<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_20_048256</id>
	<title>DARPA Puts $32M Toward Quadruped Robot Prototype</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1266655860000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>The Installer writes with this selection from GizMag: <i>"Walking quadrupeds are being cast to play a major role in the rapidly unfolding age of robotics. The platform promises versatility far beyond that of wheeled-vehicles and will undoubtedly find applications in a wide variety of fields. Not surprisingly, the development of quadrupeds is being driven by the military and DARPA has recently boosted its efforts by awarding Boston Dynamics $32 million for the <a href="http://www.gizmag.com/darpa-lc3-robot-quadruped/14256/">prototype phase of its Legged Squad Support System (LS3) program</a>. ... LC3 is conceived as an autonomous support pack-robot for ground troops that can carry 400 pounds or more of payload, sustain itself for 24 hours and cover 20 miles in almost any kind of terrain."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Installer writes with this selection from GizMag : " Walking quadrupeds are being cast to play a major role in the rapidly unfolding age of robotics .
The platform promises versatility far beyond that of wheeled-vehicles and will undoubtedly find applications in a wide variety of fields .
Not surprisingly , the development of quadrupeds is being driven by the military and DARPA has recently boosted its efforts by awarding Boston Dynamics $ 32 million for the prototype phase of its Legged Squad Support System ( LS3 ) program .
... LC3 is conceived as an autonomous support pack-robot for ground troops that can carry 400 pounds or more of payload , sustain itself for 24 hours and cover 20 miles in almost any kind of terrain .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Installer writes with this selection from GizMag: "Walking quadrupeds are being cast to play a major role in the rapidly unfolding age of robotics.
The platform promises versatility far beyond that of wheeled-vehicles and will undoubtedly find applications in a wide variety of fields.
Not surprisingly, the development of quadrupeds is being driven by the military and DARPA has recently boosted its efforts by awarding Boston Dynamics $32 million for the prototype phase of its Legged Squad Support System (LS3) program.
... LC3 is conceived as an autonomous support pack-robot for ground troops that can carry 400 pounds or more of payload, sustain itself for 24 hours and cover 20 miles in almost any kind of terrain.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208908</id>
	<title>Re:Why four legs?</title>
	<author>immaterial</author>
	<datestamp>1266663120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, was there a time when vertebrates ever had six limbs? I thought we'd just happened to pop out of the water that way; given that we vertebrates have all kept our basic layout since then, I wouldn't really say evolution ever had the opportunity to try six limbs on a large land creature.<br>
<br>
Obviously more legs doesn't necessarily mean better. Why not eight, like the last guy said? There's an advantage to redundancy but like you said there are disadvantages as well. It just seems to me like six would be a happier medium between the two.<br>
<br>
You need three points on the ground to remain relatively stable without getting into balance issues. Of course a good robot could balance itself on two - hell even a Segway can do it - but lets say in a complex situation like trying to climb a steep rocky hill in Afghanistan in a hurry you want as much stability as possible (note a person in that situation will be using their hands for additional stability too). To move while doing that requires at least one more limb, for a total of four. If there is have a failure in just one limb, you've reduced the robot's stability by quite a bit. I just seems to me like six would be worth it in varied terrain - I mean, if all you're going to do is bound across the plains all day like a gazelle the extra limbs may not be useful, but I'm imagining these things in more steep, mountainous areas as well, where extra footing could be a huge asset.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , was there a time when vertebrates ever had six limbs ?
I thought we 'd just happened to pop out of the water that way ; given that we vertebrates have all kept our basic layout since then , I would n't really say evolution ever had the opportunity to try six limbs on a large land creature .
Obviously more legs does n't necessarily mean better .
Why not eight , like the last guy said ?
There 's an advantage to redundancy but like you said there are disadvantages as well .
It just seems to me like six would be a happier medium between the two .
You need three points on the ground to remain relatively stable without getting into balance issues .
Of course a good robot could balance itself on two - hell even a Segway can do it - but lets say in a complex situation like trying to climb a steep rocky hill in Afghanistan in a hurry you want as much stability as possible ( note a person in that situation will be using their hands for additional stability too ) .
To move while doing that requires at least one more limb , for a total of four .
If there is have a failure in just one limb , you 've reduced the robot 's stability by quite a bit .
I just seems to me like six would be worth it in varied terrain - I mean , if all you 're going to do is bound across the plains all day like a gazelle the extra limbs may not be useful , but I 'm imagining these things in more steep , mountainous areas as well , where extra footing could be a huge asset .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, was there a time when vertebrates ever had six limbs?
I thought we'd just happened to pop out of the water that way; given that we vertebrates have all kept our basic layout since then, I wouldn't really say evolution ever had the opportunity to try six limbs on a large land creature.
Obviously more legs doesn't necessarily mean better.
Why not eight, like the last guy said?
There's an advantage to redundancy but like you said there are disadvantages as well.
It just seems to me like six would be a happier medium between the two.
You need three points on the ground to remain relatively stable without getting into balance issues.
Of course a good robot could balance itself on two - hell even a Segway can do it - but lets say in a complex situation like trying to climb a steep rocky hill in Afghanistan in a hurry you want as much stability as possible (note a person in that situation will be using their hands for additional stability too).
To move while doing that requires at least one more limb, for a total of four.
If there is have a failure in just one limb, you've reduced the robot's stability by quite a bit.
I just seems to me like six would be worth it in varied terrain - I mean, if all you're going to do is bound across the plains all day like a gazelle the extra limbs may not be useful, but I'm imagining these things in more steep, mountainous areas as well, where extra footing could be a huge asset.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31209570</id>
	<title>needs a ton more work</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266675180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>no - one is going to wait for that mincing donkey to catch up in a combat environment, plus it would be a prime target and a sitting duck for anyone with any foresight</p><p>crpl Jones: hey sarg! our packmule machine thingy just got shot up, it's stuck out there in the open with all our gear and ammo, and the radio...</p><p>Sarg: well volunteered Jones, bring back the radio first and I'll send for a mechanic...</p><p>crpl Jones: duh!.</p><p>useful? more use if it could do the combat and the soldiers stay in cover and issue orders, fit some guns to it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>no - one is going to wait for that mincing donkey to catch up in a combat environment , plus it would be a prime target and a sitting duck for anyone with any foresightcrpl Jones : hey sarg !
our packmule machine thingy just got shot up , it 's stuck out there in the open with all our gear and ammo , and the radio...Sarg : well volunteered Jones , bring back the radio first and I 'll send for a mechanic...crpl Jones : duh ! .useful ?
more use if it could do the combat and the soldiers stay in cover and issue orders , fit some guns to it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>no - one is going to wait for that mincing donkey to catch up in a combat environment, plus it would be a prime target and a sitting duck for anyone with any foresightcrpl Jones: hey sarg!
our packmule machine thingy just got shot up, it's stuck out there in the open with all our gear and ammo, and the radio...Sarg: well volunteered Jones, bring back the radio first and I'll send for a mechanic...crpl Jones: duh!.useful?
more use if it could do the combat and the soldiers stay in cover and issue orders, fit some guns to it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31213538</id>
	<title>Re:Congratulations</title>
	<author>couchslug</author>
	<datestamp>1266663660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"They just specced a camel!"</p><p>I put my assigned camel in War Reserve Material (WRM) storage, properly wrapped with desiccant packs, then charged the container with dry nitrogen.</p><p>When my unit deployed, we opened the box, but camel was all wrinkly, very quiet, and wouldn't get up. Attempts to jump start it off a slave cable from my truck were unsuccessful. The design needs work.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" They just specced a camel !
" I put my assigned camel in War Reserve Material ( WRM ) storage , properly wrapped with desiccant packs , then charged the container with dry nitrogen.When my unit deployed , we opened the box , but camel was all wrinkly , very quiet , and would n't get up .
Attempts to jump start it off a slave cable from my truck were unsuccessful .
The design needs work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"They just specced a camel!
"I put my assigned camel in War Reserve Material (WRM) storage, properly wrapped with desiccant packs, then charged the container with dry nitrogen.When my unit deployed, we opened the box, but camel was all wrinkly, very quiet, and wouldn't get up.
Attempts to jump start it off a slave cable from my truck were unsuccessful.
The design needs work.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208966</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208734</id>
	<title>and....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266659760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So it begins....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So it begins... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So it begins....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31223702</id>
	<title>Re:Why four legs?</title>
	<author>Animats</author>
	<datestamp>1266758040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
No, four legs are better for a large machine.  There's a tradeoff between leg working envelope, vehicle length, and top speed.
</p><p>
There was a big fad for six-legged insect robots in the 1990s, led by Rod Brooks at MIT. Those were very slow, very dumb, and had a very wide stance.  Six legs don't scale up well.  One big issue is inertia.
</p><p>
Double the dimensions of something, and it gets four times as strong (strength comes from cross-section) but eight times as massive (mass comes from volume.)  This is called the cube-square law, and it's why there are no giant insects.  For small creatures,
forces like surface tension matter, but inertia doesn't.  For large, fast ones, inertia dominates.
</p><p>
Before dynamic balance was figured out, robots tended to have very wide stances, and some had too many legs.
DARPA built funded the <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Machines-That-Walk-Adaptive-Suspension/dp/0262192748" title="amazon.com">Adaptive Suspension Vehicle</a> [amazon.com] at Ohio State in the 1980s.   28 feet long, six legs, seats one, no cargo capacity.  Top speed 3-5 MPH on flat ground.
At least three legs were on the ground at all times, and often four, five, or six. The gaits were very conservative.
It was supposed to be off-road capable, but that part never worked. A sloping road was as far as they got.  There was some computer control, but the thing was mostly driven by an onboard driver, using three joysticks.
</p><p>
With dynamic balance and traction control, the leg geometry doesn't have to be as conservative.  BigDog's leg geometry is four legs with three joints each, a narrow stance, and control which allows the leg envelopes to overlap.  This is close to the layout of the larger
quadrupeds.  (BigDog has the size and weight of a medium pony; it's bigger than dog-size.)
</p><p>With four legs and a long body, pitch stability isn't too hard, but roll stability requires active control.  The faster quadrupedal mammals have very narrow stances; a horse's track is less than a foot wide, narrower than its body.  BigDog doesn't track quite that narrow, but it gets close. The narrow track makes tight turns possible, and allows sudden changes in yaw when needed for slip recovery or collision avoidance.
</p><p>
With dynamic balance and slip control, the speed can be cranked up.  The six-legged machines mostly crawled; the modern four-legged machines trot, and some run.  (The usual running gaits, the ones with a moment of suspension, for a quadruped are the trot, pronk, rotatory gallop, and canter.  BigDog can trot and pronk; it may be able to do a rotatory gallop.)  That's the real reason to go with four legs.  Six legs just get in the way at speed.
</p><p>
BigDog's <a href="http://www.animats.com/papers/articulated/articulated.html" title="animats.com">three-joint leg</a> [animats.com] isn't mentioned much, but the third joint lets the control system adjust the ground contact force vector to stay within the friction cone, without changing the
foot position.  This is a big win when climbing hills, and the hind end needs to come under the body.
</p><p>It's all about the control algorithms.  Don't let the legs collide, prevent slip, recover from slip, support the body, maintain roll balance, provide propulsion, avoid obstacles, stay on course, accomplish the mission.  Those are the priorities.
</p><p>
If you want to understand the theory behind BigDog, read <a href="http://www.martinbuehler.net/theses/Didier\_Papadopoulos\_thesis.pdf" title="martinbuehler.net">Didier Papadoupolis's thesis</a> [martinbuehler.net], "Stable Running for a Quadruped Robot with Compliant Legs".  The technology for BigDog came from Martin Buehler's lab at McGill University.  Buehler himself quit McGill and went to work for Boston Dynamics as the chief engineer on BigDog.  (Once BigDog worked, he went to iRobot.) The theory is out there in the literature. Some of it is mine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , four legs are better for a large machine .
There 's a tradeoff between leg working envelope , vehicle length , and top speed .
There was a big fad for six-legged insect robots in the 1990s , led by Rod Brooks at MIT .
Those were very slow , very dumb , and had a very wide stance .
Six legs do n't scale up well .
One big issue is inertia .
Double the dimensions of something , and it gets four times as strong ( strength comes from cross-section ) but eight times as massive ( mass comes from volume .
) This is called the cube-square law , and it 's why there are no giant insects .
For small creatures , forces like surface tension matter , but inertia does n't .
For large , fast ones , inertia dominates .
Before dynamic balance was figured out , robots tended to have very wide stances , and some had too many legs .
DARPA built funded the Adaptive Suspension Vehicle [ amazon.com ] at Ohio State in the 1980s .
28 feet long , six legs , seats one , no cargo capacity .
Top speed 3-5 MPH on flat ground .
At least three legs were on the ground at all times , and often four , five , or six .
The gaits were very conservative .
It was supposed to be off-road capable , but that part never worked .
A sloping road was as far as they got .
There was some computer control , but the thing was mostly driven by an onboard driver , using three joysticks .
With dynamic balance and traction control , the leg geometry does n't have to be as conservative .
BigDog 's leg geometry is four legs with three joints each , a narrow stance , and control which allows the leg envelopes to overlap .
This is close to the layout of the larger quadrupeds .
( BigDog has the size and weight of a medium pony ; it 's bigger than dog-size .
) With four legs and a long body , pitch stability is n't too hard , but roll stability requires active control .
The faster quadrupedal mammals have very narrow stances ; a horse 's track is less than a foot wide , narrower than its body .
BigDog does n't track quite that narrow , but it gets close .
The narrow track makes tight turns possible , and allows sudden changes in yaw when needed for slip recovery or collision avoidance .
With dynamic balance and slip control , the speed can be cranked up .
The six-legged machines mostly crawled ; the modern four-legged machines trot , and some run .
( The usual running gaits , the ones with a moment of suspension , for a quadruped are the trot , pronk , rotatory gallop , and canter .
BigDog can trot and pronk ; it may be able to do a rotatory gallop .
) That 's the real reason to go with four legs .
Six legs just get in the way at speed .
BigDog 's three-joint leg [ animats.com ] is n't mentioned much , but the third joint lets the control system adjust the ground contact force vector to stay within the friction cone , without changing the foot position .
This is a big win when climbing hills , and the hind end needs to come under the body .
It 's all about the control algorithms .
Do n't let the legs collide , prevent slip , recover from slip , support the body , maintain roll balance , provide propulsion , avoid obstacles , stay on course , accomplish the mission .
Those are the priorities .
If you want to understand the theory behind BigDog , read Didier Papadoupolis 's thesis [ martinbuehler.net ] , " Stable Running for a Quadruped Robot with Compliant Legs " .
The technology for BigDog came from Martin Buehler 's lab at McGill University .
Buehler himself quit McGill and went to work for Boston Dynamics as the chief engineer on BigDog .
( Once BigDog worked , he went to iRobot .
) The theory is out there in the literature .
Some of it is mine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
No, four legs are better for a large machine.
There's a tradeoff between leg working envelope, vehicle length, and top speed.
There was a big fad for six-legged insect robots in the 1990s, led by Rod Brooks at MIT.
Those were very slow, very dumb, and had a very wide stance.
Six legs don't scale up well.
One big issue is inertia.
Double the dimensions of something, and it gets four times as strong (strength comes from cross-section) but eight times as massive (mass comes from volume.
)  This is called the cube-square law, and it's why there are no giant insects.
For small creatures,
forces like surface tension matter, but inertia doesn't.
For large, fast ones, inertia dominates.
Before dynamic balance was figured out, robots tended to have very wide stances, and some had too many legs.
DARPA built funded the Adaptive Suspension Vehicle [amazon.com] at Ohio State in the 1980s.
28 feet long, six legs, seats one, no cargo capacity.
Top speed 3-5 MPH on flat ground.
At least three legs were on the ground at all times, and often four, five, or six.
The gaits were very conservative.
It was supposed to be off-road capable, but that part never worked.
A sloping road was as far as they got.
There was some computer control, but the thing was mostly driven by an onboard driver, using three joysticks.
With dynamic balance and traction control, the leg geometry doesn't have to be as conservative.
BigDog's leg geometry is four legs with three joints each, a narrow stance, and control which allows the leg envelopes to overlap.
This is close to the layout of the larger
quadrupeds.
(BigDog has the size and weight of a medium pony; it's bigger than dog-size.
)
With four legs and a long body, pitch stability isn't too hard, but roll stability requires active control.
The faster quadrupedal mammals have very narrow stances; a horse's track is less than a foot wide, narrower than its body.
BigDog doesn't track quite that narrow, but it gets close.
The narrow track makes tight turns possible, and allows sudden changes in yaw when needed for slip recovery or collision avoidance.
With dynamic balance and slip control, the speed can be cranked up.
The six-legged machines mostly crawled; the modern four-legged machines trot, and some run.
(The usual running gaits, the ones with a moment of suspension, for a quadruped are the trot, pronk, rotatory gallop, and canter.
BigDog can trot and pronk; it may be able to do a rotatory gallop.
)  That's the real reason to go with four legs.
Six legs just get in the way at speed.
BigDog's three-joint leg [animats.com] isn't mentioned much, but the third joint lets the control system adjust the ground contact force vector to stay within the friction cone, without changing the
foot position.
This is a big win when climbing hills, and the hind end needs to come under the body.
It's all about the control algorithms.
Don't let the legs collide, prevent slip, recover from slip, support the body, maintain roll balance, provide propulsion, avoid obstacles, stay on course, accomplish the mission.
Those are the priorities.
If you want to understand the theory behind BigDog, read Didier Papadoupolis's thesis [martinbuehler.net], "Stable Running for a Quadruped Robot with Compliant Legs".
The technology for BigDog came from Martin Buehler's lab at McGill University.
Buehler himself quit McGill and went to work for Boston Dynamics as the chief engineer on BigDog.
(Once BigDog worked, he went to iRobot.
) The theory is out there in the literature.
Some of it is mine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208762</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31211284</id>
	<title>Re:Congratulations</title>
	<author>Ihmhi</author>
	<datestamp>1266693240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If a Camel gets a leg blown off, can you replace it with a spare?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If a Camel gets a leg blown off , can you replace it with a spare ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If a Camel gets a leg blown off, can you replace it with a spare?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208966</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31211956</id>
	<title>Is Forth behind this robotics explosion??</title>
	<author>dukesterr</author>
	<datestamp>1266696780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just wondering if Forth - or the so-called "Toilet Flushing Forth", to the Forth community's friend -- "werty" - is the programming language enabling these modern day robots? It would be about time after a 30 year hiatus from moving a telescope in Arizona. Better late than never, I guess.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just wondering if Forth - or the so-called " Toilet Flushing Forth " , to the Forth community 's friend -- " werty " - is the programming language enabling these modern day robots ?
It would be about time after a 30 year hiatus from moving a telescope in Arizona .
Better late than never , I guess .
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just wondering if Forth - or the so-called "Toilet Flushing Forth", to the Forth community's friend -- "werty" - is the programming language enabling these modern day robots?
It would be about time after a 30 year hiatus from moving a telescope in Arizona.
Better late than never, I guess.
;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31209176</id>
	<title>quirks of language</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266668880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Wheeled-vehicles"? Do those resemble wheeled vehicles? Curious, I just saw that bizarre twitch of reflexive hyphenation on Boing Boing. You're outed, Timothy. You're Cory Doctorow.</p><p>Get English lessons.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Wheeled-vehicles " ?
Do those resemble wheeled vehicles ?
Curious , I just saw that bizarre twitch of reflexive hyphenation on Boing Boing .
You 're outed , Timothy .
You 're Cory Doctorow.Get English lessons .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Wheeled-vehicles"?
Do those resemble wheeled vehicles?
Curious, I just saw that bizarre twitch of reflexive hyphenation on Boing Boing.
You're outed, Timothy.
You're Cory Doctorow.Get English lessons.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208762</id>
	<title>Why four legs?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266660300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wouldn't six be more stable, distribute weight better, and be more redundant in case of failure of a limb?

The only advantages I can think of to four is better efficiency (maybe? Having to move fewer limbs should be a plus, but on the other hand they'll each also have to be more powerful) and a slightly more compact form. Is it worth it? I'd certainly find a couple extra limbs convenient; you'd think a military robot in potentially harsh conditions would also find a couple spares very useful.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Would n't six be more stable , distribute weight better , and be more redundant in case of failure of a limb ?
The only advantages I can think of to four is better efficiency ( maybe ?
Having to move fewer limbs should be a plus , but on the other hand they 'll each also have to be more powerful ) and a slightly more compact form .
Is it worth it ?
I 'd certainly find a couple extra limbs convenient ; you 'd think a military robot in potentially harsh conditions would also find a couple spares very useful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wouldn't six be more stable, distribute weight better, and be more redundant in case of failure of a limb?
The only advantages I can think of to four is better efficiency (maybe?
Having to move fewer limbs should be a plus, but on the other hand they'll each also have to be more powerful) and a slightly more compact form.
Is it worth it?
I'd certainly find a couple extra limbs convenient; you'd think a military robot in potentially harsh conditions would also find a couple spares very useful.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31209636</id>
	<title>Re:Why four legs?</title>
	<author>Patch86</author>
	<datestamp>1266676140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Erm, well there are lots of animals which have different numbers of legs (crustaceans and insects 6, arachnids and cephalopods 8, etc.). Over the course of billions of years, most designs have been given a chance at competing in most areas.</p><p>I don't think it can be a coincidence, completely outside of the mechanics of evolution, that more than 4 legs are prolific in small animals (crabs and large bugs at the largest) while most larger animals have gone for 4 or less. Arguing that this has absolutely nothing to do with natural selection would be a difficult standpoint.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Erm , well there are lots of animals which have different numbers of legs ( crustaceans and insects 6 , arachnids and cephalopods 8 , etc. ) .
Over the course of billions of years , most designs have been given a chance at competing in most areas.I do n't think it can be a coincidence , completely outside of the mechanics of evolution , that more than 4 legs are prolific in small animals ( crabs and large bugs at the largest ) while most larger animals have gone for 4 or less .
Arguing that this has absolutely nothing to do with natural selection would be a difficult standpoint .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Erm, well there are lots of animals which have different numbers of legs (crustaceans and insects 6, arachnids and cephalopods 8, etc.).
Over the course of billions of years, most designs have been given a chance at competing in most areas.I don't think it can be a coincidence, completely outside of the mechanics of evolution, that more than 4 legs are prolific in small animals (crabs and large bugs at the largest) while most larger animals have gone for 4 or less.
Arguing that this has absolutely nothing to do with natural selection would be a difficult standpoint.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208908</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31209152</id>
	<title>Duplicate</title>
	<author>pgn674</author>
	<datestamp>1266668340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dupe: <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/story/10/02/01/2141213/Militarys-Robotic-Pack-Mule-Gets-32M-Boost" title="slashdot.org">Slashdot Technology Story | Military's Robotic Pack Mule Gets $32M Boost</a> [slashdot.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dupe : Slashdot Technology Story | Military 's Robotic Pack Mule Gets $ 32M Boost [ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dupe: Slashdot Technology Story | Military's Robotic Pack Mule Gets $32M Boost [slashdot.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208826</id>
	<title>Re:Why four legs?</title>
	<author>goldaryn</author>
	<datestamp>1266661620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Wouldn't six be more stable, distribute weight better, and be more redundant in case of failure of a limb?</p></div><p>Extra limbs are a whole extra level of complexity in terms of limb control and present extra vulnerabilities as well as extra benefits. Like with anything, limbs present diminishing returns; millions of years of evolution has settled on 4 limbs as a good number for a large land creature.<br>
<br>
Or, if you prefer "God made it that way".<br>
<br>
Or, "4 legs GOOD, 6 legs BAD"</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Would n't six be more stable , distribute weight better , and be more redundant in case of failure of a limb ? Extra limbs are a whole extra level of complexity in terms of limb control and present extra vulnerabilities as well as extra benefits .
Like with anything , limbs present diminishing returns ; millions of years of evolution has settled on 4 limbs as a good number for a large land creature .
Or , if you prefer " God made it that way " .
Or , " 4 legs GOOD , 6 legs BAD "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wouldn't six be more stable, distribute weight better, and be more redundant in case of failure of a limb?Extra limbs are a whole extra level of complexity in terms of limb control and present extra vulnerabilities as well as extra benefits.
Like with anything, limbs present diminishing returns; millions of years of evolution has settled on 4 limbs as a good number for a large land creature.
Or, if you prefer "God made it that way".
Or, "4 legs GOOD, 6 legs BAD"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208762</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31211654</id>
	<title>"Legged Squad Support System" == LC3?</title>
	<author>tqk</author>
	<datestamp>1266695220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>... prototype phase of its Legged Squad Support System (LS3) program.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... LC3 is conceived<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></div><p>LC3?  Where'd that come from?!?

Why do so few of you submitters ever bother to re-read your own submissions?  Assuming you can read.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>... prototype phase of its Legged Squad Support System ( LS3 ) program .
... LC3 is conceived ...LC3 ?
Where 'd that come from ? ! ?
Why do so few of you submitters ever bother to re-read your own submissions ?
Assuming you can read .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ... prototype phase of its Legged Squad Support System (LS3) program.
... LC3 is conceived ...LC3?
Where'd that come from?!?
Why do so few of you submitters ever bother to re-read your own submissions?
Assuming you can read.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208766</id>
	<title>Duplicate story</title>
	<author>ajknott</author>
	<datestamp>1266660360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Already been covered - <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/story/10/02/01/2141213/Militarys-Robotic-Pack-Mule-Gets-32M-Boost" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://tech.slashdot.org/story/10/02/01/2141213/Militarys-Robotic-Pack-Mule-Gets-32M-Boost</a> [slashdot.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Already been covered - http : //tech.slashdot.org/story/10/02/01/2141213/Militarys-Robotic-Pack-Mule-Gets-32M-Boost [ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Already been covered - http://tech.slashdot.org/story/10/02/01/2141213/Militarys-Robotic-Pack-Mule-Gets-32M-Boost [slashdot.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208966</id>
	<title>Congratulations</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266664320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>from TFS: <i> LC3 is conceived as an autonomous support pack-robot for ground troops that can carry 400 pounds or more of payload, sustain itself for 24 hours and cover 20 miles in almost any kind of terrain</i>
<br> <br>
They just specced a camel!</htmltext>
<tokenext>from TFS : LC3 is conceived as an autonomous support pack-robot for ground troops that can carry 400 pounds or more of payload , sustain itself for 24 hours and cover 20 miles in almost any kind of terrain They just specced a camel !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>from TFS:  LC3 is conceived as an autonomous support pack-robot for ground troops that can carry 400 pounds or more of payload, sustain itself for 24 hours and cover 20 miles in almost any kind of terrain
 
They just specced a camel!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208732</id>
	<title>Greetings my mechanical hightech Overlord</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266659760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I for one welcome our AT-AT overlords.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I for one welcome our AT-AT overlords .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I for one welcome our AT-AT overlords.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31217456</id>
	<title>Re:Why four legs?</title>
	<author>myocardialinfarction</author>
	<datestamp>1266754200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Four legs good, two legs bad.

The government enjoyed riffing on 1984 so much they've started on Animal Farm.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Four legs good , two legs bad .
The government enjoyed riffing on 1984 so much they 've started on Animal Farm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Four legs good, two legs bad.
The government enjoyed riffing on 1984 so much they've started on Animal Farm.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208762</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31209654</id>
	<title>Hexapodia as the key insight.</title>
	<author>argent</author>
	<datestamp>1266676380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Crypto: 0<br>As-Received-By: OOB shipboard ad hoc<br>Language-Path: Arbwyth-&gt;Trade 24-&gt;Cherguelen-&gt;Triskweline, SjK units<br>From: Twirlip of the Mists<br>Subject: Blighter Video thread<br>Keywords: Hexapodia as the key insight<br>Distribution: Threat of the Blight<br>Approved: yes<br>Date: 8.68 days since Fall of Relay</p><p>I haven't had a chance to see the famous video from<br>Straumli Realm, except as an evocation. (My only<br>gateway onto the Net is very expensive.) Is it true<br>that humans have six legs? I wasn't sure from the<br>evocation. If these humans have three pairs of legs,<br>then I think there is an easy explanation for<br>--MORE--</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Crypto : 0As-Received-By : OOB shipboard ad hocLanguage-Path : Arbwyth- &gt; Trade 24- &gt; Cherguelen- &gt; Triskweline , SjK unitsFrom : Twirlip of the MistsSubject : Blighter Video threadKeywords : Hexapodia as the key insightDistribution : Threat of the BlightApproved : yesDate : 8.68 days since Fall of RelayI have n't had a chance to see the famous video fromStraumli Realm , except as an evocation .
( My onlygateway onto the Net is very expensive .
) Is it truethat humans have six legs ?
I was n't sure from theevocation .
If these humans have three pairs of legs,then I think there is an easy explanation for--MORE--</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Crypto: 0As-Received-By: OOB shipboard ad hocLanguage-Path: Arbwyth-&gt;Trade 24-&gt;Cherguelen-&gt;Triskweline, SjK unitsFrom: Twirlip of the MistsSubject: Blighter Video threadKeywords: Hexapodia as the key insightDistribution: Threat of the BlightApproved: yesDate: 8.68 days since Fall of RelayI haven't had a chance to see the famous video fromStraumli Realm, except as an evocation.
(My onlygateway onto the Net is very expensive.
) Is it truethat humans have six legs?
I wasn't sure from theevocation.
If these humans have three pairs of legs,then I think there is an easy explanation for--MORE--</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208762</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31210206</id>
	<title>Ok, Rebels!</title>
	<author>smith6174</author>
	<datestamp>1266683700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who is going to build the cable-towing tripping mechanism?

ATAT</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who is going to build the cable-towing tripping mechanism ?
ATAT</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who is going to build the cable-towing tripping mechanism?
ATAT</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31231148</id>
	<title>Re:Congratulations</title>
	<author>AmericanInKiev</author>
	<datestamp>1266862320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>except a camel can go several days... and live off the land.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>except a camel can go several days... and live off the land .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>except a camel can go several days... and live off the land.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208966</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31209018</id>
	<title>15 years in the making...</title>
	<author>Airborne-ng</author>
	<datestamp>1266665280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>METAL GEAR!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>METAL GEAR !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>METAL GEAR!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31209214</id>
	<title>Re:Congratulations</title>
	<author>dmgxmichael</author>
	<datestamp>1266669780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nothing was said about spitting.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nothing was said about spitting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nothing was said about spitting.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208966</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31210026</id>
	<title>Re:Congratulations</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266681780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Get this guy on the team</p><p>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3ovrT8pWww</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Get this guy on the teamhttp : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = O3ovrT8pWww</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Get this guy on the teamhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3ovrT8pWww</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208966</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31231112</id>
	<title>Re:Why four legs?</title>
	<author>AmericanInKiev</author>
	<datestamp>1266862260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Uh, Evolution has had plenty of experience with hexapods (spiders) and a plethra of arrangements, some less than symmetrical (crabs).<br>Very often, extra limbs are more valuable for manipulating food, than for motivation and become "arms", "claws", etc...</p><p>I'll bet they could have offered a prize of 1/10th that amount and got 10 better designs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Uh , Evolution has had plenty of experience with hexapods ( spiders ) and a plethra of arrangements , some less than symmetrical ( crabs ) .Very often , extra limbs are more valuable for manipulating food , than for motivation and become " arms " , " claws " , etc...I 'll bet they could have offered a prize of 1/10th that amount and got 10 better designs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uh, Evolution has had plenty of experience with hexapods (spiders) and a plethra of arrangements, some less than symmetrical (crabs).Very often, extra limbs are more valuable for manipulating food, than for motivation and become "arms", "claws", etc...I'll bet they could have offered a prize of 1/10th that amount and got 10 better designs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208908</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208882</id>
	<title>Re:Duplicate story</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266662520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The news is that they paid more money. By the way the robot is already on youtube,

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8s3n370mOyg" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8s3n370mOyg</a> [youtube.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>The news is that they paid more money .
By the way the robot is already on youtube , http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = 8s3n370mOyg [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The news is that they paid more money.
By the way the robot is already on youtube,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8s3n370mOyg [youtube.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208766</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31212286</id>
	<title>Re:Congratulations</title>
	<author>bill\_mcgonigle</author>
	<datestamp>1266698760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>They just specced a camel!</i></p><p>Can a camel be stored in containers, air-dropped from autonomous under-radar aircraft and fitted with remote controls, heavy weaponry, and multi-spectral vision?</p><p>OK, that would probably get DARPA funding too, but I think the point stands.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They just specced a camel ! Can a camel be stored in containers , air-dropped from autonomous under-radar aircraft and fitted with remote controls , heavy weaponry , and multi-spectral vision ? OK , that would probably get DARPA funding too , but I think the point stands .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They just specced a camel!Can a camel be stored in containers, air-dropped from autonomous under-radar aircraft and fitted with remote controls, heavy weaponry, and multi-spectral vision?OK, that would probably get DARPA funding too, but I think the point stands.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208966</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31209046</id>
	<title>ta30</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266666060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">uncover a 5tory of inc7udes where you</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>uncover a 5tory of inc7udes where you [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>uncover a 5tory of inc7udes where you [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31209604</id>
	<title>Re:Why four legs?</title>
	<author>Dachannien</author>
	<datestamp>1266675720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>but lets say in a complex situation like trying to climb a steep rocky hill in Afghanistan in a hurry you want as much stability as possible (note a person in that situation will be using their hands for additional stability too)</p></div><p>This, of course, is why mountain goats have six legs.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>but lets say in a complex situation like trying to climb a steep rocky hill in Afghanistan in a hurry you want as much stability as possible ( note a person in that situation will be using their hands for additional stability too ) This , of course , is why mountain goats have six legs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but lets say in a complex situation like trying to climb a steep rocky hill in Afghanistan in a hurry you want as much stability as possible (note a person in that situation will be using their hands for additional stability too)This, of course, is why mountain goats have six legs.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208908</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208830</id>
	<title>Re:Why four legs?</title>
	<author>pipingguy</author>
	<datestamp>1266661620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How much you wanna bet that military scientists are not yet evaluating this thing?<br> <br>

<a href="http://www.techfresh.net/six-legged-logging-machine-prototype/" title="techfresh.net">http://www.techfresh.net/six-legged-logging-machine-prototype/</a> [techfresh.net]</htmltext>
<tokenext>How much you wan na bet that military scientists are not yet evaluating this thing ?
http : //www.techfresh.net/six-legged-logging-machine-prototype/ [ techfresh.net ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How much you wanna bet that military scientists are not yet evaluating this thing?
http://www.techfresh.net/six-legged-logging-machine-prototype/ [techfresh.net]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208762</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31209488</id>
	<title>the better to (thou shalt not?) kill you with?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266673980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>just what we need? more&amp;more impersonal methods to destroy each other, &amp; a world that does not belong to us. eases some of the potential guilt involved.</p><p>it would seem the self-serving 'laws' of man'kind' are not quite aligned with the process of the big flash. there will NEVER be a better time to consult with/trust in your creators (maybe even your parents/elders).</p><p>no need to confuse 'religion' with being a spiritual being. our soul purpose here is to care for one another. failing that, we're simply passing through (excess baggage) being distracted/consumed by the guaranteed to fail illusionary trappings of man'kind'. &amp; recently, (about a 2000 years ago) it was determined that hoarding &amp; excess by a few, resulted in negative consequences for all.</p><p>the lights are coming up all over now. see you there?</p><p>boeing, boeing, gone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>just what we need ?
more&amp;more impersonal methods to destroy each other , &amp; a world that does not belong to us .
eases some of the potential guilt involved.it would seem the self-serving 'laws ' of man'kind ' are not quite aligned with the process of the big flash .
there will NEVER be a better time to consult with/trust in your creators ( maybe even your parents/elders ) .no need to confuse 'religion ' with being a spiritual being .
our soul purpose here is to care for one another .
failing that , we 're simply passing through ( excess baggage ) being distracted/consumed by the guaranteed to fail illusionary trappings of man'kind' .
&amp; recently , ( about a 2000 years ago ) it was determined that hoarding &amp; excess by a few , resulted in negative consequences for all.the lights are coming up all over now .
see you there ? boeing , boeing , gone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>just what we need?
more&amp;more impersonal methods to destroy each other, &amp; a world that does not belong to us.
eases some of the potential guilt involved.it would seem the self-serving 'laws' of man'kind' are not quite aligned with the process of the big flash.
there will NEVER be a better time to consult with/trust in your creators (maybe even your parents/elders).no need to confuse 'religion' with being a spiritual being.
our soul purpose here is to care for one another.
failing that, we're simply passing through (excess baggage) being distracted/consumed by the guaranteed to fail illusionary trappings of man'kind'.
&amp; recently, (about a 2000 years ago) it was determined that hoarding &amp; excess by a few, resulted in negative consequences for all.the lights are coming up all over now.
see you there?boeing, boeing, gone.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31209452</id>
	<title>Re:Mr ed</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1266673500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Have you seen the videos? It's not Mr. Ed, it's a Pushmi-Pullyu.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you seen the videos ?
It 's not Mr. Ed , it 's a Pushmi-Pullyu .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you seen the videos?
It's not Mr. Ed, it's a Pushmi-Pullyu.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208780</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31210162</id>
	<title>Re:Congratulations</title>
	<author>hey!</author>
	<datestamp>1266683220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You don't understand this grant process, do you?</p><p>You always leave something for the next proposal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't understand this grant process , do you ? You always leave something for the next proposal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't understand this grant process, do you?You always leave something for the next proposal.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31209214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208900</id>
	<title>LC3 = LS3 = Halo-headed-robot-dog;</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266662940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>that is all</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>that is all</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that is all</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31212318</id>
	<title>Re:Why four legs?</title>
	<author>DoninIN</author>
	<datestamp>1266698880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>4 Limbs is a good number, I'm not going to dispute that part.<br>
But the way you say "Evolution has settled on 4 limbs" you make it sound like there's been a lot of trail with 5 6 7 13 or whatever. Your fishy little tetrapod (Someone who knows the right terms should bail me out here.) pre-amphibian ancestors just got lucky. They, and the whole suite of their adaptations were found to be suitable to flop in and out of the water and survive. This is not to say that there's anything superior about 4 limbs as opposed to 6, 8, 5, 3, whatever. The single most dominant animal on the planet primarily gets around on 2. There's a tremendously successful type of things running around with 2 legs and 2 wings. There are almost certainly far more little tiny 6 and 8, and even more legged critters than 4 legged ones... Well you get my point.</htmltext>
<tokenext>4 Limbs is a good number , I 'm not going to dispute that part .
But the way you say " Evolution has settled on 4 limbs " you make it sound like there 's been a lot of trail with 5 6 7 13 or whatever .
Your fishy little tetrapod ( Someone who knows the right terms should bail me out here .
) pre-amphibian ancestors just got lucky .
They , and the whole suite of their adaptations were found to be suitable to flop in and out of the water and survive .
This is not to say that there 's anything superior about 4 limbs as opposed to 6 , 8 , 5 , 3 , whatever .
The single most dominant animal on the planet primarily gets around on 2 .
There 's a tremendously successful type of things running around with 2 legs and 2 wings .
There are almost certainly far more little tiny 6 and 8 , and even more legged critters than 4 legged ones... Well you get my point .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>4 Limbs is a good number, I'm not going to dispute that part.
But the way you say "Evolution has settled on 4 limbs" you make it sound like there's been a lot of trail with 5 6 7 13 or whatever.
Your fishy little tetrapod (Someone who knows the right terms should bail me out here.
) pre-amphibian ancestors just got lucky.
They, and the whole suite of their adaptations were found to be suitable to flop in and out of the water and survive.
This is not to say that there's anything superior about 4 limbs as opposed to 6, 8, 5, 3, whatever.
The single most dominant animal on the planet primarily gets around on 2.
There's a tremendously successful type of things running around with 2 legs and 2 wings.
There are almost certainly far more little tiny 6 and 8, and even more legged critters than 4 legged ones... Well you get my point.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31212040</id>
	<title>Re:Why four legs?</title>
	<author>nameer</author>
	<datestamp>1266697320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A pogo-stick is effectively a balanced 1-leg system. Marginally stable, but doable.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A pogo-stick is effectively a balanced 1-leg system .
Marginally stable , but doable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A pogo-stick is effectively a balanced 1-leg system.
Marginally stable, but doable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208908</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31216898</id>
	<title>Re:Why four legs?</title>
	<author>Nivag064</author>
	<datestamp>1266785220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree that having 6 legs would be good, armoured cars have 6 wheels rather than just 4 for the same reason for improved redundancy (ege better able to operate with one or more wheels/legs out of commission).  Also as you have said, it would make it easier to cope with rugged terrain.</p><p>I think that normally 8 would be overkill, also more legs are not necessarily be better as they would have to be lighter and more easily damaged by enemy activity.  However, I think 4 legs is too few.</p><p>I have thought about this problem on and off since I was about 6, when I saw a picture of a six legged vehicle and wondered how it moved.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree that having 6 legs would be good , armoured cars have 6 wheels rather than just 4 for the same reason for improved redundancy ( ege better able to operate with one or more wheels/legs out of commission ) .
Also as you have said , it would make it easier to cope with rugged terrain.I think that normally 8 would be overkill , also more legs are not necessarily be better as they would have to be lighter and more easily damaged by enemy activity .
However , I think 4 legs is too few.I have thought about this problem on and off since I was about 6 , when I saw a picture of a six legged vehicle and wondered how it moved .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree that having 6 legs would be good, armoured cars have 6 wheels rather than just 4 for the same reason for improved redundancy (ege better able to operate with one or more wheels/legs out of commission).
Also as you have said, it would make it easier to cope with rugged terrain.I think that normally 8 would be overkill, also more legs are not necessarily be better as they would have to be lighter and more easily damaged by enemy activity.
However, I think 4 legs is too few.I have thought about this problem on and off since I was about 6, when I saw a picture of a six legged vehicle and wondered how it moved.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208908</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31209484</id>
	<title>Re:Congratulations</title>
	<author>peragrin</author>
	<datestamp>1266673920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>um I have never seen a bullet resistant camel before.</p><p>That is the big difference between this and real animals the ability to survive(or easily repaired) after being shot</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>um I have never seen a bullet resistant camel before.That is the big difference between this and real animals the ability to survive ( or easily repaired ) after being shot</tokentext>
<sentencetext>um I have never seen a bullet resistant camel before.That is the big difference between this and real animals the ability to survive(or easily repaired) after being shot</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208966</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31212224</id>
	<title>I am scared.</title>
	<author>dadelbunts</author>
	<datestamp>1266698400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I hope you have all seen the big dog vidoes. If not here. <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1czBcnX1Ww" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1czBcnX1Ww</a> [youtube.com]
Imagine waking up in the middle of the night to the loudest bee sound you have ever heard. Only its not bees its thousands of those things with guns strapped on their back. This is what i dream about at night.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope you have all seen the big dog vidoes .
If not here .
http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = W1czBcnX1Ww [ youtube.com ] Imagine waking up in the middle of the night to the loudest bee sound you have ever heard .
Only its not bees its thousands of those things with guns strapped on their back .
This is what i dream about at night .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope you have all seen the big dog vidoes.
If not here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1czBcnX1Ww [youtube.com]
Imagine waking up in the middle of the night to the loudest bee sound you have ever heard.
Only its not bees its thousands of those things with guns strapped on their back.
This is what i dream about at night.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208780</id>
	<title>Mr ed</title>
	<author>iamhassi</author>
	<datestamp>1266660840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Guess no t1000, sounds like we need to worry about robotic mr Ed:  "I'll be back Wilbur"</htmltext>
<tokenext>Guess no t1000 , sounds like we need to worry about robotic mr Ed : " I 'll be back Wilbur "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Guess no t1000, sounds like we need to worry about robotic mr Ed:  "I'll be back Wilbur"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31209976</id>
	<title>No, this thing needs fuel</title>
	<author>Colin Smith</author>
	<datestamp>1266681000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A camel will eat anything semi green.</p><p>(and can be bought for the meagre price of your wife, or $500, whichever comes first)</p><p>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A camel will eat anything semi green .
( and can be bought for the meagre price of your wife , or $ 500 , whichever comes first )  </tokentext>
<sentencetext>A camel will eat anything semi green.
(and can be bought for the meagre price of your wife, or $500, whichever comes first)
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208966</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_20_048256_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31209452
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208780
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_20_048256_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208762
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_20_048256_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31209604
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208908
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208762
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_20_048256_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31209976
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208966
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_20_048256_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31231112
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208908
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208762
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_20_048256_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31212286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208966
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_20_048256_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31210026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208966
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_20_048256_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31213538
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208966
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_20_048256_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31223702
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208762
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_20_048256_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31209636
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208908
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208762
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_20_048256_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31211284
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208966
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_20_048256_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31210162
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31209214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208966
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_20_048256_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31217456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208762
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_20_048256_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208766
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_20_048256_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31212040
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208908
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208762
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_20_048256_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31216898
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208908
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208762
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_20_048256_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31212318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208762
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_20_048256_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31209654
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208762
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_20_048256_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31231148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208966
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_20_048256_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31209484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208966
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_20_048256.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208766
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208882
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_20_048256.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208762
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208826
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208908
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31209604
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31209636
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31212040
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31216898
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31231112
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31212318
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208830
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31209654
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31217456
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31223702
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_20_048256.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208780
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31209452
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_20_048256.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31209152
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_20_048256.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31208966
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31209484
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31213538
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31210026
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31212286
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31209214
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31210162
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31211284
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31209976
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31231148
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_20_048256.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_20_048256.31209570
</commentlist>
</conversation>
