah , I do n't see why a killswitch would fail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>History has no evidence of any organism managing to evolve away from a lethal or maladaptive feature.Well, you're more right than you know.
Baby seals haven't evolved to withstand harder clubs.
Cows haven't managed to evolve into anything other than steak.
Us humans haven't manage evolve away from war.So yeah, I don't see why a killswitch would fail.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31043964</id>
	<title>Re:Luckily...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265488260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Cows haven't managed to evolve into anything other than steak."  Thank you, monkee!  Not sure why, maybe the hangover, but that just made me laugh!  And have a fit of smokers cough!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Cows have n't managed to evolve into anything other than steak .
" Thank you , monkee !
Not sure why , maybe the hangover , but that just made me laugh !
And have a fit of smokers cough !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Cows haven't managed to evolve into anything other than steak.
"  Thank you, monkee!
Not sure why, maybe the hangover, but that just made me laugh!
And have a fit of smokers cough!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039032</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31046318</id>
	<title>Tyrell Corporation</title>
	<author>Yvan256</author>
	<datestamp>1265479500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As always, reality is catching up to fiction.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As always , reality is catching up to fiction .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As always, reality is catching up to fiction.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040132</id>
	<title>I AM synthetic life, you insensitive clod!</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1265367720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I&rsquo;m synthetic. But I&rsquo;m not without feelings.</p><p>Bishop</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I    m synthetic .
But I    m not without feelings.Bishop</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I’m synthetic.
But I’m not without feelings.Bishop</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039532</id>
	<title>Google is one of the contractors</title>
	<author>chill</author>
	<datestamp>1265365020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You don't think the "Droid Nexus One" was a simple naming mistake, do you?  How long will it take them to get to a model 6?</p><p>Can you say "I want more life, fucker"?  I knew you could!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't think the " Droid Nexus One " was a simple naming mistake , do you ?
How long will it take them to get to a model 6 ? Can you say " I want more life , fucker " ?
I knew you could !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't think the "Droid Nexus One" was a simple naming mistake, do you?
How long will it take them to get to a model 6?Can you say "I want more life, fucker"?
I knew you could!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31044102</id>
	<title>Glad they are trying to replicate me</title>
	<author>UBfusion</author>
	<datestamp>1265448840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>After reading all the comments it emerged to me that I'm not much different from this project's aims.</p><p>I am synthetic form of life, made by my mom and dad (who btw did not plan having me, and who are not alive to benefit from my existence). I have a long-term kill switch embedded my DNA and several not-immediately-lethal switches embedded in my food, my environment, my education, my society, my government and my money.</p><p>You might argue that I am a 'human' and a 'citizen', I have freedoms and human rights and constitutions and laws protecting me (from what? the kill switches?), but these do not have any effect on my kill switches.</p><p>I should be glad they are trying to replicate me, I have no brothers or sisters.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>After reading all the comments it emerged to me that I 'm not much different from this project 's aims.I am synthetic form of life , made by my mom and dad ( who btw did not plan having me , and who are not alive to benefit from my existence ) .
I have a long-term kill switch embedded my DNA and several not-immediately-lethal switches embedded in my food , my environment , my education , my society , my government and my money.You might argue that I am a 'human ' and a 'citizen ' , I have freedoms and human rights and constitutions and laws protecting me ( from what ?
the kill switches ?
) , but these do not have any effect on my kill switches.I should be glad they are trying to replicate me , I have no brothers or sisters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After reading all the comments it emerged to me that I'm not much different from this project's aims.I am synthetic form of life, made by my mom and dad (who btw did not plan having me, and who are not alive to benefit from my existence).
I have a long-term kill switch embedded my DNA and several not-immediately-lethal switches embedded in my food, my environment, my education, my society, my government and my money.You might argue that I am a 'human' and a 'citizen', I have freedoms and human rights and constitutions and laws protecting me (from what?
the kill switches?
), but these do not have any effect on my kill switches.I should be glad they are trying to replicate me, I have no brothers or sisters.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039138</id>
	<title>Re:Luckily...</title>
	<author>gr8\_phk</author>
	<datestamp>1265363280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I prefer your funny and sarcastic comment<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-) I was going to post the logical: There may be unexpected mechanisms (including mutations) that might unintentionally trigger the kill switch. Given some chance of triggering it, a life form without it is by definition more fit and darwin will select those without it (or with it damaged). This may actually be a nice lab experiment in evolutionary biology.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I prefer your funny and sarcastic comment : - ) I was going to post the logical : There may be unexpected mechanisms ( including mutations ) that might unintentionally trigger the kill switch .
Given some chance of triggering it , a life form without it is by definition more fit and darwin will select those without it ( or with it damaged ) .
This may actually be a nice lab experiment in evolutionary biology .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I prefer your funny and sarcastic comment :-) I was going to post the logical: There may be unexpected mechanisms (including mutations) that might unintentionally trigger the kill switch.
Given some chance of triggering it, a life form without it is by definition more fit and darwin will select those without it (or with it damaged).
This may actually be a nice lab experiment in evolutionary biology.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039200</id>
	<title>Uh, can you say.. Blade Runner?</title>
	<author>Timmy D Programmer</author>
	<datestamp>1265363520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sure sounds like it to me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure sounds like it to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure sounds like it to me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039628</id>
	<title>Re:Are we mature enough as a species for this ?</title>
	<author>OldEarthResident</author>
	<datestamp>1265365560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, for as long as we have a documented history.</p><p>However, over the last few decades, we have developed the ability to destroy all life on this planet. 100 years ago we couldn't do that.</p><p>And while we have matured in some ways (we have not destroyed ourselves yet in a nuclear war) I don't think we have developed far enough to wisely use some of the military technology, like this one, which we are now developing.</p><p>The effects of a nuclear war are immediate for everyone. OTOH, this technology has the potential to be silently developed until one day we find out, the hard way, that we have gone too far.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , for as long as we have a documented history.However , over the last few decades , we have developed the ability to destroy all life on this planet .
100 years ago we could n't do that.And while we have matured in some ways ( we have not destroyed ourselves yet in a nuclear war ) I do n't think we have developed far enough to wisely use some of the military technology , like this one , which we are now developing.The effects of a nuclear war are immediate for everyone .
OTOH , this technology has the potential to be silently developed until one day we find out , the hard way , that we have gone too far .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, for as long as we have a documented history.However, over the last few decades, we have developed the ability to destroy all life on this planet.
100 years ago we couldn't do that.And while we have matured in some ways (we have not destroyed ourselves yet in a nuclear war) I don't think we have developed far enough to wisely use some of the military technology, like this one, which we are now developing.The effects of a nuclear war are immediate for everyone.
OTOH, this technology has the potential to be silently developed until one day we find out, the hard way, that we have gone too far.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039316</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040070</id>
	<title>Re:Are we mature enough as a species for this ?</title>
	<author>Jeng</author>
	<datestamp>1265367540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In this case the question is will the technology be wise enough?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In this case the question is will the technology be wise enough ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In this case the question is will the technology be wise enough?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039054</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31042570</id>
	<title>Re:Hey, old man</title>
	<author>hibiki\_r</author>
	<datestamp>1265384400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's other ways to make health care cheaper without having to rely on government, but people are extremely unwilling to head that way: For example, we could take steps to make sure that the US has a number of doctors per capita that is closer to that of the rest of the western world. We could make sure that the training required to become a doctor was a whole lot cheaper. Triple the number of doctors, simplify the certifications for medical equipment, and shorten patents, and prices would go down. But as it is, we have pretty strong interest groups making sure that we need a doctor for almost any medication, and that becoming a doctor becomes a very expensive proposition that relatively few achieve.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's other ways to make health care cheaper without having to rely on government , but people are extremely unwilling to head that way : For example , we could take steps to make sure that the US has a number of doctors per capita that is closer to that of the rest of the western world .
We could make sure that the training required to become a doctor was a whole lot cheaper .
Triple the number of doctors , simplify the certifications for medical equipment , and shorten patents , and prices would go down .
But as it is , we have pretty strong interest groups making sure that we need a doctor for almost any medication , and that becoming a doctor becomes a very expensive proposition that relatively few achieve .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's other ways to make health care cheaper without having to rely on government, but people are extremely unwilling to head that way: For example, we could take steps to make sure that the US has a number of doctors per capita that is closer to that of the rest of the western world.
We could make sure that the training required to become a doctor was a whole lot cheaper.
Triple the number of doctors, simplify the certifications for medical equipment, and shorten patents, and prices would go down.
But as it is, we have pretty strong interest groups making sure that we need a doctor for almost any medication, and that becoming a doctor becomes a very expensive proposition that relatively few achieve.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040012</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040948</id>
	<title>Copying between organisms</title>
	<author>SnarfQuest</author>
	<datestamp>1265372220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I remember reading a theory that virus could copy a bit of DNA from one organism, and implant it into another. Isn't that one of the ways that they use to genetically manipulate plant DNA?</p><p>What happens if this "kill switch" get copied into our own DNA?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember reading a theory that virus could copy a bit of DNA from one organism , and implant it into another .
Is n't that one of the ways that they use to genetically manipulate plant DNA ? What happens if this " kill switch " get copied into our own DNA ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember reading a theory that virus could copy a bit of DNA from one organism, and implant it into another.
Isn't that one of the ways that they use to genetically manipulate plant DNA?What happens if this "kill switch" get copied into our own DNA?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31044068</id>
	<title>Re:Does your tax money go where you want?</title>
	<author>dangitman</author>
	<datestamp>1265448060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>There is something supremely retarded about you kids. You see government fail miserably at almost everything it does, yet you somehow believe the solution is more government control.</p></div><p>Wait, I thought it was "the kids" who were the most high on this libertarian "let's shrink government and privatize everything" kick.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is something supremely retarded about you kids .
You see government fail miserably at almost everything it does , yet you somehow believe the solution is more government control.Wait , I thought it was " the kids " who were the most high on this libertarian " let 's shrink government and privatize everything " kick .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is something supremely retarded about you kids.
You see government fail miserably at almost everything it does, yet you somehow believe the solution is more government control.Wait, I thought it was "the kids" who were the most high on this libertarian "let's shrink government and privatize everything" kick.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039400</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31042782</id>
	<title>So no gov entity or gov-employeed person ever</title>
	<author>rlglende</author>
	<datestamp>1265386380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> acts in their own interest, to the detriment of the citizens who support them?</p><p>Also, all gov entities are 'regulated', right?</p><p>In case you aren't keeping up, our government is currently engaged in an effort to assassinate a US citizen in Yemen.</p><p>http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn\_greenwald/</p><p>Doesn't seem like the regulation is working.</p><p>Also, being pedantic, 'doing good' is not the same as 'doing net good'.  It is far from clear that our society is better off today than it would have been without all of the gov assistance we have paid for.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>acts in their own interest , to the detriment of the citizens who support them ? Also , all gov entities are 'regulated ' , right ? In case you are n't keeping up , our government is currently engaged in an effort to assassinate a US citizen in Yemen.http : //www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn \ _greenwald/Does n't seem like the regulation is working.Also , being pedantic , 'doing good ' is not the same as 'doing net good' .
It is far from clear that our society is better off today than it would have been without all of the gov assistance we have paid for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> acts in their own interest, to the detriment of the citizens who support them?Also, all gov entities are 'regulated', right?In case you aren't keeping up, our government is currently engaged in an effort to assassinate a US citizen in Yemen.http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn\_greenwald/Doesn't seem like the regulation is working.Also, being pedantic, 'doing good' is not the same as 'doing net good'.
It is far from clear that our society is better off today than it would have been without all of the gov assistance we have paid for.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039724</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040006</id>
	<title>This is how it ends</title>
	<author>Latinhypercube</author>
	<datestamp>1265367240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is how it ends. Weaponized grey goo, that is only meant to fight the 'bad guys' devours the entire world. We need a moon base ASAP !</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is how it ends .
Weaponized grey goo , that is only meant to fight the 'bad guys ' devours the entire world .
We need a moon base ASAP !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is how it ends.
Weaponized grey goo, that is only meant to fight the 'bad guys' devours the entire world.
We need a moon base ASAP !</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040140</id>
	<title>Serenity?</title>
	<author>lymond01</author>
	<datestamp>1265367780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dr. Simon Tam: A phrase that's encoded in her brain, that makes her fall asleep. If I speak the words, "Eta...<br>Jayne Cobb: Well don't say it!<br>Zo&#235;: It only works on her, Jayne.<br>Jayne Cobb: Oh... Well, now I know that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dr. Simon Tam : A phrase that 's encoded in her brain , that makes her fall asleep .
If I speak the words , " Eta...Jayne Cobb : Well do n't say it ! Zo   : It only works on her , Jayne.Jayne Cobb : Oh... Well , now I know that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dr. Simon Tam: A phrase that's encoded in her brain, that makes her fall asleep.
If I speak the words, "Eta...Jayne Cobb: Well don't say it!Zoë: It only works on her, Jayne.Jayne Cobb: Oh... Well, now I know that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039278</id>
	<title>What could POSSIBLY go wrong?</title>
	<author>kheldan</author>
	<datestamp>1265363880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I see nothing good coming of this. It's like a plot from some bad made-for-TV SciFi movie -- and it'll end just as badly, if it gets off the ground at all.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I see nothing good coming of this .
It 's like a plot from some bad made-for-TV SciFi movie -- and it 'll end just as badly , if it gets off the ground at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I see nothing good coming of this.
It's like a plot from some bad made-for-TV SciFi movie -- and it'll end just as badly, if it gets off the ground at all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039096</id>
	<title>What OS would 'it' run?</title>
	<author>padrepio</author>
	<datestamp>1265363100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hello, my name is Windows SEVEN of nine.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hello , my name is Windows SEVEN of nine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hello, my name is Windows SEVEN of nine.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040034</id>
	<title>Re:Life always finds a way</title>
	<author>MrFlibbs</author>
	<datestamp>1265367300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's been quite some time since I read the book, but as I recall, the "life always finds a way" quote was created for the movie.  The mathematician in the book had a more interesting argument -- that they were trying to control a chaotic system.  He made a mathematical argument that the control mechanisms would fail because the system behavior was unpredictable.  This would lead to unexpected corner cases that would break their control system.</p><p>I think this is a more compelling argument than some philosophical notion of the inevitability of life.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's been quite some time since I read the book , but as I recall , the " life always finds a way " quote was created for the movie .
The mathematician in the book had a more interesting argument -- that they were trying to control a chaotic system .
He made a mathematical argument that the control mechanisms would fail because the system behavior was unpredictable .
This would lead to unexpected corner cases that would break their control system.I think this is a more compelling argument than some philosophical notion of the inevitability of life .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's been quite some time since I read the book, but as I recall, the "life always finds a way" quote was created for the movie.
The mathematician in the book had a more interesting argument -- that they were trying to control a chaotic system.
He made a mathematical argument that the control mechanisms would fail because the system behavior was unpredictable.
This would lead to unexpected corner cases that would break their control system.I think this is a more compelling argument than some philosophical notion of the inevitability of life.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040258</id>
	<title>What could possibly go wrong with this?</title>
	<author>dwiget001</author>
	<datestamp>1265368320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Frog DNA substituted where dinosaur DNA was missing in Jurassic Park? Yeah, Jurassic Park was fiction, of course.</p><p>However, organisms mutate, what's to prevent said organisms from mutating out the "kill switches"?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Frog DNA substituted where dinosaur DNA was missing in Jurassic Park ?
Yeah , Jurassic Park was fiction , of course.However , organisms mutate , what 's to prevent said organisms from mutating out the " kill switches " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Frog DNA substituted where dinosaur DNA was missing in Jurassic Park?
Yeah, Jurassic Park was fiction, of course.However, organisms mutate, what's to prevent said organisms from mutating out the "kill switches"?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039366</id>
	<title>The kill switch breakpoint</title>
	<author>OldOOCoboler</author>
	<datestamp>1265364300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>From what I've read no computer can model DNA behavior faster than DNA itself can manipulate a supply of proteins.  The kill switch might be there so that they can "run" massively parallel variations and use the kill switch as a sort of debug breakpoint.  But IANAMB (molecular biologist).</htmltext>
<tokenext>From what I 've read no computer can model DNA behavior faster than DNA itself can manipulate a supply of proteins .
The kill switch might be there so that they can " run " massively parallel variations and use the kill switch as a sort of debug breakpoint .
But IANAMB ( molecular biologist ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From what I've read no computer can model DNA behavior faster than DNA itself can manipulate a supply of proteins.
The kill switch might be there so that they can "run" massively parallel variations and use the kill switch as a sort of debug breakpoint.
But IANAMB (molecular biologist).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039830</id>
	<title>Are you sure you want encoded loyalty?</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1265366400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Some Muslim sects are full of people who are very loyal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Some Muslim sects are full of people who are very loyal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some Muslim sects are full of people who are very loyal.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039852</id>
	<title>kill switch eh?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265366640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>if the rest of the genetic coding goes wrong, why is the kill switch going to work?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>if the rest of the genetic coding goes wrong , why is the kill switch going to work ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if the rest of the genetic coding goes wrong, why is the kill switch going to work?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31042908</id>
	<title>Re:Does your tax money go where you want?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265387700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Why shouldn't the beneficiary be the general public (via a federal system) instead of a small group of extremely wealthy people?</i></p><p>Duh.  Because the only reason the 'general public' even exists is to support the lifestyle of the extremely wealthy people.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why should n't the beneficiary be the general public ( via a federal system ) instead of a small group of extremely wealthy people ? Duh .
Because the only reason the 'general public ' even exists is to support the lifestyle of the extremely wealthy people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why shouldn't the beneficiary be the general public (via a federal system) instead of a small group of extremely wealthy people?Duh.
Because the only reason the 'general public' even exists is to support the lifestyle of the extremely wealthy people.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039724</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039328</id>
	<title>Sieg</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265364060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Mein F&#252;hrer, I can walk!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Mein F   hrer , I can walk !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Mein Führer, I can walk!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039832</id>
	<title>Re:Does your tax money go where you want?</title>
	<author>JerryLove</author>
	<datestamp>1265366460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Before the government got involved, health care in the US was affordable to even the poor.</p></div><p> Leeching out bad humors was less expensive than an MRI is.</p><p>Of course your statement is untrue. It was a lack of available healthcare that caused medicare and medicade to be enacted to fill the gap.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>There is something supremely retarded about you kids. You see government fail miserably at almost everything it does, yet you somehow believe the solution is more government control.</p></div><p> Perhaps because we see that non-government-controlled healthcare in the US is unaffordable, and we notice that it is private healthcare charging the government those high prices. We likely also notice that things like that law that makes it illegal for medicare to bargain for cheaper drugs was written by private healthcare companies.</p><p>More likely though, we just notice that everyone else has cheaper (often by half), more effective, universal healthcare than we do.</p><p>Please feel encouraged to mod me off-topic, right after you do the same to the parent. This isn't an article on healthcare or right-wing ranting about a time that never existed.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Before the government got involved , health care in the US was affordable to even the poor .
Leeching out bad humors was less expensive than an MRI is.Of course your statement is untrue .
It was a lack of available healthcare that caused medicare and medicade to be enacted to fill the gap.There is something supremely retarded about you kids .
You see government fail miserably at almost everything it does , yet you somehow believe the solution is more government control .
Perhaps because we see that non-government-controlled healthcare in the US is unaffordable , and we notice that it is private healthcare charging the government those high prices .
We likely also notice that things like that law that makes it illegal for medicare to bargain for cheaper drugs was written by private healthcare companies.More likely though , we just notice that everyone else has cheaper ( often by half ) , more effective , universal healthcare than we do.Please feel encouraged to mod me off-topic , right after you do the same to the parent .
This is n't an article on healthcare or right-wing ranting about a time that never existed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Before the government got involved, health care in the US was affordable to even the poor.
Leeching out bad humors was less expensive than an MRI is.Of course your statement is untrue.
It was a lack of available healthcare that caused medicare and medicade to be enacted to fill the gap.There is something supremely retarded about you kids.
You see government fail miserably at almost everything it does, yet you somehow believe the solution is more government control.
Perhaps because we see that non-government-controlled healthcare in the US is unaffordable, and we notice that it is private healthcare charging the government those high prices.
We likely also notice that things like that law that makes it illegal for medicare to bargain for cheaper drugs was written by private healthcare companies.More likely though, we just notice that everyone else has cheaper (often by half), more effective, universal healthcare than we do.Please feel encouraged to mod me off-topic, right after you do the same to the parent.
This isn't an article on healthcare or right-wing ranting about a time that never existed.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039400</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039496</id>
	<title>I saw this movie</title>
	<author>Daveez</author>
	<datestamp>1265364900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I saw this movie before. It was called BladeRunner</htmltext>
<tokenext>I saw this movie before .
It was called BladeRunner</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I saw this movie before.
It was called BladeRunner</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040846</id>
	<title>I believe it's called</title>
	<author>tciny</author>
	<datestamp>1265371620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"retire", not "kill".</htmltext>
<tokenext>" retire " , not " kill " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"retire", not "kill".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040396</id>
	<title>I feel safer already</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265368980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course, the safeguards could fail. So, they will have to engineer something capable of hunting down and killing the synthetic life. Naturally, the synthetic life killing synthetic life will require even greater safeguards. Which could fail...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course , the safeguards could fail .
So , they will have to engineer something capable of hunting down and killing the synthetic life .
Naturally , the synthetic life killing synthetic life will require even greater safeguards .
Which could fail.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course, the safeguards could fail.
So, they will have to engineer something capable of hunting down and killing the synthetic life.
Naturally, the synthetic life killing synthetic life will require even greater safeguards.
Which could fail...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878</id>
	<title>Luckily...</title>
	<author>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</author>
	<datestamp>1265362080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>History has no evidence of any organism managing to evolve away from a lethal or maladaptive feature. The killswitch should persist in the population indefinitely.</htmltext>
<tokenext>History has no evidence of any organism managing to evolve away from a lethal or maladaptive feature .
The killswitch should persist in the population indefinitely .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>History has no evidence of any organism managing to evolve away from a lethal or maladaptive feature.
The killswitch should persist in the population indefinitely.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039796</id>
	<title>Re:Does your tax money go where you want?</title>
	<author>dissy</author>
	<datestamp>1265366280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Does your tax money go where you want?</p></div><p>Well my first choice of where my tax money should go is "in my pocket", but that is just my selfishness speaking.</p><p>My next choice (or my first realistic choice) is for my tax money to go to my government.</p><p>Woot, it is!  So yes, it's going where I want it.</p><p>If my tax money went to something other than our government, I'd be a little ticked possibly.</p><p>And yes, I realize you feel you are somehow entitled to claim it is still your money after it is no longer your money, and that you also feel you have some say over how not-your-money should be spent by those whose money it is...  But that is just silly talk!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does your tax money go where you want ? Well my first choice of where my tax money should go is " in my pocket " , but that is just my selfishness speaking.My next choice ( or my first realistic choice ) is for my tax money to go to my government.Woot , it is !
So yes , it 's going where I want it.If my tax money went to something other than our government , I 'd be a little ticked possibly.And yes , I realize you feel you are somehow entitled to claim it is still your money after it is no longer your money , and that you also feel you have some say over how not-your-money should be spent by those whose money it is... But that is just silly talk !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does your tax money go where you want?Well my first choice of where my tax money should go is "in my pocket", but that is just my selfishness speaking.My next choice (or my first realistic choice) is for my tax money to go to my government.Woot, it is!
So yes, it's going where I want it.If my tax money went to something other than our government, I'd be a little ticked possibly.And yes, I realize you feel you are somehow entitled to claim it is still your money after it is no longer your money, and that you also feel you have some say over how not-your-money should be spent by those whose money it is...  But that is just silly talk!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039130</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039318</id>
	<title>As they say in Deus Ex</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265364060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know your UNATCO killphrase: Laputan machine.  Take your best shot, Flatlander Woman.</p><p>WARNING: Gunther Hermann and Anna Navarre should NOT read the above text!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know your UNATCO killphrase : Laputan machine .
Take your best shot , Flatlander Woman.WARNING : Gunther Hermann and Anna Navarre should NOT read the above text !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know your UNATCO killphrase: Laputan machine.
Take your best shot, Flatlander Woman.WARNING: Gunther Hermann and Anna Navarre should NOT read the above text!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31042212</id>
	<title>Mind experiments on Mars</title>
	<author>copponex</author>
	<datestamp>1265381400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>These exercises are mostly pointless. Yes, in a perfect world we could have communism or a completely free market. But to completely destroy your first hypothetical in an instant, all you have to do is realize that there are many products which are owned by one company. Even if there wasn't a patent system, they could quite easily buy off any competition as it arises, and continue to charge whatever they like. This would make progress impossible. Nearly all alternatives would be eliminated in their infancy. <b>The market works when there is competition.</b> Sometimes you need more government regulation to foster competition, and sometimes you need less.</p><p>Your second paragraph ignores the fact that insurance companies are now doing the choosing for their patients. While there may be some good arguments for decentralizing these bureaucracies, they already exist in the insurance industry. And in your imaginary world, insurance companies would have no incentive to keep treating their most expensive clients. Just as they do now, they would find some technicality to kick them off their rolls, and rope-a-dope with lawyers until their former clients give up or die. A government bureaucrat has no reason to deny you the health care, and I think it would be trivial to anonymize any patient information that could lead to discrimination.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>I propose that the fairest solution is to let the decision be based on the patient's values, priorities, and resources.</p></div><p>The subtext to this proposal is that poor people deserve to die more than rich people. I think it's pretty obvious that most Americans disagree with this sentiment. (In fact, I'd trade any out of work blue collar employee for a thousand Paris Hiltons.) Do you really think anyone who happens to be low on money and in a car accident deserves to die?  Or that any kid without parents who comes down with the flu should be patted on the head and sent back to work?</p><p>The problem with the hardline capitalist viewpoint is that it ignores the fact that people have bad luck, that accidents happen, and fails to recognize that society is much better as a whole when everyone has a fair shake at life. I'd challenge you to find anyone even ten people who truly believe that the consequences of complete deregulation are acceptable.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>These exercises are mostly pointless .
Yes , in a perfect world we could have communism or a completely free market .
But to completely destroy your first hypothetical in an instant , all you have to do is realize that there are many products which are owned by one company .
Even if there was n't a patent system , they could quite easily buy off any competition as it arises , and continue to charge whatever they like .
This would make progress impossible .
Nearly all alternatives would be eliminated in their infancy .
The market works when there is competition .
Sometimes you need more government regulation to foster competition , and sometimes you need less.Your second paragraph ignores the fact that insurance companies are now doing the choosing for their patients .
While there may be some good arguments for decentralizing these bureaucracies , they already exist in the insurance industry .
And in your imaginary world , insurance companies would have no incentive to keep treating their most expensive clients .
Just as they do now , they would find some technicality to kick them off their rolls , and rope-a-dope with lawyers until their former clients give up or die .
A government bureaucrat has no reason to deny you the health care , and I think it would be trivial to anonymize any patient information that could lead to discrimination.I propose that the fairest solution is to let the decision be based on the patient 's values , priorities , and resources.The subtext to this proposal is that poor people deserve to die more than rich people .
I think it 's pretty obvious that most Americans disagree with this sentiment .
( In fact , I 'd trade any out of work blue collar employee for a thousand Paris Hiltons .
) Do you really think anyone who happens to be low on money and in a car accident deserves to die ?
Or that any kid without parents who comes down with the flu should be patted on the head and sent back to work ? The problem with the hardline capitalist viewpoint is that it ignores the fact that people have bad luck , that accidents happen , and fails to recognize that society is much better as a whole when everyone has a fair shake at life .
I 'd challenge you to find anyone even ten people who truly believe that the consequences of complete deregulation are acceptable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These exercises are mostly pointless.
Yes, in a perfect world we could have communism or a completely free market.
But to completely destroy your first hypothetical in an instant, all you have to do is realize that there are many products which are owned by one company.
Even if there wasn't a patent system, they could quite easily buy off any competition as it arises, and continue to charge whatever they like.
This would make progress impossible.
Nearly all alternatives would be eliminated in their infancy.
The market works when there is competition.
Sometimes you need more government regulation to foster competition, and sometimes you need less.Your second paragraph ignores the fact that insurance companies are now doing the choosing for their patients.
While there may be some good arguments for decentralizing these bureaucracies, they already exist in the insurance industry.
And in your imaginary world, insurance companies would have no incentive to keep treating their most expensive clients.
Just as they do now, they would find some technicality to kick them off their rolls, and rope-a-dope with lawyers until their former clients give up or die.
A government bureaucrat has no reason to deny you the health care, and I think it would be trivial to anonymize any patient information that could lead to discrimination.I propose that the fairest solution is to let the decision be based on the patient's values, priorities, and resources.The subtext to this proposal is that poor people deserve to die more than rich people.
I think it's pretty obvious that most Americans disagree with this sentiment.
(In fact, I'd trade any out of work blue collar employee for a thousand Paris Hiltons.
) Do you really think anyone who happens to be low on money and in a car accident deserves to die?
Or that any kid without parents who comes down with the flu should be patted on the head and sent back to work?The problem with the hardline capitalist viewpoint is that it ignores the fact that people have bad luck, that accidents happen, and fails to recognize that society is much better as a whole when everyone has a fair shake at life.
I'd challenge you to find anyone even ten people who truly believe that the consequences of complete deregulation are acceptable.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31041024</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039262</id>
	<title>Life always finds a way</title>
	<author>Faizdog</author>
	<datestamp>1265363760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Reading about that kill switch, I'm reminded about the quote from Jurassic Park about how Life always finds a way.  I'm not sure that say 20-30 years post development when we may need a kill switch that it'll still work.  Because things probably won't go haywire to the point of needing a kill switch right away.  And even if they do, if the problems get worked out and these things become more common, I don't know if the kill switch tech will be updated with each iteration to account for possible evolutionary changes and adaptations.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Reading about that kill switch , I 'm reminded about the quote from Jurassic Park about how Life always finds a way .
I 'm not sure that say 20-30 years post development when we may need a kill switch that it 'll still work .
Because things probably wo n't go haywire to the point of needing a kill switch right away .
And even if they do , if the problems get worked out and these things become more common , I do n't know if the kill switch tech will be updated with each iteration to account for possible evolutionary changes and adaptations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reading about that kill switch, I'm reminded about the quote from Jurassic Park about how Life always finds a way.
I'm not sure that say 20-30 years post development when we may need a kill switch that it'll still work.
Because things probably won't go haywire to the point of needing a kill switch right away.
And even if they do, if the problems get worked out and these things become more common, I don't know if the kill switch tech will be updated with each iteration to account for possible evolutionary changes and adaptations.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31047380</id>
	<title>Re:Does your tax money go where you want?</title>
	<author>Rexdude</author>
	<datestamp>1265488920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>when entities are allowed to act completely in their own self-interest, they do so, to the detriment of others.</p></div><p>Totally agree. Just look at 19th century factories in Europe. Back then there were no workers' rights, no labor laws, or safety regulations. It was partly in response to the abysmal working conditions that Karl Marx proposed his theories on communism and (my conjecture) the fear of losing out to total communism resulted in better laws and regulations.<br>Let companies work in total 'self interest' divorced from regulation and control and we'll go back to that scenario.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>when entities are allowed to act completely in their own self-interest , they do so , to the detriment of others.Totally agree .
Just look at 19th century factories in Europe .
Back then there were no workers ' rights , no labor laws , or safety regulations .
It was partly in response to the abysmal working conditions that Karl Marx proposed his theories on communism and ( my conjecture ) the fear of losing out to total communism resulted in better laws and regulations.Let companies work in total 'self interest ' divorced from regulation and control and we 'll go back to that scenario .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>when entities are allowed to act completely in their own self-interest, they do so, to the detriment of others.Totally agree.
Just look at 19th century factories in Europe.
Back then there were no workers' rights, no labor laws, or safety regulations.
It was partly in response to the abysmal working conditions that Karl Marx proposed his theories on communism and (my conjecture) the fear of losing out to total communism resulted in better laws and regulations.Let companies work in total 'self interest' divorced from regulation and control and we'll go back to that scenario.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039724</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039990</id>
	<title>Ye gods...</title>
	<author>Therilith</author>
	<datestamp>1265367180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There are so many things morally wrong with this, it's not even funny.<br>
How is it really any different from "creating" normal human children and implanting kill-switches?<br>
If whatever they cook up is even close to us intellectually, using it like they plan to is nothing more than slavery.<br>

You don't <i>like</i> slavery, do you, you slavery liker, you.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are so many things morally wrong with this , it 's not even funny .
How is it really any different from " creating " normal human children and implanting kill-switches ?
If whatever they cook up is even close to us intellectually , using it like they plan to is nothing more than slavery .
You do n't like slavery , do you , you slavery liker , you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are so many things morally wrong with this, it's not even funny.
How is it really any different from "creating" normal human children and implanting kill-switches?
If whatever they cook up is even close to us intellectually, using it like they plan to is nothing more than slavery.
You don't like slavery, do you, you slavery liker, you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039576</id>
	<title>Re: Luckily...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265365260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All it would take is a mutation in the 'kill switch' vital regions of the DNA to disable it. If it's not being actively used, disabling it will confer no advantage or disadvantage.</p><p>In other words: having a kill switch or not having one - either way - won't affect the organism on a daily basis. Mutations to that gene group won't be phenotypically visible until you try to activate it. Activating it applies an extreme selective pressure toward those who don't have it. Turn it on, and the mutated progeny remain.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All it would take is a mutation in the 'kill switch ' vital regions of the DNA to disable it .
If it 's not being actively used , disabling it will confer no advantage or disadvantage.In other words : having a kill switch or not having one - either way - wo n't affect the organism on a daily basis .
Mutations to that gene group wo n't be phenotypically visible until you try to activate it .
Activating it applies an extreme selective pressure toward those who do n't have it .
Turn it on , and the mutated progeny remain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All it would take is a mutation in the 'kill switch' vital regions of the DNA to disable it.
If it's not being actively used, disabling it will confer no advantage or disadvantage.In other words: having a kill switch or not having one - either way - won't affect the organism on a daily basis.
Mutations to that gene group won't be phenotypically visible until you try to activate it.
Activating it applies an extreme selective pressure toward those who don't have it.
Turn it on, and the mutated progeny remain.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039926</id>
	<title>JC Denton</title>
	<author>Suzuran</author>
	<datestamp>1265366880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Once again, Deus Ex predicts the future!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Once again , Deus Ex predicts the future !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Once again, Deus Ex predicts the future!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31041106</id>
	<title>Silly children..........</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265373120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is ridiculous. We still do not fully understand bilogical evolution, yet we are gunna give it a red-hot-go anyway.</p><p>Is it only me who can imagine unintended bilogical mechanism within this organism, that closely interact with the functions of the killswitch? Here are some examples:</p><p>a) A seperate bacteria/virus evolves to mimic/steal some of the functions via gene addition/deletion. This function then becomes a killswitch owned by the virus/bacteria. This sequence could then be injected back into healthy cells and executed. You think AIDS is bad?</p><p>b) The killswitch is eventually inadverdantly triggered within the organism autonomously via unintended biological mechanisms. This becomes a repeatable phenomena, and failing complete extinction, within an unknown period of time the organism evolves an adaption which disables the killswitch.</p><p>Dont try and convince me that we haven't evolved to avoid cancer where possible, we have. And any killswitch that has an autonomous trigger within the organism will also be bred out. When considering the entropy presented to DNA from duplication, the environment, virus's and so on - how much is it we believe we can gaurentee?</p><p>I say 99.999\% in the first generation - and it drops away rapidly from there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is ridiculous .
We still do not fully understand bilogical evolution , yet we are gunna give it a red-hot-go anyway.Is it only me who can imagine unintended bilogical mechanism within this organism , that closely interact with the functions of the killswitch ?
Here are some examples : a ) A seperate bacteria/virus evolves to mimic/steal some of the functions via gene addition/deletion .
This function then becomes a killswitch owned by the virus/bacteria .
This sequence could then be injected back into healthy cells and executed .
You think AIDS is bad ? b ) The killswitch is eventually inadverdantly triggered within the organism autonomously via unintended biological mechanisms .
This becomes a repeatable phenomena , and failing complete extinction , within an unknown period of time the organism evolves an adaption which disables the killswitch.Dont try and convince me that we have n't evolved to avoid cancer where possible , we have .
And any killswitch that has an autonomous trigger within the organism will also be bred out .
When considering the entropy presented to DNA from duplication , the environment , virus 's and so on - how much is it we believe we can gaurentee ? I say 99.999 \ % in the first generation - and it drops away rapidly from there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is ridiculous.
We still do not fully understand bilogical evolution, yet we are gunna give it a red-hot-go anyway.Is it only me who can imagine unintended bilogical mechanism within this organism, that closely interact with the functions of the killswitch?
Here are some examples:a) A seperate bacteria/virus evolves to mimic/steal some of the functions via gene addition/deletion.
This function then becomes a killswitch owned by the virus/bacteria.
This sequence could then be injected back into healthy cells and executed.
You think AIDS is bad?b) The killswitch is eventually inadverdantly triggered within the organism autonomously via unintended biological mechanisms.
This becomes a repeatable phenomena, and failing complete extinction, within an unknown period of time the organism evolves an adaption which disables the killswitch.Dont try and convince me that we haven't evolved to avoid cancer where possible, we have.
And any killswitch that has an autonomous trigger within the organism will also be bred out.
When considering the entropy presented to DNA from duplication, the environment, virus's and so on - how much is it we believe we can gaurentee?I say 99.999\% in the first generation - and it drops away rapidly from there.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039342</id>
	<title>Kay, i'm out of here</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265364180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Shits about to seriously hit the fan.<br>This move will cause others to panic, now they too will start their own programs.</p><p>Someone, somewhere is going to screw things up.   *<br>Biological war anyone?</p><p>I'm building a vault, you pay me $10,000, you'll get your own section of the vault.</p><p>* Of course, there is the chance this has already previously happened.<br>SARS is claimed as being a case where things in the lab screwed up and someone become infected.<br>Swine Flu was also apparently mishandled, the virus being recreated from a previous similar outbreak decades ago.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Shits about to seriously hit the fan.This move will cause others to panic , now they too will start their own programs.Someone , somewhere is going to screw things up .
* Biological war anyone ? I 'm building a vault , you pay me $ 10,000 , you 'll get your own section of the vault .
* Of course , there is the chance this has already previously happened.SARS is claimed as being a case where things in the lab screwed up and someone become infected.Swine Flu was also apparently mishandled , the virus being recreated from a previous similar outbreak decades ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shits about to seriously hit the fan.This move will cause others to panic, now they too will start their own programs.Someone, somewhere is going to screw things up.
*Biological war anyone?I'm building a vault, you pay me $10,000, you'll get your own section of the vault.
* Of course, there is the chance this has already previously happened.SARS is claimed as being a case where things in the lab screwed up and someone become infected.Swine Flu was also apparently mishandled, the virus being recreated from a previous similar outbreak decades ago.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039406</id>
	<title>Step one ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265364480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wouldn't this be a stage one laundry list for creating next gen bioweapons? First we want to target it and then we want to control it. There was a recent Fringe episode along a similar lines concerning targeting a toxin based on genes. The idea has been around for years but it looks like they are trying to find some one that can make their dreams come true. Most seem to think they are talking higher life forms, most jokes are about that, but it seems they are looking to control bacterial life. Something similar to the "Terminator" gene the FDA developed for crops. Create a harmful bacteria that can't reproduce more than one or two times or exposure to a chemical turns on the "Off" switch causing it to be rendered harmless. Gee how can this go wrong let me count the evolutionary ways. I know they are hoping to take evolution out of the equation but that's unlikely. I'm guessing why they are asking for synthetic life is to avoid junk DNA which could help the organisms to evolve unwanted traits. A tall order.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Would n't this be a stage one laundry list for creating next gen bioweapons ?
First we want to target it and then we want to control it .
There was a recent Fringe episode along a similar lines concerning targeting a toxin based on genes .
The idea has been around for years but it looks like they are trying to find some one that can make their dreams come true .
Most seem to think they are talking higher life forms , most jokes are about that , but it seems they are looking to control bacterial life .
Something similar to the " Terminator " gene the FDA developed for crops .
Create a harmful bacteria that ca n't reproduce more than one or two times or exposure to a chemical turns on the " Off " switch causing it to be rendered harmless .
Gee how can this go wrong let me count the evolutionary ways .
I know they are hoping to take evolution out of the equation but that 's unlikely .
I 'm guessing why they are asking for synthetic life is to avoid junk DNA which could help the organisms to evolve unwanted traits .
A tall order .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wouldn't this be a stage one laundry list for creating next gen bioweapons?
First we want to target it and then we want to control it.
There was a recent Fringe episode along a similar lines concerning targeting a toxin based on genes.
The idea has been around for years but it looks like they are trying to find some one that can make their dreams come true.
Most seem to think they are talking higher life forms, most jokes are about that, but it seems they are looking to control bacterial life.
Something similar to the "Terminator" gene the FDA developed for crops.
Create a harmful bacteria that can't reproduce more than one or two times or exposure to a chemical turns on the "Off" switch causing it to be rendered harmless.
Gee how can this go wrong let me count the evolutionary ways.
I know they are hoping to take evolution out of the equation but that's unlikely.
I'm guessing why they are asking for synthetic life is to avoid junk DNA which could help the organisms to evolve unwanted traits.
A tall order.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31041446</id>
	<title>So, We Can't Have Stem-Cell Research, But...</title>
	<author>macs4all</author>
	<datestamp>1265375580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We can't fund Stem-Cell research and treatment to help millions of suffering in the U.S. (not to mention the rest of the world), but we can LITERALLY "play god" for a WEAPONIZED LIFE FORM?!?</htmltext>
<tokenext>We ca n't fund Stem-Cell research and treatment to help millions of suffering in the U.S. ( not to mention the rest of the world ) , but we can LITERALLY " play god " for a WEAPONIZED LIFE FORM ? !
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We can't fund Stem-Cell research and treatment to help millions of suffering in the U.S. (not to mention the rest of the world), but we can LITERALLY "play god" for a WEAPONIZED LIFE FORM?!
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039178</id>
	<title>Yea, Right after pigs fly out of my....</title>
	<author>Timmy D Programmer</author>
	<datestamp>1265363460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, maybe our new genetically superior, kill switch deactivating lords and masters just might be flying pigs small enough to come out of my butt?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , maybe our new genetically superior , kill switch deactivating lords and masters just might be flying pigs small enough to come out of my butt ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, maybe our new genetically superior, kill switch deactivating lords and masters just might be flying pigs small enough to come out of my butt?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040200</id>
	<title>Re:Junk DNA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265368020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>what about a dependency of something easily controlled.  in short, make them hardcore addicts with fatal witdhrawl.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>what about a dependency of something easily controlled .
in short , make them hardcore addicts with fatal witdhrawl .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>what about a dependency of something easily controlled.
in short, make them hardcore addicts with fatal witdhrawl.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039284</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31041436</id>
	<title>Re:Does your tax money go where you want?</title>
	<author>jwhitener</author>
	<datestamp>1265375460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/12/12/why-does-us-health-care-cost-so-much-part-iv-a-primer-on-medicare/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/12/12/why-does-us-health-care-cost-so-much-part-iv-a-primer-on-medicare/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/12/12/why-does-us-health-care-cost-so-much-part-iv-a-primer-on-medicare/</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039400</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040012</id>
	<title>Hey, old man</title>
	<author>copponex</author>
	<datestamp>1265367240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Listen. Your anecdotal claims backed up by zero statistics are surely fascinating. And I'm so excited that here in the "science" section of slashdot, hearsay is apparently super awesome.</p><p>If you want to go back to 50s medicine, you're welcome to it. People who have heart problems can die twenty years earlier. Severe forms of diabetes can go back to being lethal. Patients with mental illnesses can be lobotomized and put in a walled garden somewhere. Let's just throw out the massive advances in medical technology just so you can make some cheap, baseless, and most importantly, false political points.</p><p>Medical care is now highly specialized, with many, many fields, staffed by many different doctors, and I can guarantee you that that leading oncologists, heart surgeons, and neurosurgeons will not visit your house for an extra fifty cents. Sorry, but your childhood fantasy <b>is just a childhood fantasy</b>.</p><p>Out in the rest of civilization, the best way to cope with the increase of medical technology is to socialize it to reduce overhead. This is because it is very difficult to incentivize keeping someone healthy in a pure market. Without regulations, companies have no reason not to charge you outrageously for everything, since the cost you're willing to pay to live his virtually no limit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Listen .
Your anecdotal claims backed up by zero statistics are surely fascinating .
And I 'm so excited that here in the " science " section of slashdot , hearsay is apparently super awesome.If you want to go back to 50s medicine , you 're welcome to it .
People who have heart problems can die twenty years earlier .
Severe forms of diabetes can go back to being lethal .
Patients with mental illnesses can be lobotomized and put in a walled garden somewhere .
Let 's just throw out the massive advances in medical technology just so you can make some cheap , baseless , and most importantly , false political points.Medical care is now highly specialized , with many , many fields , staffed by many different doctors , and I can guarantee you that that leading oncologists , heart surgeons , and neurosurgeons will not visit your house for an extra fifty cents .
Sorry , but your childhood fantasy is just a childhood fantasy.Out in the rest of civilization , the best way to cope with the increase of medical technology is to socialize it to reduce overhead .
This is because it is very difficult to incentivize keeping someone healthy in a pure market .
Without regulations , companies have no reason not to charge you outrageously for everything , since the cost you 're willing to pay to live his virtually no limit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Listen.
Your anecdotal claims backed up by zero statistics are surely fascinating.
And I'm so excited that here in the "science" section of slashdot, hearsay is apparently super awesome.If you want to go back to 50s medicine, you're welcome to it.
People who have heart problems can die twenty years earlier.
Severe forms of diabetes can go back to being lethal.
Patients with mental illnesses can be lobotomized and put in a walled garden somewhere.
Let's just throw out the massive advances in medical technology just so you can make some cheap, baseless, and most importantly, false political points.Medical care is now highly specialized, with many, many fields, staffed by many different doctors, and I can guarantee you that that leading oncologists, heart surgeons, and neurosurgeons will not visit your house for an extra fifty cents.
Sorry, but your childhood fantasy is just a childhood fantasy.Out in the rest of civilization, the best way to cope with the increase of medical technology is to socialize it to reduce overhead.
This is because it is very difficult to incentivize keeping someone healthy in a pure market.
Without regulations, companies have no reason not to charge you outrageously for everything, since the cost you're willing to pay to live his virtually no limit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039400</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31047818</id>
	<title>We can call them ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265449680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We can even call them "Face Dancers!"</p><p>Eras(e)mus?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We can even call them " Face Dancers !
" Eras ( e ) mus ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We can even call them "Face Dancers!
"Eras(e)mus?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039930</id>
	<title>so...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265366880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There was this movie from 1993 called Jurassic Park... it didn't really turn out well in the end I think someone at DARPA should see it..<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...and that's all I have to say about that..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There was this movie from 1993 called Jurassic Park... it did n't really turn out well in the end I think someone at DARPA should see it.. ...and that 's all I have to say about that. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There was this movie from 1993 called Jurassic Park... it didn't really turn out well in the end I think someone at DARPA should see it.. ...and that's all I have to say about that..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039584</id>
	<title>But...</title>
	<author>Edward Teach</author>
	<datestamp>1265365260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Will they dream of electric sheep?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Will they dream of electric sheep ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Will they dream of electric sheep?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038962</id>
	<title>Re:Luckily...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265362500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>History has no evidence of any organism managing to evolve away from a lethal or maladaptive feature. The killswitch should persist in the population indefinitely.</p></div><p>As long as they don't use frog DNA, we should be fine. At least that's what Michael Crichton proved.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>History has no evidence of any organism managing to evolve away from a lethal or maladaptive feature .
The killswitch should persist in the population indefinitely.As long as they do n't use frog DNA , we should be fine .
At least that 's what Michael Crichton proved .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>History has no evidence of any organism managing to evolve away from a lethal or maladaptive feature.
The killswitch should persist in the population indefinitely.As long as they don't use frog DNA, we should be fine.
At least that's what Michael Crichton proved.
:)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039462</id>
	<title>Who'll flick the switch?</title>
	<author>vell0cet</author>
	<datestamp>1265364720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My "what could go wrong scenario" is this: If there's a killswitch, that makes it a survival imperative to not have it thrown.  If the organism wants to survive, it has two options:<br><br>1) obey and do everything the creators say.  And being human, this is likely going to be conflicting or confusing (HAL9000 anyone?)<br>2) kill the people with the finger on the switch.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My " what could go wrong scenario " is this : If there 's a killswitch , that makes it a survival imperative to not have it thrown .
If the organism wants to survive , it has two options : 1 ) obey and do everything the creators say .
And being human , this is likely going to be conflicting or confusing ( HAL9000 anyone ?
) 2 ) kill the people with the finger on the switch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My "what could go wrong scenario" is this: If there's a killswitch, that makes it a survival imperative to not have it thrown.
If the organism wants to survive, it has two options:1) obey and do everything the creators say.
And being human, this is likely going to be conflicting or confusing (HAL9000 anyone?
)2) kill the people with the finger on the switch.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039316</id>
	<title>Re:Are we mature enough as a species for this ?</title>
	<author>LWATCDR</author>
	<datestamp>1265364060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But hasn't that always been the way things worked.<br>Frankly I feel doing this on planet is about as stupid as above ground nuclear testing.<br>This is why we need a space program. Doing this kind of research on say the moon seems like a much better plan than anywhere on earth.<br>If not there maybe one of the dry valley's in the Antarctic.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But has n't that always been the way things worked.Frankly I feel doing this on planet is about as stupid as above ground nuclear testing.This is why we need a space program .
Doing this kind of research on say the moon seems like a much better plan than anywhere on earth.If not there maybe one of the dry valley 's in the Antarctic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But hasn't that always been the way things worked.Frankly I feel doing this on planet is about as stupid as above ground nuclear testing.This is why we need a space program.
Doing this kind of research on say the moon seems like a much better plan than anywhere on earth.If not there maybe one of the dry valley's in the Antarctic.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039054</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039284</id>
	<title>Junk DNA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265363880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The killswitch needs to be incorporated into critical sections of the organisms DNA to give it even a chance of working. The deadly gene needs to have a beneficial purpose, or (even without selective pressure) the section that codes for the killswitch will randomly mutate with no adverse effect on the organism.</p><p>To put it another way, a car alarm built into your rear bumper is not nearly as useful as one built into the ignition.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The killswitch needs to be incorporated into critical sections of the organisms DNA to give it even a chance of working .
The deadly gene needs to have a beneficial purpose , or ( even without selective pressure ) the section that codes for the killswitch will randomly mutate with no adverse effect on the organism.To put it another way , a car alarm built into your rear bumper is not nearly as useful as one built into the ignition .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The killswitch needs to be incorporated into critical sections of the organisms DNA to give it even a chance of working.
The deadly gene needs to have a beneficial purpose, or (even without selective pressure) the section that codes for the killswitch will randomly mutate with no adverse effect on the organism.To put it another way, a car alarm built into your rear bumper is not nearly as useful as one built into the ignition.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039414</id>
	<title>The first thing that comes to my mind...</title>
	<author>McNihil</author>
	<datestamp>1265364540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>is...</p><p>Nexus 6 Roy Batty... "I want more life f....er"</p><p>Kill switch... sooner or later that life form will want to extend its life... the same as we humans do.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>is...Nexus 6 Roy Batty... " I want more life f....er " Kill switch... sooner or later that life form will want to extend its life... the same as we humans do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is...Nexus 6 Roy Batty... "I want more life f....er"Kill switch... sooner or later that life form will want to extend its life... the same as we humans do.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31066144</id>
	<title>Re:Does your tax money go where you want?</title>
	<author>thickdiick</author>
	<datestamp>1265628000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's a laudable idea, and a noble purpose, but don't FORCE people to pay for OTHER PEOPLE. That is nothing short of forcibly STEALING with the threat to use use FORCE.<br> <br>My qualm is that it's mandatory. It's good to support things that make life better for some, but please also recognize this idea's shortcomings.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a laudable idea , and a noble purpose , but do n't FORCE people to pay for OTHER PEOPLE .
That is nothing short of forcibly STEALING with the threat to use use FORCE .
My qualm is that it 's mandatory .
It 's good to support things that make life better for some , but please also recognize this idea 's shortcomings .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a laudable idea, and a noble purpose, but don't FORCE people to pay for OTHER PEOPLE.
That is nothing short of forcibly STEALING with the threat to use use FORCE.
My qualm is that it's mandatory.
It's good to support things that make life better for some, but please also recognize this idea's shortcomings.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039724</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039152</id>
	<title>Re:Luckily...</title>
	<author>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</author>
	<datestamp>1265363340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you compare their (population level) fates to those of pretty much any other large mammal, you'd see that docile deliciousness is more adaptive than pretty much any trait that won't get you a starring role in <i>Alien</i>...</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you compare their ( population level ) fates to those of pretty much any other large mammal , you 'd see that docile deliciousness is more adaptive than pretty much any trait that wo n't get you a starring role in Alien.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you compare their (population level) fates to those of pretty much any other large mammal, you'd see that docile deliciousness is more adaptive than pretty much any trait that won't get you a starring role in Alien...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039032</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31041642</id>
	<title>three flowers in a vase...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265377020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the second one is yellow</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the second one is yellow</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the second one is yellow</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039656</id>
	<title>Re:Does your tax money go where you want?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265365620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>DARPA: if you will put a kill-switch inside politicians, I am ready to send you some money by PayPal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>DARPA : if you will put a kill-switch inside politicians , I am ready to send you some money by PayPal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DARPA: if you will put a kill-switch inside politicians, I am ready to send you some money by PayPal.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039130</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31043338</id>
	<title>Re:Does your tax money go where you want?</title>
	<author>dcollins</author>
	<datestamp>1265391900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"There is something supremely <b>retarded about you kids</b>. You see government fail miserably at almost everything it does, yet you somehow believe the solution is more government control."</p><p>Ooh, you'll have Sarah Palin to answer for that!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" There is something supremely retarded about you kids .
You see government fail miserably at almost everything it does , yet you somehow believe the solution is more government control .
" Ooh , you 'll have Sarah Palin to answer for that !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"There is something supremely retarded about you kids.
You see government fail miserably at almost everything it does, yet you somehow believe the solution is more government control.
"Ooh, you'll have Sarah Palin to answer for that!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039400</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039340</id>
	<title>Chaos will take care of it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265364120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Chaos twist the minds of these Adepts and bend them to its will all while working its way around the kill switch.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Chaos twist the minds of these Adepts and bend them to its will all while working its way around the kill switch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Chaos twist the minds of these Adepts and bend them to its will all while working its way around the kill switch.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31041632</id>
	<title>Monsanto?</title>
	<author>Lazarian</author>
	<datestamp>1265376960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I thought Monsanto already had a patent on this particular technology.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought Monsanto already had a patent on this particular technology .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought Monsanto already had a patent on this particular technology.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039568</id>
	<title>commercial intent?</title>
	<author>DaveGod</author>
	<datestamp>1265365140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I suppose this has nothing to do with commercial considerations, such as ensuring customers have to re-stock, or enforcing the payment of licensing fees?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I suppose this has nothing to do with commercial considerations , such as ensuring customers have to re-stock , or enforcing the payment of licensing fees ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I suppose this has nothing to do with commercial considerations, such as ensuring customers have to re-stock, or enforcing the payment of licensing fees?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039914</id>
	<title>Oh good</title>
	<author>mr\_josh</author>
	<datestamp>1265366820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is a really good idea.  I just can't say enough good things about this idea and the common sense in which it seems to be rooted.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a really good idea .
I just ca n't say enough good things about this idea and the common sense in which it seems to be rooted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a really good idea.
I just can't say enough good things about this idea and the common sense in which it seems to be rooted.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040044</id>
	<title>Re:Does your tax money go where you want?</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1265367360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mostly, yes.<br>darpa is critical to technological innovation and ground breaking ideas. Most will NOT be used to kill people, but be used to improve peoples lives.</p><p>Yes, we ALSO need health care but it isn't an either or concept.</p><p>Darpa, NASA, Education, Healthcare. All these things will be needed to continue to be a top player in the changing world.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mostly , yes.darpa is critical to technological innovation and ground breaking ideas .
Most will NOT be used to kill people , but be used to improve peoples lives.Yes , we ALSO need health care but it is n't an either or concept.Darpa , NASA , Education , Healthcare .
All these things will be needed to continue to be a top player in the changing world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mostly, yes.darpa is critical to technological innovation and ground breaking ideas.
Most will NOT be used to kill people, but be used to improve peoples lives.Yes, we ALSO need health care but it isn't an either or concept.Darpa, NASA, Education, Healthcare.
All these things will be needed to continue to be a top player in the changing world.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039130</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039208</id>
	<title>Cow is the host, man is the parasite</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265363580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Cows are host organisms, man is their primary parasite.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Cows are host organisms , man is their primary parasite .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cows are host organisms, man is their primary parasite.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039032</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31041510</id>
	<title>Well then...</title>
	<author>Flaming Cowpie</author>
	<datestamp>1265376060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Thanks for that heads up. I totally feel like you've things under control. After all, what could go wrong?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...go wrong.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...go wrong.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Thanks for that heads up .
I totally feel like you 've things under control .
After all , what could go wrong ?
...go wrong .
...go wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thanks for that heads up.
I totally feel like you've things under control.
After all, what could go wrong?
...go wrong.
...go wrong.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039376</id>
	<title>Monsanto</title>
	<author>dcollins</author>
	<datestamp>1265364300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So DARPA's just licensing stuff from Monsanto these days?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So DARPA 's just licensing stuff from Monsanto these days ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So DARPA's just licensing stuff from Monsanto these days?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040516</id>
	<title>Dark Angel</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265369640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As long as all the synthetic organisms are as hot as Jessica Alba, I'm pretty ok with this...</htmltext>
<tokenext>As long as all the synthetic organisms are as hot as Jessica Alba , I 'm pretty ok with this.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As long as all the synthetic organisms are as hot as Jessica Alba, I'm pretty ok with this...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31050272</id>
	<title>Re:Are we mature enough as a species for this ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265476440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Civilization ?<br>What ? Where ?<br>Don't let it get away !<br>
&nbsp; (Wait, or was that,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... 'culture'?)</p><p>As for maturity, yes, I've heard of that. It's when you stop dumping destructive chemicals in or around your biosphere. And don't do hadron-experiments near your home planet. Or do widespread, random, roulette-style genetic (ha!) 'engineering' out in the open. When you realize that collective development improves indiidual well-being and survival. It's usually accompanied by responsibility. And a preponderance of reason. And sympathy. And understanding. And mercy. And meaningful, sensible, effective action.</p><p>It depends on who is to survive the coming decades of near-total culling.Without 'maturing' ourselves into a stagnant evolutianary 'cul-de-sac'.</p><p>As Conan said (more or less) : will we survive long enough to learn ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Civilization ? What ?
Where ? Do n't let it get away !
  ( Wait , or was that , .. .
'culture ' ? ) As for maturity , yes , I 've heard of that .
It 's when you stop dumping destructive chemicals in or around your biosphere .
And do n't do hadron-experiments near your home planet .
Or do widespread , random , roulette-style genetic ( ha !
) 'engineering ' out in the open .
When you realize that collective development improves indiidual well-being and survival .
It 's usually accompanied by responsibility .
And a preponderance of reason .
And sympathy .
And understanding .
And mercy .
And meaningful , sensible , effective action.It depends on who is to survive the coming decades of near-total culling.Without 'maturing ' ourselves into a stagnant evolutianary 'cul-de-sac'.As Conan said ( more or less ) : will we survive long enough to learn ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Civilization ?What ?
Where ?Don't let it get away !
  (Wait, or was that, ...
'culture'?)As for maturity, yes, I've heard of that.
It's when you stop dumping destructive chemicals in or around your biosphere.
And don't do hadron-experiments near your home planet.
Or do widespread, random, roulette-style genetic (ha!
) 'engineering' out in the open.
When you realize that collective development improves indiidual well-being and survival.
It's usually accompanied by responsibility.
And a preponderance of reason.
And sympathy.
And understanding.
And mercy.
And meaningful, sensible, effective action.It depends on who is to survive the coming decades of near-total culling.Without 'maturing' ourselves into a stagnant evolutianary 'cul-de-sac'.As Conan said (more or less) : will we survive long enough to learn ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039054</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039434</id>
	<title>Human DNA</title>
	<author>Geert Jalink</author>
	<datestamp>1265364600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I would like them to make simulations with the basic structures of e.g. human DNA.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would like them to make simulations with the basic structures of e.g .
human DNA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would like them to make simulations with the basic structures of e.g.
human DNA.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31044906</id>
	<title>I know!</title>
	<author>(arg!)Styopa</author>
	<datestamp>1265463420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Simple, we'll just program them to die after 4 years.</p><p>If so, I hope to god that a) they name the first models Roy, Pris, Zhora, and Leon; and b) the lead developer wears really good eye-protection.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Simple , we 'll just program them to die after 4 years.If so , I hope to god that a ) they name the first models Roy , Pris , Zhora , and Leon ; and b ) the lead developer wears really good eye-protection .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Simple, we'll just program them to die after 4 years.If so, I hope to god that a) they name the first models Roy, Pris, Zhora, and Leon; and b) the lead developer wears really good eye-protection.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31044568
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040576
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31043964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039832
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039400
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31042212
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31041024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039400
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039054
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040038
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039400
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039400
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31044068
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039400
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039152
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31043338
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039400
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039796
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040158
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039284
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039786
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039400
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31066144
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039724
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039400
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040044
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31041436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039400
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039656
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039284
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040828
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039400
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31047380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039724
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039400
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040034
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039262
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31042570
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039400
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31042782
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039724
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039400
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31050272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039054
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039576
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038962
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039054
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039628
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039316
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039054
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31042908
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039724
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039400
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_1925203_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31047254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039400
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_1925203.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039852
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_1925203.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039456
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_1925203.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039926
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_1925203.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039262
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040034
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_1925203.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040516
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_1925203.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039096
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_1925203.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038878
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039032
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040576
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31044568
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039208
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31043964
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039152
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039130
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039796
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039594
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039656
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039400
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039832
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039724
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31047380
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31042782
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31066144
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31042908
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040012
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31047254
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31042570
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040828
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31041024
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31042212
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040038
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039786
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31044068
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039884
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31043338
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31041436
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040044
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039138
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31038962
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039576
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039432
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_1925203.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039178
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_1925203.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039200
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_1925203.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039284
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040200
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040158
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_1925203.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039054
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31050272
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040070
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31040664
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039316
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039628
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_1925203.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31041446
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_1925203.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039342
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_1925203.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039804
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_1925203.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039414
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_1925203.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_1925203.31039462
</commentlist>
</conversation>
