<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_15_2010230</id>
	<title>Five Years of YouTube and Forced Evolution</title>
	<author>ScuttleMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1266227160000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>NakNak writes to mention that the DailyMaverick has a feature looking back at <a href="http://www.thedailymaverick.co.za/article/2010-02-15-youtube-turns-five-hyperspaces-interweb-into-the-future">five years of YouTube</a>, some of the massive changes that have been forced through as a result of its overwhelming popularity, and what changes might be necessary going forward.  <i>"Google, which bought YouTube less than two years after it was founded for what was then considered outrageously expensive $1.65 billion, does not want Microsoft or Apple (or anybody else) to own the dominant video format. So it has become the biggest early tester of HTML5. Your browser doesn't support HTML5? Google launches its own browser, Chrome. Need to use Internet Explorer at work because that's all your IT department supports? Google launches a Chrome framework that effectively subverts IE and makes it HTML5-compatible. The final blow will be the day that YouTube switches off Flash and starts streaming only to HTML5 browsers. On that day all browsers will be HTML5 compatible or they will perish in the flames of user outrage."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>NakNak writes to mention that the DailyMaverick has a feature looking back at five years of YouTube , some of the massive changes that have been forced through as a result of its overwhelming popularity , and what changes might be necessary going forward .
" Google , which bought YouTube less than two years after it was founded for what was then considered outrageously expensive $ 1.65 billion , does not want Microsoft or Apple ( or anybody else ) to own the dominant video format .
So it has become the biggest early tester of HTML5 .
Your browser does n't support HTML5 ?
Google launches its own browser , Chrome .
Need to use Internet Explorer at work because that 's all your IT department supports ?
Google launches a Chrome framework that effectively subverts IE and makes it HTML5-compatible .
The final blow will be the day that YouTube switches off Flash and starts streaming only to HTML5 browsers .
On that day all browsers will be HTML5 compatible or they will perish in the flames of user outrage .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NakNak writes to mention that the DailyMaverick has a feature looking back at five years of YouTube, some of the massive changes that have been forced through as a result of its overwhelming popularity, and what changes might be necessary going forward.
"Google, which bought YouTube less than two years after it was founded for what was then considered outrageously expensive $1.65 billion, does not want Microsoft or Apple (or anybody else) to own the dominant video format.
So it has become the biggest early tester of HTML5.
Your browser doesn't support HTML5?
Google launches its own browser, Chrome.
Need to use Internet Explorer at work because that's all your IT department supports?
Google launches a Chrome framework that effectively subverts IE and makes it HTML5-compatible.
The final blow will be the day that YouTube switches off Flash and starts streaming only to HTML5 browsers.
On that day all browsers will be HTML5 compatible or they will perish in the flames of user outrage.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150146</id>
	<title>user outrage</title>
	<author>Khashishi</author>
	<datestamp>1266236040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think more user outrage would be focused on youtube then on the browsers if this change were made.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think more user outrage would be focused on youtube then on the browsers if this change were made .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think more user outrage would be focused on youtube then on the browsers if this change were made.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149390</id>
	<title>Ok, so that makes Three...</title>
	<author>macs4all</author>
	<datestamp>1266232320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Apple, Google, and <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/adobe-confirms-no-flash-in-windows-mobile-7/" title="engadget.com" rel="nofollow">now Microsoft</a> [engadget.com] (among others) have announced they won't be supporting Flash.
<br> <br>
Think it's not doomed now?<br> <br>
The industry verdict on Flash: You have wasted too many CPU cycles and therefore must DIE!<br> <br>
Good riddance. There is absolutely no reason why Flash should be such a resource hog. Adobe has become even fatter and more lazy than even Microsoft, and is about to receive a rude awakening (just like MS has been getting from Apple for the past 10 years or so).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple , Google , and now Microsoft [ engadget.com ] ( among others ) have announced they wo n't be supporting Flash .
Think it 's not doomed now ?
The industry verdict on Flash : You have wasted too many CPU cycles and therefore must DIE !
Good riddance .
There is absolutely no reason why Flash should be such a resource hog .
Adobe has become even fatter and more lazy than even Microsoft , and is about to receive a rude awakening ( just like MS has been getting from Apple for the past 10 years or so ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple, Google, and now Microsoft [engadget.com] (among others) have announced they won't be supporting Flash.
Think it's not doomed now?
The industry verdict on Flash: You have wasted too many CPU cycles and therefore must DIE!
Good riddance.
There is absolutely no reason why Flash should be such a resource hog.
Adobe has become even fatter and more lazy than even Microsoft, and is about to receive a rude awakening (just like MS has been getting from Apple for the past 10 years or so).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149444</id>
	<title>Re:User outrage more likely to be at Google</title>
	<author>baka\_toroi</author>
	<datestamp>1266232560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>User gets angry at the computer, not IE, not YouTube.</htmltext>
<tokenext>User gets angry at the computer , not IE , not YouTube .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>User gets angry at the computer, not IE, not YouTube.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31153060</id>
	<title>Re:Arrogance...</title>
	<author>CSMatt</author>
	<datestamp>1266352980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is possible to argue that AAC is displacing MP3, albeit silently.</p><p>For example, how many people who rip their CDs with iTunes actually go into the preferences and change the format from AAC to MP3?</p><p>"MP3" is synonymous with "audio" for most people.  Chances are that, especially with Windows' default hiding of extensions, they have no idea what the file is really encoded in.  And as long as they can play it, they have no reason to care.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is possible to argue that AAC is displacing MP3 , albeit silently.For example , how many people who rip their CDs with iTunes actually go into the preferences and change the format from AAC to MP3 ?
" MP3 " is synonymous with " audio " for most people .
Chances are that , especially with Windows ' default hiding of extensions , they have no idea what the file is really encoded in .
And as long as they can play it , they have no reason to care .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is possible to argue that AAC is displacing MP3, albeit silently.For example, how many people who rip their CDs with iTunes actually go into the preferences and change the format from AAC to MP3?
"MP3" is synonymous with "audio" for most people.
Chances are that, especially with Windows' default hiding of extensions, they have no idea what the file is really encoded in.
And as long as they can play it, they have no reason to care.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149400</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150304</id>
	<title>In its current form...</title>
	<author>IANAAC</author>
	<datestamp>1266237120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> <i>
I don't think HTML5 video will ever be successful, flash video/flv is very dominant.</i></p></div> </blockquote><p>
HTML5, in its current form, won't dominate until there's a way to handle ccntent the creator(s) want to protect.  Flash currently handles this.
</p><p>
I just can't imagine a site like Hulu serving any video in HTML5, knowing that any user is a right-click away from downloading their content. They're FAR too protective of their content.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think HTML5 video will ever be successful , flash video/flv is very dominant .
HTML5 , in its current form , wo n't dominate until there 's a way to handle ccntent the creator ( s ) want to protect .
Flash currently handles this .
I just ca n't imagine a site like Hulu serving any video in HTML5 , knowing that any user is a right-click away from downloading their content .
They 're FAR too protective of their content .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> 
I don't think HTML5 video will ever be successful, flash video/flv is very dominant.
HTML5, in its current form, won't dominate until there's a way to handle ccntent the creator(s) want to protect.
Flash currently handles this.
I just can't imagine a site like Hulu serving any video in HTML5, knowing that any user is a right-click away from downloading their content.
They're FAR too protective of their content.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149306</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149040</id>
	<title>Title bar color?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266230880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why is the title bar red?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is the title bar red ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is the title bar red?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149158</id>
	<title>"Accurate" Summary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266231480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"HTML5. Your browser doesn't support HTML5? Google launches its own browser, Chrome."<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...if you happen to have the Google Chrome Frame extension installed and are using Internet Explorer and opted in to HTML 5.</p><p>But why let details bother you?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" HTML5 .
Your browser does n't support HTML5 ?
Google launches its own browser , Chrome .
" ...if you happen to have the Google Chrome Frame extension installed and are using Internet Explorer and opted in to HTML 5.But why let details bother you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"HTML5.
Your browser doesn't support HTML5?
Google launches its own browser, Chrome.
" ...if you happen to have the Google Chrome Frame extension installed and are using Internet Explorer and opted in to HTML 5.But why let details bother you?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150860</id>
	<title>Re:life in the old browsers yet</title>
	<author>regular\_gonzalez</author>
	<datestamp>1266241260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2007/06/22/youtube-10-percent-of-all-internet-traffic/" title="datacenterknowledge.com">2007: Youtube accounts for 10\% of all traffic</a> [datacenterknowledge.com] <br>
<a href="http://newteevee.com/2008/04/16/comscore-video-views-up-66-yoy/" title="newteevee.com">2008: Youtube accounts for 35\% of all streaming video</a> [newteevee.com]; <a href="http://gigaom.com/2008/04/22/shocking-new-facts-about-p2p-and-broadband-usage/" title="gigaom.com">Streaming media accounts for 50\% of all internet traffic.</a> [gigaom.com] Doing the math, that puts Youtube around 12-15\% of *all* traffic.<br> <br>There's no good alternative because there's no good alternative.</htmltext>
<tokenext>2007 : Youtube accounts for 10 \ % of all traffic [ datacenterknowledge.com ] 2008 : Youtube accounts for 35 \ % of all streaming video [ newteevee.com ] ; Streaming media accounts for 50 \ % of all internet traffic .
[ gigaom.com ] Doing the math , that puts Youtube around 12-15 \ % of * all * traffic .
There 's no good alternative because there 's no good alternative .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>2007: Youtube accounts for 10\% of all traffic [datacenterknowledge.com] 
2008: Youtube accounts for 35\% of all streaming video [newteevee.com]; Streaming media accounts for 50\% of all internet traffic.
[gigaom.com] Doing the math, that puts Youtube around 12-15\% of *all* traffic.
There's no good alternative because there's no good alternative.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150116</id>
	<title>Re:User outrage more likely to be at Google</title>
	<author>maugle</author>
	<datestamp>1266235860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Google would be stupid to shut off Flash support entirely.  But there's nothing stopping them from making it increasingly more difficult to get to the Flash content, while making the "Your browser is obsolete, use one of (list of alternative browsers)!" messages increasingly larger and more annoying.<br> <br>
The end result is that Joe User doesn't get angry at YouTube for "suddenly not working", but eventually gets the message that his browser is broken and needs upgrading.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google would be stupid to shut off Flash support entirely .
But there 's nothing stopping them from making it increasingly more difficult to get to the Flash content , while making the " Your browser is obsolete , use one of ( list of alternative browsers ) !
" messages increasingly larger and more annoying .
The end result is that Joe User does n't get angry at YouTube for " suddenly not working " , but eventually gets the message that his browser is broken and needs upgrading .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google would be stupid to shut off Flash support entirely.
But there's nothing stopping them from making it increasingly more difficult to get to the Flash content, while making the "Your browser is obsolete, use one of (list of alternative browsers)!
" messages increasingly larger and more annoying.
The end result is that Joe User doesn't get angry at YouTube for "suddenly not working", but eventually gets the message that his browser is broken and needs upgrading.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149676</id>
	<title>Re:and this is how google wins</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266233520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good points, all.  But my condolences to your "Shift" key -- oh, and the period, too.  I wish them both a speedy recovery.</p><p>In case you are still able to cut and paste, please feel free to borrow some of mine in the meantime:</p><p>ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.....<br>ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.....<br>ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good points , all .
But my condolences to your " Shift " key -- oh , and the period , too .
I wish them both a speedy recovery.In case you are still able to cut and paste , please feel free to borrow some of mine in the meantime : ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ .....ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ .....ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ .... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good points, all.
But my condolences to your "Shift" key -- oh, and the period, too.
I wish them both a speedy recovery.In case you are still able to cut and paste, please feel free to borrow some of mine in the meantime:ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ .....ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ .....ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ .....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149136</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149470</id>
	<title>Re:Thanks to YouTube</title>
	<author>g0bshiTe</author>
	<datestamp>1266232680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Checking today there are 3,180 videos matching the term "lighting farts"."

<br> <br>The real question on my mind and alot of other<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.'rs is of those 3,180 videos matching the term "lighting farts" how many combined views do they have?<br> <br>Armed with that knowledge then and only then would I really begin to wonder about civilization.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Checking today there are 3,180 videos matching the term " lighting farts " .
" The real question on my mind and alot of other / .
'rs is of those 3,180 videos matching the term " lighting farts " how many combined views do they have ?
Armed with that knowledge then and only then would I really begin to wonder about civilization .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Checking today there are 3,180 videos matching the term "lighting farts".
"

 The real question on my mind and alot of other /.
'rs is of those 3,180 videos matching the term "lighting farts" how many combined views do they have?
Armed with that knowledge then and only then would I really begin to wonder about civilization.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149100</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31153312</id>
	<title>Re:and this is how google wins</title>
	<author>boxwood</author>
	<datestamp>1266312780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ummmm... isn't BluRay Disc a proprietary format? Seems to be working out ok for sony.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ummmm... is n't BluRay Disc a proprietary format ?
Seems to be working out ok for sony .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ummmm... isn't BluRay Disc a proprietary format?
Seems to be working out ok for sony.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149136</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150252</id>
	<title>Re:Arrogance...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266236820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No doubt Flash plugins for web browsers will still be around for a long time, because of the amount of Flash content already in existence.</p><p>But I don't think your analogy quite works; I don't see HTML5 vs. Flash as being the same situation as AAC, etc. vs. MP3 (and not just because HTML5 is not itself a video coding format).</p><p>To me, the key difference is that music is something you want to store, back up, copy to your iPod, and so on.  If you like it, you'll want to listen to it again and again.  Video -- especially all of that YouTube fad-of-the-day video --  is more likely to be streamed and viewed once, then forgotten, making the underlying format much less important.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No doubt Flash plugins for web browsers will still be around for a long time , because of the amount of Flash content already in existence.But I do n't think your analogy quite works ; I do n't see HTML5 vs. Flash as being the same situation as AAC , etc .
vs. MP3 ( and not just because HTML5 is not itself a video coding format ) .To me , the key difference is that music is something you want to store , back up , copy to your iPod , and so on .
If you like it , you 'll want to listen to it again and again .
Video -- especially all of that YouTube fad-of-the-day video -- is more likely to be streamed and viewed once , then forgotten , making the underlying format much less important .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No doubt Flash plugins for web browsers will still be around for a long time, because of the amount of Flash content already in existence.But I don't think your analogy quite works; I don't see HTML5 vs. Flash as being the same situation as AAC, etc.
vs. MP3 (and not just because HTML5 is not itself a video coding format).To me, the key difference is that music is something you want to store, back up, copy to your iPod, and so on.
If you like it, you'll want to listen to it again and again.
Video -- especially all of that YouTube fad-of-the-day video --  is more likely to be streamed and viewed once, then forgotten, making the underlying format much less important.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149400</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31156792</id>
	<title>Re:The new YouTube video page</title>
	<author>Randle\_Revar</author>
	<datestamp>1266344160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What are you talking about? Neither the HTML5 beta, nor the Feather beta are remotely like you describe. As rendered on-screen, the html5 version looks identical to the flash version, and the feather beta is a more minimal layout that isn't confusing at all. Neither on changes the URLs. I can't see why they would make radical test changes like that and randomly drop them on people instead of putting it in test tube.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What are you talking about ?
Neither the HTML5 beta , nor the Feather beta are remotely like you describe .
As rendered on-screen , the html5 version looks identical to the flash version , and the feather beta is a more minimal layout that is n't confusing at all .
Neither on changes the URLs .
I ca n't see why they would make radical test changes like that and randomly drop them on people instead of putting it in test tube .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What are you talking about?
Neither the HTML5 beta, nor the Feather beta are remotely like you describe.
As rendered on-screen, the html5 version looks identical to the flash version, and the feather beta is a more minimal layout that isn't confusing at all.
Neither on changes the URLs.
I can't see why they would make radical test changes like that and randomly drop them on people instead of putting it in test tube.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149820</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149792</id>
	<title>Youtube</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1266234120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have noticed a trend for companies to post 'tutorials' on sites like youtube to save their own bandwidth.  if we did suddenly lose the free video hosting, it would be a short term pain and cost some companies a bit of extra cash.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have noticed a trend for companies to post 'tutorials ' on sites like youtube to save their own bandwidth .
if we did suddenly lose the free video hosting , it would be a short term pain and cost some companies a bit of extra cash .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have noticed a trend for companies to post 'tutorials' on sites like youtube to save their own bandwidth.
if we did suddenly lose the free video hosting, it would be a short term pain and cost some companies a bit of extra cash.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149714</id>
	<title>Re:life in the old browsers yet</title>
	<author>General Wesc</author>
	<datestamp>1266233700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>While youtube is nice for idling away some downtime, it's not the internet-dominating force this article makes out. If it disappeared tomorrow, than apart from instantly increasing corporate productivity and allowing children everywhere to get their homework done on time, there wouldn't be so much of a change.

There are also (sit down, this might be a bit of a shock) lots and lots of people who rarely, if ever visit youtube.</p></div> </blockquote><p>If YouTuber viewers discover that YouTube now works on Perfectly Good Browser and not on their current browser, some of them will switch browsers, at least in their home environment. 100\%? No, but when <a href="http://www.comscore.com/Press\_Events/Press\_Releases/2009/3/YouTube\_Surpasses\_100\_Million\_US\_Viewers" title="comscore.com" rel="nofollow">just 10\% = 10 000 000 people</a> [comscore.com], it's hardly a trivial issue. Okay, maybe not a 'perish in flames' feature, but it is something of note.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>While youtube is nice for idling away some downtime , it 's not the internet-dominating force this article makes out .
If it disappeared tomorrow , than apart from instantly increasing corporate productivity and allowing children everywhere to get their homework done on time , there would n't be so much of a change .
There are also ( sit down , this might be a bit of a shock ) lots and lots of people who rarely , if ever visit youtube .
If YouTuber viewers discover that YouTube now works on Perfectly Good Browser and not on their current browser , some of them will switch browsers , at least in their home environment .
100 \ % ? No , but when just 10 \ % = 10 000 000 people [ comscore.com ] , it 's hardly a trivial issue .
Okay , maybe not a 'perish in flames ' feature , but it is something of note .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While youtube is nice for idling away some downtime, it's not the internet-dominating force this article makes out.
If it disappeared tomorrow, than apart from instantly increasing corporate productivity and allowing children everywhere to get their homework done on time, there wouldn't be so much of a change.
There are also (sit down, this might be a bit of a shock) lots and lots of people who rarely, if ever visit youtube.
If YouTuber viewers discover that YouTube now works on Perfectly Good Browser and not on their current browser, some of them will switch browsers, at least in their home environment.
100\%? No, but when just 10\% = 10 000 000 people [comscore.com], it's hardly a trivial issue.
Okay, maybe not a 'perish in flames' feature, but it is something of note.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31151590</id>
	<title>Re:But which codec?</title>
	<author>ducomputergeek</author>
	<datestamp>1266248640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Then I would be very worried if I were Mozilla.  Because if it no longer works with web videos users will flock to Chrome, Safari, Opera, or IE which are available as free downloads to them and so long as it is free as in beer, most people don't care if it's free as in opensource.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Then I would be very worried if I were Mozilla .
Because if it no longer works with web videos users will flock to Chrome , Safari , Opera , or IE which are available as free downloads to them and so long as it is free as in beer , most people do n't care if it 's free as in opensource .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then I would be very worried if I were Mozilla.
Because if it no longer works with web videos users will flock to Chrome, Safari, Opera, or IE which are available as free downloads to them and so long as it is free as in beer, most people don't care if it's free as in opensource.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149432</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150326</id>
	<title>Re:Thanks to YouTube</title>
	<author>jo42</author>
	<datestamp>1266237300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>3,180 videos matching the term "lighting farts"</p></div><p>That is why around this neck of the woods we call it IdiotTube. And American Idol is referred to as "American Idiot".</p><p>- Brought to you by the "Just say <b>No!</b> to Idiocracy" coalition.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>3,180 videos matching the term " lighting farts " That is why around this neck of the woods we call it IdiotTube .
And American Idol is referred to as " American Idiot " .- Brought to you by the " Just say No !
to Idiocracy " coalition .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>3,180 videos matching the term "lighting farts"That is why around this neck of the woods we call it IdiotTube.
And American Idol is referred to as "American Idiot".- Brought to you by the "Just say No!
to Idiocracy" coalition.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149100</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149442</id>
	<title>Re:HTML5 Video: A big No-No</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266232560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Y2K called and left the following message:</p><p>I don't think Flash video/flv will ever be successful.  RealMedia is very dominant.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Y2K called and left the following message : I do n't think Flash video/flv will ever be successful .
RealMedia is very dominant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Y2K called and left the following message:I don't think Flash video/flv will ever be successful.
RealMedia is very dominant.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149306</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31152350</id>
	<title>Re:Thanks to YouTube</title>
	<author>ArsonSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1266257700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or, i recently tore my ACL in my knee and will need it replaced:</p><p>"ACL Replacement" search: 569 videos.</p><p>some detailing actually surgeries, while others giving cgi based details on how the surgery works.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or , i recently tore my ACL in my knee and will need it replaced : " ACL Replacement " search : 569 videos.some detailing actually surgeries , while others giving cgi based details on how the surgery works .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or, i recently tore my ACL in my knee and will need it replaced:"ACL Replacement" search: 569 videos.some detailing actually surgeries, while others giving cgi based details on how the surgery works.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149100</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150298</id>
	<title>Re:Thanks to YouTube</title>
	<author>tibman</author>
	<datestamp>1266237060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It seems you've never visited 4chan then.. your wondering would cease and you'd curl up into a little ball.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems you 've never visited 4chan then.. your wondering would cease and you 'd curl up into a little ball .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems you've never visited 4chan then.. your wondering would cease and you'd curl up into a little ball.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149100</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149492</id>
	<title>I forget, but</title>
	<author>benjamindees</author>
	<datestamp>1266232800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wasn't it John Adams who said:</p><p>"I must study politics and war that my sons may have liberty to make fart lighting and Rick-roll videos."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Was n't it John Adams who said : " I must study politics and war that my sons may have liberty to make fart lighting and Rick-roll videos .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wasn't it John Adams who said:"I must study politics and war that my sons may have liberty to make fart lighting and Rick-roll videos.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149100</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31160156</id>
	<title>Re:But which codec?</title>
	<author>evilviper</author>
	<datestamp>1266314460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Mozilla, for good reasons (IMHO), is not willing to support H.264</p></div></blockquote><p>Mozilla not only refuses to support H.264, but refuses to allow it to be supported by 3rd party plug-ins as well.  Their reasons for this are most certainly NOT "good", and is all about PR.</p><p>Theora isn't going to take over the world.  The quality is terrible, and I can provide quotes from 10 of the top Open Source codec developers stating that even in theory, it can't possibly even compete with OLD codecs.  Not to mention how horrendously it is to code for.</p><p>If Mozilla wanted video in HTML5, they would have already included MJPEG with PCM audio, H.261, MPEG-1 video/Layer-2 audio, musepack, flac, speex, etc, etc.  But those weren't developed by infallible ideologues, so that's no good.  What the Mozilla team really wants is a victory for their preferred dogma.</p><p>That's not to say the H.264 side of this isn't filled with schills of a similarly contentious and irrational nature, but let's try not to bend the truth here.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Mozilla , for good reasons ( IMHO ) , is not willing to support H.264Mozilla not only refuses to support H.264 , but refuses to allow it to be supported by 3rd party plug-ins as well .
Their reasons for this are most certainly NOT " good " , and is all about PR.Theora is n't going to take over the world .
The quality is terrible , and I can provide quotes from 10 of the top Open Source codec developers stating that even in theory , it ca n't possibly even compete with OLD codecs .
Not to mention how horrendously it is to code for.If Mozilla wanted video in HTML5 , they would have already included MJPEG with PCM audio , H.261 , MPEG-1 video/Layer-2 audio , musepack , flac , speex , etc , etc .
But those were n't developed by infallible ideologues , so that 's no good .
What the Mozilla team really wants is a victory for their preferred dogma.That 's not to say the H.264 side of this is n't filled with schills of a similarly contentious and irrational nature , but let 's try not to bend the truth here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mozilla, for good reasons (IMHO), is not willing to support H.264Mozilla not only refuses to support H.264, but refuses to allow it to be supported by 3rd party plug-ins as well.
Their reasons for this are most certainly NOT "good", and is all about PR.Theora isn't going to take over the world.
The quality is terrible, and I can provide quotes from 10 of the top Open Source codec developers stating that even in theory, it can't possibly even compete with OLD codecs.
Not to mention how horrendously it is to code for.If Mozilla wanted video in HTML5, they would have already included MJPEG with PCM audio, H.261, MPEG-1 video/Layer-2 audio, musepack, flac, speex, etc, etc.
But those weren't developed by infallible ideologues, so that's no good.
What the Mozilla team really wants is a victory for their preferred dogma.That's not to say the H.264 side of this isn't filled with schills of a similarly contentious and irrational nature, but let's try not to bend the truth here.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149432</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149432</id>
	<title>But which codec?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266232500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The bigger issue is not Flash or HTML5, it's which codec implementers of HTML5 will choose to support. Mozilla, for good reasons (IMHO), is not willing to support H.264, but that seems to be the direction YouTube is heading. But as good and open as Theora is, I think don't believe there is any hardware with a Theora accelerator (yet?).</p><p>In any case, some support browsers both H.264 and Ogg Theora, some support only one, and we all know Microsoft is unlikely to support either any time soon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The bigger issue is not Flash or HTML5 , it 's which codec implementers of HTML5 will choose to support .
Mozilla , for good reasons ( IMHO ) , is not willing to support H.264 , but that seems to be the direction YouTube is heading .
But as good and open as Theora is , I think do n't believe there is any hardware with a Theora accelerator ( yet ?
) .In any case , some support browsers both H.264 and Ogg Theora , some support only one , and we all know Microsoft is unlikely to support either any time soon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The bigger issue is not Flash or HTML5, it's which codec implementers of HTML5 will choose to support.
Mozilla, for good reasons (IMHO), is not willing to support H.264, but that seems to be the direction YouTube is heading.
But as good and open as Theora is, I think don't believe there is any hardware with a Theora accelerator (yet?
).In any case, some support browsers both H.264 and Ogg Theora, some support only one, and we all know Microsoft is unlikely to support either any time soon.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150306</id>
	<title>Youtube Will Either Work On The Browser I Have Now</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266237120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>or it won't, in which case I'll use something else.  I don't have a ring in my nose, or rather, my computer doesn't have a ring in its nose that I will let anyone else lead it around by.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>or it wo n't , in which case I 'll use something else .
I do n't have a ring in my nose , or rather , my computer does n't have a ring in its nose that I will let anyone else lead it around by .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>or it won't, in which case I'll use something else.
I don't have a ring in my nose, or rather, my computer doesn't have a ring in its nose that I will let anyone else lead it around by.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149900</id>
	<title>Re:Perish</title>
	<author>madddddddddd</author>
	<datestamp>1266234600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>uh.... he didn't say perish for lack of flash, he said perish for lack of video content from the #1 provider.  iphone's come with youtube functionality installed as an icon on the homepage... something almost no other company has.</p><p>perhaps without it, apple feared they might perish.</p><p>RTFS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>uh.... he did n't say perish for lack of flash , he said perish for lack of video content from the # 1 provider .
iphone 's come with youtube functionality installed as an icon on the homepage... something almost no other company has.perhaps without it , apple feared they might perish.RTFS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>uh.... he didn't say perish for lack of flash, he said perish for lack of video content from the #1 provider.
iphone's come with youtube functionality installed as an icon on the homepage... something almost no other company has.perhaps without it, apple feared they might perish.RTFS.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149056</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149100</id>
	<title>Thanks to YouTube</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266231180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Checking today there are 3,180 videos matching the term "lighting farts".
That and people reviving Rick Astley's career. It's a fun diversion, but
you really have to wonder. About civilization.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Checking today there are 3,180 videos matching the term " lighting farts " .
That and people reviving Rick Astley 's career .
It 's a fun diversion , but you really have to wonder .
About civilization .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Checking today there are 3,180 videos matching the term "lighting farts".
That and people reviving Rick Astley's career.
It's a fun diversion, but
you really have to wonder.
About civilization.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150186</id>
	<title>Re:Thanks to YouTube</title>
	<author>boudie2</author>
	<datestamp>1266236280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>It would be too time consuming to come up with an aggregate figure, but as an example, the top rated video which is described as "a montage of various farts and fart techniques" has 5,819,116 views
Myself, I prefer the monkey riding the motorbike.
He's quite good.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It would be too time consuming to come up with an aggregate figure , but as an example , the top rated video which is described as " a montage of various farts and fart techniques " has 5,819,116 views Myself , I prefer the monkey riding the motorbike .
He 's quite good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would be too time consuming to come up with an aggregate figure, but as an example, the top rated video which is described as "a montage of various farts and fart techniques" has 5,819,116 views
Myself, I prefer the monkey riding the motorbike.
He's quite good.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149470</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149768</id>
	<title>doing no evil</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1266234060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When you chose what your customers will have or not have, calling them evil isn't a long stretch.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When you chose what your customers will have or not have , calling them evil is n't a long stretch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When you chose what your customers will have or not have, calling them evil isn't a long stretch.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149136</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149820</id>
	<title>The new YouTube video page</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266234300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been selected to try out the new YouTube video page. If that's forced evolution, then I don't want to be a part of it...</p><p>There are no normal links anywhere anymore. Whereas previously the video links were <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxxxxxxxx" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxxxxxxxx</a> [youtube.com], they are now monstrosities with a hundred characters in the URL.</p><p>It's all full of AJAX. I haven't tried disabling JS to see what happens... The layout has changed, it's confusing, and it's ugly. When the video you are watching stops, the next one starts automatically, as if it were all a giant playlist.</p><p>If you get that piece of garbage (which is a clear devolution, not an evolution), delete YouTube's cookies. I'm not sure which one was responsible; I just got rid of all of them and got normal YouTube back.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been selected to try out the new YouTube video page .
If that 's forced evolution , then I do n't want to be a part of it...There are no normal links anywhere anymore .
Whereas previously the video links were http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = xxxxxxxxx [ youtube.com ] , they are now monstrosities with a hundred characters in the URL.It 's all full of AJAX .
I have n't tried disabling JS to see what happens... The layout has changed , it 's confusing , and it 's ugly .
When the video you are watching stops , the next one starts automatically , as if it were all a giant playlist.If you get that piece of garbage ( which is a clear devolution , not an evolution ) , delete YouTube 's cookies .
I 'm not sure which one was responsible ; I just got rid of all of them and got normal YouTube back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been selected to try out the new YouTube video page.
If that's forced evolution, then I don't want to be a part of it...There are no normal links anywhere anymore.
Whereas previously the video links were http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxxxxxxxx [youtube.com], they are now monstrosities with a hundred characters in the URL.It's all full of AJAX.
I haven't tried disabling JS to see what happens... The layout has changed, it's confusing, and it's ugly.
When the video you are watching stops, the next one starts automatically, as if it were all a giant playlist.If you get that piece of garbage (which is a clear devolution, not an evolution), delete YouTube's cookies.
I'm not sure which one was responsible; I just got rid of all of them and got normal YouTube back.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149966</id>
	<title>Re:and this is how google wins</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266235020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>has any of it worked? no</p></div><p> <a href="http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=msft" title="yahoo.com" rel="nofollow">http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=msft</a> [yahoo.com]</p><p>You have a funny definition of "has not worked"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>has any of it worked ?
no http : //finance.yahoo.com/q/ks ? s = msft [ yahoo.com ] You have a funny definition of " has not worked " .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>has any of it worked?
no http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=msft [yahoo.com]You have a funny definition of "has not worked" ...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149136</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149780</id>
	<title>Re:life in the old browsers yet</title>
	<author>Kjella</author>
	<datestamp>1266234060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>While youtube is nice for idling away some downtime, it's not the internet-dominating force this article makes out. If it disappeared tomorrow, than apart from instantly increasing corporate productivity and allowing children everywhere to get their homework done on time, there wouldn't be so much of a change.</p></div><p>You're right, but there's a big difference between YouTube disappearing and YouTube not working for you. People link to YouTube all the time, be it friends or chats or blogs and even newspaper articles do that around here, it'd be like a part of Internet that is broken to you. Personally, I think moving from flash/H.264 to HTML5/H.264 is a great step forward, and those that are desperately trying to hold it back (Mozilla, Opera) just aren't achieving anything. Even if they will or can not support H.264 natively or via system codecs you can always play it in their browser via flash, no matter how little they like it. They have no force to push a change to Theora and since everybody won't support it all the providers are looking at double the systems and double the support cost, so there's no business case to motivate anyone else.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>While youtube is nice for idling away some downtime , it 's not the internet-dominating force this article makes out .
If it disappeared tomorrow , than apart from instantly increasing corporate productivity and allowing children everywhere to get their homework done on time , there would n't be so much of a change.You 're right , but there 's a big difference between YouTube disappearing and YouTube not working for you .
People link to YouTube all the time , be it friends or chats or blogs and even newspaper articles do that around here , it 'd be like a part of Internet that is broken to you .
Personally , I think moving from flash/H.264 to HTML5/H.264 is a great step forward , and those that are desperately trying to hold it back ( Mozilla , Opera ) just are n't achieving anything .
Even if they will or can not support H.264 natively or via system codecs you can always play it in their browser via flash , no matter how little they like it .
They have no force to push a change to Theora and since everybody wo n't support it all the providers are looking at double the systems and double the support cost , so there 's no business case to motivate anyone else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While youtube is nice for idling away some downtime, it's not the internet-dominating force this article makes out.
If it disappeared tomorrow, than apart from instantly increasing corporate productivity and allowing children everywhere to get their homework done on time, there wouldn't be so much of a change.You're right, but there's a big difference between YouTube disappearing and YouTube not working for you.
People link to YouTube all the time, be it friends or chats or blogs and even newspaper articles do that around here, it'd be like a part of Internet that is broken to you.
Personally, I think moving from flash/H.264 to HTML5/H.264 is a great step forward, and those that are desperately trying to hold it back (Mozilla, Opera) just aren't achieving anything.
Even if they will or can not support H.264 natively or via system codecs you can always play it in their browser via flash, no matter how little they like it.
They have no force to push a change to Theora and since everybody won't support it all the providers are looking at double the systems and double the support cost, so there's no business case to motivate anyone else.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149534</id>
	<title>Re:User outrage more likely to be at Google</title>
	<author>lordsid</author>
	<datestamp>1266232980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are you trying to say Google is afraid their trademark on youtube will run out and come out with NewYouTube in response?</p><p>Because otherwise you epically fail at analogies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you trying to say Google is afraid their trademark on youtube will run out and come out with NewYouTube in response ? Because otherwise you epically fail at analogies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you trying to say Google is afraid their trademark on youtube will run out and come out with NewYouTube in response?Because otherwise you epically fail at analogies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149366</id>
	<title>IE6 rules!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266232260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Management is going to be VERY happy that youtube will stop working with older web browsers. User productivity is going to skyrocket.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Management is going to be VERY happy that youtube will stop working with older web browsers .
User productivity is going to skyrocket .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Management is going to be VERY happy that youtube will stop working with older web browsers.
User productivity is going to skyrocket.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149306</id>
	<title>HTML5 Video: A big No-No</title>
	<author>fysdt</author>
	<datestamp>1266232080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't think HTML5 video will ever be successful, flash video/flv is very dominant.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think HTML5 video will ever be successful , flash video/flv is very dominant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think HTML5 video will ever be successful, flash video/flv is very dominant.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31151496</id>
	<title>Thought-provoking line from the article</title>
	<author>dmneoblade</author>
	<datestamp>1266247800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <em>However, there was a more fundamental problem, in the minds of some internet service providers and powerful telecommunications companies. YouTube pays for the transmission of half that awesome amount of data it serves (in theory only, in practice it's less). The other half is paid by those who receive it, by way of the telephone company used to get internet access. <b>The users may consider that fair, but the telephone companies saw the equivalent of newspapers being delivered using their vans while they see none of the advertising revenue. YouTube, and Google and Facebook and other big traffic destinations, they argued, should pay to reach those customers.</b> </em> </p><p>Now, think about this for a moment. If I am renting a van from you, paying what you asked for mileage, filling up the tank when I brought it back, etc... why should I give you more money for using it to deliver newspapers, than if I used it to pick up a couch and bring it back to my place?</p><p>Seriously, where the hell did they think up this analogy?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>However , there was a more fundamental problem , in the minds of some internet service providers and powerful telecommunications companies .
YouTube pays for the transmission of half that awesome amount of data it serves ( in theory only , in practice it 's less ) .
The other half is paid by those who receive it , by way of the telephone company used to get internet access .
The users may consider that fair , but the telephone companies saw the equivalent of newspapers being delivered using their vans while they see none of the advertising revenue .
YouTube , and Google and Facebook and other big traffic destinations , they argued , should pay to reach those customers .
Now , think about this for a moment .
If I am renting a van from you , paying what you asked for mileage , filling up the tank when I brought it back , etc... why should I give you more money for using it to deliver newspapers , than if I used it to pick up a couch and bring it back to my place ? Seriously , where the hell did they think up this analogy ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> However, there was a more fundamental problem, in the minds of some internet service providers and powerful telecommunications companies.
YouTube pays for the transmission of half that awesome amount of data it serves (in theory only, in practice it's less).
The other half is paid by those who receive it, by way of the telephone company used to get internet access.
The users may consider that fair, but the telephone companies saw the equivalent of newspapers being delivered using their vans while they see none of the advertising revenue.
YouTube, and Google and Facebook and other big traffic destinations, they argued, should pay to reach those customers.
Now, think about this for a moment.
If I am renting a van from you, paying what you asked for mileage, filling up the tank when I brought it back, etc... why should I give you more money for using it to deliver newspapers, than if I used it to pick up a couch and bring it back to my place?Seriously, where the hell did they think up this analogy?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149178</id>
	<title>Re:Perish</title>
	<author>pantherace</author>
	<datestamp>1266231480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As it is, you can view youtube on the iphone. If you couldn't, I suspect that the iphone would have gotten a lot of rage. (Don't know about other video sites)</p><p>I suspect that the vast majority of what people do with flash (intentionally, I'm not counting ads) is view video. Oh sure, there are stupid little flash games, but things like that existed before, they were Java though. True, some websites are flash only, but frankly those sites should probably die. (At least that's everyone's hope.) Indeed, trading the lack of flash games, for basically not having to deal with any of the flash ads, is essentially an ad-blocker.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As it is , you can view youtube on the iphone .
If you could n't , I suspect that the iphone would have gotten a lot of rage .
( Do n't know about other video sites ) I suspect that the vast majority of what people do with flash ( intentionally , I 'm not counting ads ) is view video .
Oh sure , there are stupid little flash games , but things like that existed before , they were Java though .
True , some websites are flash only , but frankly those sites should probably die .
( At least that 's everyone 's hope .
) Indeed , trading the lack of flash games , for basically not having to deal with any of the flash ads , is essentially an ad-blocker .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As it is, you can view youtube on the iphone.
If you couldn't, I suspect that the iphone would have gotten a lot of rage.
(Don't know about other video sites)I suspect that the vast majority of what people do with flash (intentionally, I'm not counting ads) is view video.
Oh sure, there are stupid little flash games, but things like that existed before, they were Java though.
True, some websites are flash only, but frankly those sites should probably die.
(At least that's everyone's hope.
) Indeed, trading the lack of flash games, for basically not having to deal with any of the flash ads, is essentially an ad-blocker.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149056</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31151472</id>
	<title>Re:The new YouTube video page</title>
	<author>/dev/trash</author>
	<datestamp>1266247560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Waaaaah waaaaah waaaaah I hate change.  Change sucks!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Waaaaah waaaaah waaaaah I hate change .
Change sucks !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Waaaaah waaaaah waaaaah I hate change.
Change sucks!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149820</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149154</id>
	<title>I'm trying to see what's wrong with this?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266231420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm trying to see what's wrong with this scenario, but I cannot.  Flash needs to die.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm trying to see what 's wrong with this scenario , but I can not .
Flash needs to die .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm trying to see what's wrong with this scenario, but I cannot.
Flash needs to die.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150136</id>
	<title>Re:Thanks to YouTube</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266236040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sure, there's a lot of garbage on YouTube.  But they're also a lot of great stuff.  I've been introduced to more great music on YouTube than anywhere else lately... and I don't spend much time on YouTube.   First it was <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNWJ7lbshzQ" title="youtube.com">Sigur Ros</a> [youtube.com] (incredible Icelandic ambient), then it was <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89MRWueAy4U" title="youtube.com">The Timeout Drawer</a> [youtube.com] ("space rock" with a slow build to a high crescendo), and lately <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q\_GvyJ9JBBw" title="youtube.com">Dean DiMarzo</a> [youtube.com] -- probably one of the most musically-talented high schoolers I've ever seen, a kid who does his own guitar, keyboard, drums, vocals, and mixing. Here he is <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orVGflmQ5Lo" title="youtube.com">embarrassing the parents of other kids</a> [youtube.com] while playing Boehmian Rhapsody in his high school band,  here he <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRkB3Ge3FQo" title="youtube.com">does a drum cover of Daft Punk</a> [youtube.com], and here's him <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wK2WZCLwHRA" title="youtube.com">shredding a Halo cover</a> [youtube.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure , there 's a lot of garbage on YouTube .
But they 're also a lot of great stuff .
I 've been introduced to more great music on YouTube than anywhere else lately... and I do n't spend much time on YouTube .
First it was Sigur Ros [ youtube.com ] ( incredible Icelandic ambient ) , then it was The Timeout Drawer [ youtube.com ] ( " space rock " with a slow build to a high crescendo ) , and lately Dean DiMarzo [ youtube.com ] -- probably one of the most musically-talented high schoolers I 've ever seen , a kid who does his own guitar , keyboard , drums , vocals , and mixing .
Here he is embarrassing the parents of other kids [ youtube.com ] while playing Boehmian Rhapsody in his high school band , here he does a drum cover of Daft Punk [ youtube.com ] , and here 's him shredding a Halo cover [ youtube.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure, there's a lot of garbage on YouTube.
But they're also a lot of great stuff.
I've been introduced to more great music on YouTube than anywhere else lately... and I don't spend much time on YouTube.
First it was Sigur Ros [youtube.com] (incredible Icelandic ambient), then it was The Timeout Drawer [youtube.com] ("space rock" with a slow build to a high crescendo), and lately Dean DiMarzo [youtube.com] -- probably one of the most musically-talented high schoolers I've ever seen, a kid who does his own guitar, keyboard, drums, vocals, and mixing.
Here he is embarrassing the parents of other kids [youtube.com] while playing Boehmian Rhapsody in his high school band,  here he does a drum cover of Daft Punk [youtube.com], and here's him shredding a Halo cover [youtube.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149100</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31155674</id>
	<title>Re:Thanks to YouTube</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266338820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>That and people reviving Rick Astley's career.</p> </div><p>hey that sounds interesting, got a link?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That and people reviving Rick Astley 's career .
hey that sounds interesting , got a link ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That and people reviving Rick Astley's career.
hey that sounds interesting, got a link?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149100</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31151984</id>
	<title>Re:Arrogance...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266253200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Uh, because of MP3 players that only play, you guessed it, MP3s and raw audio? Flash support on embedded devices is hit-and-miss, so it doesn't have the same grounding that MP3 does. Plus OGG has no major corporation fighting for it (although AAC and AC-3 have effectively won in a sideways way, through DVD audio), which is what Google will have. Ultimately HTML5 will replace Flash, the question is only when, and with what codec.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Uh , because of MP3 players that only play , you guessed it , MP3s and raw audio ?
Flash support on embedded devices is hit-and-miss , so it does n't have the same grounding that MP3 does .
Plus OGG has no major corporation fighting for it ( although AAC and AC-3 have effectively won in a sideways way , through DVD audio ) , which is what Google will have .
Ultimately HTML5 will replace Flash , the question is only when , and with what codec .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uh, because of MP3 players that only play, you guessed it, MP3s and raw audio?
Flash support on embedded devices is hit-and-miss, so it doesn't have the same grounding that MP3 does.
Plus OGG has no major corporation fighting for it (although AAC and AC-3 have effectively won in a sideways way, through DVD audio), which is what Google will have.
Ultimately HTML5 will replace Flash, the question is only when, and with what codec.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149400</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149168</id>
	<title>Google should work on Google stuff</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266231480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google should work on Google stuff instead of attacking Microsoft at every turn. Apple tried this for a long time. Apple attacked Nintendo, Playstation, AOL, Microsoft, etc...</p><p>When Apple finally quit the bologna and concentrated on things their customers wanted they did MUCH better (iPod, iMac, iPhone).</p><p>Maybe Google should worry about their customers instead of Microsoft?</p><p>I know focusing on customer needs is an INSANE concept to big companies today so I apologize for saying something so nutty and far-fetched.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google should work on Google stuff instead of attacking Microsoft at every turn .
Apple tried this for a long time .
Apple attacked Nintendo , Playstation , AOL , Microsoft , etc...When Apple finally quit the bologna and concentrated on things their customers wanted they did MUCH better ( iPod , iMac , iPhone ) .Maybe Google should worry about their customers instead of Microsoft ? I know focusing on customer needs is an INSANE concept to big companies today so I apologize for saying something so nutty and far-fetched .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google should work on Google stuff instead of attacking Microsoft at every turn.
Apple tried this for a long time.
Apple attacked Nintendo, Playstation, AOL, Microsoft, etc...When Apple finally quit the bologna and concentrated on things their customers wanted they did MUCH better (iPod, iMac, iPhone).Maybe Google should worry about their customers instead of Microsoft?I know focusing on customer needs is an INSANE concept to big companies today so I apologize for saying something so nutty and far-fetched.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149430</id>
	<title>Re:life in the old browsers yet</title>
	<author>tsm\_sf</author>
	<datestamp>1266232500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're not really making a distinction between people who are surfing the tubes for recreation and people who are working or studying.  If you're just kicking around, then youtube and co. are certainly optional stops.  But it's also the prime gathering point for stuff like TED talks, "man on the street" video reporting, Sagan mashups, HOWTO videos, out of circulation educational films, and so forth.  It's not really that important to have all of this hosted by YouGoogly, but it is nice to have one place to start your searching.</p><p>As far as "life changing" is concerned, I think would depend on if you're in the "funny cat" camp or the "last lecture" camp.  You may, in fact, be doing it wrong.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're not really making a distinction between people who are surfing the tubes for recreation and people who are working or studying .
If you 're just kicking around , then youtube and co. are certainly optional stops .
But it 's also the prime gathering point for stuff like TED talks , " man on the street " video reporting , Sagan mashups , HOWTO videos , out of circulation educational films , and so forth .
It 's not really that important to have all of this hosted by YouGoogly , but it is nice to have one place to start your searching.As far as " life changing " is concerned , I think would depend on if you 're in the " funny cat " camp or the " last lecture " camp .
You may , in fact , be doing it wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're not really making a distinction between people who are surfing the tubes for recreation and people who are working or studying.
If you're just kicking around, then youtube and co. are certainly optional stops.
But it's also the prime gathering point for stuff like TED talks, "man on the street" video reporting, Sagan mashups, HOWTO videos, out of circulation educational films, and so forth.
It's not really that important to have all of this hosted by YouGoogly, but it is nice to have one place to start your searching.As far as "life changing" is concerned, I think would depend on if you're in the "funny cat" camp or the "last lecture" camp.
You may, in fact, be doing it wrong.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149672</id>
	<title>Re:life in the old browsers yet</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266233460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If it disappeared tomorrow, than apart from instantly increasing corporate productivity and allowing children everywhere to get their homework done on time,</p></div><p>I know this was just a tangential joke, but I think it's worth pointing out that the lack of YouTube wouldn't mean anything with respect to productivity. People spend a certain amount of their day relaxing/spacing-out. Whether this time is "necessary" to remain happy, focused and productive, or whether it is an "unavoidable" aspect of human laziness is debatable but largely irrelevant. This "time wastage" will always happen. If it were not YouTube it would just be something else (trip to the water cooler, doing a crossword in the paper, etc.).<br> <br>

As for whether or not YouTube is an Internet-dominating force, I do agree that the world would go on without it. But that's largely because other video sites would grow to fill the vacuum left by it. Again whether it's truly good/necessary or just wasteful/unavoidable is irrelevant: people will want to watch/make/trade silly videos online.<br> <br>

But until YouTube actually disappears, it holds considerable mindshare and thus considerable clout. If YouTube makes a change in the way it works, you can bet that browser makers will take notice and adjust their product so that their users can keep accessing the site. It's not like YouTube has unilateral control over the evolution of Internet standards, but they do have a large enough user base that they can have a strong effect on how browsers work.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If it disappeared tomorrow , than apart from instantly increasing corporate productivity and allowing children everywhere to get their homework done on time,I know this was just a tangential joke , but I think it 's worth pointing out that the lack of YouTube would n't mean anything with respect to productivity .
People spend a certain amount of their day relaxing/spacing-out .
Whether this time is " necessary " to remain happy , focused and productive , or whether it is an " unavoidable " aspect of human laziness is debatable but largely irrelevant .
This " time wastage " will always happen .
If it were not YouTube it would just be something else ( trip to the water cooler , doing a crossword in the paper , etc. ) .
As for whether or not YouTube is an Internet-dominating force , I do agree that the world would go on without it .
But that 's largely because other video sites would grow to fill the vacuum left by it .
Again whether it 's truly good/necessary or just wasteful/unavoidable is irrelevant : people will want to watch/make/trade silly videos online .
But until YouTube actually disappears , it holds considerable mindshare and thus considerable clout .
If YouTube makes a change in the way it works , you can bet that browser makers will take notice and adjust their product so that their users can keep accessing the site .
It 's not like YouTube has unilateral control over the evolution of Internet standards , but they do have a large enough user base that they can have a strong effect on how browsers work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it disappeared tomorrow, than apart from instantly increasing corporate productivity and allowing children everywhere to get their homework done on time,I know this was just a tangential joke, but I think it's worth pointing out that the lack of YouTube wouldn't mean anything with respect to productivity.
People spend a certain amount of their day relaxing/spacing-out.
Whether this time is "necessary" to remain happy, focused and productive, or whether it is an "unavoidable" aspect of human laziness is debatable but largely irrelevant.
This "time wastage" will always happen.
If it were not YouTube it would just be something else (trip to the water cooler, doing a crossword in the paper, etc.).
As for whether or not YouTube is an Internet-dominating force, I do agree that the world would go on without it.
But that's largely because other video sites would grow to fill the vacuum left by it.
Again whether it's truly good/necessary or just wasteful/unavoidable is irrelevant: people will want to watch/make/trade silly videos online.
But until YouTube actually disappears, it holds considerable mindshare and thus considerable clout.
If YouTube makes a change in the way it works, you can bet that browser makers will take notice and adjust their product so that their users can keep accessing the site.
It's not like YouTube has unilateral control over the evolution of Internet standards, but they do have a large enough user base that they can have a strong effect on how browsers work.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149144</id>
	<title>If Youtube ever shuts off flv streaming...</title>
	<author>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</author>
	<datestamp>1266231360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>There won't be enough waaaambulances in the entire world to handle the mass-casualty incident at Adobe HQ...</htmltext>
<tokenext>There wo n't be enough waaaambulances in the entire world to handle the mass-casualty incident at Adobe HQ.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There won't be enough waaaambulances in the entire world to handle the mass-casualty incident at Adobe HQ...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31151712</id>
	<title>Re:The new YouTube video page</title>
	<author>FunPika</author>
	<datestamp>1266249960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In other news, there should have been a link that said something like "Return to old Youtube" in the top right area of the page to switch things back.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In other news , there should have been a link that said something like " Return to old Youtube " in the top right area of the page to switch things back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In other news, there should have been a link that said something like "Return to old Youtube" in the top right area of the page to switch things back.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149820</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31152582</id>
	<title>Well..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266259800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hate to be the voice from the darkness, but, well.. a LOT of main stream sites use Flash nowadays.<br>Unless Google or Apple or whomever wants to take control of just about any non tech savvy site that does any sort of streaming...flash won't show up on your random pad/mobile device without Flash.</p><p>Just sayin... bitch all you want about standards and what not but the world won't change overnight - and the adopters of the simple tech 'that just works' (even if it does crash now and again), dictate mainstream usage (more a looking towards the coming 'tablet wars' then cells, but the mobile handsets are quickly coming to that theater)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hate to be the voice from the darkness , but , well.. a LOT of main stream sites use Flash nowadays.Unless Google or Apple or whomever wants to take control of just about any non tech savvy site that does any sort of streaming...flash wo n't show up on your random pad/mobile device without Flash.Just sayin... bitch all you want about standards and what not but the world wo n't change overnight - and the adopters of the simple tech 'that just works ' ( even if it does crash now and again ) , dictate mainstream usage ( more a looking towards the coming 'tablet wars ' then cells , but the mobile handsets are quickly coming to that theater )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hate to be the voice from the darkness, but, well.. a LOT of main stream sites use Flash nowadays.Unless Google or Apple or whomever wants to take control of just about any non tech savvy site that does any sort of streaming...flash won't show up on your random pad/mobile device without Flash.Just sayin... bitch all you want about standards and what not but the world won't change overnight - and the adopters of the simple tech 'that just works' (even if it does crash now and again), dictate mainstream usage (more a looking towards the coming 'tablet wars' then cells, but the mobile handsets are quickly coming to that theater)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149570</id>
	<title>Re:life in the old browsers yet</title>
	<author>fm6</author>
	<datestamp>1266233100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> <i>it's not the internet-dominating force this article makes out.</i></p></div> </blockquote><p>Did you miss the part about networks being overwhelmed and major fight over who pays for the bandwidth? That's pretty major. Maybe not "dominating", but that's your word.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>If it disappeared tomorrow, than apart from instantly increasing corporate productivity and allowing children everywhere to get their homework done on time, there wouldn't be so much of a change.</p> </div><p>Have you been following the news at all over the last two years? Just a few days ago, the FDIC felt compelled to rebut corruption allegations in a viral video. Other such videos has successfully promoted or destroyed movies, more or less put ACORN out of business, and a lot more. There are niche video stars who now make a living doing with schticks that nobody would have heard of without YouTube. Meanwhile, TV ratings continue to shrink...</p><p><div class="quote"><p>There are also (sit down, this might be a bit of a shock) lots and lots of people who rarely, if ever visit youtube.</p></div><p>So? There are also lots of people who still don't have cell phones. In both cases, it's a reasonable choice, but it's not the way things are trending.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>it 's not the internet-dominating force this article makes out .
Did you miss the part about networks being overwhelmed and major fight over who pays for the bandwidth ?
That 's pretty major .
Maybe not " dominating " , but that 's your word.If it disappeared tomorrow , than apart from instantly increasing corporate productivity and allowing children everywhere to get their homework done on time , there would n't be so much of a change .
Have you been following the news at all over the last two years ?
Just a few days ago , the FDIC felt compelled to rebut corruption allegations in a viral video .
Other such videos has successfully promoted or destroyed movies , more or less put ACORN out of business , and a lot more .
There are niche video stars who now make a living doing with schticks that nobody would have heard of without YouTube .
Meanwhile , TV ratings continue to shrink...There are also ( sit down , this might be a bit of a shock ) lots and lots of people who rarely , if ever visit youtube.So ?
There are also lots of people who still do n't have cell phones .
In both cases , it 's a reasonable choice , but it 's not the way things are trending .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> it's not the internet-dominating force this article makes out.
Did you miss the part about networks being overwhelmed and major fight over who pays for the bandwidth?
That's pretty major.
Maybe not "dominating", but that's your word.If it disappeared tomorrow, than apart from instantly increasing corporate productivity and allowing children everywhere to get their homework done on time, there wouldn't be so much of a change.
Have you been following the news at all over the last two years?
Just a few days ago, the FDIC felt compelled to rebut corruption allegations in a viral video.
Other such videos has successfully promoted or destroyed movies, more or less put ACORN out of business, and a lot more.
There are niche video stars who now make a living doing with schticks that nobody would have heard of without YouTube.
Meanwhile, TV ratings continue to shrink...There are also (sit down, this might be a bit of a shock) lots and lots of people who rarely, if ever visit youtube.So?
There are also lots of people who still don't have cell phones.
In both cases, it's a reasonable choice, but it's not the way things are trending.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149888</id>
	<title>sociology of small things</title>
	<author>epine</author>
	<datestamp>1266234540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>While youtube is nice for idling away some downtime, it's not the internet-dominating force this article makes out.</p></div><p>Wow, do you ever misunderstand the calculus of adolescent outrage.  Ever joined a condo association rife with government retirees?  If you have a busy career, there's a lot of battles you aren't going to fight on time investment alone.</p><p>Teenagers don't have much clout in the adult world, but they do have a lot of time, they're well connected, they function as mobs, and nothing makes them yowl louder than exclusion from mob norms.</p><p>For example, in many split families, if one of the parents has YouTube and the other can't be bothered to torch IE6, guess which parent won't be seeing much of the kids, if the kids have the option about which bus to take home after school that day?</p><p>I know families which function exactly this way.  Kids start to get on your nerves, wait for an incident to occur (never in short supply), then shut off the Xbox for a week, then they predictably spend the next six days out of seven staying over at Dad's place.  Nice little time out.  In the example I'm thinking about, Dad doesn't make the kids do homework, so eventually you have to turn the Xbox back on, to make sure the little rats don't flunk the entire school year.</p><p>I like the way Google is presently working to lock-out lock-in.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>While youtube is nice for idling away some downtime , it 's not the internet-dominating force this article makes out.Wow , do you ever misunderstand the calculus of adolescent outrage .
Ever joined a condo association rife with government retirees ?
If you have a busy career , there 's a lot of battles you are n't going to fight on time investment alone.Teenagers do n't have much clout in the adult world , but they do have a lot of time , they 're well connected , they function as mobs , and nothing makes them yowl louder than exclusion from mob norms.For example , in many split families , if one of the parents has YouTube and the other ca n't be bothered to torch IE6 , guess which parent wo n't be seeing much of the kids , if the kids have the option about which bus to take home after school that day ? I know families which function exactly this way .
Kids start to get on your nerves , wait for an incident to occur ( never in short supply ) , then shut off the Xbox for a week , then they predictably spend the next six days out of seven staying over at Dad 's place .
Nice little time out .
In the example I 'm thinking about , Dad does n't make the kids do homework , so eventually you have to turn the Xbox back on , to make sure the little rats do n't flunk the entire school year.I like the way Google is presently working to lock-out lock-in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While youtube is nice for idling away some downtime, it's not the internet-dominating force this article makes out.Wow, do you ever misunderstand the calculus of adolescent outrage.
Ever joined a condo association rife with government retirees?
If you have a busy career, there's a lot of battles you aren't going to fight on time investment alone.Teenagers don't have much clout in the adult world, but they do have a lot of time, they're well connected, they function as mobs, and nothing makes them yowl louder than exclusion from mob norms.For example, in many split families, if one of the parents has YouTube and the other can't be bothered to torch IE6, guess which parent won't be seeing much of the kids, if the kids have the option about which bus to take home after school that day?I know families which function exactly this way.
Kids start to get on your nerves, wait for an incident to occur (never in short supply), then shut off the Xbox for a week, then they predictably spend the next six days out of seven staying over at Dad's place.
Nice little time out.
In the example I'm thinking about, Dad doesn't make the kids do homework, so eventually you have to turn the Xbox back on, to make sure the little rats don't flunk the entire school year.I like the way Google is presently working to lock-out lock-in.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31152150</id>
	<title>Re:Thanks to YouTube</title>
	<author>Randle\_Revar</author>
	<datestamp>1266255360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;Dean DiMarzo</p><p>That's pretty cool stuff right there</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Dean DiMarzoThat 's pretty cool stuff right there</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;Dean DiMarzoThat's pretty cool stuff right there</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150136</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150150</id>
	<title>Re:Thanks to YouTube</title>
	<author>Petrushka</author>
	<datestamp>1266236040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's a fun diversion, but you really have to wonder. About civilization.</p></div><p>People are still reading Aristophanes. Fart jokes have always been funny. I'm not worrying too much. (Not about that, anyway.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a fun diversion , but you really have to wonder .
About civilization.People are still reading Aristophanes .
Fart jokes have always been funny .
I 'm not worrying too much .
( Not about that , anyway .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a fun diversion, but you really have to wonder.
About civilization.People are still reading Aristophanes.
Fart jokes have always been funny.
I'm not worrying too much.
(Not about that, anyway.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149100</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149196</id>
	<title>Re:Perish</title>
	<author>thePsychologist</author>
	<datestamp>1266231600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except that you can watch YouTube on the iPhone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except that you can watch YouTube on the iPhone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except that you can watch YouTube on the iPhone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149056</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149364</id>
	<title>Re:User outrage more likely to be at Google</title>
	<author>Sinning</author>
	<datestamp>1266232260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or..
<ul>
<li>Google notifies users to download an HTML5 compatible browser.</li>

<li>User moves to Chrome and never looks back to IE.</li>
</ul><p>

It may actually benefit Google to give users a reason to switch to Chrome.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or. . Google notifies users to download an HTML5 compatible browser .
User moves to Chrome and never looks back to IE .
It may actually benefit Google to give users a reason to switch to Chrome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or..

Google notifies users to download an HTML5 compatible browser.
User moves to Chrome and never looks back to IE.
It may actually benefit Google to give users a reason to switch to Chrome.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31156522</id>
	<title>Re:life in the old browsers yet</title>
	<author>tehcyder</author>
	<datestamp>1266343260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why can't your company just have the videos on your own web site then?  What purpose does using YouTube have, other than give the impression of amateurishness?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why ca n't your company just have the videos on your own web site then ?
What purpose does using YouTube have , other than give the impression of amateurishness ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why can't your company just have the videos on your own web site then?
What purpose does using YouTube have, other than give the impression of amateurishness?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149568</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149476</id>
	<title>Re:Cart or Horse first?</title>
	<author>The MAZZTer</author>
	<datestamp>1266232680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Google will probably throw up an info bar a bit before the switchover if your browser is not HTML5 compatible, warning that YouTube is dropping support for said browser and so get a new one if you wish to keep using YouTube... it would have a link leading to a list of HTML5 compatible browsers you can install such as Firefox, Chrome, ChromeFrame, Safari, etc.  Or just ChromeFrame, for IE users, though I think even now Wave offers browser suggestions too as well as ChromeFrame.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google will probably throw up an info bar a bit before the switchover if your browser is not HTML5 compatible , warning that YouTube is dropping support for said browser and so get a new one if you wish to keep using YouTube... it would have a link leading to a list of HTML5 compatible browsers you can install such as Firefox , Chrome , ChromeFrame , Safari , etc .
Or just ChromeFrame , for IE users , though I think even now Wave offers browser suggestions too as well as ChromeFrame .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google will probably throw up an info bar a bit before the switchover if your browser is not HTML5 compatible, warning that YouTube is dropping support for said browser and so get a new one if you wish to keep using YouTube... it would have a link leading to a list of HTML5 compatible browsers you can install such as Firefox, Chrome, ChromeFrame, Safari, etc.
Or just ChromeFrame, for IE users, though I think even now Wave offers browser suggestions too as well as ChromeFrame.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149890</id>
	<title>YouTube will get the outrage, not IE</title>
	<author>johnthuss</author>
	<datestamp>1266234600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>On that day all browsers will be HTML5 compatible or they will perish in the flames of user outrage.</p></div><p>People won't blame their browser (IE) they will yell at YouTube for needlessly breaking something that was working just fine.  Seriously, users don't care AT ALL about the politics behind this.  They just want IE6 to keep working.  Well, "working" might be a generous description, but you get the point.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>On that day all browsers will be HTML5 compatible or they will perish in the flames of user outrage.People wo n't blame their browser ( IE ) they will yell at YouTube for needlessly breaking something that was working just fine .
Seriously , users do n't care AT ALL about the politics behind this .
They just want IE6 to keep working .
Well , " working " might be a generous description , but you get the point .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On that day all browsers will be HTML5 compatible or they will perish in the flames of user outrage.People won't blame their browser (IE) they will yell at YouTube for needlessly breaking something that was working just fine.
Seriously, users don't care AT ALL about the politics behind this.
They just want IE6 to keep working.
Well, "working" might be a generous description, but you get the point.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31151092</id>
	<title>Re:and this is how google wins</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266243600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>like microsoft</p></div><p>Office, WMV, DirectX,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.Net, XBox</p><p><div class="quote"><p>like sony</p></div><p>Playstation, BluRay, RIAA</p><p><div class="quote"><p>has any of it worked?</p></div><p>I dunno, they seem to be doing OK, or at least, I'd like to be as "unsuccessful" as they are.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>like microsoftOffice , WMV , DirectX , .Net , XBoxlike sonyPlaystation , BluRay , RIAAhas any of it worked ? I dunno , they seem to be doing OK , or at least , I 'd like to be as " unsuccessful " as they are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>like microsoftOffice, WMV, DirectX, .Net, XBoxlike sonyPlaystation, BluRay, RIAAhas any of it worked?I dunno, they seem to be doing OK, or at least, I'd like to be as "unsuccessful" as they are.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149136</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149206</id>
	<title>When that day comes...</title>
	<author>actionbastard</author>
	<datestamp>1266231600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Many Shuvs and Zuuls will know what it is like to be roasted in the depths of the Slor that day, I can tell you!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Many Shuvs and Zuuls will know what it is like to be roasted in the depths of the Slor that day , I can tell you !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Many Shuvs and Zuuls will know what it is like to be roasted in the depths of the Slor that day, I can tell you!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149400</id>
	<title>Arrogance...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266232380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... the reason flash became so popular was because there was nothing better.</p><p>I think anyone who thinks HTML5 video is going to displace flash has to look to how MP3 was not displaced by better formats like AAC, OGG, etc, etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... the reason flash became so popular was because there was nothing better.I think anyone who thinks HTML5 video is going to displace flash has to look to how MP3 was not displaced by better formats like AAC , OGG , etc , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... the reason flash became so popular was because there was nothing better.I think anyone who thinks HTML5 video is going to displace flash has to look to how MP3 was not displaced by better formats like AAC, OGG, etc, etc.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150234</id>
	<title>Re:Perish</title>
	<author>Estragib</author>
	<datestamp>1266236700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>perish [...] just like the Iphone</p></div><p>I'm inclined to believe there's a fair amount of people who, when their time comes, would just <em>love</em> to perish as the iPhone is perishing now.</p><blockquote><div><p>The Company sold 8.7 million iPhones in the quarter, representing 100 percent unit growth over the year-ago quarter. (<a href="http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2010/01/25results.html" title="apple.com" rel="nofollow">Apple Reports First Quarter Results, 2010/01/25</a> [apple.com])</p></div></blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>perish [ ... ] just like the IphoneI 'm inclined to believe there 's a fair amount of people who , when their time comes , would just love to perish as the iPhone is perishing now.The Company sold 8.7 million iPhones in the quarter , representing 100 percent unit growth over the year-ago quarter .
( Apple Reports First Quarter Results , 2010/01/25 [ apple.com ] )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>perish [...] just like the IphoneI'm inclined to believe there's a fair amount of people who, when their time comes, would just love to perish as the iPhone is perishing now.The Company sold 8.7 million iPhones in the quarter, representing 100 percent unit growth over the year-ago quarter.
(Apple Reports First Quarter Results, 2010/01/25 [apple.com])
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149056</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150148</id>
	<title>Forcing Change</title>
	<author>aBaldrich</author>
	<datestamp>1266236040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>And nobody mentioned the IE 6 ban in G-Docs...
Google is moving the internet foward.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And nobody mentioned the IE 6 ban in G-Docs.. . Google is moving the internet foward .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And nobody mentioned the IE 6 ban in G-Docs...
Google is moving the internet foward.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150464</id>
	<title>Re:HTML5 Video: A big No-No</title>
	<author>ThrowAwaySociety</author>
	<datestamp>1266238200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I don't think HTML5 video will ever be successful, flash video/flv is very dominant.</p></div><p>I don't think Flash video will ever be successful, since RealPlayer is very dominant.</p><p>Sincerely,<br>1999.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think HTML5 video will ever be successful , flash video/flv is very dominant.I do n't think Flash video will ever be successful , since RealPlayer is very dominant.Sincerely,1999 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think HTML5 video will ever be successful, flash video/flv is very dominant.I don't think Flash video will ever be successful, since RealPlayer is very dominant.Sincerely,1999.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149306</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31152580</id>
	<title>Re:Thanks to YouTube</title>
	<author>wiredlogic</author>
	<datestamp>1266259800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You haven't lived until you've seen the mashup with "Smells Like Teen Spirit".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You have n't lived until you 've seen the mashup with " Smells Like Teen Spirit " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You haven't lived until you've seen the mashup with "Smells Like Teen Spirit".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149100</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149312</id>
	<title>Chrome Frame</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1266232080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>User gets angry at YouTube, not IE</p></div><p>"YouTube no longer uses Flash. Now we use Chrome Frame to provide you with new features. Click here to install Chrome Frame." The user response really isn't that much different from the "Your Flash Player is too old" that YouTube started serving once Nintendo finally upgraded Wii Internet Channel from Flash 7.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>User gets angry at YouTube , not IE " YouTube no longer uses Flash .
Now we use Chrome Frame to provide you with new features .
Click here to install Chrome Frame .
" The user response really is n't that much different from the " Your Flash Player is too old " that YouTube started serving once Nintendo finally upgraded Wii Internet Channel from Flash 7 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>User gets angry at YouTube, not IE"YouTube no longer uses Flash.
Now we use Chrome Frame to provide you with new features.
Click here to install Chrome Frame.
" The user response really isn't that much different from the "Your Flash Player is too old" that YouTube started serving once Nintendo finally upgraded Wii Internet Channel from Flash 7.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31155144</id>
	<title>Is your employer hiring?</title>
	<author>Traegorn</author>
	<datestamp>1266335940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because Youtube is totally blocked at my office, and I really want to watch a piano playing cat right now.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because Youtube is totally blocked at my office , and I really want to watch a piano playing cat right now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because Youtube is totally blocked at my office, and I really want to watch a piano playing cat right now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149568</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149044</id>
	<title>First</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266230880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FP</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FP</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FP</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149460</id>
	<title>They need to fix the site first.</title>
	<author>Doug52392</author>
	<datestamp>1266232620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What use would HTML5 have if Google insists on streaming crystal-clear high-definition unskippable ads to me in a few seconds, but streams the video to me bit-by-bit to the point where it takes five minutes to watch a one minute HD video.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What use would HTML5 have if Google insists on streaming crystal-clear high-definition unskippable ads to me in a few seconds , but streams the video to me bit-by-bit to the point where it takes five minutes to watch a one minute HD video .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What use would HTML5 have if Google insists on streaming crystal-clear high-definition unskippable ads to me in a few seconds, but streams the video to me bit-by-bit to the point where it takes five minutes to watch a one minute HD video.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31152478</id>
	<title>Isn't Flash Open?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266258900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Adobe opened the SWF file format a while ago. Why is it still referred to as a closed format?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Adobe opened the SWF file format a while ago .
Why is it still referred to as a closed format ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Adobe opened the SWF file format a while ago.
Why is it still referred to as a closed format?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149450</id>
	<title>Re:Cart or Horse first?</title>
	<author>Etherized</author>
	<datestamp>1266232560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're right, of course. Google will continue to support Flash in some fashion for quite a while; they can't really afford not to. If Youtube blocks flash, some other site that provides a flash option will pick up the slack, and youtube perishes in the flames of user outrage.</p><p>There's nothing particularly unique about Youtube, except that it was the first and currently largest site to "just work" with video clips. Let's not forget that Flash, for all its sins, is what even made this possible to begin with.</p><p>I personally suspect that the benefits of HTML5 will be very clear to many users, especially on mobile devices where Flash simply is not viable. It should be a case of superior technology ultimately winning out, just as long as the word is actually spread (and it's in google's interest to spread it).</p><p>Youtube currently gives you the option to "opt in" to HTML5, and that's excellent. In the future, they may give you an option to "opt in" to Flash, and they'll tell you that performance may suffer for it. They don't really need to kill Flash entirely, because Flash is good enough at killing itself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're right , of course .
Google will continue to support Flash in some fashion for quite a while ; they ca n't really afford not to .
If Youtube blocks flash , some other site that provides a flash option will pick up the slack , and youtube perishes in the flames of user outrage.There 's nothing particularly unique about Youtube , except that it was the first and currently largest site to " just work " with video clips .
Let 's not forget that Flash , for all its sins , is what even made this possible to begin with.I personally suspect that the benefits of HTML5 will be very clear to many users , especially on mobile devices where Flash simply is not viable .
It should be a case of superior technology ultimately winning out , just as long as the word is actually spread ( and it 's in google 's interest to spread it ) .Youtube currently gives you the option to " opt in " to HTML5 , and that 's excellent .
In the future , they may give you an option to " opt in " to Flash , and they 'll tell you that performance may suffer for it .
They do n't really need to kill Flash entirely , because Flash is good enough at killing itself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're right, of course.
Google will continue to support Flash in some fashion for quite a while; they can't really afford not to.
If Youtube blocks flash, some other site that provides a flash option will pick up the slack, and youtube perishes in the flames of user outrage.There's nothing particularly unique about Youtube, except that it was the first and currently largest site to "just work" with video clips.
Let's not forget that Flash, for all its sins, is what even made this possible to begin with.I personally suspect that the benefits of HTML5 will be very clear to many users, especially on mobile devices where Flash simply is not viable.
It should be a case of superior technology ultimately winning out, just as long as the word is actually spread (and it's in google's interest to spread it).Youtube currently gives you the option to "opt in" to HTML5, and that's excellent.
In the future, they may give you an option to "opt in" to Flash, and they'll tell you that performance may suffer for it.
They don't really need to kill Flash entirely, because Flash is good enough at killing itself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149150</id>
	<title>User outrage more likely to be at Google</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266231420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>On that day all browsers will be HTML5 compatible or they will perish in the flames of user outrage</p></div><p>Most users don't know and don't care about the standards wars. What's more likely to happen is:</p><ul>
<li>User has been using IE and watching YouTube for umpteen number of years</li><li>Google shuts out Flash and IE, only supporting HTML 5</li><li>User notices YouTube doesn't work anymore</li><li>User gets angry at YouTube, not IE. MS isn't the one that changed something, Google is.</li><li>Google backpedals in a way reminiscent of New Coke in 1986</li></ul></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>On that day all browsers will be HTML5 compatible or they will perish in the flames of user outrageMost users do n't know and do n't care about the standards wars .
What 's more likely to happen is : User has been using IE and watching YouTube for umpteen number of yearsGoogle shuts out Flash and IE , only supporting HTML 5User notices YouTube does n't work anymoreUser gets angry at YouTube , not IE .
MS is n't the one that changed something , Google is.Google backpedals in a way reminiscent of New Coke in 1986</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On that day all browsers will be HTML5 compatible or they will perish in the flames of user outrageMost users don't know and don't care about the standards wars.
What's more likely to happen is:
User has been using IE and watching YouTube for umpteen number of yearsGoogle shuts out Flash and IE, only supporting HTML 5User notices YouTube doesn't work anymoreUser gets angry at YouTube, not IE.
MS isn't the one that changed something, Google is.Google backpedals in a way reminiscent of New Coke in 1986
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31152194</id>
	<title>Re:Thanks to YouTube</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266255720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yep, fart jokes are still funny.<br>They might get a bit old and stale, but they are still funny.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yep , fart jokes are still funny.They might get a bit old and stale , but they are still funny .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yep, fart jokes are still funny.They might get a bit old and stale, but they are still funny.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149412</id>
	<title>Re:HTML5 Video: A big No-No</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266232380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And here's a good example of how anti-mods would be useful. This was the exact opposite of insightful.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And here 's a good example of how anti-mods would be useful .
This was the exact opposite of insightful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And here's a good example of how anti-mods would be useful.
This was the exact opposite of insightful.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149306</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149140</id>
	<title>life in the old browsers yet</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266231360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>On that day all browsers will be HTML5 compatible or they will perish in the flames of user outrage</p></div><p>While youtube is nice for idling away some downtime, it's not the internet-dominating force this article makes out. If it disappeared tomorrow, than apart from instantly increasing corporate productivity and allowing children everywhere to get their homework done on time, there wouldn't be so much of a change.
</p><p>
There are also (sit down, this might be a bit of a shock) lots and lots of people who rarely, if ever visit youtube. For them, it's existence or change in the tech. it needs will make no difference at all - if their old browsers fail I'm sure they find other things to do on the internet.
</p><p>
While I'm sure youtube will keep going - for some time at least, and will change more over time there's nothing life changing about it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>On that day all browsers will be HTML5 compatible or they will perish in the flames of user outrageWhile youtube is nice for idling away some downtime , it 's not the internet-dominating force this article makes out .
If it disappeared tomorrow , than apart from instantly increasing corporate productivity and allowing children everywhere to get their homework done on time , there would n't be so much of a change .
There are also ( sit down , this might be a bit of a shock ) lots and lots of people who rarely , if ever visit youtube .
For them , it 's existence or change in the tech .
it needs will make no difference at all - if their old browsers fail I 'm sure they find other things to do on the internet .
While I 'm sure youtube will keep going - for some time at least , and will change more over time there 's nothing life changing about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On that day all browsers will be HTML5 compatible or they will perish in the flames of user outrageWhile youtube is nice for idling away some downtime, it's not the internet-dominating force this article makes out.
If it disappeared tomorrow, than apart from instantly increasing corporate productivity and allowing children everywhere to get their homework done on time, there wouldn't be so much of a change.
There are also (sit down, this might be a bit of a shock) lots and lots of people who rarely, if ever visit youtube.
For them, it's existence or change in the tech.
it needs will make no difference at all - if their old browsers fail I'm sure they find other things to do on the internet.
While I'm sure youtube will keep going - for some time at least, and will change more over time there's nothing life changing about it.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31151898</id>
	<title>Re:Thanks to YouTube</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266252240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow, lots of boring music to drowse off to.  The kid is pretty good though.  I can see him playing in a cover band on Friday nights at the local sports bar in a few years.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , lots of boring music to drowse off to .
The kid is pretty good though .
I can see him playing in a cover band on Friday nights at the local sports bar in a few years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, lots of boring music to drowse off to.
The kid is pretty good though.
I can see him playing in a cover band on Friday nights at the local sports bar in a few years.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150136</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149568</id>
	<title>Re:life in the old browsers yet</title>
	<author>FranTaylor</author>
	<datestamp>1266233100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"If it disappeared tomorrow, than apart from instantly increasing corporate productivity"</p><p>Really?  My employer uses YouTube a lot.  We make YouTube videos of customer recommendations.  Having an engineer gush about all of the time he saves with our product makes a very effective sales tool.</p><p>A lot of companies use YouTube for instructional videos for their products.  Why bother with complex printed directions when you can watch a real live human do it?</p><p>Really you should not dismiss the value of something just because YOU can't figure out how to do something useful with it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" If it disappeared tomorrow , than apart from instantly increasing corporate productivity " Really ?
My employer uses YouTube a lot .
We make YouTube videos of customer recommendations .
Having an engineer gush about all of the time he saves with our product makes a very effective sales tool.A lot of companies use YouTube for instructional videos for their products .
Why bother with complex printed directions when you can watch a real live human do it ? Really you should not dismiss the value of something just because YOU ca n't figure out how to do something useful with it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"If it disappeared tomorrow, than apart from instantly increasing corporate productivity"Really?
My employer uses YouTube a lot.
We make YouTube videos of customer recommendations.
Having an engineer gush about all of the time he saves with our product makes a very effective sales tool.A lot of companies use YouTube for instructional videos for their products.
Why bother with complex printed directions when you can watch a real live human do it?Really you should not dismiss the value of something just because YOU can't figure out how to do something useful with it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149786</id>
	<title>Re:Google should work on Google stuff</title>
	<author>General Wesc</author>
	<datestamp>1266234120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Right, because creating a free, high-quality web browser and open sourcing the codebase didn't do anything to help customers. Allowing users to use a standards-compliant web browser AND access the systems required by their job didn't do anything to help customers. Shifting to (relatively) open standards won't do anything to help customers.</p><p>It almost sounds like your problem is that Google isn't being evil enough. I find myself lacking sympathy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Right , because creating a free , high-quality web browser and open sourcing the codebase did n't do anything to help customers .
Allowing users to use a standards-compliant web browser AND access the systems required by their job did n't do anything to help customers .
Shifting to ( relatively ) open standards wo n't do anything to help customers.It almost sounds like your problem is that Google is n't being evil enough .
I find myself lacking sympathy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right, because creating a free, high-quality web browser and open sourcing the codebase didn't do anything to help customers.
Allowing users to use a standards-compliant web browser AND access the systems required by their job didn't do anything to help customers.
Shifting to (relatively) open standards won't do anything to help customers.It almost sounds like your problem is that Google isn't being evil enough.
I find myself lacking sympathy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149168</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150134</id>
	<title>Re:HTML5 Video: A big No-No</title>
	<author>element-o.p.</author>
	<datestamp>1266235980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Back when I graduated from high school, cassette tapes and VHS were the dominant audio/video format, and they haven't been displaced, either!
<br> <br>
Erm...I mean...oh, nevermind.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Back when I graduated from high school , cassette tapes and VHS were the dominant audio/video format , and they have n't been displaced , either !
Erm...I mean...oh , nevermind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Back when I graduated from high school, cassette tapes and VHS were the dominant audio/video format, and they haven't been displaced, either!
Erm...I mean...oh, nevermind.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149306</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31159022</id>
	<title>Re:Ok, so that makes Three...</title>
	<author>hazydave</author>
	<datestamp>1266352440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Huh?  Google has been saying "Flash is coming for Android, 2010" since mid-2009 if not sooner. Adobe just announced AIR and Flash for Android:  <a href="http://www.pcworld.com/article/189338/adobe\_shows\_flash\_and\_air\_apps\_for\_google\_android.html" title="pcworld.com">http://www.pcworld.com/article/189338/adobe\_shows\_flash\_and\_air\_apps\_for\_google\_android.html</a> [pcworld.com]</p><p>Apple doesn't want Flash, Air, Java, or any other means of loading applications onto an iPhone. They want total control, and as many commercial apps as possible, so they get paid. That's the only reason they're not supporting Flash, Java, or other defacto web standards on the iPhone, despite the fact that's currently making the iPhone a lower-class web client.</p><p>Microsoft is the only proponent of Silverlight, a competitor to Flash that's just as proprietary. So it's quite natural they would not be supporting Flash themselves on their WinMo devices... 'scuse me, their "Windows Phone 7" devices... a new name with each revision. Of course, had you read the link you posted carefully, you would know that Microsoft is working with Adobe to allow them to release Flash for "Windows Phone 7". I would estimate, at this point, Microsoft will do everything they can to not screw up their new platform, and "better web experience than iPhone" will be one of the standard targets of, well, everyone but Apple.</p><p>And in fact, it is Adobe's job to push Flash. They're doing that, too, even on Linux<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. they recently joined the LiMo Foundation, and play to support Flash on Linux phones and other devices: <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685\_3-20000072-264.html" title="cnet.com">http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685\_3-20000072-264.html</a> [cnet.com]</p><p>Google's YouTube is moving away from Flash, for very good reasons: they're a video site, and Flash is just extra baggage, once you have standard video. That's very different than Google saying "no Flash anywhere". YouTube is an entirely different concern than smart phones and tablets.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Huh ?
Google has been saying " Flash is coming for Android , 2010 " since mid-2009 if not sooner .
Adobe just announced AIR and Flash for Android : http : //www.pcworld.com/article/189338/adobe \ _shows \ _flash \ _and \ _air \ _apps \ _for \ _google \ _android.html [ pcworld.com ] Apple does n't want Flash , Air , Java , or any other means of loading applications onto an iPhone .
They want total control , and as many commercial apps as possible , so they get paid .
That 's the only reason they 're not supporting Flash , Java , or other defacto web standards on the iPhone , despite the fact that 's currently making the iPhone a lower-class web client.Microsoft is the only proponent of Silverlight , a competitor to Flash that 's just as proprietary .
So it 's quite natural they would not be supporting Flash themselves on their WinMo devices... 'scuse me , their " Windows Phone 7 " devices... a new name with each revision .
Of course , had you read the link you posted carefully , you would know that Microsoft is working with Adobe to allow them to release Flash for " Windows Phone 7 " .
I would estimate , at this point , Microsoft will do everything they can to not screw up their new platform , and " better web experience than iPhone " will be one of the standard targets of , well , everyone but Apple.And in fact , it is Adobe 's job to push Flash .
They 're doing that , too , even on Linux .. they recently joined the LiMo Foundation , and play to support Flash on Linux phones and other devices : http : //news.cnet.com/8301-30685 \ _3-20000072-264.html [ cnet.com ] Google 's YouTube is moving away from Flash , for very good reasons : they 're a video site , and Flash is just extra baggage , once you have standard video .
That 's very different than Google saying " no Flash anywhere " .
YouTube is an entirely different concern than smart phones and tablets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Huh?
Google has been saying "Flash is coming for Android, 2010" since mid-2009 if not sooner.
Adobe just announced AIR and Flash for Android:  http://www.pcworld.com/article/189338/adobe\_shows\_flash\_and\_air\_apps\_for\_google\_android.html [pcworld.com]Apple doesn't want Flash, Air, Java, or any other means of loading applications onto an iPhone.
They want total control, and as many commercial apps as possible, so they get paid.
That's the only reason they're not supporting Flash, Java, or other defacto web standards on the iPhone, despite the fact that's currently making the iPhone a lower-class web client.Microsoft is the only proponent of Silverlight, a competitor to Flash that's just as proprietary.
So it's quite natural they would not be supporting Flash themselves on their WinMo devices... 'scuse me, their "Windows Phone 7" devices... a new name with each revision.
Of course, had you read the link you posted carefully, you would know that Microsoft is working with Adobe to allow them to release Flash for "Windows Phone 7".
I would estimate, at this point, Microsoft will do everything they can to not screw up their new platform, and "better web experience than iPhone" will be one of the standard targets of, well, everyone but Apple.And in fact, it is Adobe's job to push Flash.
They're doing that, too, even on Linux .. they recently joined the LiMo Foundation, and play to support Flash on Linux phones and other devices: http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685\_3-20000072-264.html [cnet.com]Google's YouTube is moving away from Flash, for very good reasons: they're a video site, and Flash is just extra baggage, once you have standard video.
That's very different than Google saying "no Flash anywhere".
YouTube is an entirely different concern than smart phones and tablets.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31153520</id>
	<title>Re:If Youtube ever shuts off flv streaming...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266316200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is then, when they will remember that they should have allowed installations of their Creative Suites on file-systems with case-sensitivity turned on...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is then , when they will remember that they should have allowed installations of their Creative Suites on file-systems with case-sensitivity turned on.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is then, when they will remember that they should have allowed installations of their Creative Suites on file-systems with case-sensitivity turned on...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149144</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149056</id>
	<title>Perish</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266231000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, perish for lack of Flash, just like the Iphone is now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , perish for lack of Flash , just like the Iphone is now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, perish for lack of Flash, just like the Iphone is now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149136</id>
	<title>and this is how google wins</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266231360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>some business school moron could have said "hey, why don't we leverage our power and force a proprietary format on consumers, and they will be our captive audience"</p><p>like microsoft</p><p>like sony</p><p>etc</p><p>has any of it worked? no</p><p>for all the anxiety about google's increasing power, as long google does something like this: actively undermine and destroy a closed format in favor of an open one, then the consumer wins, google wins, other companies win, progress and innovation wins, and shortsighted greedy assholes who try to manipulate market inefficiencies in their favor lose (i'm looking at you, music and other media companies). in this context, at least, google really is "doing no evil"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>some business school moron could have said " hey , why do n't we leverage our power and force a proprietary format on consumers , and they will be our captive audience " like microsoftlike sonyetchas any of it worked ?
nofor all the anxiety about google 's increasing power , as long google does something like this : actively undermine and destroy a closed format in favor of an open one , then the consumer wins , google wins , other companies win , progress and innovation wins , and shortsighted greedy assholes who try to manipulate market inefficiencies in their favor lose ( i 'm looking at you , music and other media companies ) .
in this context , at least , google really is " doing no evil "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>some business school moron could have said "hey, why don't we leverage our power and force a proprietary format on consumers, and they will be our captive audience"like microsoftlike sonyetchas any of it worked?
nofor all the anxiety about google's increasing power, as long google does something like this: actively undermine and destroy a closed format in favor of an open one, then the consumer wins, google wins, other companies win, progress and innovation wins, and shortsighted greedy assholes who try to manipulate market inefficiencies in their favor lose (i'm looking at you, music and other media companies).
in this context, at least, google really is "doing no evil"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31162520</id>
	<title>Re:Perish</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266325980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Adobe sucks, about time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Adobe sucks , about time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Adobe sucks, about time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149056</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150408</id>
	<title>NOT TRUE</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266237840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This can't be true. Look at http://bit.ly/9qhqKo</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This ca n't be true .
Look at http : //bit.ly/9qhqKo</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This can't be true.
Look at http://bit.ly/9qhqKo</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31156274</id>
	<title>Re:The new YouTube video page</title>
	<author>steelfood</author>
	<datestamp>1266342300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Surprise! Change isn't always a good thing. Things can change for the worse. For example, going from living to dead is a huge lifestyle change. I don't imagine many people to think it'd be for the better.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Surprise !
Change is n't always a good thing .
Things can change for the worse .
For example , going from living to dead is a huge lifestyle change .
I do n't imagine many people to think it 'd be for the better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Surprise!
Change isn't always a good thing.
Things can change for the worse.
For example, going from living to dead is a huge lifestyle change.
I don't imagine many people to think it'd be for the better.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31151472</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150290</id>
	<title>What about pr0n?</title>
	<author>CohibaVancouver</author>
	<datestamp>1266237000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't a lot of pr0n sites still depend on flash?  I presume n00die vids are still a large percentage of web traffic?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't a lot of pr0n sites still depend on flash ?
I presume n00die vids are still a large percentage of web traffic ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't a lot of pr0n sites still depend on flash?
I presume n00die vids are still a large percentage of web traffic?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149216</id>
	<title>Cart or Horse first?</title>
	<author>JSBiff</author>
	<datestamp>1266231660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>" The final blow will be the day that YouTube switches off Flash and starts streaming only to HTML5 browsers. On that day all browsers will be HTML5 compatible or they will perish in the flames of user outrage."</p><p>Except, YouTube won't turn off Flash until a super-majority of users have HTML-5 compliant browsers. (Actually, since a super-majority is usually considered to be 60\% or 66\%, that probably still wouldn't be enough - I wouldn't shut off any potential customers until I was north of 90\% deployment, though Google may surprise me and throw the switch a bit before that). No business that hopes to succeed just shuts off the ability for any significant portion of their customer base to consume their product.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The final blow will be the day that YouTube switches off Flash and starts streaming only to HTML5 browsers .
On that day all browsers will be HTML5 compatible or they will perish in the flames of user outrage .
" Except , YouTube wo n't turn off Flash until a super-majority of users have HTML-5 compliant browsers .
( Actually , since a super-majority is usually considered to be 60 \ % or 66 \ % , that probably still would n't be enough - I would n't shut off any potential customers until I was north of 90 \ % deployment , though Google may surprise me and throw the switch a bit before that ) .
No business that hopes to succeed just shuts off the ability for any significant portion of their customer base to consume their product .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>" The final blow will be the day that YouTube switches off Flash and starts streaming only to HTML5 browsers.
On that day all browsers will be HTML5 compatible or they will perish in the flames of user outrage.
"Except, YouTube won't turn off Flash until a super-majority of users have HTML-5 compliant browsers.
(Actually, since a super-majority is usually considered to be 60\% or 66\%, that probably still wouldn't be enough - I wouldn't shut off any potential customers until I was north of 90\% deployment, though Google may surprise me and throw the switch a bit before that).
No business that hopes to succeed just shuts off the ability for any significant portion of their customer base to consume their product.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31162522</id>
	<title>Re:life in the old browsers yet</title>
	<author>jwhitener</author>
	<datestamp>1266325980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"While youtube is nice for idling away some downtime, it's not the internet-dominating force this article makes out"</p><p>Completely not true.  Hundreds of universities host content.  Youtubes api's, transcribing, and other tools make building video sites around youtube streams easy.  It is very expensive to host videos in house, Youtube makes it free, easy, and meets ADA needs.</p><p>Schools alone would be in serious upheaval if Youtube went down.  And I'm sure that is just one slice of the pie.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" While youtube is nice for idling away some downtime , it 's not the internet-dominating force this article makes out " Completely not true .
Hundreds of universities host content .
Youtubes api 's , transcribing , and other tools make building video sites around youtube streams easy .
It is very expensive to host videos in house , Youtube makes it free , easy , and meets ADA needs.Schools alone would be in serious upheaval if Youtube went down .
And I 'm sure that is just one slice of the pie .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"While youtube is nice for idling away some downtime, it's not the internet-dominating force this article makes out"Completely not true.
Hundreds of universities host content.
Youtubes api's, transcribing, and other tools make building video sites around youtube streams easy.
It is very expensive to host videos in house, Youtube makes it free, easy, and meets ADA needs.Schools alone would be in serious upheaval if Youtube went down.
And I'm sure that is just one slice of the pie.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149274</id>
	<title>Re:Perish</title>
	<author>cupantae</author>
	<datestamp>1266231900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Perish for a lack of HTML5 support, my friend. Try again, maybe?</p><p>Besides, the iPhone is a special case. If there are several roughly equivalent browsers for the SAME platform, then of course the ones with hugely reduced functionality will die off.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Perish for a lack of HTML5 support , my friend .
Try again , maybe ? Besides , the iPhone is a special case .
If there are several roughly equivalent browsers for the SAME platform , then of course the ones with hugely reduced functionality will die off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perish for a lack of HTML5 support, my friend.
Try again, maybe?Besides, the iPhone is a special case.
If there are several roughly equivalent browsers for the SAME platform, then of course the ones with hugely reduced functionality will die off.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149056</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149688</id>
	<title>Re:life in the old browsers yet</title>
	<author>complete loony</author>
	<datestamp>1266233520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How many of those businesses that have forced their users to remain on IE6 have also blocked youtube?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How many of those businesses that have forced their users to remain on IE6 have also blocked youtube ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many of those businesses that have forced their users to remain on IE6 have also blocked youtube?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149140</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149178
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149056
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31151898
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150136
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149100
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31151590
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149432
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149780
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149140
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149888
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149140
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31156522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149568
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149140
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149688
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149140
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31151092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149136
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31152150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150136
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149100
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149900
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149056
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149676
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149136
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149150
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31156274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31151472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149820
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149312
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149150
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31151712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149820
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31153060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149400
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149966
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149136
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150186
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149470
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149100
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149672
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149140
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31162520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149056
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31153312
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149136
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31153520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149144
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149150
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149430
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149140
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31155144
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149568
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149140
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149714
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149140
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31155674
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149100
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149056
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150234
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149056
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31159022
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149390
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149534
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149150
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149570
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149140
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149792
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149140
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149056
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149400
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150464
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31151984
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149400
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31152580
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149100
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149768
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149136
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149100
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31160156
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149432
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150304
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31152194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149100
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31156792
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149820
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150860
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149140
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149100
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149786
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149168
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31152350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149100
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150116
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149150
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31162522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149140
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2010230_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149100
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2010230.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149140
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149570
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149672
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149688
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149792
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149888
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31162522
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149568
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31156522
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31155144
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149780
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150860
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149714
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149430
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2010230.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149400
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31151984
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31153060
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150252
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2010230.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149136
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149966
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149768
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31153312
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31151092
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149676
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2010230.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149144
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31153520
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2010230.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149390
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31159022
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2010230.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149040
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2010230.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149216
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149450
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149476
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2010230.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149432
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31160156
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31151590
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2010230.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149100
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150150
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31152194
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150136
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31151898
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31152150
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31155674
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31152580
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149492
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149470
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150186
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150298
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150326
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31152350
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2010230.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149890
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2010230.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149056
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149900
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149178
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149196
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149274
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150234
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31162520
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2010230.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149820
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31151472
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31156274
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31151712
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31156792
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2010230.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149306
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150304
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150134
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149442
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150464
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149412
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2010230.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149460
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2010230.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149168
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149786
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2010230.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149366
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2010230.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149150
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149364
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149444
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149312
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31150116
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149534
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2010230.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2010230.31149044
</commentlist>
</conversation>
