<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_01_1557234</id>
	<title>US Government Begins Largest IT Consolidation in History</title>
	<author>ScuttleMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1267462440000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>miller60 writes <i>"Saying 1,100 data centers is too many, the federal government has begun what looms as the <a href="http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2010/03/01/feds-commence-huge-data-center-consolidation/">largest IT consolidation in history</a>. Federal CIO Vivek Kundra has directed federal agencies to inventory their assets by April 30 and prepare a plan to reduce the number of servers and data centers, with a focus on slashing energy costs (<a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/27535844/Data-Center-Consolidation-Memo-02-26-10">full memo</a>). Kundra says some applications may be shifted to <a href="http://fcw.com/articles/2010/02/26/government-specific-clouds-a-boon-to-feds-kundra-says.aspx">cloud computing</a> platforms customized for government use."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>miller60 writes " Saying 1,100 data centers is too many , the federal government has begun what looms as the largest IT consolidation in history .
Federal CIO Vivek Kundra has directed federal agencies to inventory their assets by April 30 and prepare a plan to reduce the number of servers and data centers , with a focus on slashing energy costs ( full memo ) .
Kundra says some applications may be shifted to cloud computing platforms customized for government use .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>miller60 writes "Saying 1,100 data centers is too many, the federal government has begun what looms as the largest IT consolidation in history.
Federal CIO Vivek Kundra has directed federal agencies to inventory their assets by April 30 and prepare a plan to reduce the number of servers and data centers, with a focus on slashing energy costs (full memo).
Kundra says some applications may be shifted to cloud computing platforms customized for government use.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318190</id>
	<title>Re:... if you can spell "Cloud Computing"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267466640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You spell it <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaYUqXAmXRQ" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">"A huge cloud of shit"</a> [youtube.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You spell it " A huge cloud of shit " [ youtube.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You spell it "A huge cloud of shit" [youtube.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318050</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318448</id>
	<title>History to Repeat Itself?</title>
	<author>lax-goalie</author>
	<datestamp>1267467600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have no problem with the CONCEPT of consolidation, but Virginia's IT outsourcing/consolidation project to Northrup Grumman happened on Kundra's watch. It is an unmitigated disaster.</p><p>Years into it, there's not even a complete inventory of the systems that NG is supposed to be managing for the Commonwealth, and at least as of a few months ago, NG couldn't even produce an invoice for the Commonwealth to pay that had more than six or eight line items on it.</p><p>I sat through a special meeting of the House Committee on Science and Technology on the issue a few months ago, and the legislature is NOT happy about the situation. Privately, you will hear from them words like "gross negligence" to "I'm convinced it's corruption". The Delegates who engineered the legislation enabling the IT outsourcing are especially pissed.</p><p>No disrespect to Kundra, but I don't think he's the right guy to oversee it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have no problem with the CONCEPT of consolidation , but Virginia 's IT outsourcing/consolidation project to Northrup Grumman happened on Kundra 's watch .
It is an unmitigated disaster.Years into it , there 's not even a complete inventory of the systems that NG is supposed to be managing for the Commonwealth , and at least as of a few months ago , NG could n't even produce an invoice for the Commonwealth to pay that had more than six or eight line items on it.I sat through a special meeting of the House Committee on Science and Technology on the issue a few months ago , and the legislature is NOT happy about the situation .
Privately , you will hear from them words like " gross negligence " to " I 'm convinced it 's corruption " .
The Delegates who engineered the legislation enabling the IT outsourcing are especially pissed.No disrespect to Kundra , but I do n't think he 's the right guy to oversee it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have no problem with the CONCEPT of consolidation, but Virginia's IT outsourcing/consolidation project to Northrup Grumman happened on Kundra's watch.
It is an unmitigated disaster.Years into it, there's not even a complete inventory of the systems that NG is supposed to be managing for the Commonwealth, and at least as of a few months ago, NG couldn't even produce an invoice for the Commonwealth to pay that had more than six or eight line items on it.I sat through a special meeting of the House Committee on Science and Technology on the issue a few months ago, and the legislature is NOT happy about the situation.
Privately, you will hear from them words like "gross negligence" to "I'm convinced it's corruption".
The Delegates who engineered the legislation enabling the IT outsourcing are especially pissed.No disrespect to Kundra, but I don't think he's the right guy to oversee it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31320314</id>
	<title>Datamining and Program terminations</title>
	<author>StillNeedMoreCoffee</author>
	<datestamp>1267474860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It seems to me this is a bad idea. If for no other reason than when all the different programs are together in larger clusters of applications and data storage, it makes it easier for someone in the government (or someone hacked in) to do more cross application data browsing. I'm not sure that we trust the government or the security of a data government data center to make private information secure. Not to mention covert clandestine operations we don't know about.</p><p>The second bad idea is that governement programs come and go. When the computing resources are closer to the program, it is easier to manage and in some cases turn off if defunded. With all the computation and data storage co-mingled, which is how you get the savings, then boundries and clean removal of all aspects of a project will be much much more difficult. Not to mention the nightmare of accounting for the resources used by one project vs another.</p><p>I remember hearing the story (I don't know if it is true) that AMTrak or one of its ancestor incarnations did an accounting dance, charging the passenger lines passing over track 100\% of the maintenence cost whereas they did not charge any of that to the freight traffic over the same track. As I understand basically wanted to find a way to kill the passenger service by loading it up with expenses.  The Chicago CTA did something similar I understand with switching the sides of two CTA runs, giving one of the lines the two least used ends and the other parallel route the most used. They then tried to claim losses on that line and planned on shutting it down. Luckily the Government stepped in and said, no problem, just pay back all the money from the Government that was given with the condition that those lines be kept open. We still have both lines, one it the one that goes close to my house.</p><p>So combined facilities means games with cost accounting that may or may not favor one type of application over another and may also be used for hiding black budgets more easily.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems to me this is a bad idea .
If for no other reason than when all the different programs are together in larger clusters of applications and data storage , it makes it easier for someone in the government ( or someone hacked in ) to do more cross application data browsing .
I 'm not sure that we trust the government or the security of a data government data center to make private information secure .
Not to mention covert clandestine operations we do n't know about.The second bad idea is that governement programs come and go .
When the computing resources are closer to the program , it is easier to manage and in some cases turn off if defunded .
With all the computation and data storage co-mingled , which is how you get the savings , then boundries and clean removal of all aspects of a project will be much much more difficult .
Not to mention the nightmare of accounting for the resources used by one project vs another.I remember hearing the story ( I do n't know if it is true ) that AMTrak or one of its ancestor incarnations did an accounting dance , charging the passenger lines passing over track 100 \ % of the maintenence cost whereas they did not charge any of that to the freight traffic over the same track .
As I understand basically wanted to find a way to kill the passenger service by loading it up with expenses .
The Chicago CTA did something similar I understand with switching the sides of two CTA runs , giving one of the lines the two least used ends and the other parallel route the most used .
They then tried to claim losses on that line and planned on shutting it down .
Luckily the Government stepped in and said , no problem , just pay back all the money from the Government that was given with the condition that those lines be kept open .
We still have both lines , one it the one that goes close to my house.So combined facilities means games with cost accounting that may or may not favor one type of application over another and may also be used for hiding black budgets more easily .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems to me this is a bad idea.
If for no other reason than when all the different programs are together in larger clusters of applications and data storage, it makes it easier for someone in the government (or someone hacked in) to do more cross application data browsing.
I'm not sure that we trust the government or the security of a data government data center to make private information secure.
Not to mention covert clandestine operations we don't know about.The second bad idea is that governement programs come and go.
When the computing resources are closer to the program, it is easier to manage and in some cases turn off if defunded.
With all the computation and data storage co-mingled, which is how you get the savings, then boundries and clean removal of all aspects of a project will be much much more difficult.
Not to mention the nightmare of accounting for the resources used by one project vs another.I remember hearing the story (I don't know if it is true) that AMTrak or one of its ancestor incarnations did an accounting dance, charging the passenger lines passing over track 100\% of the maintenence cost whereas they did not charge any of that to the freight traffic over the same track.
As I understand basically wanted to find a way to kill the passenger service by loading it up with expenses.
The Chicago CTA did something similar I understand with switching the sides of two CTA runs, giving one of the lines the two least used ends and the other parallel route the most used.
They then tried to claim losses on that line and planned on shutting it down.
Luckily the Government stepped in and said, no problem, just pay back all the money from the Government that was given with the condition that those lines be kept open.
We still have both lines, one it the one that goes close to my house.So combined facilities means games with cost accounting that may or may not favor one type of application over another and may also be used for hiding black budgets more easily.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318484</id>
	<title>Free software and owned infrastructure</title>
	<author>Statecraftsman</author>
	<datestamp>1267467720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>To run a sovereign state, it is necessary for all systems to be based on free software and to be run on public infrastructure. That means no privately hosted cloud computing and no proprietary software. How else are we to ever find out how our government is run?</htmltext>
<tokenext>To run a sovereign state , it is necessary for all systems to be based on free software and to be run on public infrastructure .
That means no privately hosted cloud computing and no proprietary software .
How else are we to ever find out how our government is run ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To run a sovereign state, it is necessary for all systems to be based on free software and to be run on public infrastructure.
That means no privately hosted cloud computing and no proprietary software.
How else are we to ever find out how our government is run?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318582</id>
	<title>Re:IT as a commodity</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267468020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Computing power is a commodity, but there are plenty of other IT things that aren't.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Computing power is a commodity , but there are plenty of other IT things that are n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Computing power is a commodity, but there are plenty of other IT things that aren't.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31330040</id>
	<title>Re:What about "use it or lose it"?</title>
	<author>jimbob666</author>
	<datestamp>1267546320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I see the 'use it or lose it' scenario where I work every March. In fact it is starting now...

All year we are told to save money, then March comes around and all of a sudden we have &pound;000's to spend. It doesn't fit in to how I think money should be spent.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I see the 'use it or lose it ' scenario where I work every March .
In fact it is starting now.. . All year we are told to save money , then March comes around and all of a sudden we have   000 's to spend .
It does n't fit in to how I think money should be spent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I see the 'use it or lose it' scenario where I work every March.
In fact it is starting now...

All year we are told to save money, then March comes around and all of a sudden we have £000's to spend.
It doesn't fit in to how I think money should be spent.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318416</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318820</id>
	<title>Re:IT as a commodity</title>
	<author>rainmayun</author>
	<datestamp>1267468980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You must not be aware of how many government data centers are already privately operated.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You must not be aware of how many government data centers are already privately operated .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You must not be aware of how many government data centers are already privately operated.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319514</id>
	<title>Re:... if you can spell "Cloud Computing"</title>
	<author>cayenne8</author>
	<datestamp>1267471800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"Why? It doesn't seem to have been a job qualification to be able to spell or pronounce "nookuler"</i> <p>
Nor to know how to pronounce <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlKIfzoC8D0" title="youtube.com">corpsman</a> [youtube.com]  (hint:not corpse-man)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Why ?
It does n't seem to have been a job qualification to be able to spell or pronounce " nookuler " Nor to know how to pronounce corpsman [ youtube.com ] ( hint : not corpse-man )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Why?
It doesn't seem to have been a job qualification to be able to spell or pronounce "nookuler" 
Nor to know how to pronounce corpsman [youtube.com]  (hint:not corpse-man)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318188</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319104</id>
	<title>Re:What about "use it or lose it"?</title>
	<author>jwl17330536</author>
	<datestamp>1267470180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>As the funding for the year would approach a close (in October), all-of-a-sudden the leadership would start spending money like crazy because they had a large surplus.  Money would be spent on things that were not actually necessary; if they were necessary, why not get them at any other time during the year?</p></div><p>But, I seriously needed the 12 pairs of sunglasses that I got in October 2006.  They were only $200.00 / each and we only bought 12 for 12 different people.  When I say we needed them I mean we needed to spend more money!

I actually wore a pair this morning.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As the funding for the year would approach a close ( in October ) , all-of-a-sudden the leadership would start spending money like crazy because they had a large surplus .
Money would be spent on things that were not actually necessary ; if they were necessary , why not get them at any other time during the year ? But , I seriously needed the 12 pairs of sunglasses that I got in October 2006 .
They were only $ 200.00 / each and we only bought 12 for 12 different people .
When I say we needed them I mean we needed to spend more money !
I actually wore a pair this morning .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As the funding for the year would approach a close (in October), all-of-a-sudden the leadership would start spending money like crazy because they had a large surplus.
Money would be spent on things that were not actually necessary; if they were necessary, why not get them at any other time during the year?But, I seriously needed the 12 pairs of sunglasses that I got in October 2006.
They were only $200.00 / each and we only bought 12 for 12 different people.
When I say we needed them I mean we needed to spend more money!
I actually wore a pair this morning.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318416</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318188</id>
	<title>Re:... if you can spell "Cloud Computing"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267466640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why? It doesn't seem to have been a job qualification to be able to spell or pronounce "nookuler"</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why ?
It does n't seem to have been a job qualification to be able to spell or pronounce " nookuler "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why?
It doesn't seem to have been a job qualification to be able to spell or pronounce "nookuler"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318050</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319186</id>
	<title>Just think of the possibilities</title>
	<author>aarenz</author>
	<datestamp>1267470540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This will make it much easier to take down the government. We will only need 100 bombers to take the data centers offline instead of 1,100.  Just think how many fewer families we will have to reward for that.
<br> <br>
Actually, it does sound like a good idea, but after working for larger companies, it will not go as smooth as they would like since someone will be holding onto an old AS/400 that no one knows how to change the IP configuration and the pointers to the printers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This will make it much easier to take down the government .
We will only need 100 bombers to take the data centers offline instead of 1,100 .
Just think how many fewer families we will have to reward for that .
Actually , it does sound like a good idea , but after working for larger companies , it will not go as smooth as they would like since someone will be holding onto an old AS/400 that no one knows how to change the IP configuration and the pointers to the printers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This will make it much easier to take down the government.
We will only need 100 bombers to take the data centers offline instead of 1,100.
Just think how many fewer families we will have to reward for that.
Actually, it does sound like a good idea, but after working for larger companies, it will not go as smooth as they would like since someone will be holding onto an old AS/400 that no one knows how to change the IP configuration and the pointers to the printers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31320608</id>
	<title>Re:IT as a commodity</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267476060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do you generate your own power?  Maintain your own fiber?  Probably not.</p><p>Generally, as soon as economies of scale kick in, unless a function is actually part of your business model [i.e. Edison may, indeed, generate its own power], why on earth would you do it yourself???  Google, MSFT, and a few others are getting pretty good at hosting the commodity-based services (email, chat, collaboration, calendering, etc.)...  and, honestly, it is pretty hard to compete with the prices.</p><p>Your position sounded nice until i actually thought about it...  then you started sounding like someone with a vested interest in keeping up the status quo [i.e. you are paid to be an exchange/notes/groupwise admin]...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you generate your own power ?
Maintain your own fiber ?
Probably not.Generally , as soon as economies of scale kick in , unless a function is actually part of your business model [ i.e .
Edison may , indeed , generate its own power ] , why on earth would you do it yourself ? ? ?
Google , MSFT , and a few others are getting pretty good at hosting the commodity-based services ( email , chat , collaboration , calendering , etc. ) .. .
and , honestly , it is pretty hard to compete with the prices.Your position sounded nice until i actually thought about it... then you started sounding like someone with a vested interest in keeping up the status quo [ i.e .
you are paid to be an exchange/notes/groupwise admin ] .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you generate your own power?
Maintain your own fiber?
Probably not.Generally, as soon as economies of scale kick in, unless a function is actually part of your business model [i.e.
Edison may, indeed, generate its own power], why on earth would you do it yourself???
Google, MSFT, and a few others are getting pretty good at hosting the commodity-based services (email, chat, collaboration, calendering, etc.)...
and, honestly, it is pretty hard to compete with the prices.Your position sounded nice until i actually thought about it...  then you started sounding like someone with a vested interest in keeping up the status quo [i.e.
you are paid to be an exchange/notes/groupwise admin]...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318312</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319162</id>
	<title>Easy pickins</title>
	<author>hesaigo999ca</author>
	<datestamp>1267470420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Great, now hackers will only have to bypass a few firewalls and hack a few servers instead on 1100.<br>Letting politics dictate security has always been a surefire way of decimating an empire,<br>I am going to go get some popcorn and come back to watch...wait for me?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Great , now hackers will only have to bypass a few firewalls and hack a few servers instead on 1100.Letting politics dictate security has always been a surefire way of decimating an empire,I am going to go get some popcorn and come back to watch...wait for me ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Great, now hackers will only have to bypass a few firewalls and hack a few servers instead on 1100.Letting politics dictate security has always been a surefire way of decimating an empire,I am going to go get some popcorn and come back to watch...wait for me?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318340</id>
	<title>We are too small to realize a savings</title>
	<author>coulbc</author>
	<datestamp>1267467180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We have 89 users and twenty five servers. The cost to move to managed hosting is 3x our current annual cost. We also still need bandwidth to servers that used to be local as well. It makes no sense at all. On top of that the managed services do not allow any bleeding edge deployments.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We have 89 users and twenty five servers .
The cost to move to managed hosting is 3x our current annual cost .
We also still need bandwidth to servers that used to be local as well .
It makes no sense at all .
On top of that the managed services do not allow any bleeding edge deployments .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We have 89 users and twenty five servers.
The cost to move to managed hosting is 3x our current annual cost.
We also still need bandwidth to servers that used to be local as well.
It makes no sense at all.
On top of that the managed services do not allow any bleeding edge deployments.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31320556</id>
	<title>Winning a Cyber War?</title>
	<author>mi</author>
	<datestamp>1267475760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Perhaps, trying to do better in a <a href="http://it.slashdot.org/story/10/02/24/157205/US-Unable-To-Win-a-Cyber-War" title="slashdot.org">cyber war</a> [slashdot.org] ought to have a higher priority, than consolidation?

</p><p>The rest of the article is scary too:</p><blockquote><div><p>Huge Implications for Data Center Sector<br>
The government data center consolidation has huge implications for the fortunes of system integrators, data center service providers (especially in northern Virginia), and cloud computing platforms optimized for hosting government apps.</p></div></blockquote><p>Yes, <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/06/the-amazing-money-machine/6809/" title="theatlantic.com">Silicon Valley's support for Obama's candidacy</a> [theatlantic.com] was not in vain...</p><blockquote><div><ul> <li>Promote the use of Green IT by reducing the overall energy and real estate footprint of government data centers;</li>
<li>Reduce the cost of data center hardware, software and operations;</li></ul></div></blockquote><p>Oh, again, the "greenness" goes before the cost. Hey, I have this $100 fan, that uses 1/3 less electricity, than the $10 fan from my polluting competitor. Per the Administration's instructions, you must buy my equipment...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps , trying to do better in a cyber war [ slashdot.org ] ought to have a higher priority , than consolidation ?
The rest of the article is scary too : Huge Implications for Data Center Sector The government data center consolidation has huge implications for the fortunes of system integrators , data center service providers ( especially in northern Virginia ) , and cloud computing platforms optimized for hosting government apps.Yes , Silicon Valley 's support for Obama 's candidacy [ theatlantic.com ] was not in vain... Promote the use of Green IT by reducing the overall energy and real estate footprint of government data centers ; Reduce the cost of data center hardware , software and operations ; Oh , again , the " greenness " goes before the cost .
Hey , I have this $ 100 fan , that uses 1/3 less electricity , than the $ 10 fan from my polluting competitor .
Per the Administration 's instructions , you must buy my equipment.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps, trying to do better in a cyber war [slashdot.org] ought to have a higher priority, than consolidation?
The rest of the article is scary too:Huge Implications for Data Center Sector
The government data center consolidation has huge implications for the fortunes of system integrators, data center service providers (especially in northern Virginia), and cloud computing platforms optimized for hosting government apps.Yes, Silicon Valley's support for Obama's candidacy [theatlantic.com] was not in vain... Promote the use of Green IT by reducing the overall energy and real estate footprint of government data centers;
Reduce the cost of data center hardware, software and operations;Oh, again, the "greenness" goes before the cost.
Hey, I have this $100 fan, that uses 1/3 less electricity, than the $10 fan from my polluting competitor.
Per the Administration's instructions, you must buy my equipment...
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318118</id>
	<title>Computer Rooms</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267466400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We don't have data centers! We have "Computer Rooms"!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We do n't have data centers !
We have " Computer Rooms " !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We don't have data centers!
We have "Computer Rooms"!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318416</id>
	<title>What about "use it or lose it"?</title>
	<author>joocemann</author>
	<datestamp>1267467480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Didn't read the article, but my experience with government entities is that they receive a specific value of funding each year to spend on gear, training, energy costs, etc.</p><p>The nature of the funding goes that if you don't use all of it this year, you get a reduced amount next year.  Now this may seem logical -- it may seem like a policy that governs spending.  Instead what it is is a policy that drives UNNECESSARY SPENDING.</p><p>The places I have been were frugal but appropriate in their spending throughout the year.  As the funding for the year would approach a close (in October), all-of-a-sudden the leadership would start spending money like crazy because they had a large surplus.  Money would be spent on things that were not actually necessary; if they were necessary, why not get them at any other time during the year?</p><p>In several cases, seeing this strange frenzy of spending I would ask the leadership what was going on.  They explained the 'use it or lose it' policy and that in order to maintain the funding they got this year, for next year, they *must* spend it all.   I was in conflict because I was taught integrity/honesty and there is no integrity in spending up dads helpful money on worthless junk so as to appear that you still have 'need'.<br>------</p><p>The reason I bring this up is because I am curious if the units that will save money via IT consolidation will actually save us money or if they will be (by obvious standing procedure) driven to spend it in pointless/needless ways.</p><p>Discuss?  Anyone else experience this?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did n't read the article , but my experience with government entities is that they receive a specific value of funding each year to spend on gear , training , energy costs , etc.The nature of the funding goes that if you do n't use all of it this year , you get a reduced amount next year .
Now this may seem logical -- it may seem like a policy that governs spending .
Instead what it is is a policy that drives UNNECESSARY SPENDING.The places I have been were frugal but appropriate in their spending throughout the year .
As the funding for the year would approach a close ( in October ) , all-of-a-sudden the leadership would start spending money like crazy because they had a large surplus .
Money would be spent on things that were not actually necessary ; if they were necessary , why not get them at any other time during the year ? In several cases , seeing this strange frenzy of spending I would ask the leadership what was going on .
They explained the 'use it or lose it ' policy and that in order to maintain the funding they got this year , for next year , they * must * spend it all .
I was in conflict because I was taught integrity/honesty and there is no integrity in spending up dads helpful money on worthless junk so as to appear that you still have 'need'.------The reason I bring this up is because I am curious if the units that will save money via IT consolidation will actually save us money or if they will be ( by obvious standing procedure ) driven to spend it in pointless/needless ways.Discuss ?
Anyone else experience this ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Didn't read the article, but my experience with government entities is that they receive a specific value of funding each year to spend on gear, training, energy costs, etc.The nature of the funding goes that if you don't use all of it this year, you get a reduced amount next year.
Now this may seem logical -- it may seem like a policy that governs spending.
Instead what it is is a policy that drives UNNECESSARY SPENDING.The places I have been were frugal but appropriate in their spending throughout the year.
As the funding for the year would approach a close (in October), all-of-a-sudden the leadership would start spending money like crazy because they had a large surplus.
Money would be spent on things that were not actually necessary; if they were necessary, why not get them at any other time during the year?In several cases, seeing this strange frenzy of spending I would ask the leadership what was going on.
They explained the 'use it or lose it' policy and that in order to maintain the funding they got this year, for next year, they *must* spend it all.
I was in conflict because I was taught integrity/honesty and there is no integrity in spending up dads helpful money on worthless junk so as to appear that you still have 'need'.------The reason I bring this up is because I am curious if the units that will save money via IT consolidation will actually save us money or if they will be (by obvious standing procedure) driven to spend it in pointless/needless ways.Discuss?
Anyone else experience this?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31321498</id>
	<title>Re:... if you can spell "Cloud Computing"</title>
	<author>Darinbob</author>
	<datestamp>1267436160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Too late.  I submitted a bid to support all of the federal government's IT needs.  Apparently $125K/yr was the low bid.  How hard can it be?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Too late .
I submitted a bid to support all of the federal government 's IT needs .
Apparently $ 125K/yr was the low bid .
How hard can it be ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Too late.
I submitted a bid to support all of the federal government's IT needs.
Apparently $125K/yr was the low bid.
How hard can it be?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318050</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318294</id>
	<title>Vivek</title>
	<author>bigmattana</author>
	<datestamp>1267466940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oh, Vivek, what brilliant thing will you think of next?  How much energy will it take to replace all of these server farms?  How much energy will be required for the taxpayers to earn the money necessary to pay for it?  What about security concerns of consolidating all of this data?
<br> <br>
I think Vivek wants to make himself look useful after being exposed as a fraud by John C. Dvorak.
<a href="http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2009/08/12/special-report-is-us-chief-information-officer-cio-vivek-kundra-a-phony/" title="dvorak.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2009/08/12/special-report-is-us-chief-information-officer-cio-vivek-kundra-a-phony/</a> [dvorak.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , Vivek , what brilliant thing will you think of next ?
How much energy will it take to replace all of these server farms ?
How much energy will be required for the taxpayers to earn the money necessary to pay for it ?
What about security concerns of consolidating all of this data ?
I think Vivek wants to make himself look useful after being exposed as a fraud by John C. Dvorak . http : //www.dvorak.org/blog/2009/08/12/special-report-is-us-chief-information-officer-cio-vivek-kundra-a-phony/ [ dvorak.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, Vivek, what brilliant thing will you think of next?
How much energy will it take to replace all of these server farms?
How much energy will be required for the taxpayers to earn the money necessary to pay for it?
What about security concerns of consolidating all of this data?
I think Vivek wants to make himself look useful after being exposed as a fraud by John C. Dvorak.
http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2009/08/12/special-report-is-us-chief-information-officer-cio-vivek-kundra-a-phony/ [dvorak.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319434</id>
	<title>Let the NSA do it</title>
	<author>jjohnson</author>
	<datestamp>1267471500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The NSA has 1) the mad hax0r skillz, 2) massive reserves of hidden computer power, and 3) the security chops to actually create a secure U.S. government computing cloud.  If they can keep their own codebreaking and intelligence records secure (when was the last time you heard about the NSA getting hacked?), they can do it for the government as a whole.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The NSA has 1 ) the mad hax0r skillz , 2 ) massive reserves of hidden computer power , and 3 ) the security chops to actually create a secure U.S. government computing cloud .
If they can keep their own codebreaking and intelligence records secure ( when was the last time you heard about the NSA getting hacked ?
) , they can do it for the government as a whole .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The NSA has 1) the mad hax0r skillz, 2) massive reserves of hidden computer power, and 3) the security chops to actually create a secure U.S. government computing cloud.
If they can keep their own codebreaking and intelligence records secure (when was the last time you heard about the NSA getting hacked?
), they can do it for the government as a whole.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31342006</id>
	<title>Re:Free software and owned infrastructure</title>
	<author>griblik</author>
	<datestamp>1267607940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>To run a sovereign state, it is necessary for all systems to be based on free software and to be run on public infrastructure.</p></div><p>Why? It hasn't been that way for the past several thousand years, what makes you think it's necessary now?</p><p>If you mean government should be open and transparent then that's what you should be asking for, not demanding without reason that government must use a particular software model.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>To run a sovereign state , it is necessary for all systems to be based on free software and to be run on public infrastructure.Why ?
It has n't been that way for the past several thousand years , what makes you think it 's necessary now ? If you mean government should be open and transparent then that 's what you should be asking for , not demanding without reason that government must use a particular software model .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To run a sovereign state, it is necessary for all systems to be based on free software and to be run on public infrastructure.Why?
It hasn't been that way for the past several thousand years, what makes you think it's necessary now?If you mean government should be open and transparent then that's what you should be asking for, not demanding without reason that government must use a particular software model.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318722</id>
	<title>Re:Prediction</title>
	<author>megamerican</author>
	<datestamp>1267468500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Government: There's no success like failure.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Government : There 's no success like failure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Government: There's no success like failure.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318108</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318964</id>
	<title>Re:What about "use it or lose it"?</title>
	<author>rainmayun</author>
	<datestamp>1267469520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>You have to consider the personal incentives for managers with budget authority.  If you manage a shrinking department, there's no rewards for spending less money. Your prestige and responsibility shrink, and your career path dwindles.  For better or for worse, all of the incentives for budget managers are towards bigger and bigger spending allocations.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You have to consider the personal incentives for managers with budget authority .
If you manage a shrinking department , there 's no rewards for spending less money .
Your prestige and responsibility shrink , and your career path dwindles .
For better or for worse , all of the incentives for budget managers are towards bigger and bigger spending allocations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have to consider the personal incentives for managers with budget authority.
If you manage a shrinking department, there's no rewards for spending less money.
Your prestige and responsibility shrink, and your career path dwindles.
For better or for worse, all of the incentives for budget managers are towards bigger and bigger spending allocations.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318416</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31321390</id>
	<title>Sounds familiar</title>
	<author>kalirion</author>
	<datestamp>1267435800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So it will basically be <a href="http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/A-Systematic-Approach.aspx" title="thedailywtf.com">this</a> [thedailywtf.com] on a larger scale?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So it will basically be this [ thedailywtf.com ] on a larger scale ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So it will basically be this [thedailywtf.com] on a larger scale?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318050</id>
	<title>... if you can spell "Cloud Computing"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267466220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I predict a rash of job openings that you can get hired for provided you can spell "Cloud Computing"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I predict a rash of job openings that you can get hired for provided you can spell " Cloud Computing "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I predict a rash of job openings that you can get hired for provided you can spell "Cloud Computing"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31321284</id>
	<title>Re:Vivek</title>
	<author>benjamindees</author>
	<datestamp>1267435380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How much energy will be required for the taxpayers to earn the money necessary to pay for it?</p></div><p>Excellent point.  Energy accounting is tricky business.  Just adding up the energy saved in the government datacenters doesn't account for the energy *used* by all the contractors and employees brought in to realize those savings.</p><p>It's too bad that the federal government has abandoned the dollar as a universal measure of scarcity, otherwise we could simply say that cheaper == more efficient.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How much energy will be required for the taxpayers to earn the money necessary to pay for it ? Excellent point .
Energy accounting is tricky business .
Just adding up the energy saved in the government datacenters does n't account for the energy * used * by all the contractors and employees brought in to realize those savings.It 's too bad that the federal government has abandoned the dollar as a universal measure of scarcity , otherwise we could simply say that cheaper = = more efficient .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How much energy will be required for the taxpayers to earn the money necessary to pay for it?Excellent point.
Energy accounting is tricky business.
Just adding up the energy saved in the government datacenters doesn't account for the energy *used* by all the contractors and employees brought in to realize those savings.It's too bad that the federal government has abandoned the dollar as a universal measure of scarcity, otherwise we could simply say that cheaper == more efficient.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318294</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31320076</id>
	<title>WOO HOO</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267473900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Gimme one of those yummy gub'ment jobs!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Gim me one of those yummy gub'ment jobs !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gimme one of those yummy gub'ment jobs!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318808</id>
	<title>Re:Vivek</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267468920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's a technically sound idea, it's just doomed to failure.<br>It might still have been a good idea even with some expectation of failure, but by the sound of this there will be too much failure to handle at one time, and the failure will come so fast that by the time they amass the competency to handle it it's all over.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a technically sound idea , it 's just doomed to failure.It might still have been a good idea even with some expectation of failure , but by the sound of this there will be too much failure to handle at one time , and the failure will come so fast that by the time they amass the competency to handle it it 's all over .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a technically sound idea, it's just doomed to failure.It might still have been a good idea even with some expectation of failure, but by the sound of this there will be too much failure to handle at one time, and the failure will come so fast that by the time they amass the competency to handle it it's all over.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318294</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318438</id>
	<title>He should resign</title>
	<author>Ricardo</author>
	<datestamp>1267467540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wonder if he will insist the new computers will use "Cobol Data" and "skip logic". These are BS concepts he used in one of his early speaches. should should not act like he knows about IT when he obviously doesnt.<br><a href="http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2009/08/12/special-report-is-us-chief-information-officer-cio-vivek-kundra-a-phony/" title="dvorak.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2009/08/12/special-report-is-us-chief-information-officer-cio-vivek-kundra-a-phony/</a> [dvorak.org]<br>Basically he claims to have been the CEO of a company with 2 employees. A guy like that should not be holding his Role</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder if he will insist the new computers will use " Cobol Data " and " skip logic " .
These are BS concepts he used in one of his early speaches .
should should not act like he knows about IT when he obviously doesnt.http : //www.dvorak.org/blog/2009/08/12/special-report-is-us-chief-information-officer-cio-vivek-kundra-a-phony/ [ dvorak.org ] Basically he claims to have been the CEO of a company with 2 employees .
A guy like that should not be holding his Role</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder if he will insist the new computers will use "Cobol Data" and "skip logic".
These are BS concepts he used in one of his early speaches.
should should not act like he knows about IT when he obviously doesnt.http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2009/08/12/special-report-is-us-chief-information-officer-cio-vivek-kundra-a-phony/ [dvorak.org]Basically he claims to have been the CEO of a company with 2 employees.
A guy like that should not be holding his Role</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31321332</id>
	<title>Re:IT as a commodity</title>
	<author>benjamindees</author>
	<datestamp>1267435500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>enterprise equipment in large data centers</p></div><p>Large datacenters don't use "enterprise" equipment.  That bullshit is only sold to small datacenters that don't know what they're doing.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>enterprise equipment in large data centersLarge datacenters do n't use " enterprise " equipment .
That bullshit is only sold to small datacenters that do n't know what they 're doing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>enterprise equipment in large data centersLarge datacenters don't use "enterprise" equipment.
That bullshit is only sold to small datacenters that don't know what they're doing.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319278</id>
	<title>Virtualization-</title>
	<author>Xacid</author>
	<datestamp>1267470900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm pretty sure I'm seeing some of this where I'm at now. Basically it has become a bad word to suggest you need a "server". There's the hardware cost, operational cost, and then most importantly to those signing the checks - the bureaucracy costs involved with running such.</p><p>The push has now become to just acquire a slot on the virtual machines they've started to toss up which has actually worked out damned well. What used to run on two giant racks now runs on one little blade server. Definitely a newer angle that I'm glad to see is finally taking hold nowadays.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm pretty sure I 'm seeing some of this where I 'm at now .
Basically it has become a bad word to suggest you need a " server " .
There 's the hardware cost , operational cost , and then most importantly to those signing the checks - the bureaucracy costs involved with running such.The push has now become to just acquire a slot on the virtual machines they 've started to toss up which has actually worked out damned well .
What used to run on two giant racks now runs on one little blade server .
Definitely a newer angle that I 'm glad to see is finally taking hold nowadays .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm pretty sure I'm seeing some of this where I'm at now.
Basically it has become a bad word to suggest you need a "server".
There's the hardware cost, operational cost, and then most importantly to those signing the checks - the bureaucracy costs involved with running such.The push has now become to just acquire a slot on the virtual machines they've started to toss up which has actually worked out damned well.
What used to run on two giant racks now runs on one little blade server.
Definitely a newer angle that I'm glad to see is finally taking hold nowadays.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31326554</id>
	<title>Vivek Assholio says let's ship IT jobs to India</title>
	<author>jsepeta</author>
	<datestamp>1267466340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What exactly are Vivek Kundra's qualifications? He's a bozo with business interests IN India, so of course he wants us to close US IT facilities and offshore the work. Someone needs to bitchslap that jackass publicly, and unmask him for the worthless mouthbreathing piece of shit he is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What exactly are Vivek Kundra 's qualifications ?
He 's a bozo with business interests IN India , so of course he wants us to close US IT facilities and offshore the work .
Someone needs to bitchslap that jackass publicly , and unmask him for the worthless mouthbreathing piece of shit he is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What exactly are Vivek Kundra's qualifications?
He's a bozo with business interests IN India, so of course he wants us to close US IT facilities and offshore the work.
Someone needs to bitchslap that jackass publicly, and unmask him for the worthless mouthbreathing piece of shit he is.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31325288</id>
	<title>Re:Prediction</title>
	<author>KORfan</author>
	<datestamp>1267454520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Egads, my work is slow enough already because I have to store my work halfway across the state.  I don't need to spend three weeks fighting to get my computer back to working so it can be even slower accessing files halfway across the country.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Egads , my work is slow enough already because I have to store my work halfway across the state .
I do n't need to spend three weeks fighting to get my computer back to working so it can be even slower accessing files halfway across the country .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Egads, my work is slow enough already because I have to store my work halfway across the state.
I don't need to spend three weeks fighting to get my computer back to working so it can be even slower accessing files halfway across the country.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318108</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318430</id>
	<title>An Invitation From Microsoft:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267467480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Welcome to the <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/windowsazure/" title="microsoft.com" rel="nofollow">Windows Seizure Platform</a> [microsoft.com].</p><p>Fail.</p><p>Yours In Ashgabat,<br>Kilgore Trout</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Welcome to the Windows Seizure Platform [ microsoft.com ] .Fail.Yours In Ashgabat,Kilgore Trout</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Welcome to the Windows Seizure Platform [microsoft.com].Fail.Yours In Ashgabat,Kilgore Trout</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318036</id>
	<title>meow</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267466160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>first post!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>first post ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>first post!!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318282</id>
	<title>So there is Hope for the Secret Service ...</title>
	<author>foobsr</author>
	<datestamp>1267466880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"A classified review of the United States Secret Service's computer technology found that the agency's computers were fully operational only 60 percent of the time because of outdated systems and a reliance on a computer mainframe that dates to the 1980s, according to Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn. "
<br>
(<a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/us-secret-service-outdated-computer-mainframe-system-1980s/story?id=9945663" title="go.com">loc. cit.</a> [go.com])
<br> <br>
CC.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" A classified review of the United States Secret Service 's computer technology found that the agency 's computers were fully operational only 60 percent of the time because of outdated systems and a reliance on a computer mainframe that dates to the 1980s , according to Sen. Joe Lieberman , I-Conn. " ( loc .
cit. [ go.com ] ) CC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"A classified review of the United States Secret Service's computer technology found that the agency's computers were fully operational only 60 percent of the time because of outdated systems and a reliance on a computer mainframe that dates to the 1980s, according to Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn. "

(loc.
cit. [go.com])
 
CC.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318420</id>
	<title>Nice idea in theory...</title>
	<author>hrieke</author>
	<datestamp>1267467480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now just wait for a data center to be scheduled to close in some Congressman's home district and see how big of a block is put into place.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now just wait for a data center to be scheduled to close in some Congressman 's home district and see how big of a block is put into place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now just wait for a data center to be scheduled to close in some Congressman's home district and see how big of a block is put into place.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31320674</id>
	<title>Damn them to hell.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267476420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We've been consolidating for the last few years in the Air Force.  Needless to say the whole experience has been on par with getting punched in the face everyday.  The concept of cloud computing works great until you realize that you have to pay for all that bandwidth when people actually want to use there computers for something other than email and a few web based portals.</p><p>Their solution has been to disable just about every usefull function since data transfer is no longer hopping a free ride across the base network.  That combined with the fact that when the network at our primary factility goes down so does everyone else's since those oh so lovely portals that link us to everything else are only served up there.</p><p>The concept of cloud computing looks great on paper and actually does work for really light applications such as email, but who ever thought that converting everything including locally shared data over to the cloud (cloud served but still restricted to local access??!!) should be forced to lick the toilets in every office, just after lunch time while they are still warmed, in every office they've inflicted this crap upon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We 've been consolidating for the last few years in the Air Force .
Needless to say the whole experience has been on par with getting punched in the face everyday .
The concept of cloud computing works great until you realize that you have to pay for all that bandwidth when people actually want to use there computers for something other than email and a few web based portals.Their solution has been to disable just about every usefull function since data transfer is no longer hopping a free ride across the base network .
That combined with the fact that when the network at our primary factility goes down so does everyone else 's since those oh so lovely portals that link us to everything else are only served up there.The concept of cloud computing looks great on paper and actually does work for really light applications such as email , but who ever thought that converting everything including locally shared data over to the cloud ( cloud served but still restricted to local access ? ? ! !
) should be forced to lick the toilets in every office , just after lunch time while they are still warmed , in every office they 've inflicted this crap upon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We've been consolidating for the last few years in the Air Force.
Needless to say the whole experience has been on par with getting punched in the face everyday.
The concept of cloud computing works great until you realize that you have to pay for all that bandwidth when people actually want to use there computers for something other than email and a few web based portals.Their solution has been to disable just about every usefull function since data transfer is no longer hopping a free ride across the base network.
That combined with the fact that when the network at our primary factility goes down so does everyone else's since those oh so lovely portals that link us to everything else are only served up there.The concept of cloud computing looks great on paper and actually does work for really light applications such as email, but who ever thought that converting everything including locally shared data over to the cloud (cloud served but still restricted to local access??!!
) should be forced to lick the toilets in every office, just after lunch time while they are still warmed, in every office they've inflicted this crap upon.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31328658</id>
	<title>Re:History to Repeat Itself?</title>
	<author>bjk002</author>
	<datestamp>1267538580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"No disrespect to Kundra, but I don't think he's the right guy to oversee it."</p><p>Perhaps through 'lessons learned', Kundra could be just the person to do it right this time?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" No disrespect to Kundra , but I do n't think he 's the right guy to oversee it .
" Perhaps through 'lessons learned ' , Kundra could be just the person to do it right this time ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"No disrespect to Kundra, but I don't think he's the right guy to oversee it.
"Perhaps through 'lessons learned', Kundra could be just the person to do it right this time?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318448</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318348</id>
	<title>Sounds promising, but...</title>
	<author>adosch</author>
	<datestamp>1267467180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I work for a government project in a Federally funded building right now and all I can say is... it sound promising.  Common sense, proper planning and innovation gets put on the back burner for under-estimated budgets, bad trade studies, botched planning and wrong decisions being made by the wrong people.  In the end, everything will still be money driven and the stove-pipe approach to IT infrastructure will remain the same:  everyone will take their OWN budgeted money and set up their OWN infrastructure that will be completely different than project-A over project-B, so you'd spend double that to consolidate it.  If you want to use some of project-A's setup (e.g. authentication, storage, ect.) because mis-managed budgets being a huge concern, project-B will get quoted a ridiculous amount of money to jump aboard to do it; much more, in-fact, than it would take to do a trade study, setup of a proof-of-concept test, purchase what you need and implement it.  Thus that's how stove-piped approaches become what they are:  a mess.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I work for a government project in a Federally funded building right now and all I can say is... it sound promising .
Common sense , proper planning and innovation gets put on the back burner for under-estimated budgets , bad trade studies , botched planning and wrong decisions being made by the wrong people .
In the end , everything will still be money driven and the stove-pipe approach to IT infrastructure will remain the same : everyone will take their OWN budgeted money and set up their OWN infrastructure that will be completely different than project-A over project-B , so you 'd spend double that to consolidate it .
If you want to use some of project-A 's setup ( e.g .
authentication , storage , ect .
) because mis-managed budgets being a huge concern , project-B will get quoted a ridiculous amount of money to jump aboard to do it ; much more , in-fact , than it would take to do a trade study , setup of a proof-of-concept test , purchase what you need and implement it .
Thus that 's how stove-piped approaches become what they are : a mess .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work for a government project in a Federally funded building right now and all I can say is... it sound promising.
Common sense, proper planning and innovation gets put on the back burner for under-estimated budgets, bad trade studies, botched planning and wrong decisions being made by the wrong people.
In the end, everything will still be money driven and the stove-pipe approach to IT infrastructure will remain the same:  everyone will take their OWN budgeted money and set up their OWN infrastructure that will be completely different than project-A over project-B, so you'd spend double that to consolidate it.
If you want to use some of project-A's setup (e.g.
authentication, storage, ect.
) because mis-managed budgets being a huge concern, project-B will get quoted a ridiculous amount of money to jump aboard to do it; much more, in-fact, than it would take to do a trade study, setup of a proof-of-concept test, purchase what you need and implement it.
Thus that's how stove-piped approaches become what they are:  a mess.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319538</id>
	<title>Can Work When Appropriate</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267471860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A department I work with is undergoing a transition to "cloud computing" now.  The data stored is public information and some network downtime would not be catastrophic, so there's no reason why it must be kept in house.  The biggest advantages I see are better hardware management and economies of scale.  The current servers are not properly cooled (AC has gone out causing HD failures) and the staff managing them are incompetent.  This department's server performance needs are pretty low and can be met with a single server or even a VPS.</p><p>The cost estimate is $200 per month, which includes backups at two sites.  Of course you will need someone with the expertise to set things up and fix things when they go wrong, but that's really another issue and affects in house setups too.  You get to eliminate hardware maintenance and hardware upgrade costs.  Don't underestimate the cost of upgrades.  I can't come up with a cost for in house hardware management, but I'll say as a tax payer and someone familiar with operations that $200 per month is a really good value.</p><p>Obviously there are things that should be kept in house.  You must assume that whoever has access to the physical hardware has access to your data.  You can encrypt, but not from where the data originates b/c the key is there.  If you can't do with some network downtime you must keep your apps in house.  Also, if going from a LAN based setup, security needs to be thoroughly evaluated.  You may want to limit access to VPN or IP address blocks and such.  For those what qualify, if well planned and executed I think there are big savings to be had.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A department I work with is undergoing a transition to " cloud computing " now .
The data stored is public information and some network downtime would not be catastrophic , so there 's no reason why it must be kept in house .
The biggest advantages I see are better hardware management and economies of scale .
The current servers are not properly cooled ( AC has gone out causing HD failures ) and the staff managing them are incompetent .
This department 's server performance needs are pretty low and can be met with a single server or even a VPS.The cost estimate is $ 200 per month , which includes backups at two sites .
Of course you will need someone with the expertise to set things up and fix things when they go wrong , but that 's really another issue and affects in house setups too .
You get to eliminate hardware maintenance and hardware upgrade costs .
Do n't underestimate the cost of upgrades .
I ca n't come up with a cost for in house hardware management , but I 'll say as a tax payer and someone familiar with operations that $ 200 per month is a really good value.Obviously there are things that should be kept in house .
You must assume that whoever has access to the physical hardware has access to your data .
You can encrypt , but not from where the data originates b/c the key is there .
If you ca n't do with some network downtime you must keep your apps in house .
Also , if going from a LAN based setup , security needs to be thoroughly evaluated .
You may want to limit access to VPN or IP address blocks and such .
For those what qualify , if well planned and executed I think there are big savings to be had .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A department I work with is undergoing a transition to "cloud computing" now.
The data stored is public information and some network downtime would not be catastrophic, so there's no reason why it must be kept in house.
The biggest advantages I see are better hardware management and economies of scale.
The current servers are not properly cooled (AC has gone out causing HD failures) and the staff managing them are incompetent.
This department's server performance needs are pretty low and can be met with a single server or even a VPS.The cost estimate is $200 per month, which includes backups at two sites.
Of course you will need someone with the expertise to set things up and fix things when they go wrong, but that's really another issue and affects in house setups too.
You get to eliminate hardware maintenance and hardware upgrade costs.
Don't underestimate the cost of upgrades.
I can't come up with a cost for in house hardware management, but I'll say as a tax payer and someone familiar with operations that $200 per month is a really good value.Obviously there are things that should be kept in house.
You must assume that whoever has access to the physical hardware has access to your data.
You can encrypt, but not from where the data originates b/c the key is there.
If you can't do with some network downtime you must keep your apps in house.
Also, if going from a LAN based setup, security needs to be thoroughly evaluated.
You may want to limit access to VPN or IP address blocks and such.
For those what qualify, if well planned and executed I think there are big savings to be had.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318728</id>
	<title>Key phrase: "Budget Authority"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267468500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does CIO Vivek Kundra have budget authority over these data centers? If not, then the agencies will do with him what they do with every other "czar:" Flip him the bird and go right back to the way they were doing things before.</p><p>'Nuff said.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does CIO Vivek Kundra have budget authority over these data centers ?
If not , then the agencies will do with him what they do with every other " czar : " Flip him the bird and go right back to the way they were doing things before .
'Nuff said .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does CIO Vivek Kundra have budget authority over these data centers?
If not, then the agencies will do with him what they do with every other "czar:" Flip him the bird and go right back to the way they were doing things before.
'Nuff said.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31320500</id>
	<title>Re:Prediction</title>
	<author>wintercolby</author>
	<datestamp>1267475580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>[rant]<br>
I'm sorry, but the FREE MARKET is another way to say LINING FATCATS POCKETS when you mention Government contracts.  The <b>best</b> thing that could be done is for the Gov't to relocate the admins that have known and loved those systems/servers for years, and help them work with the new structure.  On some levels, they may even be able to let them telecommute and save on the relocation/cost of living adjustment for moving the data centers.  Release admins through attrition, with 1100 data centers it shouldn't be hard to find people retiring over the next 5 years.<br> <br>It's time to stop second and third sourcing positions that only end up degrading service and costing workers their retirement/benefits.  The money saved looks great on paper, but with the FREE MARKET all it does is make it so the people that use the systems will have poorer service at the same cost.<br> <br>
This is why 401K and insurance premiums are rising, fewer and fewer people are receiving any employer assistance for them.  Without employer assistance, few can justify paying the premiums that the insurance companies are used to charging.  As state and federal government agencies follow the path to the FREE MARKET, the parts of the FREE MARKET that they prop up fail.  There are times and places for the free market, inside our government isn't one of them.
<br>[/rant]</htmltext>
<tokenext>[ rant ] I 'm sorry , but the FREE MARKET is another way to say LINING FATCATS POCKETS when you mention Government contracts .
The best thing that could be done is for the Gov't to relocate the admins that have known and loved those systems/servers for years , and help them work with the new structure .
On some levels , they may even be able to let them telecommute and save on the relocation/cost of living adjustment for moving the data centers .
Release admins through attrition , with 1100 data centers it should n't be hard to find people retiring over the next 5 years .
It 's time to stop second and third sourcing positions that only end up degrading service and costing workers their retirement/benefits .
The money saved looks great on paper , but with the FREE MARKET all it does is make it so the people that use the systems will have poorer service at the same cost .
This is why 401K and insurance premiums are rising , fewer and fewer people are receiving any employer assistance for them .
Without employer assistance , few can justify paying the premiums that the insurance companies are used to charging .
As state and federal government agencies follow the path to the FREE MARKET , the parts of the FREE MARKET that they prop up fail .
There are times and places for the free market , inside our government is n't one of them .
[ /rant ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[rant]
I'm sorry, but the FREE MARKET is another way to say LINING FATCATS POCKETS when you mention Government contracts.
The best thing that could be done is for the Gov't to relocate the admins that have known and loved those systems/servers for years, and help them work with the new structure.
On some levels, they may even be able to let them telecommute and save on the relocation/cost of living adjustment for moving the data centers.
Release admins through attrition, with 1100 data centers it shouldn't be hard to find people retiring over the next 5 years.
It's time to stop second and third sourcing positions that only end up degrading service and costing workers their retirement/benefits.
The money saved looks great on paper, but with the FREE MARKET all it does is make it so the people that use the systems will have poorer service at the same cost.
This is why 401K and insurance premiums are rising, fewer and fewer people are receiving any employer assistance for them.
Without employer assistance, few can justify paying the premiums that the insurance companies are used to charging.
As state and federal government agencies follow the path to the FREE MARKET, the parts of the FREE MARKET that they prop up fail.
There are times and places for the free market, inside our government isn't one of them.
[/rant]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31321230</id>
	<title>Re:History to Repeat Itself?</title>
	<author>mspohr</author>
	<datestamp>1267435200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So it sounds like outsourcing to the private sector (Northrup Grumman) was a disaster.  So much for private sector efficiency.  Hard to blame Kundra for that unless he was micromanaging NG and it looks like NG was in far over its head.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So it sounds like outsourcing to the private sector ( Northrup Grumman ) was a disaster .
So much for private sector efficiency .
Hard to blame Kundra for that unless he was micromanaging NG and it looks like NG was in far over its head .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So it sounds like outsourcing to the private sector (Northrup Grumman) was a disaster.
So much for private sector efficiency.
Hard to blame Kundra for that unless he was micromanaging NG and it looks like NG was in far over its head.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318448</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318898</id>
	<title>Re:Vivek</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1267469220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I think Vivek wants to make himself look useful after being exposed as a fraud by John C. Dvorak. <a href="http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2009/08/12/special-report-is-us-chief-information-officer-cio-vivek-kundra-a-phony/" title="dvorak.org">http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2009/08/12/special-report-is-us-chief-information-officer-cio-vivek-kundra-a-phony/</a> [dvorak.org]</p> </div><p>So who will make Dvorak look useful after <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOHzHVF-4Mg" title="youtube.com">exposing himself as a fraud?</a> [youtube.com] </p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think Vivek wants to make himself look useful after being exposed as a fraud by John C. Dvorak. http : //www.dvorak.org/blog/2009/08/12/special-report-is-us-chief-information-officer-cio-vivek-kundra-a-phony/ [ dvorak.org ] So who will make Dvorak look useful after exposing himself as a fraud ?
[ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think Vivek wants to make himself look useful after being exposed as a fraud by John C. Dvorak. http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2009/08/12/special-report-is-us-chief-information-officer-cio-vivek-kundra-a-phony/ [dvorak.org] So who will make Dvorak look useful after exposing himself as a fraud?
[youtube.com] 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318294</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319182</id>
	<title>Potential for massive savings</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267470540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The potential for saving is great - assuming they can get it right.  I am a defense contractor and I go to military bases that have thousands of one-off servers that are dedicated to a single, specialized contract tasks and are probably being utilized at around 1\% of their potential.  One base I went to told me they spend $25 million on electricity for their primary data center each year.  This base is now requiring all new systems to be virtualized and they are converting all their current systems to blade servers running 20-40 environments per blade.  This setup reduces their electricity use significantly and reduces their management costs.

Now, imagine if the federal government could do this for every site, every project.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The potential for saving is great - assuming they can get it right .
I am a defense contractor and I go to military bases that have thousands of one-off servers that are dedicated to a single , specialized contract tasks and are probably being utilized at around 1 \ % of their potential .
One base I went to told me they spend $ 25 million on electricity for their primary data center each year .
This base is now requiring all new systems to be virtualized and they are converting all their current systems to blade servers running 20-40 environments per blade .
This setup reduces their electricity use significantly and reduces their management costs .
Now , imagine if the federal government could do this for every site , every project .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The potential for saving is great - assuming they can get it right.
I am a defense contractor and I go to military bases that have thousands of one-off servers that are dedicated to a single, specialized contract tasks and are probably being utilized at around 1\% of their potential.
One base I went to told me they spend $25 million on electricity for their primary data center each year.
This base is now requiring all new systems to be virtualized and they are converting all their current systems to blade servers running 20-40 environments per blade.
This setup reduces their electricity use significantly and reduces their management costs.
Now, imagine if the federal government could do this for every site, every project.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318324</id>
	<title>BRB, buying VMware stock.</title>
	<author>gimmebeer</author>
	<datestamp>1267467120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>All that's left to do now is pick curtains for my sea side villa in the Carribean.</htmltext>
<tokenext>All that 's left to do now is pick curtains for my sea side villa in the Carribean .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All that's left to do now is pick curtains for my sea side villa in the Carribean.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318138</id>
	<title>Better not use Northrop Grumman</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267466460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/29/AR2009062903830.html" title="washingtonpost.com">Virginia's IT overhaul</a> [washingtonpost.com] is any <a href="http://www2.timesdispatch.com/rtd/news/state\_regional/state\_regional\_govtpolitics/article/VITA05\_20100204-220605/322338/" title="timesdispatch.com">indication</a> [timesdispatch.com], this is going to be a slow-motion cluster of a <a href="http://washingtontechnology.com/Articles/2009/10/14/Northrop-Virginia-controversy.aspx" title="washingtontechnology.com">mess</a> [washingtontechnology.com] for the next 10-20 years</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If Virginia 's IT overhaul [ washingtonpost.com ] is any indication [ timesdispatch.com ] , this is going to be a slow-motion cluster of a mess [ washingtontechnology.com ] for the next 10-20 years</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Virginia's IT overhaul [washingtonpost.com] is any indication [timesdispatch.com], this is going to be a slow-motion cluster of a mess [washingtontechnology.com] for the next 10-20 years</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319066</id>
	<title>Re:Dear Contractors...</title>
	<author>ArcadeX</author>
	<datestamp>1267469940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I work on the DoT network, and this thought scares me. Please remember the lowest bidder gets the job in most cases, we recently started putting VM servers in, and these guys can't even reboota a virtual server without screwing it up. As a regional subcontractor, I'm completely locked out, to the point that I had to spend 10 minutes on the phone with our official helpdesk explaining the runas command in windows to the guy on the other end so he could run a command I don't have access to...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I work on the DoT network , and this thought scares me .
Please remember the lowest bidder gets the job in most cases , we recently started putting VM servers in , and these guys ca n't even reboota a virtual server without screwing it up .
As a regional subcontractor , I 'm completely locked out , to the point that I had to spend 10 minutes on the phone with our official helpdesk explaining the runas command in windows to the guy on the other end so he could run a command I do n't have access to.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work on the DoT network, and this thought scares me.
Please remember the lowest bidder gets the job in most cases, we recently started putting VM servers in, and these guys can't even reboota a virtual server without screwing it up.
As a regional subcontractor, I'm completely locked out, to the point that I had to spend 10 minutes on the phone with our official helpdesk explaining the runas command in windows to the guy on the other end so he could run a command I don't have access to...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318058</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318864</id>
	<title>Government!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267469100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>More Government! They can't do anything right...! unless it's nation building....! and militarily outspending the rest of the world combined...!</p><p>I hereby declare that we all to trust the gov to build walls along borders and spend $700 annually on building better annihilation technology... but when the gov starts handing out free cheese, we need to wake up! Then we've got full blown socialist tyranny on our hands people!!!<br>AAAAaaaaHaaVietnam!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>More Government !
They ca n't do anything right... !
unless it 's nation building.... !
and militarily outspending the rest of the world combined... ! I hereby declare that we all to trust the gov to build walls along borders and spend $ 700 annually on building better annihilation technology... but when the gov starts handing out free cheese , we need to wake up !
Then we 've got full blown socialist tyranny on our hands people ! !
! AAAAaaaaHaaVietnam !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More Government!
They can't do anything right...!
unless it's nation building....!
and militarily outspending the rest of the world combined...!I hereby declare that we all to trust the gov to build walls along borders and spend $700 annually on building better annihilation technology... but when the gov starts handing out free cheese, we need to wake up!
Then we've got full blown socialist tyranny on our hands people!!
!AAAAaaaaHaaVietnam!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318304</id>
	<title>Re:IT as a commodity</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267467000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>WITCH! A witch! Burn her!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>WITCH !
A witch !
Burn her !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WITCH!
A witch!
Burn her!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31320566</id>
	<title>Re:... if you can spell "Cloud Computing"</title>
	<author>cashman73</author>
	<datestamp>1267475820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How do you say "cloud computing" in Mandarin? Hindi?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How do you say " cloud computing " in Mandarin ?
Hindi ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How do you say "cloud computing" in Mandarin?
Hindi?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318050</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319508</id>
	<title>Re:Better not use Northrop Grumman</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267471740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What about the Department of Veterans affairs current massive centralization?</p><p>The article doesn't state what agencies are supposed to centralize, and if it will affect my branch, so I can only comment on what I know to be true.</p><p>The VA has been centralizing IT for 2+ years. Removing all IT employees from the hospitals and shifting them under one management umbrella. Co-locating and managing 30+ Veterans Health Information Systems and Technology Architecture (VISTA) computer systems? (Yes, VISTA)</p><p>Centralized storage management, networking decisions, and IT shops streamlined. We moved from maintaining 30+ VISTA systems, to managing 2 LARGE systems co-located at commercial data-centers. (We're moving off VMS to Linux front end user servers right now... WOW that is a HUGE savings, but the money is still spent elsewhere.)</p><p>What I'm finding is we won't spend less money, but the money will be better utilized. What you've got is sites in California who spend 3x what a site in Montana spends. So when we centralize, we even the playing field. We spend less in CA, but more in Montana. We upgrade the sometimes shameful IT shops, and knock the big spenders down a peg. The net result? Better overall standards, but no cost savings at all.</p><p>Now is doing more with less going to save any tax dollars in the long run? I doubt it... The budget seems to be completely disjointed from the mission in my 15 year government employment. They always find a way to spend the money... If we don't spend it... Then we must not need it, and if we didn't need it, they will cut our budget! We can't let that happen!!!! (Not my mentality mind you.)</p><p>The last time, that I am aware they tried to hold the VA to a strict budget some directors ensured they increased services they were offering. Running the hospitals into the RED on PURPOSE to hold congress hostage for a bail out. (This has happened twice that I am aware of in my term of employment.) Will congress simply not fund the VA? Will it 'turn it's back' on the vets? Not a chance in hell. So congress shook the money tree, and bailed out those hospitals. (I think they should have fired those managers for going over budget SO badly.)</p><p>I'm just saying... Don't expect the budgets to lower... Ever! Okay, maybe they won't increase as fast as the could by saving money, but they will not decrease.</p><p>--Anon Government IT<br>-15 Years and counting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What about the Department of Veterans affairs current massive centralization ? The article does n't state what agencies are supposed to centralize , and if it will affect my branch , so I can only comment on what I know to be true.The VA has been centralizing IT for 2 + years .
Removing all IT employees from the hospitals and shifting them under one management umbrella .
Co-locating and managing 30 + Veterans Health Information Systems and Technology Architecture ( VISTA ) computer systems ?
( Yes , VISTA ) Centralized storage management , networking decisions , and IT shops streamlined .
We moved from maintaining 30 + VISTA systems , to managing 2 LARGE systems co-located at commercial data-centers .
( We 're moving off VMS to Linux front end user servers right now... WOW that is a HUGE savings , but the money is still spent elsewhere .
) What I 'm finding is we wo n't spend less money , but the money will be better utilized .
What you 've got is sites in California who spend 3x what a site in Montana spends .
So when we centralize , we even the playing field .
We spend less in CA , but more in Montana .
We upgrade the sometimes shameful IT shops , and knock the big spenders down a peg .
The net result ?
Better overall standards , but no cost savings at all.Now is doing more with less going to save any tax dollars in the long run ?
I doubt it... The budget seems to be completely disjointed from the mission in my 15 year government employment .
They always find a way to spend the money... If we do n't spend it... Then we must not need it , and if we did n't need it , they will cut our budget !
We ca n't let that happen ! ! ! !
( Not my mentality mind you .
) The last time , that I am aware they tried to hold the VA to a strict budget some directors ensured they increased services they were offering .
Running the hospitals into the RED on PURPOSE to hold congress hostage for a bail out .
( This has happened twice that I am aware of in my term of employment .
) Will congress simply not fund the VA ?
Will it 'turn it 's back ' on the vets ?
Not a chance in hell .
So congress shook the money tree , and bailed out those hospitals .
( I think they should have fired those managers for going over budget SO badly .
) I 'm just saying... Do n't expect the budgets to lower... Ever ! Okay , maybe they wo n't increase as fast as the could by saving money , but they will not decrease.--Anon Government IT-15 Years and counting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What about the Department of Veterans affairs current massive centralization?The article doesn't state what agencies are supposed to centralize, and if it will affect my branch, so I can only comment on what I know to be true.The VA has been centralizing IT for 2+ years.
Removing all IT employees from the hospitals and shifting them under one management umbrella.
Co-locating and managing 30+ Veterans Health Information Systems and Technology Architecture (VISTA) computer systems?
(Yes, VISTA)Centralized storage management, networking decisions, and IT shops streamlined.
We moved from maintaining 30+ VISTA systems, to managing 2 LARGE systems co-located at commercial data-centers.
(We're moving off VMS to Linux front end user servers right now... WOW that is a HUGE savings, but the money is still spent elsewhere.
)What I'm finding is we won't spend less money, but the money will be better utilized.
What you've got is sites in California who spend 3x what a site in Montana spends.
So when we centralize, we even the playing field.
We spend less in CA, but more in Montana.
We upgrade the sometimes shameful IT shops, and knock the big spenders down a peg.
The net result?
Better overall standards, but no cost savings at all.Now is doing more with less going to save any tax dollars in the long run?
I doubt it... The budget seems to be completely disjointed from the mission in my 15 year government employment.
They always find a way to spend the money... If we don't spend it... Then we must not need it, and if we didn't need it, they will cut our budget!
We can't let that happen!!!!
(Not my mentality mind you.
)The last time, that I am aware they tried to hold the VA to a strict budget some directors ensured they increased services they were offering.
Running the hospitals into the RED on PURPOSE to hold congress hostage for a bail out.
(This has happened twice that I am aware of in my term of employment.
) Will congress simply not fund the VA?
Will it 'turn it's back' on the vets?
Not a chance in hell.
So congress shook the money tree, and bailed out those hospitals.
(I think they should have fired those managers for going over budget SO badly.
)I'm just saying... Don't expect the budgets to lower... Ever! Okay, maybe they won't increase as fast as the could by saving money, but they will not decrease.--Anon Government IT-15 Years and counting.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318138</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318058</id>
	<title>Dear Contractors...</title>
	<author>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</author>
	<datestamp>1267466220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dinner is served! Please approach the money trough in an orderly line...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dinner is served !
Please approach the money trough in an orderly line.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dinner is served!
Please approach the money trough in an orderly line...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318466</id>
	<title>Re:IT as a commodity</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267467660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I agree with the government's effort to consolidate, because you can take advantage of cheaper per-gigabyte costs and have more robust backup, recovery, disaster recovery, and redundancy solutions when you're using enterprise equipment in large data centers.  I think the government has a lot to gain from consolidation in this manner.
<br> <br>
However, I don't see that they'd have much to gain by outsourcing.  Government data, by nature, is quite a bit more sensitive than just about any private company's data.  The kind of security the government needs is not going to come cheaply, and it's arguable that any private company is really capable of providing it (although they say they are).  Even if they can provide it, it's doubtful they can do it cheaper than the government could.  For people in need of true commodity services like web hosting, outsourcing makes sense because it can be done far cheaper that way.  For people in need of large-scale custom solutions, like the government, keeping it in-house is going to tend to be both more secure and less expensive.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree with the government 's effort to consolidate , because you can take advantage of cheaper per-gigabyte costs and have more robust backup , recovery , disaster recovery , and redundancy solutions when you 're using enterprise equipment in large data centers .
I think the government has a lot to gain from consolidation in this manner .
However , I do n't see that they 'd have much to gain by outsourcing .
Government data , by nature , is quite a bit more sensitive than just about any private company 's data .
The kind of security the government needs is not going to come cheaply , and it 's arguable that any private company is really capable of providing it ( although they say they are ) .
Even if they can provide it , it 's doubtful they can do it cheaper than the government could .
For people in need of true commodity services like web hosting , outsourcing makes sense because it can be done far cheaper that way .
For people in need of large-scale custom solutions , like the government , keeping it in-house is going to tend to be both more secure and less expensive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree with the government's effort to consolidate, because you can take advantage of cheaper per-gigabyte costs and have more robust backup, recovery, disaster recovery, and redundancy solutions when you're using enterprise equipment in large data centers.
I think the government has a lot to gain from consolidation in this manner.
However, I don't see that they'd have much to gain by outsourcing.
Government data, by nature, is quite a bit more sensitive than just about any private company's data.
The kind of security the government needs is not going to come cheaply, and it's arguable that any private company is really capable of providing it (although they say they are).
Even if they can provide it, it's doubtful they can do it cheaper than the government could.
For people in need of true commodity services like web hosting, outsourcing makes sense because it can be done far cheaper that way.
For people in need of large-scale custom solutions, like the government, keeping it in-house is going to tend to be both more secure and less expensive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319950</id>
	<title>Re:... if you can spell "Cloud Computing"</title>
	<author>david\_thornley</author>
	<datestamp>1267473360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
C-L-U-O-D C-M-P-U-T-E-N-G.
</p><p>
Is that close enough for government work?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>C-L-U-O-D C-M-P-U-T-E-N-G . Is that close enough for government work ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
C-L-U-O-D C-M-P-U-T-E-N-G.

Is that close enough for government work?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318050</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318960</id>
	<title>Re:Prediction</title>
	<author>oldhack</author>
	<datestamp>1267469460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hey, beltway bandits have families to feed and boat payments to make, like everyone else.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey , beltway bandits have families to feed and boat payments to make , like everyone else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey, beltway bandits have families to feed and boat payments to make, like everyone else.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318108</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318210</id>
	<title>Where do I send my resume?</title>
	<author>gimmebeer</author>
	<datestamp>1267466700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In for some way overpriced consulting gigs.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>In for some way overpriced consulting gigs .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In for some way overpriced consulting gigs.
:)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31324702</id>
	<title>Re:Let the NSA do it</title>
	<author>Leebert</author>
	<datestamp>1267450140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If they can keep their own codebreaking and intelligence records secure (when was the last time you heard about the NSA getting hacked?), they can do it for the government as a whole.</p></div><p>Sorry, you touched a nerve...</p><p>Where does the NSA have a need (or a MANDATE) to interact with the public with their data?</p><p>I do contract work at NASA.  We have an actual requirement to <b>share</b> data.  Actual Internet exposure.  People doing science.  That sort of thing.  Guess what?  The agency gets hacked.  Relatively speaking among federal agencies, fairly often.  It's not surprising.</p><p>The IRS collects data online.  Social Security.  NHTSA.  NIST.  NOAA.  FDA.  Ad nauseum.  All of them have heavy interaction with the public.</p><p>So yeah, when your requirements are, like the NSA, mostly to keep it all on the property at Fort Meade (or maybe a little bit to remote sites), it's (relatively) easy.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If they can keep their own codebreaking and intelligence records secure ( when was the last time you heard about the NSA getting hacked ?
) , they can do it for the government as a whole.Sorry , you touched a nerve...Where does the NSA have a need ( or a MANDATE ) to interact with the public with their data ? I do contract work at NASA .
We have an actual requirement to share data .
Actual Internet exposure .
People doing science .
That sort of thing .
Guess what ?
The agency gets hacked .
Relatively speaking among federal agencies , fairly often .
It 's not surprising.The IRS collects data online .
Social Security .
NHTSA. NIST .
NOAA. FDA .
Ad nauseum .
All of them have heavy interaction with the public.So yeah , when your requirements are , like the NSA , mostly to keep it all on the property at Fort Meade ( or maybe a little bit to remote sites ) , it 's ( relatively ) easy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they can keep their own codebreaking and intelligence records secure (when was the last time you heard about the NSA getting hacked?
), they can do it for the government as a whole.Sorry, you touched a nerve...Where does the NSA have a need (or a MANDATE) to interact with the public with their data?I do contract work at NASA.
We have an actual requirement to share data.
Actual Internet exposure.
People doing science.
That sort of thing.
Guess what?
The agency gets hacked.
Relatively speaking among federal agencies, fairly often.
It's not surprising.The IRS collects data online.
Social Security.
NHTSA.  NIST.
NOAA.  FDA.
Ad nauseum.
All of them have heavy interaction with the public.So yeah, when your requirements are, like the NSA, mostly to keep it all on the property at Fort Meade (or maybe a little bit to remote sites), it's (relatively) easy.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319434</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319496</id>
	<title>WTH is Federal CIO Vivek Kundra?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267471680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is this a cabinet post that had to be vetted through Congress or is it another one of those Czar posts that Obama created without anybody's consent?<br> <br>

If this is a Czar, Kundra can "go outside and play a rousing game of Go Fuck Yourself" as that position has NO power.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is this a cabinet post that had to be vetted through Congress or is it another one of those Czar posts that Obama created without anybody 's consent ?
If this is a Czar , Kundra can " go outside and play a rousing game of Go Fuck Yourself " as that position has NO power .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is this a cabinet post that had to be vetted through Congress or is it another one of those Czar posts that Obama created without anybody's consent?
If this is a Czar, Kundra can "go outside and play a rousing game of Go Fuck Yourself" as that position has NO power.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31324428</id>
	<title>Some separations are for a REASON.  1984...</title>
	<author>Ungrounded Lightning</author>
	<datestamp>1267448580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Some separations are for a REASON.</p><p>For instance:</p><p>Tax data is separate from criminal investigative data because access to tax information without a VERY hard-to-get warrant is prohibited.</p><p>Similarly, gun transfer information is supposed to be destroyed after a small amount of time to prevent compilation of a database for confiscation - either by a runaway government or an invading power trying to disarm a potential resistance movement.  (Also:  It's tax information because the only way they could get federal gun bans and tracking passed back when congress and the courts paid more than lip service to the constitution was to disguise it as a tax.  That's why BATF is part of treasury.)</p><p>Many other classes of information are confidential and access restricted to small groups of people with a particular need to know.  Examples:  Medical information.  Competitive bidding information.  Company secrets disclosed to regulators.  I could go on.</p><p>Keeping this information restricted to the personnel of the agency with the need-to-know is easier if it's in the agency's own I.T. operation.  Then other agencies don't have automatic access to it - and interdepartmental rivalry works to keep the information bottled up.  "Consolidate the IT operations" and you have a much larger I.T. staff with back-channel access, while need-to-know compartmentalization is a bolt-on to the unified database, with enormous potential for failure or bypassing (if it's implemented at all).</p><p>So consolidating the IT operations is a grand opportunity for both foulups leaking data outside their authorized compartmentalization and the clandestine creation of a "Total Information Awareness" Big-Brother superstate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Some separations are for a REASON.For instance : Tax data is separate from criminal investigative data because access to tax information without a VERY hard-to-get warrant is prohibited.Similarly , gun transfer information is supposed to be destroyed after a small amount of time to prevent compilation of a database for confiscation - either by a runaway government or an invading power trying to disarm a potential resistance movement .
( Also : It 's tax information because the only way they could get federal gun bans and tracking passed back when congress and the courts paid more than lip service to the constitution was to disguise it as a tax .
That 's why BATF is part of treasury .
) Many other classes of information are confidential and access restricted to small groups of people with a particular need to know .
Examples : Medical information .
Competitive bidding information .
Company secrets disclosed to regulators .
I could go on.Keeping this information restricted to the personnel of the agency with the need-to-know is easier if it 's in the agency 's own I.T .
operation. Then other agencies do n't have automatic access to it - and interdepartmental rivalry works to keep the information bottled up .
" Consolidate the IT operations " and you have a much larger I.T .
staff with back-channel access , while need-to-know compartmentalization is a bolt-on to the unified database , with enormous potential for failure or bypassing ( if it 's implemented at all ) .So consolidating the IT operations is a grand opportunity for both foulups leaking data outside their authorized compartmentalization and the clandestine creation of a " Total Information Awareness " Big-Brother superstate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some separations are for a REASON.For instance:Tax data is separate from criminal investigative data because access to tax information without a VERY hard-to-get warrant is prohibited.Similarly, gun transfer information is supposed to be destroyed after a small amount of time to prevent compilation of a database for confiscation - either by a runaway government or an invading power trying to disarm a potential resistance movement.
(Also:  It's tax information because the only way they could get federal gun bans and tracking passed back when congress and the courts paid more than lip service to the constitution was to disguise it as a tax.
That's why BATF is part of treasury.
)Many other classes of information are confidential and access restricted to small groups of people with a particular need to know.
Examples:  Medical information.
Competitive bidding information.
Company secrets disclosed to regulators.
I could go on.Keeping this information restricted to the personnel of the agency with the need-to-know is easier if it's in the agency's own I.T.
operation.  Then other agencies don't have automatic access to it - and interdepartmental rivalry works to keep the information bottled up.
"Consolidate the IT operations" and you have a much larger I.T.
staff with back-channel access, while need-to-know compartmentalization is a bolt-on to the unified database, with enormous potential for failure or bypassing (if it's implemented at all).So consolidating the IT operations is a grand opportunity for both foulups leaking data outside their authorized compartmentalization and the clandestine creation of a "Total Information Awareness" Big-Brother superstate.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319784</id>
	<title>Good idea, but huge problems are coming</title>
	<author>ErichTheRed</author>
	<datestamp>1267472760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've actually done a lot of smaller server consolidation projects. In most cases, the results are great...those lonely database and file servers that get hits 5 or 6 times a day are all combined into one big box that actually uses all the hardware capacity.</p><p>The biggest problems I've seen with VMs are the project managers who treat it as magic, never-ending capacity. The new favorite phrase in IT project management circles seems to be, "Oh, we'll just build a VM for it." Problem is, unless someone else is hosting your data center, you can't just call up and order more capacity without paying for more hardware.</p><p>Second-biggest with a consolidation like this is incomplete requirements. Lowest-bidder contractors are not going to do a good job of gathering every single requirement...even high-bidder contractors have problems with this. And the problem is that the more they miss, the worse the fallout. A certain large company I used to work for found this out the hard way moving their inhouse data center to one of the big IT services companies. I'm a systems guy, and had all my stuff well documented. Others were pissed off they were losing their jobs and intentionally withheld information...the contractors didn't follow up, and a lot of last minute scrambling had to be done to complete the migration.</p><p>Third problem for a government IT consolidation? Some huge services company like Accenture or IBM is going to win the bid and staff the project with dumbasses they pulled off the street in order to maximize profits. (Yes, this happened in my case in point #2 above...the sales staff presented the A Squad and swapped them out as soon as the contract was signed.) Not that government employees are rockstars, but they at least have a vested interest in keeping the data safe. IBM will probably win the contract too, given their involvement with government systems already. IBM has been so India-happy over the last ten years that I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of the (non security critical) work ends up there.</p><p>Just like PMs treat VMs as magic hardware, CIOs treat outsourcers as magic black boxes that flawlessly run their IT operations. Unfortunately, the reality is not as sunny beneath the surface!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've actually done a lot of smaller server consolidation projects .
In most cases , the results are great...those lonely database and file servers that get hits 5 or 6 times a day are all combined into one big box that actually uses all the hardware capacity.The biggest problems I 've seen with VMs are the project managers who treat it as magic , never-ending capacity .
The new favorite phrase in IT project management circles seems to be , " Oh , we 'll just build a VM for it .
" Problem is , unless someone else is hosting your data center , you ca n't just call up and order more capacity without paying for more hardware.Second-biggest with a consolidation like this is incomplete requirements .
Lowest-bidder contractors are not going to do a good job of gathering every single requirement...even high-bidder contractors have problems with this .
And the problem is that the more they miss , the worse the fallout .
A certain large company I used to work for found this out the hard way moving their inhouse data center to one of the big IT services companies .
I 'm a systems guy , and had all my stuff well documented .
Others were pissed off they were losing their jobs and intentionally withheld information...the contractors did n't follow up , and a lot of last minute scrambling had to be done to complete the migration.Third problem for a government IT consolidation ?
Some huge services company like Accenture or IBM is going to win the bid and staff the project with dumbasses they pulled off the street in order to maximize profits .
( Yes , this happened in my case in point # 2 above...the sales staff presented the A Squad and swapped them out as soon as the contract was signed .
) Not that government employees are rockstars , but they at least have a vested interest in keeping the data safe .
IBM will probably win the contract too , given their involvement with government systems already .
IBM has been so India-happy over the last ten years that I would n't be surprised if a lot of the ( non security critical ) work ends up there.Just like PMs treat VMs as magic hardware , CIOs treat outsourcers as magic black boxes that flawlessly run their IT operations .
Unfortunately , the reality is not as sunny beneath the surface !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've actually done a lot of smaller server consolidation projects.
In most cases, the results are great...those lonely database and file servers that get hits 5 or 6 times a day are all combined into one big box that actually uses all the hardware capacity.The biggest problems I've seen with VMs are the project managers who treat it as magic, never-ending capacity.
The new favorite phrase in IT project management circles seems to be, "Oh, we'll just build a VM for it.
" Problem is, unless someone else is hosting your data center, you can't just call up and order more capacity without paying for more hardware.Second-biggest with a consolidation like this is incomplete requirements.
Lowest-bidder contractors are not going to do a good job of gathering every single requirement...even high-bidder contractors have problems with this.
And the problem is that the more they miss, the worse the fallout.
A certain large company I used to work for found this out the hard way moving their inhouse data center to one of the big IT services companies.
I'm a systems guy, and had all my stuff well documented.
Others were pissed off they were losing their jobs and intentionally withheld information...the contractors didn't follow up, and a lot of last minute scrambling had to be done to complete the migration.Third problem for a government IT consolidation?
Some huge services company like Accenture or IBM is going to win the bid and staff the project with dumbasses they pulled off the street in order to maximize profits.
(Yes, this happened in my case in point #2 above...the sales staff presented the A Squad and swapped them out as soon as the contract was signed.
) Not that government employees are rockstars, but they at least have a vested interest in keeping the data safe.
IBM will probably win the contract too, given their involvement with government systems already.
IBM has been so India-happy over the last ten years that I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of the (non security critical) work ends up there.Just like PMs treat VMs as magic hardware, CIOs treat outsourcers as magic black boxes that flawlessly run their IT operations.
Unfortunately, the reality is not as sunny beneath the surface!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318312</id>
	<title>Re:IT as a commodity</title>
	<author>FuckingNickName</author>
	<datestamp>1267467060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am not quite sure what you are talking about. Because everyone has access to yesteryear's supercomputer on their desktop, there is no reason whatever to go back to a 1960s outsourcing model. If you want to distribute load over your machines, go ahead! But why do it over someone else's?</p><p>If you think this is going to reduce IT expenditure requirements, you have barely worked a minute in IT. When you outsource, you are simply paying someone else to do your job, plus profit, plus a gaggle of negotiators in middle management collecting their kickbacks, plus downtime costs because your business is less important to them than your business is to you (if you have enterprise e-mail and it has been down more than, say, GMail, you have done something very wrong)...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am not quite sure what you are talking about .
Because everyone has access to yesteryear 's supercomputer on their desktop , there is no reason whatever to go back to a 1960s outsourcing model .
If you want to distribute load over your machines , go ahead !
But why do it over someone else 's ? If you think this is going to reduce IT expenditure requirements , you have barely worked a minute in IT .
When you outsource , you are simply paying someone else to do your job , plus profit , plus a gaggle of negotiators in middle management collecting their kickbacks , plus downtime costs because your business is less important to them than your business is to you ( if you have enterprise e-mail and it has been down more than , say , GMail , you have done something very wrong ) .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am not quite sure what you are talking about.
Because everyone has access to yesteryear's supercomputer on their desktop, there is no reason whatever to go back to a 1960s outsourcing model.
If you want to distribute load over your machines, go ahead!
But why do it over someone else's?If you think this is going to reduce IT expenditure requirements, you have barely worked a minute in IT.
When you outsource, you are simply paying someone else to do your job, plus profit, plus a gaggle of negotiators in middle management collecting their kickbacks, plus downtime costs because your business is less important to them than your business is to you (if you have enterprise e-mail and it has been down more than, say, GMail, you have done something very wrong)...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319584</id>
	<title>Re:Prediction</title>
	<author>DigitalDeviation</author>
	<datestamp>1267471980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I feel a Federal Datacenter Consolidation tax coming on.</p><p>I shudder every time I hear about a government I.T. project.  Can't wait to see what mess occurs after this and who steps down as a result.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I feel a Federal Datacenter Consolidation tax coming on.I shudder every time I hear about a government I.T .
project. Ca n't wait to see what mess occurs after this and who steps down as a result .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I feel a Federal Datacenter Consolidation tax coming on.I shudder every time I hear about a government I.T.
project.  Can't wait to see what mess occurs after this and who steps down as a result.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318108</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318764</id>
	<title>Re:Prediction</title>
	<author>BitHive</author>
	<datestamp>1267468680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unless they outsource it to the FREE MARKET in which case it will be the most efficient, cost-effective solution ever completed six months ahead of schedule.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unless they outsource it to the FREE MARKET in which case it will be the most efficient , cost-effective solution ever completed six months ahead of schedule .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unless they outsource it to the FREE MARKET in which case it will be the most efficient, cost-effective solution ever completed six months ahead of schedule.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318108</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31321400</id>
	<title>This will not turn out well. Ask the Navy!</title>
	<author>ScottFree2600</author>
	<datestamp>1267435800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Navy did the "biggest IT contract ever let" and it was pretty much an expensive bloated disaster. See <a href="http://www.itsmwatch.com/itil/article.php/3813651" title="itsmwatch.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.itsmwatch.com/itil/article.php/3813651</a> [itsmwatch.com]

I'm beginning to think that "too big to fail" means "too big" and that failure is inevitable.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Navy did the " biggest IT contract ever let " and it was pretty much an expensive bloated disaster .
See http : //www.itsmwatch.com/itil/article.php/3813651 [ itsmwatch.com ] I 'm beginning to think that " too big to fail " means " too big " and that failure is inevitable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Navy did the "biggest IT contract ever let" and it was pretty much an expensive bloated disaster.
See http://www.itsmwatch.com/itil/article.php/3813651 [itsmwatch.com]

I'm beginning to think that "too big to fail" means "too big" and that failure is inevitable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318050</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31320900</id>
	<title>Re:What about "use it or lose it"?</title>
	<author>ShelfWare</author>
	<datestamp>1267477140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Umm.. this is the same way that large corporations work. I think it is just a fact of life working in a large bureaucratic organization.</p><p>Coincidentally, if you are in a large bureaucratic organization that is also an IT company, then you see a large uptick in sales in 4Q (Oct-Dec) pretty much because of this fact.</p><p>I have never understood it, but the way to embrace it is to plan the budget to be *over* what you received and for valuable work.  I'm not talking about spending it for the sake of spending - but planning your actual work (and spend) out and on purpose overspend it (go in the red) to get more done because there is bound to be some other schlump that didn't spend it - and that will cover your overage.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Umm.. this is the same way that large corporations work .
I think it is just a fact of life working in a large bureaucratic organization.Coincidentally , if you are in a large bureaucratic organization that is also an IT company , then you see a large uptick in sales in 4Q ( Oct-Dec ) pretty much because of this fact.I have never understood it , but the way to embrace it is to plan the budget to be * over * what you received and for valuable work .
I 'm not talking about spending it for the sake of spending - but planning your actual work ( and spend ) out and on purpose overspend it ( go in the red ) to get more done because there is bound to be some other schlump that did n't spend it - and that will cover your overage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Umm.. this is the same way that large corporations work.
I think it is just a fact of life working in a large bureaucratic organization.Coincidentally, if you are in a large bureaucratic organization that is also an IT company, then you see a large uptick in sales in 4Q (Oct-Dec) pretty much because of this fact.I have never understood it, but the way to embrace it is to plan the budget to be *over* what you received and for valuable work.
I'm not talking about spending it for the sake of spending - but planning your actual work (and spend) out and on purpose overspend it (go in the red) to get more done because there is bound to be some other schlump that didn't spend it - and that will cover your overage.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318416</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318714</id>
	<title>consolidation and cloud computing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267468500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Can I say, 'that's a paradox?'
<br>
<br>
<br>
I thought cloud computing was about adding more servers <b>but</b> sharing resources more efficiently, and not reducing your datacenters to a mainframe environment, which is what consolidation results in. What he is proposing, is like saying Google, Apple or Microsoft are reducing their datacenter/server inventory to that advantage of cloud computing...
<br>
<br>
Nothing is for 'Free'. Sure they can cloud compute and ship the same # of servers to specific locations, but they'll hit there bandwidth maximum within a year I bet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Can I say , 'that 's a paradox ?
' I thought cloud computing was about adding more servers but sharing resources more efficiently , and not reducing your datacenters to a mainframe environment , which is what consolidation results in .
What he is proposing , is like saying Google , Apple or Microsoft are reducing their datacenter/server inventory to that advantage of cloud computing.. . Nothing is for 'Free' .
Sure they can cloud compute and ship the same # of servers to specific locations , but they 'll hit there bandwidth maximum within a year I bet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can I say, 'that's a paradox?
'



I thought cloud computing was about adding more servers but sharing resources more efficiently, and not reducing your datacenters to a mainframe environment, which is what consolidation results in.
What he is proposing, is like saying Google, Apple or Microsoft are reducing their datacenter/server inventory to that advantage of cloud computing...


Nothing is for 'Free'.
Sure they can cloud compute and ship the same # of servers to specific locations, but they'll hit there bandwidth maximum within a year I bet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318890</id>
	<title>Re:Memo not clear</title>
	<author>rainmayun</author>
	<datestamp>1267469220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You might be surprised at what agencies and have requirements for the most computing resources.  Sure, DoD and NASA are high on the list, but so are IRS, SSA, CMS. Operational agencies that serve most Americans have HUGE amounts of data to manage.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You might be surprised at what agencies and have requirements for the most computing resources .
Sure , DoD and NASA are high on the list , but so are IRS , SSA , CMS .
Operational agencies that serve most Americans have HUGE amounts of data to manage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You might be surprised at what agencies and have requirements for the most computing resources.
Sure, DoD and NASA are high on the list, but so are IRS, SSA, CMS.
Operational agencies that serve most Americans have HUGE amounts of data to manage.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318180</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31321702</id>
	<title>Re:What about "use it or lose it"?</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1267436760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>it may seem like a policy that governs spending. Instead what it is is a policy that drives UNNECESSARY SPENDING.</p></div><p>I've seen this in both academic and corporate scenarios.<br>
For the academics, they tended to waste their grant money on truly unnecessary things: "Yes, this ipod touch is for my computational research; it is my portable storage drive."  "This Nvidia Whizbang graphics card is for the research machine I brought home with me last year.  It's totally unrelated to the RAM, power supply, computer case, hard drive, motherboard and UV reactive fans from last month's purchase (and they were all unrelated to each other)."<br>
In corporate, most of the unnecessary spending is only temporarily unnecessary.  Almost every time we bought an extra few machines, we were happy we had them when XYZ emergency came up and ate through what our normal emergency stock would have been.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>it may seem like a policy that governs spending .
Instead what it is is a policy that drives UNNECESSARY SPENDING.I 've seen this in both academic and corporate scenarios .
For the academics , they tended to waste their grant money on truly unnecessary things : " Yes , this ipod touch is for my computational research ; it is my portable storage drive .
" " This Nvidia Whizbang graphics card is for the research machine I brought home with me last year .
It 's totally unrelated to the RAM , power supply , computer case , hard drive , motherboard and UV reactive fans from last month 's purchase ( and they were all unrelated to each other ) .
" In corporate , most of the unnecessary spending is only temporarily unnecessary .
Almost every time we bought an extra few machines , we were happy we had them when XYZ emergency came up and ate through what our normal emergency stock would have been .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it may seem like a policy that governs spending.
Instead what it is is a policy that drives UNNECESSARY SPENDING.I've seen this in both academic and corporate scenarios.
For the academics, they tended to waste their grant money on truly unnecessary things: "Yes, this ipod touch is for my computational research; it is my portable storage drive.
"  "This Nvidia Whizbang graphics card is for the research machine I brought home with me last year.
It's totally unrelated to the RAM, power supply, computer case, hard drive, motherboard and UV reactive fans from last month's purchase (and they were all unrelated to each other).
"
In corporate, most of the unnecessary spending is only temporarily unnecessary.
Almost every time we bought an extra few machines, we were happy we had them when XYZ emergency came up and ate through what our normal emergency stock would have been.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318416</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31321250</id>
	<title>Re:Prediction</title>
	<author>twiddlingbits</author>
	<datestamp>1267435260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Umm..NO..the Gov't Agencies will still "manage" the contractor(s) into doing stupid things in order to save a few bucks or save political face for someone. And don't forget the CongressCritters who don't want DC's in their districts closed. Think the BRAC (DoD) process on a much larger scale of agencies and locations.  Total freaking chaos. Looks great on paper, works pretty well in the private sector, but it will be a massive fustercluck in the Gov't.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Umm..NO..the Gov't Agencies will still " manage " the contractor ( s ) into doing stupid things in order to save a few bucks or save political face for someone .
And do n't forget the CongressCritters who do n't want DC 's in their districts closed .
Think the BRAC ( DoD ) process on a much larger scale of agencies and locations .
Total freaking chaos .
Looks great on paper , works pretty well in the private sector , but it will be a massive fustercluck in the Gov't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Umm..NO..the Gov't Agencies will still "manage" the contractor(s) into doing stupid things in order to save a few bucks or save political face for someone.
And don't forget the CongressCritters who don't want DC's in their districts closed.
Think the BRAC (DoD) process on a much larger scale of agencies and locations.
Total freaking chaos.
Looks great on paper, works pretty well in the private sector, but it will be a massive fustercluck in the Gov't.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319726</id>
	<title>Here's how Vivek will succeed at this project...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267472520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><ul><li> Get a thousand monkeys and feed them a bunch of Viagra before locking them into a room </li><li> Toss a thousand footballs into that room</li><li> ??? </li><li> Profit!!! </li></ul></htmltext>
<tokenext>Get a thousand monkeys and feed them a bunch of Viagra before locking them into a room Toss a thousand footballs into that room ? ? ?
Profit ! ! !</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Get a thousand monkeys and feed them a bunch of Viagra before locking them into a room  Toss a thousand footballs into that room ???
Profit!!! </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318294</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318180</id>
	<title>Memo not clear</title>
	<author>bsDaemon</author>
	<datestamp>1267466580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The memo isn't clear if this project is only for what i'd call "paper shuffling" agencies, or if Department of Energy, NASA, DOD, etc, are going to be required to participate as well.  I doubt they would be, but they're also the ones who require the most computing resources, I would think.  Of course, it seems they put the CIO of DHS in charge of this (for what reason, I don't know, but probably a nefarious one), so who knows what sort of ridiculousness is going to come of it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The memo is n't clear if this project is only for what i 'd call " paper shuffling " agencies , or if Department of Energy , NASA , DOD , etc , are going to be required to participate as well .
I doubt they would be , but they 're also the ones who require the most computing resources , I would think .
Of course , it seems they put the CIO of DHS in charge of this ( for what reason , I do n't know , but probably a nefarious one ) , so who knows what sort of ridiculousness is going to come of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The memo isn't clear if this project is only for what i'd call "paper shuffling" agencies, or if Department of Energy, NASA, DOD, etc, are going to be required to participate as well.
I doubt they would be, but they're also the ones who require the most computing resources, I would think.
Of course, it seems they put the CIO of DHS in charge of this (for what reason, I don't know, but probably a nefarious one), so who knows what sort of ridiculousness is going to come of it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318724</id>
	<title>Re:Better not use Northrop Grumman</title>
	<author>mikefocke</author>
	<datestamp>1267468500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course it is</p><p>consolidations are always a mess and ones full of job implications mean political interference (I want em in my district).</p><p>But you have to do something as the growth of government IT gets out of hand and we can only afford so much.</p><p>IIRC, the government consolidated all the payroll systems it had into about 4 pay centers back about 10 years ago. Went from maintaining hundreds to one s/w run 4 places for redundancy. Everybody screamed they needed theirs because it had unique features, they learned to do without or incorporated the features into the new s/w. Wasn't that fairly successful?</p><p>While all govt computing is a bit more complex now than a single application was then, still if we are to afford the things we really need, consolidation and standardization makes sense.</p><p>Now the contracting and execution...that will be a challenge. And so what if it takes 5 years, if we are going in the right direction and saving money in the long run. Because we can't sustain even the current government spending on what we are willing to vote as taxes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course it isconsolidations are always a mess and ones full of job implications mean political interference ( I want em in my district ) .But you have to do something as the growth of government IT gets out of hand and we can only afford so much.IIRC , the government consolidated all the payroll systems it had into about 4 pay centers back about 10 years ago .
Went from maintaining hundreds to one s/w run 4 places for redundancy .
Everybody screamed they needed theirs because it had unique features , they learned to do without or incorporated the features into the new s/w .
Was n't that fairly successful ? While all govt computing is a bit more complex now than a single application was then , still if we are to afford the things we really need , consolidation and standardization makes sense.Now the contracting and execution...that will be a challenge .
And so what if it takes 5 years , if we are going in the right direction and saving money in the long run .
Because we ca n't sustain even the current government spending on what we are willing to vote as taxes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course it isconsolidations are always a mess and ones full of job implications mean political interference (I want em in my district).But you have to do something as the growth of government IT gets out of hand and we can only afford so much.IIRC, the government consolidated all the payroll systems it had into about 4 pay centers back about 10 years ago.
Went from maintaining hundreds to one s/w run 4 places for redundancy.
Everybody screamed they needed theirs because it had unique features, they learned to do without or incorporated the features into the new s/w.
Wasn't that fairly successful?While all govt computing is a bit more complex now than a single application was then, still if we are to afford the things we really need, consolidation and standardization makes sense.Now the contracting and execution...that will be a challenge.
And so what if it takes 5 years, if we are going in the right direction and saving money in the long run.
Because we can't sustain even the current government spending on what we are willing to vote as taxes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318138</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318158</id>
	<title>Re:Prediction</title>
	<author>Nadaka</author>
	<datestamp>1267466520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This being a government IT project, I predict it will take 5 years longer than planned, cost 10x the initial budget, and still never really work quite right.</p></div><p>Then it will be a complete success.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This being a government IT project , I predict it will take 5 years longer than planned , cost 10x the initial budget , and still never really work quite right.Then it will be a complete success .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This being a government IT project, I predict it will take 5 years longer than planned, cost 10x the initial budget, and still never really work quite right.Then it will be a complete success.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318108</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318320</id>
	<title>ALL HACKERS WELCOME, HOURLY RATES APPLY</title>
	<author>whtdrgn101</author>
	<datestamp>1267467120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, this strikes me as a good way to create one large highly vulnerable target.  I understand conserving energy and creating a single uniform and tight security standard, but putting all your eggs in one basket is like putting up a neon sign that reads "ALL HACKERS WELCOME, HOURLY RATES APPLY"</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , this strikes me as a good way to create one large highly vulnerable target .
I understand conserving energy and creating a single uniform and tight security standard , but putting all your eggs in one basket is like putting up a neon sign that reads " ALL HACKERS WELCOME , HOURLY RATES APPLY "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, this strikes me as a good way to create one large highly vulnerable target.
I understand conserving energy and creating a single uniform and tight security standard, but putting all your eggs in one basket is like putting up a neon sign that reads "ALL HACKERS WELCOME, HOURLY RATES APPLY"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319748</id>
	<title>Re:Prediction</title>
	<author>Sandbags</author>
	<datestamp>1267472580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know, we started with a network of well over 3,000 servers, and in less than 2 years we've moved almost entirely off Win 2K, virtualized over 1,000 servers, moved to AIX 6 and VIO, delpoyed a VMWare infrastructure, deployed an Exchange architecture in place of a legacy e-mail system, and converted more than half our web apps into SOA and put it on IFLs in a mainframe.  We cut from over 3,000 systems, nearly all physical, to under 2500 with near half virtual, and saved significant money in the process vs budgeted outlays.  We've reduced our data center footprint by 60-70\%, and our power draw is down dramatically.</p><p>The forward looking TCO now that the bulk of the migrations are done is impressively smaller.</p><p>We did all this while holding to DOD network standards.</p><p>The problem the government will have, which we fought with a bit but was no where near as big of a deal, is getting hundreds of small business units to agree to consolidate to central systems, and to convert from "these servers are mine, see, here's where I paid for them" to a metered utilization budget system where hardly any smaller government agency owns it's own infrastructure.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know , we started with a network of well over 3,000 servers , and in less than 2 years we 've moved almost entirely off Win 2K , virtualized over 1,000 servers , moved to AIX 6 and VIO , delpoyed a VMWare infrastructure , deployed an Exchange architecture in place of a legacy e-mail system , and converted more than half our web apps into SOA and put it on IFLs in a mainframe .
We cut from over 3,000 systems , nearly all physical , to under 2500 with near half virtual , and saved significant money in the process vs budgeted outlays .
We 've reduced our data center footprint by 60-70 \ % , and our power draw is down dramatically.The forward looking TCO now that the bulk of the migrations are done is impressively smaller.We did all this while holding to DOD network standards.The problem the government will have , which we fought with a bit but was no where near as big of a deal , is getting hundreds of small business units to agree to consolidate to central systems , and to convert from " these servers are mine , see , here 's where I paid for them " to a metered utilization budget system where hardly any smaller government agency owns it 's own infrastructure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know, we started with a network of well over 3,000 servers, and in less than 2 years we've moved almost entirely off Win 2K, virtualized over 1,000 servers, moved to AIX 6 and VIO, delpoyed a VMWare infrastructure, deployed an Exchange architecture in place of a legacy e-mail system, and converted more than half our web apps into SOA and put it on IFLs in a mainframe.
We cut from over 3,000 systems, nearly all physical, to under 2500 with near half virtual, and saved significant money in the process vs budgeted outlays.
We've reduced our data center footprint by 60-70\%, and our power draw is down dramatically.The forward looking TCO now that the bulk of the migrations are done is impressively smaller.We did all this while holding to DOD network standards.The problem the government will have, which we fought with a bit but was no where near as big of a deal, is getting hundreds of small business units to agree to consolidate to central systems, and to convert from "these servers are mine, see, here's where I paid for them" to a metered utilization budget system where hardly any smaller government agency owns it's own infrastructure.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318108</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318134</id>
	<title>IT as a commodity</title>
	<author>DogDude</author>
	<datestamp>1267466460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Finally, IT is on its way to being considered a commodity, as it should.  There's no reason for every organization to maintain their own IT infrastructure any more than there's reason for every organization to maintain their own electricity generation and distribution.  Of course, the hordes of IT people won't be happy, as the number of It jobs will continue to fall precipitously, but such is life.  Because everybody has access to relatively significant computing power, society as a whole gets to reap the rewards, as opposed to 20 years ago, when only the largest organizations had the money and the manpower to maintain an IT network of any kind.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Finally , IT is on its way to being considered a commodity , as it should .
There 's no reason for every organization to maintain their own IT infrastructure any more than there 's reason for every organization to maintain their own electricity generation and distribution .
Of course , the hordes of IT people wo n't be happy , as the number of It jobs will continue to fall precipitously , but such is life .
Because everybody has access to relatively significant computing power , society as a whole gets to reap the rewards , as opposed to 20 years ago , when only the largest organizations had the money and the manpower to maintain an IT network of any kind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Finally, IT is on its way to being considered a commodity, as it should.
There's no reason for every organization to maintain their own IT infrastructure any more than there's reason for every organization to maintain their own electricity generation and distribution.
Of course, the hordes of IT people won't be happy, as the number of It jobs will continue to fall precipitously, but such is life.
Because everybody has access to relatively significant computing power, society as a whole gets to reap the rewards, as opposed to 20 years ago, when only the largest organizations had the money and the manpower to maintain an IT network of any kind.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31321258</id>
	<title>Re:Prediction</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267435260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I weren't a die hard AC, I'd mod this one Troll or Funny, but as far as I can tell, BitHive is actually serious...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I were n't a die hard AC , I 'd mod this one Troll or Funny , but as far as I can tell , BitHive is actually serious.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I weren't a die hard AC, I'd mod this one Troll or Funny, but as far as I can tell, BitHive is actually serious...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319026</id>
	<title>Re:Memo not clear</title>
	<author>QuantumRiff</author>
	<datestamp>1267469760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are you referring to processing power, or computer resources?  Cause I would think the IRS and Social Security both have a crapload more stuff than the DoE..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you referring to processing power , or computer resources ?
Cause I would think the IRS and Social Security both have a crapload more stuff than the DoE. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you referring to processing power, or computer resources?
Cause I would think the IRS and Social Security both have a crapload more stuff than the DoE..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318180</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319312</id>
	<title>Buy stock in VMware</title>
	<author>Vrtigo1</author>
	<datestamp>1267471080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...if you don't already have some, sounds like now ought to be a pretty good time to buy up some stock in VMware.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...if you do n't already have some , sounds like now ought to be a pretty good time to buy up some stock in VMware .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...if you don't already have some, sounds like now ought to be a pretty good time to buy up some stock in VMware.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318996</id>
	<title>Cloud Computing for Governments</title>
	<author>al0ha</author>
	<datestamp>1267469640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>is such a colossally bad idea.  Government data living on any system ultimately controlled by a corporation on that corporation's property is so rife for abuse, we are really opening perhaps the biggest Pandora's box of our times.  Future Americans will likely rue the day the government gave all control of its data to Corporate America.</htmltext>
<tokenext>is such a colossally bad idea .
Government data living on any system ultimately controlled by a corporation on that corporation 's property is so rife for abuse , we are really opening perhaps the biggest Pandora 's box of our times .
Future Americans will likely rue the day the government gave all control of its data to Corporate America .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is such a colossally bad idea.
Government data living on any system ultimately controlled by a corporation on that corporation's property is so rife for abuse, we are really opening perhaps the biggest Pandora's box of our times.
Future Americans will likely rue the day the government gave all control of its data to Corporate America.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318598</id>
	<title>dang, beat me to it!</title>
	<author>Tumbleweed</author>
	<datestamp>1267468080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was halfway through the description and intended to make a "Let's move everything to the Cloud!" joke, but I see the OP beat me to it. How disappointing. Let me give you a little tip: the person who sets up the joke isn't supposed to then tell the punchline. C'mon, Abbot and Costello 101 here, people. I don't know! Third base!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was halfway through the description and intended to make a " Let 's move everything to the Cloud !
" joke , but I see the OP beat me to it .
How disappointing .
Let me give you a little tip : the person who sets up the joke is n't supposed to then tell the punchline .
C'mon , Abbot and Costello 101 here , people .
I do n't know !
Third base !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was halfway through the description and intended to make a "Let's move everything to the Cloud!
" joke, but I see the OP beat me to it.
How disappointing.
Let me give you a little tip: the person who sets up the joke isn't supposed to then tell the punchline.
C'mon, Abbot and Costello 101 here, people.
I don't know!
Third base!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318108</id>
	<title>Prediction</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267466400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>This being a government IT project, I predict it will take 5 years longer than planned, cost 10x the initial budget, and still never really work quite right.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This being a government IT project , I predict it will take 5 years longer than planned , cost 10x the initial budget , and still never really work quite right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This being a government IT project, I predict it will take 5 years longer than planned, cost 10x the initial budget, and still never really work quite right.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318076</id>
	<title>Bout time</title>
	<author>Monkeedude1212</author>
	<datestamp>1267466280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>See, the last time we upgraded we put everything on eleven hundred windows 95 machines with 1 gig hard drives. That did pretty good for a spell, all things considered. Now we're thinking about one of them pointy computers... whaddya call em? Blade servers? Yeah, we hear good things about those.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>See , the last time we upgraded we put everything on eleven hundred windows 95 machines with 1 gig hard drives .
That did pretty good for a spell , all things considered .
Now we 're thinking about one of them pointy computers... whaddya call em ?
Blade servers ?
Yeah , we hear good things about those .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>See, the last time we upgraded we put everything on eleven hundred windows 95 machines with 1 gig hard drives.
That did pretty good for a spell, all things considered.
Now we're thinking about one of them pointy computers... whaddya call em?
Blade servers?
Yeah, we hear good things about those.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319864</id>
	<title>Who is doing the work?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267473060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can only assume that IBM will play a role in this major effort, since Sammy P and Obama are such big pals.  Right now, as I type this, my fellow IBMers are receiving their walking papers.  I expect I may join them before the day is over.  They/we will be replaced by offshore resources in India, Brazil, Argentina, etc.  How do we as a country continue to let this happen; let money hungry megacorps like IBM take our jobs and our personal/classified governement information and put them in the hands of people in other countries?  Is someone with a 21 syllable name sitting in Bangalore really concerned about how well he manages a job he's doing for someone 10000 miles away?  Does a band 3 worker hired in Dubuque, Fishkill, or Boulder as skilled as the band 6-7-8 person he replaced?  IBM wants their customers to believe this is the case, but ask anyone who is still stuck in this corporate rathole and has had an opportunity to work with these groups.
<br> <br>
STOP SENDING GOVERNMENT MONEY TO COMPANIES WHO OFFSHORE
<br> <br>
I post this anonymously because I fear for my job.  I need to pay my bills.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I can only assume that IBM will play a role in this major effort , since Sammy P and Obama are such big pals .
Right now , as I type this , my fellow IBMers are receiving their walking papers .
I expect I may join them before the day is over .
They/we will be replaced by offshore resources in India , Brazil , Argentina , etc .
How do we as a country continue to let this happen ; let money hungry megacorps like IBM take our jobs and our personal/classified governement information and put them in the hands of people in other countries ?
Is someone with a 21 syllable name sitting in Bangalore really concerned about how well he manages a job he 's doing for someone 10000 miles away ?
Does a band 3 worker hired in Dubuque , Fishkill , or Boulder as skilled as the band 6-7-8 person he replaced ?
IBM wants their customers to believe this is the case , but ask anyone who is still stuck in this corporate rathole and has had an opportunity to work with these groups .
STOP SENDING GOVERNMENT MONEY TO COMPANIES WHO OFFSHORE I post this anonymously because I fear for my job .
I need to pay my bills .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can only assume that IBM will play a role in this major effort, since Sammy P and Obama are such big pals.
Right now, as I type this, my fellow IBMers are receiving their walking papers.
I expect I may join them before the day is over.
They/we will be replaced by offshore resources in India, Brazil, Argentina, etc.
How do we as a country continue to let this happen; let money hungry megacorps like IBM take our jobs and our personal/classified governement information and put them in the hands of people in other countries?
Is someone with a 21 syllable name sitting in Bangalore really concerned about how well he manages a job he's doing for someone 10000 miles away?
Does a band 3 worker hired in Dubuque, Fishkill, or Boulder as skilled as the band 6-7-8 person he replaced?
IBM wants their customers to believe this is the case, but ask anyone who is still stuck in this corporate rathole and has had an opportunity to work with these groups.
STOP SENDING GOVERNMENT MONEY TO COMPANIES WHO OFFSHORE
 
I post this anonymously because I fear for my job.
I need to pay my bills.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318606</id>
	<title>Mark my words</title>
	<author>MikeRT</author>
	<datestamp>1267468080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It'll fail and be another boondoggle. The federal government is an incredible diverse organization with varying degrees of competence. Much of it, mainly the DoD and DoJ, can't even safely use cloud computing environments except in strict isolation from the rest of the world. Those two departments alone account for the overwhelming majority of federal employees.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 'll fail and be another boondoggle .
The federal government is an incredible diverse organization with varying degrees of competence .
Much of it , mainly the DoD and DoJ , ca n't even safely use cloud computing environments except in strict isolation from the rest of the world .
Those two departments alone account for the overwhelming majority of federal employees .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It'll fail and be another boondoggle.
The federal government is an incredible diverse organization with varying degrees of competence.
Much of it, mainly the DoD and DoJ, can't even safely use cloud computing environments except in strict isolation from the rest of the world.
Those two departments alone account for the overwhelming majority of federal employees.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319164</id>
	<title>Re:... if you can spell "Cloud Computing"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267470480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>those 1100 servers were already serviced by a lot of people, they'd be stupid to fire them and then seek others to replace them, oh wait, we're talking about a government project, never mind</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>those 1100 servers were already serviced by a lot of people , they 'd be stupid to fire them and then seek others to replace them , oh wait , we 're talking about a government project , never mind</tokentext>
<sentencetext>those 1100 servers were already serviced by a lot of people, they'd be stupid to fire them and then seek others to replace them, oh wait, we're talking about a government project, never mind</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318050</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318970</id>
	<title>Re:... if you can spell "Cloud Computing"</title>
	<author>dkleinsc</author>
	<datestamp>1267469520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It depends entirely on the political clout of your congressional representation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It depends entirely on the political clout of your congressional representation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It depends entirely on the political clout of your congressional representation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318050</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319840</id>
	<title>Re:IT as a commodity</title>
	<author>Sandbags</author>
	<datestamp>1267472940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Much of the data is to be secured, however, much of it is in fact already on 3rd party systems or outsourced to start with, so i don;t see a change in risk.</p><p>Also, the bulk of the systems i believe they're talking about here, that could be outsourced (non-military owned), are almost exclusively simply web apps tied to databases.  yea, the IRS and a few others peg pretty high, but all those tiny little underfunded departments that currently run their own servers should not do so, and that's the low hanging fruit to start with....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Much of the data is to be secured , however , much of it is in fact already on 3rd party systems or outsourced to start with , so i don ; t see a change in risk.Also , the bulk of the systems i believe they 're talking about here , that could be outsourced ( non-military owned ) , are almost exclusively simply web apps tied to databases .
yea , the IRS and a few others peg pretty high , but all those tiny little underfunded departments that currently run their own servers should not do so , and that 's the low hanging fruit to start with... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Much of the data is to be secured, however, much of it is in fact already on 3rd party systems or outsourced to start with, so i don;t see a change in risk.Also, the bulk of the systems i believe they're talking about here, that could be outsourced (non-military owned), are almost exclusively simply web apps tied to databases.
yea, the IRS and a few others peg pretty high, but all those tiny little underfunded departments that currently run their own servers should not do so, and that's the low hanging fruit to start with....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318142</id>
	<title>Re:... if you can spell "Cloud Computing"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267466460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Frosted butts!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Frosted butts !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Frosted butts!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318050</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319086</id>
	<title>Re:IT as a commodity</title>
	<author>Target Practice</author>
	<datestamp>1267470060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Finally, IT is on its way to being considered a commodity, as it should.  There's no reason for every organization to maintain their own IT infrastructure any more than there's reason for every organization to maintain their own electricity generation and distribution.  Of course, the hordes of IT people won't be happy...</p></div><p>You need to go watch Metropolis. Just because the workers aren't visible, doesn't mean the workers aren't there. The jobs will still be there, just relocated a bit. Oh, and we'll have a hot female robot overlord to incite riots in all the workers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Finally , IT is on its way to being considered a commodity , as it should .
There 's no reason for every organization to maintain their own IT infrastructure any more than there 's reason for every organization to maintain their own electricity generation and distribution .
Of course , the hordes of IT people wo n't be happy...You need to go watch Metropolis .
Just because the workers are n't visible , does n't mean the workers are n't there .
The jobs will still be there , just relocated a bit .
Oh , and we 'll have a hot female robot overlord to incite riots in all the workers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Finally, IT is on its way to being considered a commodity, as it should.
There's no reason for every organization to maintain their own IT infrastructure any more than there's reason for every organization to maintain their own electricity generation and distribution.
Of course, the hordes of IT people won't be happy...You need to go watch Metropolis.
Just because the workers aren't visible, doesn't mean the workers aren't there.
The jobs will still be there, just relocated a bit.
Oh, and we'll have a hot female robot overlord to incite riots in all the workers.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31324140</id>
	<title>Re:... if you can spell "Cloud Computing"</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1267446900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or even if you cant spell it but at least pronounce it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or even if you cant spell it but at least pronounce it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or even if you cant spell it but at least pronounce it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318050</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31321476</id>
	<title>Redundancy is over rated....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267436040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FTA..<br>"This growth in redundant infrastructure investments is costly, inefficient and unsustainable and has a significant impact on energy consumption"....</p><p>In other words, that mission critical server that does the whole income tax thingy..e-file i think its called, that only needs one server. Two servers with the same data are not required, they just waste energy and if it goes down due to a hardware failure (because parts are readily available on 10 year old servers)  you will have to wait till we can rebuild the server and restore for tape. oh wait, tape is redundant data, we got rid of those too.</p><p>Well i didnt like paying income tax's anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FTA.. " This growth in redundant infrastructure investments is costly , inefficient and unsustainable and has a significant impact on energy consumption " ....In other words , that mission critical server that does the whole income tax thingy..e-file i think its called , that only needs one server .
Two servers with the same data are not required , they just waste energy and if it goes down due to a hardware failure ( because parts are readily available on 10 year old servers ) you will have to wait till we can rebuild the server and restore for tape .
oh wait , tape is redundant data , we got rid of those too.Well i didnt like paying income tax 's anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FTA.."This growth in redundant infrastructure investments is costly, inefficient and unsustainable and has a significant impact on energy consumption"....In other words, that mission critical server that does the whole income tax thingy..e-file i think its called, that only needs one server.
Two servers with the same data are not required, they just waste energy and if it goes down due to a hardware failure (because parts are readily available on 10 year old servers)  you will have to wait till we can rebuild the server and restore for tape.
oh wait, tape is redundant data, we got rid of those too.Well i didnt like paying income tax's anyway.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319726
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318294
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318108
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318138
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318820
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318134
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318050
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318058
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31328658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318448
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31321284
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318294
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31325288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318108
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318134
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31320566
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318050
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318416
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318190
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318050
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318808
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318294
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31342006
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31321250
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318108
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31321400
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318050
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318898
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318294
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318188
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318050
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318890
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318180
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31320608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318312
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318134
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318304
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318134
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318582
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318134
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31330040
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318416
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31320500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318108
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31321230
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318448
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318158
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318108
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31321702
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318416
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31321332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318134
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318970
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318050
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319748
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318108
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318724
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318138
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318416
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319840
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318134
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319950
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318050
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31324702
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319434
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31321498
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318050
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318142
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318050
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31324140
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318050
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318722
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318108
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31320900
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318416
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318108
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31321258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318108
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_1557234_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318180
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_1557234.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318416
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31330040
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319104
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31321702
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31320900
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318964
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_1557234.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318438
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_1557234.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318294
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31321284
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318898
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319726
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318808
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_1557234.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318134
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318582
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319086
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318312
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31320608
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318304
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318466
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318820
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319840
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31321332
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_1557234.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318076
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_1557234.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318050
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31320566
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318970
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318142
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319164
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31324140
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318190
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31321400
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318188
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319514
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31321498
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319950
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_1557234.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318430
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_1557234.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318996
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_1557234.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319434
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31324702
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_1557234.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318138
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318724
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319508
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_1557234.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318448
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31321230
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31328658
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_1557234.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319312
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_1557234.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318036
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_1557234.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318728
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_1557234.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318484
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31342006
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_1557234.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318340
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_1557234.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318108
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31325288
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319748
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318960
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318158
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318722
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319584
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318764
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31320500
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31321250
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31321258
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_1557234.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318058
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319066
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_1557234.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318180
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318890
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319026
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_1557234.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31318210
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_1557234.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_1557234.31319278
</commentlist>
</conversation>
