<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_15_2142237</id>
	<title>Verizon CTO Says 4G Service Is On Track</title>
	<author>ScuttleMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1266229860000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Verizon has announced that it is on track to roll out their new <a href="http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-13970\_7-10453550-78.html">4G LTE service</a> using the 700 MHz band that it acquired in the recent <a href="//mobile.slashdot.org/story/08/03/19/124251/FCC-Ends-700-MHz-Auction">FCC auction</a>.  Targeted first towards USB air cards for laptop customers, the service will be extended to cell phones and other mobile devices with embedded LTE eventually.  Testing in Boston and Seattle should conclude in the next couple of months and commercial deployments should follow soon thereafter.  <i>"Lynch said getting voice to work over LTE has been particularly challenging. But that challenge is getting resolved as Verizon and other members of the GSMA announced Monday they are supporting a standard that uses IMS technology to deliver voice services over LTE. Still, more work needs to be done.  Until a solution is complete, Verizon will use its CDMA network to provide voice services. And the LTE network will be used for data. Eventually, when voice over LTE becomes a reality, Verizon will use that technology.  Verizon will also have to integrate EV-DO into its LTE offering to ensure that customers can switch to the 3G EV-DO network when the 4G LTE network is not available. Even though Verizon is being aggressive in building its network, it won't happen overnight."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Verizon has announced that it is on track to roll out their new 4G LTE service using the 700 MHz band that it acquired in the recent FCC auction .
Targeted first towards USB air cards for laptop customers , the service will be extended to cell phones and other mobile devices with embedded LTE eventually .
Testing in Boston and Seattle should conclude in the next couple of months and commercial deployments should follow soon thereafter .
" Lynch said getting voice to work over LTE has been particularly challenging .
But that challenge is getting resolved as Verizon and other members of the GSMA announced Monday they are supporting a standard that uses IMS technology to deliver voice services over LTE .
Still , more work needs to be done .
Until a solution is complete , Verizon will use its CDMA network to provide voice services .
And the LTE network will be used for data .
Eventually , when voice over LTE becomes a reality , Verizon will use that technology .
Verizon will also have to integrate EV-DO into its LTE offering to ensure that customers can switch to the 3G EV-DO network when the 4G LTE network is not available .
Even though Verizon is being aggressive in building its network , it wo n't happen overnight .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Verizon has announced that it is on track to roll out their new 4G LTE service using the 700 MHz band that it acquired in the recent FCC auction.
Targeted first towards USB air cards for laptop customers, the service will be extended to cell phones and other mobile devices with embedded LTE eventually.
Testing in Boston and Seattle should conclude in the next couple of months and commercial deployments should follow soon thereafter.
"Lynch said getting voice to work over LTE has been particularly challenging.
But that challenge is getting resolved as Verizon and other members of the GSMA announced Monday they are supporting a standard that uses IMS technology to deliver voice services over LTE.
Still, more work needs to be done.
Until a solution is complete, Verizon will use its CDMA network to provide voice services.
And the LTE network will be used for data.
Eventually, when voice over LTE becomes a reality, Verizon will use that technology.
Verizon will also have to integrate EV-DO into its LTE offering to ensure that customers can switch to the 3G EV-DO network when the 4G LTE network is not available.
Even though Verizon is being aggressive in building its network, it won't happen overnight.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31152584</id>
	<title>Re:I'm jealous</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266259860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, if by "longer" you mean "shorter".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , if by " longer " you mean " shorter " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, if by "longer" you mean "shorter".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149974</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150736</id>
	<title>Re:Wimax</title>
	<author>dzdragonlord</author>
	<datestamp>1266240120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It is worth nothing that while LTE is still in development Sprint and Clearwire have already deployed 4G services that are operational and covering 30 million people in the US. Wimax is deployed in around 145 countries worldwide. Sprint will have a 4G device in 2Q or 3Q this year, and will likely have 120 million people covered by 4G before LTE is even deployed here.</p></div><p>But the 4g sprint's rolling out is only 10 mb/s while the 4g verizon will be rolling out will be up to 100 mb/s.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is worth nothing that while LTE is still in development Sprint and Clearwire have already deployed 4G services that are operational and covering 30 million people in the US .
Wimax is deployed in around 145 countries worldwide .
Sprint will have a 4G device in 2Q or 3Q this year , and will likely have 120 million people covered by 4G before LTE is even deployed here.But the 4g sprint 's rolling out is only 10 mb/s while the 4g verizon will be rolling out will be up to 100 mb/s .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is worth nothing that while LTE is still in development Sprint and Clearwire have already deployed 4G services that are operational and covering 30 million people in the US.
Wimax is deployed in around 145 countries worldwide.
Sprint will have a 4G device in 2Q or 3Q this year, and will likely have 120 million people covered by 4G before LTE is even deployed here.But the 4g sprint's rolling out is only 10 mb/s while the 4g verizon will be rolling out will be up to 100 mb/s.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149940</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31154458</id>
	<title>Re:Impressive....</title>
	<author>Sandbags</author>
	<datestamp>1266331380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Me thinks this is simply a ploy to keep people on existing, non-700MHz technology for their phone plans, so that Verizon can avoid "open network" devices for a longer time period.  Essentially, wether or not your device, that you acwuired from a non-Verizon source, has ANY voice network chip in it other than strictly LTE, then Verizon could refuse it on their network, or refuse to allow the device you bought from them on someone lese's network...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Me thinks this is simply a ploy to keep people on existing , non-700MHz technology for their phone plans , so that Verizon can avoid " open network " devices for a longer time period .
Essentially , wether or not your device , that you acwuired from a non-Verizon source , has ANY voice network chip in it other than strictly LTE , then Verizon could refuse it on their network , or refuse to allow the device you bought from them on someone lese 's network.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Me thinks this is simply a ploy to keep people on existing, non-700MHz technology for their phone plans, so that Verizon can avoid "open network" devices for a longer time period.
Essentially, wether or not your device, that you acwuired from a non-Verizon source, has ANY voice network chip in it other than strictly LTE, then Verizon could refuse it on their network, or refuse to allow the device you bought from them on someone lese's network...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149772</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149856</id>
	<title>VoIP</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266234420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why not use VoIP for voice services?  That's trivial over a data network.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why not use VoIP for voice services ?
That 's trivial over a data network .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why not use VoIP for voice services?
That's trivial over a data network.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31152918</id>
	<title>Re:4g forces IPV6?</title>
	<author>BrookHarty</author>
	<datestamp>1266351360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Telecoms are already using NAT'ed IP's for mobiles. They are not even using normal NAT IP space due to large amount of IP's needed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Telecoms are already using NAT'ed IP 's for mobiles .
They are not even using normal NAT IP space due to large amount of IP 's needed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Telecoms are already using NAT'ed IP's for mobiles.
They are not even using normal NAT IP space due to large amount of IP's needed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150558</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150078</id>
	<title>I hope the first LTE phone will be...</title>
	<author>ickleberry</author>
	<datestamp>1266235620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>An obscure unpopular candybar-shaped brick, preferably with a non-standard keypad and an external antenna and a kick-ass field test app pre-installed. Kinda like the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia\_6650" title="wikipedia.org">Nokia 6650</a> [wikipedia.org], but with LTE. I'd cringe if the first production LTE phone was, for example an iPhone 4G or some Google Touchscreen phone that uses LTE to supply a continuous barrage of text based ads</htmltext>
<tokenext>An obscure unpopular candybar-shaped brick , preferably with a non-standard keypad and an external antenna and a kick-ass field test app pre-installed .
Kinda like the Nokia 6650 [ wikipedia.org ] , but with LTE .
I 'd cringe if the first production LTE phone was , for example an iPhone 4G or some Google Touchscreen phone that uses LTE to supply a continuous barrage of text based ads</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An obscure unpopular candybar-shaped brick, preferably with a non-standard keypad and an external antenna and a kick-ass field test app pre-installed.
Kinda like the Nokia 6650 [wikipedia.org], but with LTE.
I'd cringe if the first production LTE phone was, for example an iPhone 4G or some Google Touchscreen phone that uses LTE to supply a continuous barrage of text based ads</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31152034</id>
	<title>Re:4g forces IPV6?</title>
	<author>Randle\_Revar</author>
	<datestamp>1266253920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For LTE, IPv6 support is required, while IPv4 support is optional</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6#Deployment" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6#Deployment</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For LTE , IPv6 support is required , while IPv4 support is optionalhttp : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6 # Deployment [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For LTE, IPv6 support is required, while IPv4 support is optionalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6#Deployment [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150558</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150648</id>
	<title>Re:Wimax</title>
	<author>postbigbang</author>
	<datestamp>1266239520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cite your source, please. Other data would disagree with your assertion.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cite your source , please .
Other data would disagree with your assertion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cite your source, please.
Other data would disagree with your assertion.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149940</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150044</id>
	<title>Re:VoIP</title>
	<author>tius</author>
	<datestamp>1266235440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Timing over a packet network is not trivial for voice or video...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Timing over a packet network is not trivial for voice or video.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Timing over a packet network is not trivial for voice or video...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149856</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150414</id>
	<title>Re:Wimax</title>
	<author>XXeR</author>
	<datestamp>1266237900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yep, I love my Sprint/Clear Wimax service...I get ~12Mb down / ~1Mb up pretty much everywhere I get a signal!  They even already have solutions that will fall back to 3G when 4g isn't available.  The coverage is definitely sparse right now (at least in my area I have to be pretty close to a major road and near the city), but they're clearly far ahead of this Verizon/LTE rollout.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yep , I love my Sprint/Clear Wimax service...I get ~ 12Mb down / ~ 1Mb up pretty much everywhere I get a signal !
They even already have solutions that will fall back to 3G when 4g is n't available .
The coverage is definitely sparse right now ( at least in my area I have to be pretty close to a major road and near the city ) , but they 're clearly far ahead of this Verizon/LTE rollout .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yep, I love my Sprint/Clear Wimax service...I get ~12Mb down / ~1Mb up pretty much everywhere I get a signal!
They even already have solutions that will fall back to 3G when 4g isn't available.
The coverage is definitely sparse right now (at least in my area I have to be pretty close to a major road and near the city), but they're clearly far ahead of this Verizon/LTE rollout.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149940</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31151990</id>
	<title>Re:Impressive....</title>
	<author>Randle\_Revar</author>
	<datestamp>1266253260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;Why on earth would anybody care about voice calls when LTE users should have the speed and bandwidth to handle real VoIP calls?</p><p>LTE may not be Skype or Vonage,  but it is VoIP:<br><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3GPP\_Long\_Term\_Evolution#An\_.22All\_IP\_Network.22\_.28AIPN.29" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3GPP\_Long\_Term\_Evolution#An\_.22All\_IP\_Network.22\_.28AIPN.29</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Why on earth would anybody care about voice calls when LTE users should have the speed and bandwidth to handle real VoIP calls ? LTE may not be Skype or Vonage , but it is VoIP : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3GPP \ _Long \ _Term \ _Evolution # An \ _.22All \ _IP \ _Network.22 \ _.28AIPN.29 [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;Why on earth would anybody care about voice calls when LTE users should have the speed and bandwidth to handle real VoIP calls?LTE may not be Skype or Vonage,  but it is VoIP:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3GPP\_Long\_Term\_Evolution#An\_.22All\_IP\_Network.22\_.28AIPN.29 [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150566</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31154772</id>
	<title>Re:VoIP</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266333660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>LTE will use SIP with QoS to guarantee <b>maximum</b> latency and jitter.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>

Yes, compatibility with their existing network is a must.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>LTE will use SIP with QoS to guarantee maximum latency and jitter .
Yes , compatibility with their existing network is a must .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>LTE will use SIP with QoS to guarantee maximum latency and jitter.
Yes, compatibility with their existing network is a must.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150556</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150558</id>
	<title>4g forces IPV6?</title>
	<author>DigiShaman</author>
	<datestamp>1266238860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>According to Wiki, 4G is packet based only. It's assumed that by the time 4G is rolled out, IP4 addresses will have been exhausted. So does that mean all new 4G phones will use IP6 by default? Sounds like a good idea to me. If your going to make a move to IP6, handheld devices are the perfect place to start rolling out the new IP standard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>According to Wiki , 4G is packet based only .
It 's assumed that by the time 4G is rolled out , IP4 addresses will have been exhausted .
So does that mean all new 4G phones will use IP6 by default ?
Sounds like a good idea to me .
If your going to make a move to IP6 , handheld devices are the perfect place to start rolling out the new IP standard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to Wiki, 4G is packet based only.
It's assumed that by the time 4G is rolled out, IP4 addresses will have been exhausted.
So does that mean all new 4G phones will use IP6 by default?
Sounds like a good idea to me.
If your going to make a move to IP6, handheld devices are the perfect place to start rolling out the new IP standard.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31151882</id>
	<title>Re:Impressive....</title>
	<author>rhadc</author>
	<datestamp>1266252060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's harder than it looks.  In an ideal LTE environment, services that had their own dedicated channels in earlier technologies share the IP-based channel.  Your average VoIP call is made of bidirectional streams of, say, 20-millisecond samples.  When one doesn't arrive, you're missing audio and it's too late to recover.  To have decent call quality, the packets must be protected via some resource reservation method - QOS, etc.  Your 911 call \_IS\_ more important than the next guy's file transfer.  (I can hear the howls of the net neutrality folks).  Aside from voice calls, high-bitrate streams (video) and any real-time communication may need resource reservation.  Since it isn't something that has been as important in the past, the providers and their suppliers must get it working before they can sell it.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..  Vendors haven't been making cellular radio equipment for that spectrum.  Don't forget that since it's RF spectrum, there may be interference as well.  Lots of hurdles.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's harder than it looks .
In an ideal LTE environment , services that had their own dedicated channels in earlier technologies share the IP-based channel .
Your average VoIP call is made of bidirectional streams of , say , 20-millisecond samples .
When one does n't arrive , you 're missing audio and it 's too late to recover .
To have decent call quality , the packets must be protected via some resource reservation method - QOS , etc .
Your 911 call \ _IS \ _ more important than the next guy 's file transfer .
( I can hear the howls of the net neutrality folks ) .
Aside from voice calls , high-bitrate streams ( video ) and any real-time communication may need resource reservation .
Since it is n't something that has been as important in the past , the providers and their suppliers must get it working before they can sell it .
.. Vendors have n't been making cellular radio equipment for that spectrum .
Do n't forget that since it 's RF spectrum , there may be interference as well .
Lots of hurdles .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's harder than it looks.
In an ideal LTE environment, services that had their own dedicated channels in earlier technologies share the IP-based channel.
Your average VoIP call is made of bidirectional streams of, say, 20-millisecond samples.
When one doesn't arrive, you're missing audio and it's too late to recover.
To have decent call quality, the packets must be protected via some resource reservation method - QOS, etc.
Your 911 call \_IS\_ more important than the next guy's file transfer.
(I can hear the howls of the net neutrality folks).
Aside from voice calls, high-bitrate streams (video) and any real-time communication may need resource reservation.
Since it isn't something that has been as important in the past, the providers and their suppliers must get it working before they can sell it.
..  Vendors haven't been making cellular radio equipment for that spectrum.
Don't forget that since it's RF spectrum, there may be interference as well.
Lots of hurdles.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149772</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31169040</id>
	<title>Re:Impressive....</title>
	<author>sznupi</author>
	<datestamp>1265039460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But (from your own link) the end product of that effort, AMR-WB, is being deployed <i>rigtht now</i>...without the need for LTE network. Even without the need for UMTS/3G; apparently it works also via GSM/2G connections.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But ( from your own link ) the end product of that effort , AMR-WB , is being deployed rigtht now...without the need for LTE network .
Even without the need for UMTS/3G ; apparently it works also via GSM/2G connections .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But (from your own link) the end product of that effort, AMR-WB, is being deployed rigtht now...without the need for LTE network.
Even without the need for UMTS/3G; apparently it works also via GSM/2G connections.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31151008</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31151710</id>
	<title>Re:Impressive....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266249900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Why on earth would anybody care about voice calls when LTE users should have the speed and bandwidth to handle real VoIP calls?  Who will care about voice plans then?</p></div><p>I'm guessing Verizon customers since VoIP will be one of the services blocked on their network.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why on earth would anybody care about voice calls when LTE users should have the speed and bandwidth to handle real VoIP calls ?
Who will care about voice plans then ? I 'm guessing Verizon customers since VoIP will be one of the services blocked on their network .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Why on earth would anybody care about voice calls when LTE users should have the speed and bandwidth to handle real VoIP calls?
Who will care about voice plans then?I'm guessing Verizon customers since VoIP will be one of the services blocked on their network.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150566</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31156376</id>
	<title>Re:VoIP</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266342660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>... LTE will use SIP with QoS to guarantee maximum latency and jitter.  To all of the people saying you can't use VoIP: how stupid are you?  </p></div><p>I think you probably meant <i>minimum</i> latency.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>... LTE will use SIP with QoS to guarantee maximum latency and jitter .
To all of the people saying you ca n't use VoIP : how stupid are you ?
I think you probably meant minimum latency .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... LTE will use SIP with QoS to guarantee maximum latency and jitter.
To all of the people saying you can't use VoIP: how stupid are you?
I think you probably meant minimum latency.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150556</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150566</id>
	<title>Re:Impressive....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266238980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm guessing you don't understand how long it takes to roll out new generation to one city, let alone an entire country, let alone a country with the size and landscape of the United States.</p><p>Nevermind the fact that once the cabinets and antennas are in place, that all of the cell phone makers have to create phones with new radios that can talk on this fancy new generation.</p><p>I'd be \_extremely\_ happy to have an upgraded Verizon BlackBerry that has a separate radio JUST for extremely fast data.  Do you really think an LTE call is going to sound any different than a EV-DO call?  Why on earth would anybody care about voice calls when LTE users should have the speed and bandwidth to handle real VoIP calls?  Who will care about voice plans then?</p><p>The real truth is that Verizon is moving forward on this and on-schedule, while AT&amp;T has just confirmed what company will supply their cabinets and will begin building it out next year.  There is no big switch somewhere that somebody simply needs to flip ON for 4G to be ready for you.  It takes thousands and thousands of employees and contractors to make it happen, so just wait patiently like everybody else, okay?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm guessing you do n't understand how long it takes to roll out new generation to one city , let alone an entire country , let alone a country with the size and landscape of the United States.Nevermind the fact that once the cabinets and antennas are in place , that all of the cell phone makers have to create phones with new radios that can talk on this fancy new generation.I 'd be \ _extremely \ _ happy to have an upgraded Verizon BlackBerry that has a separate radio JUST for extremely fast data .
Do you really think an LTE call is going to sound any different than a EV-DO call ?
Why on earth would anybody care about voice calls when LTE users should have the speed and bandwidth to handle real VoIP calls ?
Who will care about voice plans then ? The real truth is that Verizon is moving forward on this and on-schedule , while AT&amp;T has just confirmed what company will supply their cabinets and will begin building it out next year .
There is no big switch somewhere that somebody simply needs to flip ON for 4G to be ready for you .
It takes thousands and thousands of employees and contractors to make it happen , so just wait patiently like everybody else , okay ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm guessing you don't understand how long it takes to roll out new generation to one city, let alone an entire country, let alone a country with the size and landscape of the United States.Nevermind the fact that once the cabinets and antennas are in place, that all of the cell phone makers have to create phones with new radios that can talk on this fancy new generation.I'd be \_extremely\_ happy to have an upgraded Verizon BlackBerry that has a separate radio JUST for extremely fast data.
Do you really think an LTE call is going to sound any different than a EV-DO call?
Why on earth would anybody care about voice calls when LTE users should have the speed and bandwidth to handle real VoIP calls?
Who will care about voice plans then?The real truth is that Verizon is moving forward on this and on-schedule, while AT&amp;T has just confirmed what company will supply their cabinets and will begin building it out next year.
There is no big switch somewhere that somebody simply needs to flip ON for 4G to be ready for you.
It takes thousands and thousands of employees and contractors to make it happen, so just wait patiently like everybody else, okay?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149772</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149772</id>
	<title>Impressive....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266234060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>So, everything is hunky-dory, going right according to plan.<br> <br>

But the <i>phone company</i> doesn't actually have any way of making the new technology make voice calls, so they'll be retaining the legacy CDMA technology. And, of course, they'll be building the intermediate legacy EV-DO technology for the forseeable future to deal with places where the new hotness is not actually available. Oh, and support for mobile devices is planned for "eventually"...<br> <br>

I wish my standards for success were this achievable.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , everything is hunky-dory , going right according to plan .
But the phone company does n't actually have any way of making the new technology make voice calls , so they 'll be retaining the legacy CDMA technology .
And , of course , they 'll be building the intermediate legacy EV-DO technology for the forseeable future to deal with places where the new hotness is not actually available .
Oh , and support for mobile devices is planned for " eventually " .. . I wish my standards for success were this achievable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, everything is hunky-dory, going right according to plan.
But the phone company doesn't actually have any way of making the new technology make voice calls, so they'll be retaining the legacy CDMA technology.
And, of course, they'll be building the intermediate legacy EV-DO technology for the forseeable future to deal with places where the new hotness is not actually available.
Oh, and support for mobile devices is planned for "eventually"... 

I wish my standards for success were this achievable.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150460</id>
	<title>4G?</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1266238140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Get with it.  Here in Nebraska we already have <a href="http://www.ne4hfoundation.org/" title="ne4hfoundation.org" rel="nofollow">4-H</a> [ne4hfoundation.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Get with it .
Here in Nebraska we already have 4-H [ ne4hfoundation.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Get with it.
Here in Nebraska we already have 4-H [ne4hfoundation.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150556</id>
	<title>Re:VoIP</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1266238860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's the plan.  LTE will use SIP with QoS to guarantee maximum latency and jitter.  To all of the people saying you can't use VoIP: how stupid are you?  Almost all voice calls in the western world go over packet switched networks and have for most of the last decade, and most of the last three decade in some cases.  Do you think things magically get worse because those packets have an IP header?  If you make a landline call anywhere in the UK or Canada, you are using VoIP.  </p><p>
The problem is that some of the standards for telephony services over LTE (which is an all-IP network) have not quite been finalised yet.  This includes things like SMS bridges and the standards for mapping SIP addresses to phone numbers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's the plan .
LTE will use SIP with QoS to guarantee maximum latency and jitter .
To all of the people saying you ca n't use VoIP : how stupid are you ?
Almost all voice calls in the western world go over packet switched networks and have for most of the last decade , and most of the last three decade in some cases .
Do you think things magically get worse because those packets have an IP header ?
If you make a landline call anywhere in the UK or Canada , you are using VoIP .
The problem is that some of the standards for telephony services over LTE ( which is an all-IP network ) have not quite been finalised yet .
This includes things like SMS bridges and the standards for mapping SIP addresses to phone numbers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's the plan.
LTE will use SIP with QoS to guarantee maximum latency and jitter.
To all of the people saying you can't use VoIP: how stupid are you?
Almost all voice calls in the western world go over packet switched networks and have for most of the last decade, and most of the last three decade in some cases.
Do you think things magically get worse because those packets have an IP header?
If you make a landline call anywhere in the UK or Canada, you are using VoIP.
The problem is that some of the standards for telephony services over LTE (which is an all-IP network) have not quite been finalised yet.
This includes things like SMS bridges and the standards for mapping SIP addresses to phone numbers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149856</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31151008</id>
	<title>Re:Impressive....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266242760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually calls will probably <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HD\_Voice" title="wikipedia.org">sound better</a> [wikipedia.org] over LTE.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually calls will probably sound better [ wikipedia.org ] over LTE .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually calls will probably sound better [wikipedia.org] over LTE.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150566</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149940</id>
	<title>Wimax</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266234900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>It is worth nothing that while LTE is still in development Sprint and Clearwire have already deployed 4G services that are operational and covering 30 million people in the US. Wimax is deployed in around 145 countries worldwide. Sprint will have a 4G device in 2Q or 3Q this year, and will likely have 120 million people covered by 4G before LTE is even deployed here.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is worth nothing that while LTE is still in development Sprint and Clearwire have already deployed 4G services that are operational and covering 30 million people in the US .
Wimax is deployed in around 145 countries worldwide .
Sprint will have a 4G device in 2Q or 3Q this year , and will likely have 120 million people covered by 4G before LTE is even deployed here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is worth nothing that while LTE is still in development Sprint and Clearwire have already deployed 4G services that are operational and covering 30 million people in the US.
Wimax is deployed in around 145 countries worldwide.
Sprint will have a 4G device in 2Q or 3Q this year, and will likely have 120 million people covered by 4G before LTE is even deployed here.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31154360</id>
	<title>Re:Impressive....</title>
	<author>k\_187</author>
	<datestamp>1266330360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why on earth would anybody care about voice calls when LTE users should have the speed and bandwidth to handle real VoIP calls?</p> </div><p>The biggest reason is that once everyone is transitioned over to Voice on LTE, three of the four major carriers in the US will be working on the same technology which will give a level of phone interoperability that the US has never seen.  Quite honestly, it will change the game to have the ability to take your phone with you instead of relying upon carrier subsidies if you switch.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why on earth would anybody care about voice calls when LTE users should have the speed and bandwidth to handle real VoIP calls ?
The biggest reason is that once everyone is transitioned over to Voice on LTE , three of the four major carriers in the US will be working on the same technology which will give a level of phone interoperability that the US has never seen .
Quite honestly , it will change the game to have the ability to take your phone with you instead of relying upon carrier subsidies if you switch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why on earth would anybody care about voice calls when LTE users should have the speed and bandwidth to handle real VoIP calls?
The biggest reason is that once everyone is transitioned over to Voice on LTE, three of the four major carriers in the US will be working on the same technology which will give a level of phone interoperability that the US has never seen.
Quite honestly, it will change the game to have the ability to take your phone with you instead of relying upon carrier subsidies if you switch.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150566</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31154832</id>
	<title>Re:Impressive....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266334080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Your 911 call \_IS\_ more important than the next guy's file transfer. (I can hear the howls of the net neutrality folks).</p></div></blockquote><p>Only the net neutrality folks who don't understand what net neutrality is about.</p><p>(Hint: it has nothing to do with QoS or [reasonable] traffic shaping based on protocol)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Your 911 call \ _IS \ _ more important than the next guy 's file transfer .
( I can hear the howls of the net neutrality folks ) .Only the net neutrality folks who do n't understand what net neutrality is about .
( Hint : it has nothing to do with QoS or [ reasonable ] traffic shaping based on protocol )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your 911 call \_IS\_ more important than the next guy's file transfer.
(I can hear the howls of the net neutrality folks).Only the net neutrality folks who don't understand what net neutrality is about.
(Hint: it has nothing to do with QoS or [reasonable] traffic shaping based on protocol)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31151882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31151056</id>
	<title>Re:4g forces IPV6?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266243180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, it means most cellphone IP addresses are NAT -- usually in the 10.x.x.x range.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , it means most cellphone IP addresses are NAT -- usually in the 10.x.x.x range .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, it means most cellphone IP addresses are NAT -- usually in the 10.x.x.x range.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150558</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31152878</id>
	<title>Re:Wimax</title>
	<author>CSMatt</author>
	<datestamp>1266350880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, because what the mobile business desperately needs is another standards war now that 3GPP2/CDMA has bit the dust.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , because what the mobile business desperately needs is another standards war now that 3GPP2/CDMA has bit the dust .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, because what the mobile business desperately needs is another standards war now that 3GPP2/CDMA has bit the dust.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149940</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31151682</id>
	<title>I should care?</title>
	<author>f16c</author>
	<datestamp>1266249600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No. I don't think so. I can't afford Verizon any more so this spring I close the account and smash the phones to move to another carrier. The phones are junk and the plan costs too much. I'll get new phones if or when I choose a replacement carrier.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No .
I do n't think so .
I ca n't afford Verizon any more so this spring I close the account and smash the phones to move to another carrier .
The phones are junk and the plan costs too much .
I 'll get new phones if or when I choose a replacement carrier .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.
I don't think so.
I can't afford Verizon any more so this spring I close the account and smash the phones to move to another carrier.
The phones are junk and the plan costs too much.
I'll get new phones if or when I choose a replacement carrier.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150400</id>
	<title>Re:Impressive....</title>
	<author>mjwalshe</author>
	<datestamp>1266237780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>well "getting voice to work over LTE" isnt that the main fucking point of a mobile phone network! for crying out loud just how fucking usless do you have to be to get a job in the mobile industry in the states.</htmltext>
<tokenext>well " getting voice to work over LTE " isnt that the main fucking point of a mobile phone network !
for crying out loud just how fucking usless do you have to be to get a job in the mobile industry in the states .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>well "getting voice to work over LTE" isnt that the main fucking point of a mobile phone network!
for crying out loud just how fucking usless do you have to be to get a job in the mobile industry in the states.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149772</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149756</id>
	<title>For cell carriers, can we have a new story icon?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266233940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Like one of those evil characters that eat humans from some video game or movie?</p><p>Or better yet, some flesh eating parasite? Yeah! A flesh eating parasite would be a perfect story icon for a cell company! None of those old rotary phone, tower and motherboard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Like one of those evil characters that eat humans from some video game or movie ? Or better yet , some flesh eating parasite ?
Yeah ! A flesh eating parasite would be a perfect story icon for a cell company !
None of those old rotary phone , tower and motherboard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like one of those evil characters that eat humans from some video game or movie?Or better yet, some flesh eating parasite?
Yeah! A flesh eating parasite would be a perfect story icon for a cell company!
None of those old rotary phone, tower and motherboard.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150026</id>
	<title>F**k Verizon</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266235380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>After the stupid 4chan "DDoS" attack and filtering:  Fuck Verizon.  Right in the ass.</p><p>I live in Verizon ILECland and I plan on vandalizing as much of their infrastructure as I can until I get caught.</p><p>Fuck Verizon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>After the stupid 4chan " DDoS " attack and filtering : Fuck Verizon .
Right in the ass.I live in Verizon ILECland and I plan on vandalizing as much of their infrastructure as I can until I get caught.Fuck Verizon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After the stupid 4chan "DDoS" attack and filtering:  Fuck Verizon.
Right in the ass.I live in Verizon ILECland and I plan on vandalizing as much of their infrastructure as I can until I get caught.Fuck Verizon.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150332</id>
	<title>Who cares...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266237360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Current 10 Mbit/s with 3G is enough for my mobile needs at least. Even 300 kbit/s is fine most of the time for some random maps and browsing. 4G is not going to compete with 100 Mbit/s home connections everyone has anyways.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Current 10 Mbit/s with 3G is enough for my mobile needs at least .
Even 300 kbit/s is fine most of the time for some random maps and browsing .
4G is not going to compete with 100 Mbit/s home connections everyone has anyways .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Current 10 Mbit/s with 3G is enough for my mobile needs at least.
Even 300 kbit/s is fine most of the time for some random maps and browsing.
4G is not going to compete with 100 Mbit/s home connections everyone has anyways.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31152866</id>
	<title>Re:4g forces IPV6?</title>
	<author>CSMatt</author>
	<datestamp>1266350760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Cellular telephone systems present a large deployment field for Internet Protocol devices as mobile telephone service is being transitioned from 3G systems to next generation (4G) technologies in which voice is provisioned as a Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) service. This mandates the use of IPv6 for such networks due to the impending IPv4 address exhaustion. In the U.S., cellular operator Verizon has released technical specifications for devices operating on its future networks.[30] The specification mandates IPv6 operation according to the 3GPP Release 8 Specifications (March 2009) and deprecates IPv4 as an optional capability.</p></div><p> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=IPv6&amp;oldid=343433680#Deployment" title="wikipedia.org">Wikipedia.</a> [wikipedia.org] <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/print/20090609\_verizon\_mandates\_ipv6\_support\_for\_next\_gen\_cell\_phones/" title="circleid.com"> Print version of Wikipedia's source.</a> [circleid.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Cellular telephone systems present a large deployment field for Internet Protocol devices as mobile telephone service is being transitioned from 3G systems to next generation ( 4G ) technologies in which voice is provisioned as a Voice over Internet Protocol ( VoIP ) service .
This mandates the use of IPv6 for such networks due to the impending IPv4 address exhaustion .
In the U.S. , cellular operator Verizon has released technical specifications for devices operating on its future networks .
[ 30 ] The specification mandates IPv6 operation according to the 3GPP Release 8 Specifications ( March 2009 ) and deprecates IPv4 as an optional capability .
Wikipedia. [ wikipedia.org ] Print version of Wikipedia 's source .
[ circleid.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cellular telephone systems present a large deployment field for Internet Protocol devices as mobile telephone service is being transitioned from 3G systems to next generation (4G) technologies in which voice is provisioned as a Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) service.
This mandates the use of IPv6 for such networks due to the impending IPv4 address exhaustion.
In the U.S., cellular operator Verizon has released technical specifications for devices operating on its future networks.
[30] The specification mandates IPv6 operation according to the 3GPP Release 8 Specifications (March 2009) and deprecates IPv4 as an optional capability.
Wikipedia. [wikipedia.org]  Print version of Wikipedia's source.
[circleid.com]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150558</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149862</id>
	<title>True Story</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266234420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My sister in law, a very attractive girl in college and unfortunatly, raised by nigger loving parents became close friends with a coalburner. Seeing no problem with this because her parents did her no favor by not educating her about the reality of real niggers, but how all niggers are magic niggers, this is what happened:</p><p>Coalburning friend asks her to take her and her buck nigger to a party because she had a car. So she actually gives this buck nigger a lift to the party. It's a college rager, everyone is drinking, her girlfriend leaves her to go smoke some black dick. She finds herself swarmed by a group of bucks totaly Muh Dikking her. One of them spikes her drink.</p><p>She wakes up in the morning on a mattress in the basement of a piss smelling apartment building. Her shoes, pants and underwear nowhere to be found. Her shirt is around her neck, her bra missing as well. No keys, cell, or purse either.</p><p>She felt somthing crusty all over her face along with a gagging awful slime in her mouth and throat. Her vagina and anus felt as if they were burning. She had been gang raped for what was later to be determined by at least 8 niggers for at least 2 hours, possibly longer.</p><p>She was able to pull her shirt down far enough to walk out to look for help. She saw a gas station 2 doors down but had to run behind the dumpster to throw up. She found her purse behind the dumpster, empty of course. She had a spare car key zipped into a purse pocket, she knew where she was and with a nasty discarded jacket she found behind the dumpster, she walked back to where the party was to get her car. It was gone, recovered a week later, tires smoked off, an empty chicken bucket in the backseat along with her jeans and underwear. They apparently used her car to drive her to the scene of the crime.</p><p>Back to the gas station to call her niggerloving dad. Suddenly, he wasn't the niggerlover he had been prior to his daughter sitting next to him with nigger jiz breath on the way to the hospital.</p><p>DNA was collected and she was given an abortion type pill to prevent her from having a zebra. No DNA matches because apparently the<br>criminals had never been caught by any enforcement agency yet.</p><p>Today, 10 years later, she has the worst type of STD known to man, it will never go away, but what does go away is any man who finds out she has an STD from a nigger gang bang. And if someday she finds a sympathetic man who isn't afraid to put his dick in her, he will also face the risk of catching a severe case of crank rot as well as any children she may have that will be infected.</p><p>Now, tell me how her niggerloving daddy did her any good preparing her for the real world. It was only one night but that one night ruined her for the rest of her life.</p><p>You could probably find daddy here on Chimpout today, but he paid a high price for addmission here, he paid it with one of his little girls.</p><p>Spread the word. Girls, stay away from niggers at all cost!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My sister in law , a very attractive girl in college and unfortunatly , raised by nigger loving parents became close friends with a coalburner .
Seeing no problem with this because her parents did her no favor by not educating her about the reality of real niggers , but how all niggers are magic niggers , this is what happened : Coalburning friend asks her to take her and her buck nigger to a party because she had a car .
So she actually gives this buck nigger a lift to the party .
It 's a college rager , everyone is drinking , her girlfriend leaves her to go smoke some black dick .
She finds herself swarmed by a group of bucks totaly Muh Dikking her .
One of them spikes her drink.She wakes up in the morning on a mattress in the basement of a piss smelling apartment building .
Her shoes , pants and underwear nowhere to be found .
Her shirt is around her neck , her bra missing as well .
No keys , cell , or purse either.She felt somthing crusty all over her face along with a gagging awful slime in her mouth and throat .
Her vagina and anus felt as if they were burning .
She had been gang raped for what was later to be determined by at least 8 niggers for at least 2 hours , possibly longer.She was able to pull her shirt down far enough to walk out to look for help .
She saw a gas station 2 doors down but had to run behind the dumpster to throw up .
She found her purse behind the dumpster , empty of course .
She had a spare car key zipped into a purse pocket , she knew where she was and with a nasty discarded jacket she found behind the dumpster , she walked back to where the party was to get her car .
It was gone , recovered a week later , tires smoked off , an empty chicken bucket in the backseat along with her jeans and underwear .
They apparently used her car to drive her to the scene of the crime.Back to the gas station to call her niggerloving dad .
Suddenly , he was n't the niggerlover he had been prior to his daughter sitting next to him with nigger jiz breath on the way to the hospital.DNA was collected and she was given an abortion type pill to prevent her from having a zebra .
No DNA matches because apparently thecriminals had never been caught by any enforcement agency yet.Today , 10 years later , she has the worst type of STD known to man , it will never go away , but what does go away is any man who finds out she has an STD from a nigger gang bang .
And if someday she finds a sympathetic man who is n't afraid to put his dick in her , he will also face the risk of catching a severe case of crank rot as well as any children she may have that will be infected.Now , tell me how her niggerloving daddy did her any good preparing her for the real world .
It was only one night but that one night ruined her for the rest of her life.You could probably find daddy here on Chimpout today , but he paid a high price for addmission here , he paid it with one of his little girls.Spread the word .
Girls , stay away from niggers at all cost !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My sister in law, a very attractive girl in college and unfortunatly, raised by nigger loving parents became close friends with a coalburner.
Seeing no problem with this because her parents did her no favor by not educating her about the reality of real niggers, but how all niggers are magic niggers, this is what happened:Coalburning friend asks her to take her and her buck nigger to a party because she had a car.
So she actually gives this buck nigger a lift to the party.
It's a college rager, everyone is drinking, her girlfriend leaves her to go smoke some black dick.
She finds herself swarmed by a group of bucks totaly Muh Dikking her.
One of them spikes her drink.She wakes up in the morning on a mattress in the basement of a piss smelling apartment building.
Her shoes, pants and underwear nowhere to be found.
Her shirt is around her neck, her bra missing as well.
No keys, cell, or purse either.She felt somthing crusty all over her face along with a gagging awful slime in her mouth and throat.
Her vagina and anus felt as if they were burning.
She had been gang raped for what was later to be determined by at least 8 niggers for at least 2 hours, possibly longer.She was able to pull her shirt down far enough to walk out to look for help.
She saw a gas station 2 doors down but had to run behind the dumpster to throw up.
She found her purse behind the dumpster, empty of course.
She had a spare car key zipped into a purse pocket, she knew where she was and with a nasty discarded jacket she found behind the dumpster, she walked back to where the party was to get her car.
It was gone, recovered a week later, tires smoked off, an empty chicken bucket in the backseat along with her jeans and underwear.
They apparently used her car to drive her to the scene of the crime.Back to the gas station to call her niggerloving dad.
Suddenly, he wasn't the niggerlover he had been prior to his daughter sitting next to him with nigger jiz breath on the way to the hospital.DNA was collected and she was given an abortion type pill to prevent her from having a zebra.
No DNA matches because apparently thecriminals had never been caught by any enforcement agency yet.Today, 10 years later, she has the worst type of STD known to man, it will never go away, but what does go away is any man who finds out she has an STD from a nigger gang bang.
And if someday she finds a sympathetic man who isn't afraid to put his dick in her, he will also face the risk of catching a severe case of crank rot as well as any children she may have that will be infected.Now, tell me how her niggerloving daddy did her any good preparing her for the real world.
It was only one night but that one night ruined her for the rest of her life.You could probably find daddy here on Chimpout today, but he paid a high price for addmission here, he paid it with one of his little girls.Spread the word.
Girls, stay away from niggers at all cost!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150700</id>
	<title>Re:Impressive....</title>
	<author>dlevitan</author>
	<datestamp>1266239880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The lack of voice over LTE is because it will use the same data channel for voice (i.e. VoIP). So it's not like any of the hardware has to be change. The reason it's not being deployed now is that there's no consensus over how voice should be done on LTE. I'm thrilled that VZW is waiting. LTE will be the global standard, and it will be good if they maintain full compatibility with global networks. Unfortunately, VZW is one of the first companies to deploy it - it appears the rest of the world is lagging behind.</p><p>As for it needing to retain CDMA on phones, that's also good. IT will be a while before VZW deploys LTE with the same coverage as CDMA. This is needed for backwards compatibility.</p><p>While I understand it's a slow process, consider that VZW, unlike most of their competitors, is actively pushing forward with LTE.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The lack of voice over LTE is because it will use the same data channel for voice ( i.e .
VoIP ) . So it 's not like any of the hardware has to be change .
The reason it 's not being deployed now is that there 's no consensus over how voice should be done on LTE .
I 'm thrilled that VZW is waiting .
LTE will be the global standard , and it will be good if they maintain full compatibility with global networks .
Unfortunately , VZW is one of the first companies to deploy it - it appears the rest of the world is lagging behind.As for it needing to retain CDMA on phones , that 's also good .
IT will be a while before VZW deploys LTE with the same coverage as CDMA .
This is needed for backwards compatibility.While I understand it 's a slow process , consider that VZW , unlike most of their competitors , is actively pushing forward with LTE .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The lack of voice over LTE is because it will use the same data channel for voice (i.e.
VoIP). So it's not like any of the hardware has to be change.
The reason it's not being deployed now is that there's no consensus over how voice should be done on LTE.
I'm thrilled that VZW is waiting.
LTE will be the global standard, and it will be good if they maintain full compatibility with global networks.
Unfortunately, VZW is one of the first companies to deploy it - it appears the rest of the world is lagging behind.As for it needing to retain CDMA on phones, that's also good.
IT will be a while before VZW deploys LTE with the same coverage as CDMA.
This is needed for backwards compatibility.While I understand it's a slow process, consider that VZW, unlike most of their competitors, is actively pushing forward with LTE.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149772</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149974</id>
	<title>I'm jealous</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266235080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Having worked on LTE and LTE Advanced these last two years of my university degree, I can't wait to see and use the actual network... Well, guess I'll have to wait a bit longer to see it in Europe...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Having worked on LTE and LTE Advanced these last two years of my university degree , I ca n't wait to see and use the actual network... Well , guess I 'll have to wait a bit longer to see it in Europe.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having worked on LTE and LTE Advanced these last two years of my university degree, I can't wait to see and use the actual network... Well, guess I'll have to wait a bit longer to see it in Europe...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31157816</id>
	<title>Re:VoIP</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266347760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The problem is that some of the standards for telephony services over LTE (which is an all-IP network) have not quite been finalised yet.  This includes things like SMS bridges and the standards for mapping SIP addresses to phone numbers.</p></div><p>sip-&gt;phone number mapping can be done with dns. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAPTR\_record" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">naptr</a> [wikipedia.org]. are there other approaches?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is that some of the standards for telephony services over LTE ( which is an all-IP network ) have not quite been finalised yet .
This includes things like SMS bridges and the standards for mapping SIP addresses to phone numbers.sip- &gt; phone number mapping can be done with dns .
naptr [ wikipedia.org ] .
are there other approaches ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is that some of the standards for telephony services over LTE (which is an all-IP network) have not quite been finalised yet.
This includes things like SMS bridges and the standards for mapping SIP addresses to phone numbers.sip-&gt;phone number mapping can be done with dns.
naptr [wikipedia.org].
are there other approaches?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150556</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149870</id>
	<title>Damn.</title>
	<author>aldld</author>
	<datestamp>1266234480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Damn it, I should have waited to buy my phone, instead of just buying it yesterday!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Damn it , I should have waited to buy my phone , instead of just buying it yesterday !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Damn it, I should have waited to buy my phone, instead of just buying it yesterday!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2142237_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31152918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150558
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2142237_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31156376
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149856
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2142237_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31151710
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150566
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149772
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2142237_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150414
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149940
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2142237_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31157816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149856
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2142237_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31154772
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149856
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2142237_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150736
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149940
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2142237_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31169040
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31151008
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150566
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149772
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2142237_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150400
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149772
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2142237_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150648
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149940
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2142237_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31152866
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150558
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2142237_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31151056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150558
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2142237_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31154360
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150566
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149772
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2142237_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31152878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149940
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2142237_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31154458
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149772
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2142237_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31151990
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150566
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149772
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2142237_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31152034
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150558
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2142237_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31154832
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31151882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149772
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2142237_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150044
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149856
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2142237_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31152584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149974
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2142237_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150700
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149772
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2142237.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149856
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150044
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150556
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31154772
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31157816
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31156376
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2142237.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150558
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31152866
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31151056
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31152034
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31152918
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2142237.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149940
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150414
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150736
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31152878
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150648
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2142237.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149974
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31152584
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2142237.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149862
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2142237.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31149772
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150700
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150566
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31154360
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31151008
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31169040
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31151990
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31151710
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31154458
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31151882
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31154832
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150400
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2142237.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2142237.31150026
</commentlist>
</conversation>
