<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_02_170221</id>
	<title>Passage of Time Solves PS3 Glitch</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1267554420000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"A quick update on the <a href="http://games.slashdot.org/story/10/03/01/0536236/Calendar-Bug-Disables-Older-PlayStation-3-Models">widespread PlayStation 3 glitch</a> we discussed recently: as of last night (Monday, March 1st) <a href="http://www.itworld.com/personal-tech/98437/playstation-3-glitch-fixed-due-erroneous-leap-year-detection">the problem has resolved itself</a>. I powered up my PS3 to find the clock was set to April 29th, 2020, but once I went into the system menu and set the date and time via the internet I got an accurate date. That seems to be the test of whether your PS3 is 'fixed' or not; <a href="http://blog.us.playstation.com/2010/03/playstation-network-service-restored/">Sony says you should be all set</a>."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " A quick update on the widespread PlayStation 3 glitch we discussed recently : as of last night ( Monday , March 1st ) the problem has resolved itself .
I powered up my PS3 to find the clock was set to April 29th , 2020 , but once I went into the system menu and set the date and time via the internet I got an accurate date .
That seems to be the test of whether your PS3 is 'fixed ' or not ; Sony says you should be all set .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "A quick update on the widespread PlayStation 3 glitch we discussed recently: as of last night (Monday, March 1st) the problem has resolved itself.
I powered up my PS3 to find the clock was set to April 29th, 2020, but once I went into the system menu and set the date and time via the internet I got an accurate date.
That seems to be the test of whether your PS3 is 'fixed' or not; Sony says you should be all set.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31337210</id>
	<title>Re:Sony's Official Announcement</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267530420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mate, that was so funny.  Have you ever considered becoming a comedian?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mate , that was so funny .
Have you ever considered becoming a comedian ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mate, that was so funny.
Have you ever considered becoming a comedian?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31332998</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31343570</id>
	<title>Re:I'm still pissed, though</title>
	<author>Megane</author>
	<datestamp>1267621680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The wiki entry mentioned in another reply was deleted becase it was not relevant to "ARM Architecture". (And it had horrible grammar too.) I dug it out of the article history:
</p><p><div class="quote"><p>PS3 Date Controversy

It has been suggest that older verions of the ARM SYSCON cpus had errata such that the CPUs believed incorrectly that 2010 was a leap year and may be partially responsible for non slim versions of the Playstation 3 not being able to function properly on 3/1/2010 (issue resolved itself on most PS3s at midnight GMT on 3/2/2010). "The ARM SYSCON CPU that is used to power up the front panel of the ps3, that is responsible for doing things like sleep mode, eject, RTC etc. Is an old batch that sony picked up from the shelf like other manufacturers that has that calendar year bug regarding feburary 29th on certain periods. Causing the ps3 system clock and the real time clock to desync, messing up security measures like Digital Rights management software and sometimes games that relies on clocks for whatever reason. As well as signing up to the playstation network This CPU is always on even when your PS3 isn&rsquo;t plugged
<br> <br>
This is the one of the same type of CPUs that is powering up mobile devices like zune and blackberries, they have been affected with this bug, so they done some software patches. A syscon update can also fix this problem
<br> <br>
The Slims ps3s aren&rsquo;t affected because they use a newer up to date revision on the syscon cpu that fixes this bug.
<br> <br>
[WARNING: will void your warranty, may be best to wait for official solution from Sony] - A quick way to fix this is to remove the RTC battery for at least 5-10 min and plug it back in, you will see the date and time reset, and voila "</p></div><p>I would add the following:
<br>1) PS3 asks for date from chip (note: chip time does not include local time zone, and is probably in UTC)
<br>2) Chip returns 10-02-29 with correct hh:mm:ss. Like many clock chips, these are returned as discrete components, probably in BCD.
<br>3) PS3 adds 2000 to the year and passes 2010-02-29 to conversion routine, which is supposed to return an epoch offset in seconds.
<br>4) Conversion routine says "that's stupid" and returns zero because it's an error.
<br>5) PS3 adds hh:mm:ss and time zone offset to the zero.
<br>6) PS3 later tries to convert back to Y/M/D using an epoch of 2000-01-01 00:00.
<br>6) PS3s around the world display 1999-12-31 or 2000-01-01.
</p><p>The problem points:
<br>* Chip that used discrete date components instead of keeping track of seconds since offset. This is common to make low level (assembly-language) software easier to write, even in this era when C is used for everything but first-stage boot loaders, and integer multiply/divide instructions are standard in CPU instruction sets. This meant that a piece of un-patchable hardware needed to correctly implement the leap year date algorithm, which is rarely tested when implemented, even if the implementor understands it.
<br>* Bogus date was passed to conversion routine, and error condition was not checked. But then what do you do when the date you got from hardware is bogus?
<br>* DRM and other features that depended upon a correct date to enforce digital restrictions.
</p><p>I think it's possible the source of the bug was that the "year divisible by four" condition in the chip was based on the BCD date. 10 is not divisible by four, but 0x10 is. If so, that would put it in the same category as the SMS Y2010 bug, being due to the use of BCD. So expect it to come back every even year for the rest of the decade, if Sony doesn't patch the software's interpretation of the incorrect date.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The wiki entry mentioned in another reply was deleted becase it was not relevant to " ARM Architecture " .
( And it had horrible grammar too .
) I dug it out of the article history : PS3 Date Controversy It has been suggest that older verions of the ARM SYSCON cpus had errata such that the CPUs believed incorrectly that 2010 was a leap year and may be partially responsible for non slim versions of the Playstation 3 not being able to function properly on 3/1/2010 ( issue resolved itself on most PS3s at midnight GMT on 3/2/2010 ) .
" The ARM SYSCON CPU that is used to power up the front panel of the ps3 , that is responsible for doing things like sleep mode , eject , RTC etc .
Is an old batch that sony picked up from the shelf like other manufacturers that has that calendar year bug regarding feburary 29th on certain periods .
Causing the ps3 system clock and the real time clock to desync , messing up security measures like Digital Rights management software and sometimes games that relies on clocks for whatever reason .
As well as signing up to the playstation network This CPU is always on even when your PS3 isn    t plugged This is the one of the same type of CPUs that is powering up mobile devices like zune and blackberries , they have been affected with this bug , so they done some software patches .
A syscon update can also fix this problem The Slims ps3s aren    t affected because they use a newer up to date revision on the syscon cpu that fixes this bug .
[ WARNING : will void your warranty , may be best to wait for official solution from Sony ] - A quick way to fix this is to remove the RTC battery for at least 5-10 min and plug it back in , you will see the date and time reset , and voila " I would add the following : 1 ) PS3 asks for date from chip ( note : chip time does not include local time zone , and is probably in UTC ) 2 ) Chip returns 10-02-29 with correct hh : mm : ss .
Like many clock chips , these are returned as discrete components , probably in BCD .
3 ) PS3 adds 2000 to the year and passes 2010-02-29 to conversion routine , which is supposed to return an epoch offset in seconds .
4 ) Conversion routine says " that 's stupid " and returns zero because it 's an error .
5 ) PS3 adds hh : mm : ss and time zone offset to the zero .
6 ) PS3 later tries to convert back to Y/M/D using an epoch of 2000-01-01 00 : 00 .
6 ) PS3s around the world display 1999-12-31 or 2000-01-01 .
The problem points : * Chip that used discrete date components instead of keeping track of seconds since offset .
This is common to make low level ( assembly-language ) software easier to write , even in this era when C is used for everything but first-stage boot loaders , and integer multiply/divide instructions are standard in CPU instruction sets .
This meant that a piece of un-patchable hardware needed to correctly implement the leap year date algorithm , which is rarely tested when implemented , even if the implementor understands it .
* Bogus date was passed to conversion routine , and error condition was not checked .
But then what do you do when the date you got from hardware is bogus ?
* DRM and other features that depended upon a correct date to enforce digital restrictions .
I think it 's possible the source of the bug was that the " year divisible by four " condition in the chip was based on the BCD date .
10 is not divisible by four , but 0x10 is .
If so , that would put it in the same category as the SMS Y2010 bug , being due to the use of BCD .
So expect it to come back every even year for the rest of the decade , if Sony does n't patch the software 's interpretation of the incorrect date .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The wiki entry mentioned in another reply was deleted becase it was not relevant to "ARM Architecture".
(And it had horrible grammar too.
) I dug it out of the article history:
PS3 Date Controversy

It has been suggest that older verions of the ARM SYSCON cpus had errata such that the CPUs believed incorrectly that 2010 was a leap year and may be partially responsible for non slim versions of the Playstation 3 not being able to function properly on 3/1/2010 (issue resolved itself on most PS3s at midnight GMT on 3/2/2010).
"The ARM SYSCON CPU that is used to power up the front panel of the ps3, that is responsible for doing things like sleep mode, eject, RTC etc.
Is an old batch that sony picked up from the shelf like other manufacturers that has that calendar year bug regarding feburary 29th on certain periods.
Causing the ps3 system clock and the real time clock to desync, messing up security measures like Digital Rights management software and sometimes games that relies on clocks for whatever reason.
As well as signing up to the playstation network This CPU is always on even when your PS3 isn’t plugged
 
This is the one of the same type of CPUs that is powering up mobile devices like zune and blackberries, they have been affected with this bug, so they done some software patches.
A syscon update can also fix this problem
 
The Slims ps3s aren’t affected because they use a newer up to date revision on the syscon cpu that fixes this bug.
[WARNING: will void your warranty, may be best to wait for official solution from Sony] - A quick way to fix this is to remove the RTC battery for at least 5-10 min and plug it back in, you will see the date and time reset, and voila "I would add the following:
1) PS3 asks for date from chip (note: chip time does not include local time zone, and is probably in UTC)
2) Chip returns 10-02-29 with correct hh:mm:ss.
Like many clock chips, these are returned as discrete components, probably in BCD.
3) PS3 adds 2000 to the year and passes 2010-02-29 to conversion routine, which is supposed to return an epoch offset in seconds.
4) Conversion routine says "that's stupid" and returns zero because it's an error.
5) PS3 adds hh:mm:ss and time zone offset to the zero.
6) PS3 later tries to convert back to Y/M/D using an epoch of 2000-01-01 00:00.
6) PS3s around the world display 1999-12-31 or 2000-01-01.
The problem points:
* Chip that used discrete date components instead of keeping track of seconds since offset.
This is common to make low level (assembly-language) software easier to write, even in this era when C is used for everything but first-stage boot loaders, and integer multiply/divide instructions are standard in CPU instruction sets.
This meant that a piece of un-patchable hardware needed to correctly implement the leap year date algorithm, which is rarely tested when implemented, even if the implementor understands it.
* Bogus date was passed to conversion routine, and error condition was not checked.
But then what do you do when the date you got from hardware is bogus?
* DRM and other features that depended upon a correct date to enforce digital restrictions.
I think it's possible the source of the bug was that the "year divisible by four" condition in the chip was based on the BCD date.
10 is not divisible by four, but 0x10 is.
If so, that would put it in the same category as the SMS Y2010 bug, being due to the use of BCD.
So expect it to come back every even year for the rest of the decade, if Sony doesn't patch the software's interpretation of the incorrect date.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333570</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31337672</id>
	<title>Re:BUG!</title>
	<author>ildon</author>
	<datestamp>1267532460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't blame WoW players for this. The use of "glitch" instead of bug is, and has been, extremely prevalent in console communities since the N64 days.</p><p>There is some usefulness to the term "glitch" in the context it's often used for in console games, though. There are a lot of things that players can do to break the game in certain ways that don't necessarily fall into the realm of something that should or even can be fixed by a developer. Things that are the equivalent of shifting your NES cartridge left and right while the game is running do not, in my opinion, fall into the realm of "bugs". By using "glitch", the users can include that type of crap under the same umbrella as legitimate bugs.</p><p>Anyway, my main point was don't fucking blame WoW players for that shit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't blame WoW players for this .
The use of " glitch " instead of bug is , and has been , extremely prevalent in console communities since the N64 days.There is some usefulness to the term " glitch " in the context it 's often used for in console games , though .
There are a lot of things that players can do to break the game in certain ways that do n't necessarily fall into the realm of something that should or even can be fixed by a developer .
Things that are the equivalent of shifting your NES cartridge left and right while the game is running do not , in my opinion , fall into the realm of " bugs " .
By using " glitch " , the users can include that type of crap under the same umbrella as legitimate bugs.Anyway , my main point was do n't fucking blame WoW players for that shit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't blame WoW players for this.
The use of "glitch" instead of bug is, and has been, extremely prevalent in console communities since the N64 days.There is some usefulness to the term "glitch" in the context it's often used for in console games, though.
There are a lot of things that players can do to break the game in certain ways that don't necessarily fall into the realm of something that should or even can be fixed by a developer.
Things that are the equivalent of shifting your NES cartridge left and right while the game is running do not, in my opinion, fall into the realm of "bugs".
By using "glitch", the users can include that type of crap under the same umbrella as legitimate bugs.Anyway, my main point was don't fucking blame WoW players for that shit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333222</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31340322</id>
	<title>Re:Sony is very lucky...</title>
	<author>DarkJC</author>
	<datestamp>1267549980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You don't need to be connected to PSN to download an update. In fact, if you aren't up to date and the update is mandatory, you can't connect to PSN until you DO download the update.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't need to be connected to PSN to download an update .
In fact , if you are n't up to date and the update is mandatory , you ca n't connect to PSN until you DO download the update .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't need to be connected to PSN to download an update.
In fact, if you aren't up to date and the update is mandatory, you can't connect to PSN until you DO download the update.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333634</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333788</id>
	<title>Re:I can't wait for April Fool's Day...</title>
	<author>vlm</author>
	<datestamp>1267561020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Is SONY going to make my PS3 explode?</p></div><p>No, that's July 4th not April Fools Day.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is SONY going to make my PS3 explode ? No , that 's July 4th not April Fools Day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is SONY going to make my PS3 explode?No, that's July 4th not April Fools Day.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333042</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334074</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdot has programmers</title>
	<author>Beardo the Bearded</author>
	<datestamp>1267561920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Amateurs, the lot of you.</p><p>I once created a bug where the fix involved -- and I am serious here -- shooting a tiger.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Amateurs , the lot of you.I once created a bug where the fix involved -- and I am serious here -- shooting a tiger .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Amateurs, the lot of you.I once created a bug where the fix involved -- and I am serious here -- shooting a tiger.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333070</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333394</id>
	<title>BS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267559580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>BS.  Just like Microsoft, Sony is patching more than just the problems they state.  We will never know the real number of software patches applied.  In this case the patch was applied while getting "the date and time via the internet".  In other words the PS3 has software built-in to automatically update itself.  It sure as hell didn't just "fix itself" or for that matter "magically break itself".  In fact this patch is just a patch for their failed patch which nearly bricked everyone's system.  Telling people "Oh it was simply a miscalculation in the leap year" is a lot better than saying "We didn't fully test our last DRM update and almost bricked everyone's PS3".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>BS .
Just like Microsoft , Sony is patching more than just the problems they state .
We will never know the real number of software patches applied .
In this case the patch was applied while getting " the date and time via the internet " .
In other words the PS3 has software built-in to automatically update itself .
It sure as hell did n't just " fix itself " or for that matter " magically break itself " .
In fact this patch is just a patch for their failed patch which nearly bricked everyone 's system .
Telling people " Oh it was simply a miscalculation in the leap year " is a lot better than saying " We did n't fully test our last DRM update and almost bricked everyone 's PS3 " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>BS.
Just like Microsoft, Sony is patching more than just the problems they state.
We will never know the real number of software patches applied.
In this case the patch was applied while getting "the date and time via the internet".
In other words the PS3 has software built-in to automatically update itself.
It sure as hell didn't just "fix itself" or for that matter "magically break itself".
In fact this patch is just a patch for their failed patch which nearly bricked everyone's system.
Telling people "Oh it was simply a miscalculation in the leap year" is a lot better than saying "We didn't fully test our last DRM update and almost bricked everyone's PS3".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334532</id>
	<title>Re:I'm still pissed, though</title>
	<author>petermgreen</author>
	<datestamp>1267520460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I mean, it's apparently an internal hardware clock, right? It's not user visible. So why, exactly, is it storing dates and not just being a clock?</i><br>Many off the shelf hardware RTCs do use human style date and time, I guess because they expect people to use them in systems where that is the most convenient format. PCs also traditionally use a human style format for thier RTC so if that part of their system is a derivative of a PC design that could also explain it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean , it 's apparently an internal hardware clock , right ?
It 's not user visible .
So why , exactly , is it storing dates and not just being a clock ? Many off the shelf hardware RTCs do use human style date and time , I guess because they expect people to use them in systems where that is the most convenient format .
PCs also traditionally use a human style format for thier RTC so if that part of their system is a derivative of a PC design that could also explain it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean, it's apparently an internal hardware clock, right?
It's not user visible.
So why, exactly, is it storing dates and not just being a clock?Many off the shelf hardware RTCs do use human style date and time, I guess because they expect people to use them in systems where that is the most convenient format.
PCs also traditionally use a human style format for thier RTC so if that part of their system is a derivative of a PC design that could also explain it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333570</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334578</id>
	<title>Clock begins again</title>
	<author>smd75</author>
	<datestamp>1267520700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sony has a little less than 4 years to figure out how to solve this. I pray they can do it in time. Meanwhile, my PS2 worked just fine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sony has a little less than 4 years to figure out how to solve this .
I pray they can do it in time .
Meanwhile , my PS2 worked just fine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sony has a little less than 4 years to figure out how to solve this.
I pray they can do it in time.
Meanwhile, my PS2 worked just fine.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333170</id>
	<title>Here's a patch</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267558680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>bool isLeapYear = (((year \% 4 == 0) &amp;&amp; (year \% 100 != 0)) || (year \% 400 == 0));</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>bool isLeapYear = ( ( ( year \ % 4 = = 0 ) &amp;&amp; ( year \ % 100 ! = 0 ) ) | | ( year \ % 400 = = 0 ) ) ;</tokentext>
<sentencetext>bool isLeapYear = (((year \% 4 == 0) &amp;&amp; (year \% 100 != 0)) || (year \% 400 == 0));</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334368</id>
	<title>Re:BUG!</title>
	<author>Xtifr</author>
	<datestamp>1267563000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>how did we let Warcraft users slowly replace the word "bug" with "glitch" ?! It's a bug!</p></div><p>A bug is a logic problem in the code; a glitch is misbehavior by the program.  Glitches are normally associated with bugs, but faulty hardware or cosmic rays can also cause glitches.  On the other hand, it is quite possible for a bug to exist without ever triggering a glitch, if the conditions that would trigger the bug are sufficiently remote, or if other code in the system corrects for the behavior of the bug (the latter is actually quite common).</p><p>In this case, I don't believe they've fixed the bug, but the <em>glitch</em> that is the manifestation of the bug is solved <em>for now</em>.  If my understanding of what happened is correct, they should have nearly four years to ship a fix to the <em>bug</em> before the glitch reappears, so the fix will probably be bundled with the next system update.</p><p>If the headline had read "passage of time fixes bug", as you suggest, I would have had to call it an outright lie.  As it is, however, I think the headline is exactly correct.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>how did we let Warcraft users slowly replace the word " bug " with " glitch " ? !
It 's a bug ! A bug is a logic problem in the code ; a glitch is misbehavior by the program .
Glitches are normally associated with bugs , but faulty hardware or cosmic rays can also cause glitches .
On the other hand , it is quite possible for a bug to exist without ever triggering a glitch , if the conditions that would trigger the bug are sufficiently remote , or if other code in the system corrects for the behavior of the bug ( the latter is actually quite common ) .In this case , I do n't believe they 've fixed the bug , but the glitch that is the manifestation of the bug is solved for now .
If my understanding of what happened is correct , they should have nearly four years to ship a fix to the bug before the glitch reappears , so the fix will probably be bundled with the next system update.If the headline had read " passage of time fixes bug " , as you suggest , I would have had to call it an outright lie .
As it is , however , I think the headline is exactly correct .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>how did we let Warcraft users slowly replace the word "bug" with "glitch" ?!
It's a bug!A bug is a logic problem in the code; a glitch is misbehavior by the program.
Glitches are normally associated with bugs, but faulty hardware or cosmic rays can also cause glitches.
On the other hand, it is quite possible for a bug to exist without ever triggering a glitch, if the conditions that would trigger the bug are sufficiently remote, or if other code in the system corrects for the behavior of the bug (the latter is actually quite common).In this case, I don't believe they've fixed the bug, but the glitch that is the manifestation of the bug is solved for now.
If my understanding of what happened is correct, they should have nearly four years to ship a fix to the bug before the glitch reappears, so the fix will probably be bundled with the next system update.If the headline had read "passage of time fixes bug", as you suggest, I would have had to call it an outright lie.
As it is, however, I think the headline is exactly correct.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333222</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31349528</id>
	<title>So the slim is affected?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267649940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>So the slim will be affected further down the road?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So the slim will be affected further down the road ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So the slim will be affected further down the road?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333634</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334844</id>
	<title>Re:I can't wait for April Fool's Day...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267521780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>no silly it doesn't contain any flammables, gases under pressure, or lithium batteries, but be aware like other Japanese products you may experience sudden acceleration problems, so while it will not explode; it may crash into your tv causing it to explode (likely caused by improper floor-mats, even if located in the trunk.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>no silly it does n't contain any flammables , gases under pressure , or lithium batteries , but be aware like other Japanese products you may experience sudden acceleration problems , so while it will not explode ; it may crash into your tv causing it to explode ( likely caused by improper floor-mats , even if located in the trunk .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>no silly it doesn't contain any flammables, gases under pressure, or lithium batteries, but be aware like other Japanese products you may experience sudden acceleration problems, so while it will not explode; it may crash into your tv causing it to explode (likely caused by improper floor-mats, even if located in the trunk.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333042</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333918</id>
	<title>Re:Sony Timer</title>
	<author>plague3106</author>
	<datestamp>1267561440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What I don't understand is my system played fine Sun night and Monday night.  At least, it synced trophies and Bioshock played.  I have one of the newer fat models though, maybe that's the difference.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What I do n't understand is my system played fine Sun night and Monday night .
At least , it synced trophies and Bioshock played .
I have one of the newer fat models though , maybe that 's the difference .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What I don't understand is my system played fine Sun night and Monday night.
At least, it synced trophies and Bioshock played.
I have one of the newer fat models though, maybe that's the difference.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31335888</id>
	<title>All the people complaining about DRM...</title>
	<author>feepness</author>
	<datestamp>1267525380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This clock verification exists to figure out whether the console is compromised.  Avoiding being compromised serves both DRM <i>and</i> anti-cheating.  I don't want people with hacked consoles getting every trophy in every game instantaneously.  I don't want people getting instant headshots in MW2.  This is one of the reasons I stopped playing on the PC.
<br> <br>
I realize cheating is still possible, but I applaud having a system which is difficult to hack, even if it means things like this can happen.  Do they get to use it for DRM?  Yeah, they do.  Tradeoff.  And if this had been some sort of permanent problem I would take my business elsewhere.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This clock verification exists to figure out whether the console is compromised .
Avoiding being compromised serves both DRM and anti-cheating .
I do n't want people with hacked consoles getting every trophy in every game instantaneously .
I do n't want people getting instant headshots in MW2 .
This is one of the reasons I stopped playing on the PC .
I realize cheating is still possible , but I applaud having a system which is difficult to hack , even if it means things like this can happen .
Do they get to use it for DRM ?
Yeah , they do .
Tradeoff. And if this had been some sort of permanent problem I would take my business elsewhere .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This clock verification exists to figure out whether the console is compromised.
Avoiding being compromised serves both DRM and anti-cheating.
I don't want people with hacked consoles getting every trophy in every game instantaneously.
I don't want people getting instant headshots in MW2.
This is one of the reasons I stopped playing on the PC.
I realize cheating is still possible, but I applaud having a system which is difficult to hack, even if it means things like this can happen.
Do they get to use it for DRM?
Yeah, they do.
Tradeoff.  And if this had been some sort of permanent problem I would take my business elsewhere.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31332998</id>
	<title>Sony's Official Announcement</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267558020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Here is the official press release I received in an e-mail this morning:<p><div class="quote"><p> <b>First Quadrennial Childhood Obesity Awareness Day Goes Off Without a Hitch!</b> <br> <br>

We'd like to thank all our gamers for observing our compulsory First Quadrennial Childhood Obesity Awareness Day that we had planned many years in advance back when we made our first consoles.  We hope all the children took the time to get outside and exercise.  As always, Sony endorses moderation in game play and we feel that this surprise holiday away from the Playstation Network will help today's youth become more healthy and social.  <br> <br>

Should we decide to surprise you with a second Quadrennial Childhood Obesity Awareness Day, it could happen March 1st of 2012.  See you in 2012 (maybe)!  Until then, remember to get plenty of fresh air and exercise!  <br> <br>

<i>Totally in control of the situation</i>,<br> <br>

Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf<br>
Chief Sony Public Think of the Children Relations Officer</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Here is the official press release I received in an e-mail this morning : First Quadrennial Childhood Obesity Awareness Day Goes Off Without a Hitch !
We 'd like to thank all our gamers for observing our compulsory First Quadrennial Childhood Obesity Awareness Day that we had planned many years in advance back when we made our first consoles .
We hope all the children took the time to get outside and exercise .
As always , Sony endorses moderation in game play and we feel that this surprise holiday away from the Playstation Network will help today 's youth become more healthy and social .
Should we decide to surprise you with a second Quadrennial Childhood Obesity Awareness Day , it could happen March 1st of 2012 .
See you in 2012 ( maybe ) !
Until then , remember to get plenty of fresh air and exercise !
Totally in control of the situation , Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf Chief Sony Public Think of the Children Relations Officer</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here is the official press release I received in an e-mail this morning: First Quadrennial Childhood Obesity Awareness Day Goes Off Without a Hitch!
We'd like to thank all our gamers for observing our compulsory First Quadrennial Childhood Obesity Awareness Day that we had planned many years in advance back when we made our first consoles.
We hope all the children took the time to get outside and exercise.
As always, Sony endorses moderation in game play and we feel that this surprise holiday away from the Playstation Network will help today's youth become more healthy and social.
Should we decide to surprise you with a second Quadrennial Childhood Obesity Awareness Day, it could happen March 1st of 2012.
See you in 2012 (maybe)!
Until then, remember to get plenty of fresh air and exercise!
Totally in control of the situation, 

Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf
Chief Sony Public Think of the Children Relations Officer
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333062</id>
	<title>the question is</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267558320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The question is whether or not this will happen on March 1 of any other even non-leap years (next one would be 2014).</htmltext>
<tokenext>The question is whether or not this will happen on March 1 of any other even non-leap years ( next one would be 2014 ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The question is whether or not this will happen on March 1 of any other even non-leap years (next one would be 2014).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333256</id>
	<title>Re:Sony's Official Announcement</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267558980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem yesterday was that the servers thought it was the 29th, but the consoles refused to accept such nonsense. In 2012 it really is a leap year. I guess the reverse could happen, but then you'd just change the date to something else and you'd be alright.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem yesterday was that the servers thought it was the 29th , but the consoles refused to accept such nonsense .
In 2012 it really is a leap year .
I guess the reverse could happen , but then you 'd just change the date to something else and you 'd be alright .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem yesterday was that the servers thought it was the 29th, but the consoles refused to accept such nonsense.
In 2012 it really is a leap year.
I guess the reverse could happen, but then you'd just change the date to something else and you'd be alright.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31332998</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333222</id>
	<title>BUG!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267558860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Bug bug bug BUG "bug" "BUG"! <br> <br>
I know I have pretty much become an old man at this point in my life, but how did we let Warcraft users slowly replace the word "bug" with "glitch" ?! It's a bug!
<br> <br>
However, I have to feely admit one point: replacing the word with 'glitch' makes it easier to use as a verb, as in "that instance is glitched" vs "that instance is bugged" - in the sense that the latter use could mean "we put that bug in the bug DB already." Ah well, back to feeding ferrite core beads to pigeons...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bug bug bug BUG " bug " " BUG " !
I know I have pretty much become an old man at this point in my life , but how did we let Warcraft users slowly replace the word " bug " with " glitch " ? !
It 's a bug !
However , I have to feely admit one point : replacing the word with 'glitch ' makes it easier to use as a verb , as in " that instance is glitched " vs " that instance is bugged " - in the sense that the latter use could mean " we put that bug in the bug DB already .
" Ah well , back to feeding ferrite core beads to pigeons.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bug bug bug BUG "bug" "BUG"!
I know I have pretty much become an old man at this point in my life, but how did we let Warcraft users slowly replace the word "bug" with "glitch" ?!
It's a bug!
However, I have to feely admit one point: replacing the word with 'glitch' makes it easier to use as a verb, as in "that instance is glitched" vs "that instance is bugged" - in the sense that the latter use could mean "we put that bug in the bug DB already.
" Ah well, back to feeding ferrite core beads to pigeons...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333070</id>
	<title>Slashdot has programmers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267558320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Probably many of them will feel superior for never having made a logic bug in something as clear-cut as leap years (it's not even the year 2000 leap year problem).  Just because they feel superior doesn't mean that they aren't actually superior, though!</p><p>I think we should all use TAI and stop messing around with both leap years and leap seconds.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Probably many of them will feel superior for never having made a logic bug in something as clear-cut as leap years ( it 's not even the year 2000 leap year problem ) .
Just because they feel superior does n't mean that they are n't actually superior , though ! I think we should all use TAI and stop messing around with both leap years and leap seconds .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Probably many of them will feel superior for never having made a logic bug in something as clear-cut as leap years (it's not even the year 2000 leap year problem).
Just because they feel superior doesn't mean that they aren't actually superior, though!I think we should all use TAI and stop messing around with both leap years and leap seconds.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333606</id>
	<title>Re:Here's a patch</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267560360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your using an extra 'mod', 'compare' and 'or' to avoid a branch, yet those 'compare's are probably going to be compiled into branches anyway, thus defeating the point.</p><p>Really, you should either break down and write it as a simple branch, or write branch free assembly for each target platform. I would suggest the former. Simplicity and readability are much more important in this day and age than a few clock cycles.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your using an extra 'mod ' , 'compare ' and 'or ' to avoid a branch , yet those 'compare 's are probably going to be compiled into branches anyway , thus defeating the point.Really , you should either break down and write it as a simple branch , or write branch free assembly for each target platform .
I would suggest the former .
Simplicity and readability are much more important in this day and age than a few clock cycles .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your using an extra 'mod', 'compare' and 'or' to avoid a branch, yet those 'compare's are probably going to be compiled into branches anyway, thus defeating the point.Really, you should either break down and write it as a simple branch, or write branch free assembly for each target platform.
I would suggest the former.
Simplicity and readability are much more important in this day and age than a few clock cycles.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333138</id>
	<title>Re:I can't wait for April Fool's Day...</title>
	<author>Mongoose Disciple</author>
	<datestamp>1267558560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Is SONY going to make my PS3 explode?</i></p><p>No, but every twenty minutes <a href="http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2007/9/7/" title="penny-arcade.com">a kitten will come out.</a> [penny-arcade.com]</p><p>That'll be <a href="http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2007/9/10/" title="penny-arcade.com">fixed in the next update</a> [penny-arcade.com] though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is SONY going to make my PS3 explode ? No , but every twenty minutes a kitten will come out .
[ penny-arcade.com ] That 'll be fixed in the next update [ penny-arcade.com ] though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is SONY going to make my PS3 explode?No, but every twenty minutes a kitten will come out.
[penny-arcade.com]That'll be fixed in the next update [penny-arcade.com] though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333042</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31347974</id>
	<title>Re:Here's a patch</title>
	<author>HTH NE1</author>
	<datestamp>1267642380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <tt>bool isLeapYear = (((year \% 4 == 0) &amp;&amp; (year \% 100 != 0)) || (year \% 400 == 0));</tt></p> </div><p>What type is "year"?</p><p>Human representations of time should be restricted to display purposes only. A computer shouldn't care whether a particular span of 86400 seconds is in February or March.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>bool isLeapYear = ( ( ( year \ % 4 = = 0 ) &amp;&amp; ( year \ % 100 ! = 0 ) ) | | ( year \ % 400 = = 0 ) ) ; What type is " year " ? Human representations of time should be restricted to display purposes only .
A computer should n't care whether a particular span of 86400 seconds is in February or March .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> bool isLeapYear = (((year \% 4 == 0) &amp;&amp; (year \% 100 != 0)) || (year \% 400 == 0)); What type is "year"?Human representations of time should be restricted to display purposes only.
A computer shouldn't care whether a particular span of 86400 seconds is in February or March.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333784</id>
	<title>They seriously want us to believe this?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267561020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Fix the problem, don't wait for it to magically fix itself by getting past the error date. What about next year, or the next? Do they think the product won't hold up until then and we'll be forced to buy a new one. The bug didn't "fix" it self it just got passed the errored timespan and continued on. The problem still exists.</p><p>And who do they think they are telling us how to use our time? I went to watch a netflix online movie with my lady and was unable to due to not being able to authenticate to the PSN. Those are our big nights together to just sit back and relax.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Fix the problem , do n't wait for it to magically fix itself by getting past the error date .
What about next year , or the next ?
Do they think the product wo n't hold up until then and we 'll be forced to buy a new one .
The bug did n't " fix " it self it just got passed the errored timespan and continued on .
The problem still exists.And who do they think they are telling us how to use our time ?
I went to watch a netflix online movie with my lady and was unable to due to not being able to authenticate to the PSN .
Those are our big nights together to just sit back and relax .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fix the problem, don't wait for it to magically fix itself by getting past the error date.
What about next year, or the next?
Do they think the product won't hold up until then and we'll be forced to buy a new one.
The bug didn't "fix" it self it just got passed the errored timespan and continued on.
The problem still exists.And who do they think they are telling us how to use our time?
I went to watch a netflix online movie with my lady and was unable to due to not being able to authenticate to the PSN.
Those are our big nights together to just sit back and relax.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333634</id>
	<title>Sony is very lucky...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267560480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>That this particular bug "fixes" itself in a relatively short span of time.<br> <br>

According to the <a href="http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/geoff/cell/ps3-linux-docs/ps3-linux-docs-08.06.09/LinuxKernelOverview.html" title="kernel.org">documentation</a> [kernel.org] provided for PS3 linux, the clock that is embedded in the PS3 cannot actually be manipulated from under the hypervisor:<br> <br> "Similar to a PC, a built-in real time clock (RTC) keeps the wall clock time for the PS3. The RTC is backed up by a battery and so ticks even if external power is removed.  The RTC value can be read by a hypervisor call, but it can not be written.   The RTC value monotonically increases and never rolls back.

The PS3 Linux platform support uses the standard RTC userland interface<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/rtc, The standard hwclock command can be used to manage the RTC. Since the RTC is read only, the PS3 Linux platform support maintaines a value in system flash memory that represents the difference between the hardware RTC value and the Linux RTC value."<br> <br>

I'm assuming that this read-only clock "feature" is in some way related to DRM, to keep people from playing tricks with expiration dates. Worst case scenario, it is impossible to modify the RTC without hardware tinkering. Had this not been a transient bug, that would have meant massive physical recalls. More likely, it is possible for sony-blessed firmware updates to modify the clock. However, Sony can only push those either through the internet, or on physical disks. Since the bug was preventing PSN logins, the internet option wouldn't have been automatically available(though, since the issue is transient, it now is again). They would either have to mail out upgrade disks to affected users, bundle the upgrade with future game releases, or make their customers go to some support site and burn their own upgrade disks. Gigantic pain in the ass.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That this particular bug " fixes " itself in a relatively short span of time .
According to the documentation [ kernel.org ] provided for PS3 linux , the clock that is embedded in the PS3 can not actually be manipulated from under the hypervisor : " Similar to a PC , a built-in real time clock ( RTC ) keeps the wall clock time for the PS3 .
The RTC is backed up by a battery and so ticks even if external power is removed .
The RTC value can be read by a hypervisor call , but it can not be written .
The RTC value monotonically increases and never rolls back .
The PS3 Linux platform support uses the standard RTC userland interface /dev/rtc , The standard hwclock command can be used to manage the RTC .
Since the RTC is read only , the PS3 Linux platform support maintaines a value in system flash memory that represents the difference between the hardware RTC value and the Linux RTC value .
" I 'm assuming that this read-only clock " feature " is in some way related to DRM , to keep people from playing tricks with expiration dates .
Worst case scenario , it is impossible to modify the RTC without hardware tinkering .
Had this not been a transient bug , that would have meant massive physical recalls .
More likely , it is possible for sony-blessed firmware updates to modify the clock .
However , Sony can only push those either through the internet , or on physical disks .
Since the bug was preventing PSN logins , the internet option would n't have been automatically available ( though , since the issue is transient , it now is again ) .
They would either have to mail out upgrade disks to affected users , bundle the upgrade with future game releases , or make their customers go to some support site and burn their own upgrade disks .
Gigantic pain in the ass .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That this particular bug "fixes" itself in a relatively short span of time.
According to the documentation [kernel.org] provided for PS3 linux, the clock that is embedded in the PS3 cannot actually be manipulated from under the hypervisor:  "Similar to a PC, a built-in real time clock (RTC) keeps the wall clock time for the PS3.
The RTC is backed up by a battery and so ticks even if external power is removed.
The RTC value can be read by a hypervisor call, but it can not be written.
The RTC value monotonically increases and never rolls back.
The PS3 Linux platform support uses the standard RTC userland interface /dev/rtc, The standard hwclock command can be used to manage the RTC.
Since the RTC is read only, the PS3 Linux platform support maintaines a value in system flash memory that represents the difference between the hardware RTC value and the Linux RTC value.
" 

I'm assuming that this read-only clock "feature" is in some way related to DRM, to keep people from playing tricks with expiration dates.
Worst case scenario, it is impossible to modify the RTC without hardware tinkering.
Had this not been a transient bug, that would have meant massive physical recalls.
More likely, it is possible for sony-blessed firmware updates to modify the clock.
However, Sony can only push those either through the internet, or on physical disks.
Since the bug was preventing PSN logins, the internet option wouldn't have been automatically available(though, since the issue is transient, it now is again).
They would either have to mail out upgrade disks to affected users, bundle the upgrade with future game releases, or make their customers go to some support site and burn their own upgrade disks.
Gigantic pain in the ass.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333190</id>
	<title>Parable</title>
	<author>Quiet\_Desperation</author>
	<datestamp>1267558740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Time heals all wounds, and so do health potions.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Time heals all wounds , and so do health potions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Time heals all wounds, and so do health potions.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334710</id>
	<title>Re:BUG!</title>
	<author>Lumpy</author>
	<datestamp>1267521240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because you are using the wrong form of bug.</p><p>the correct use is....</p><p>"That instance is completely <b>buggered</b>!"  and yes the UK use of buggered is 100\% correct in any sense of the term bug.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because you are using the wrong form of bug.the correct use is.... " That instance is completely buggered !
" and yes the UK use of buggered is 100 \ % correct in any sense of the term bug .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because you are using the wrong form of bug.the correct use is...."That instance is completely buggered!
"  and yes the UK use of buggered is 100\% correct in any sense of the term bug.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333222</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333770</id>
	<title>Re:Sony Timer</title>
	<author>spire3661</author>
	<datestamp>1267560960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There are errors in your post. First of all when you download a movie from PSN<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,you have 2 WEEKS to first watch it. After you first push play, you have up to 24 hours to watch it again before it expires.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are errors in your post .
First of all when you download a movie from PSN ,you have 2 WEEKS to first watch it .
After you first push play , you have up to 24 hours to watch it again before it expires .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are errors in your post.
First of all when you download a movie from PSN ,you have 2 WEEKS to first watch it.
After you first push play, you have up to 24 hours to watch it again before it expires.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31358454</id>
	<title>Re:Sony is very lucky...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267721220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So what happens when your battery dies (well it's made by sony isn't it) and it can't keep time any more?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So what happens when your battery dies ( well it 's made by sony is n't it ) and it ca n't keep time any more ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So what happens when your battery dies (well it's made by sony isn't it) and it can't keep time any more?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333634</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31336418</id>
	<title>Re:BUG!</title>
	<author>Abcd1234</author>
	<datestamp>1267527480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Bug bug bug BUG "bug" "BUG"! </i></p><p>Why, for god sakes, are the last two "bugs" in quotes?  Are they some sort of ironic bugs?  Is the wink implied?</p><p>(yes, this is a <a href="http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Frisky\_Dingo#Pimp\_My\_Revenue" title="wikiquote.org">ripped off joke</a> [wikiquote.org])</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bug bug bug BUG " bug " " BUG " !
Why , for god sakes , are the last two " bugs " in quotes ?
Are they some sort of ironic bugs ?
Is the wink implied ?
( yes , this is a ripped off joke [ wikiquote.org ] )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bug bug bug BUG "bug" "BUG"!
Why, for god sakes, are the last two "bugs" in quotes?
Are they some sort of ironic bugs?
Is the wink implied?
(yes, this is a ripped off joke [wikiquote.org])</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333222</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334782</id>
	<title>Re:I'm still pissed, though</title>
	<author>Lumpy</author>
	<datestamp>1267521480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Shut up, if you anger them they will start putting root-kits on CD's and DVD's again!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Shut up , if you anger them they will start putting root-kits on CD 's and DVD 's again !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shut up, if you anger them they will start putting root-kits on CD's and DVD's again!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333570</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333162</id>
	<title>I never realized</title>
	<author>vekrander</author>
	<datestamp>1267558680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>that the PS3 was powered by the Zune...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>that the PS3 was powered by the Zune.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that the PS3 was powered by the Zune...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333378</id>
	<title>linux?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267559520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>still for fags, fag.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>still for fags , fag .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>still for fags, fag.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31337606</id>
	<title>Re:I can't wait for April Fool's Day...</title>
	<author>SimonTheSoundMan</author>
	<datestamp>1267532160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just Sony's famous times kill switch, that's all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just Sony 's famous times kill switch , that 's all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just Sony's famous times kill switch, that's all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333042</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31335556</id>
	<title>Bravo Dev Team!</title>
	<author>Warhawke</author>
	<datestamp>1267524180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I love how sony said that they would "fix" this in the next 24 hours yesterday.  I'm glad they worked so hard and diligently to apply this fix.  One might even say they moved the earth for it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I love how sony said that they would " fix " this in the next 24 hours yesterday .
I 'm glad they worked so hard and diligently to apply this fix .
One might even say they moved the earth for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love how sony said that they would "fix" this in the next 24 hours yesterday.
I'm glad they worked so hard and diligently to apply this fix.
One might even say they moved the earth for it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31336318</id>
	<title>Re:I'm still pissed, though</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267527000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh no, poor \_xeno\_ couldn't play his precious video games for 24(!) hours. That's a whole day! The horror! Perhaps if you ventured outside your basement every now and then, you would understand how pathetic you look.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh no , poor \ _xeno \ _ could n't play his precious video games for 24 ( !
) hours .
That 's a whole day !
The horror !
Perhaps if you ventured outside your basement every now and then , you would understand how pathetic you look .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh no, poor \_xeno\_ couldn't play his precious video games for 24(!
) hours.
That's a whole day!
The horror!
Perhaps if you ventured outside your basement every now and then, you would understand how pathetic you look.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333570</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333874</id>
	<title>Re:Sony Timer</title>
	<author>El Gigante de Justic</author>
	<datestamp>1267561320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problems seemed to specifically affect the PSN system along with the older PS3s (I don't have one so I haven't followed the issue that much).  I'm going to guess that the date and time is sent from PSN as a single integer in seconds from an epoch time, likely Unix/POSIX time counting from Jan 1, 1970, which is then used by the hardware to figure out the actual date/time for talking to the network, and not your system entered "local" time.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; The system must have been translating the epoch time it to February 29th, which was probably causing an error in some other date checking code.</p><p>What I'd be curious to know is if the affected systems now think its March 1 and not March 2.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problems seemed to specifically affect the PSN system along with the older PS3s ( I do n't have one so I have n't followed the issue that much ) .
I 'm going to guess that the date and time is sent from PSN as a single integer in seconds from an epoch time , likely Unix/POSIX time counting from Jan 1 , 1970 , which is then used by the hardware to figure out the actual date/time for talking to the network , and not your system entered " local " time .
    The system must have been translating the epoch time it to February 29th , which was probably causing an error in some other date checking code.What I 'd be curious to know is if the affected systems now think its March 1 and not March 2 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problems seemed to specifically affect the PSN system along with the older PS3s (I don't have one so I haven't followed the issue that much).
I'm going to guess that the date and time is sent from PSN as a single integer in seconds from an epoch time, likely Unix/POSIX time counting from Jan 1, 1970, which is then used by the hardware to figure out the actual date/time for talking to the network, and not your system entered "local" time.
    The system must have been translating the epoch time it to February 29th, which was probably causing an error in some other date checking code.What I'd be curious to know is if the affected systems now think its March 1 and not March 2.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334732</id>
	<title>Re:Sony's Official Announcement</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1267521300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf<br>Chief Sony Public Think of the Children Relations Officer</i></p><p>And I was wondering just yesterday where he ended up... Well, I guess in times like these, with economic problems, even honest people have to bend over and take any job they can get.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Muhammed Saeed al-SahafChief Sony Public Think of the Children Relations OfficerAnd I was wondering just yesterday where he ended up... Well , I guess in times like these , with economic problems , even honest people have to bend over and take any job they can get .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Muhammed Saeed al-SahafChief Sony Public Think of the Children Relations OfficerAnd I was wondering just yesterday where he ended up... Well, I guess in times like these, with economic problems, even honest people have to bend over and take any job they can get.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31332998</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31337432</id>
	<title>Re:Here's a patch</title>
	<author>Dylan16807</author>
	<datestamp>1267531320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I like this.  Because this is probably the code that caused the bug.  year \% 4 when year is actually BCD.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I like this .
Because this is probably the code that caused the bug .
year \ % 4 when year is actually BCD .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like this.
Because this is probably the code that caused the bug.
year \% 4 when year is actually BCD.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31340086</id>
	<title>Re:Sony is very lucky...</title>
	<author>zanderredux</author>
	<datestamp>1267547940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>so what happens when the battery that keeps the RTC running dies or cannot be recharged again? if there's no way to write a new date or remotely synchronize it with sony servers, would the console be effectively bricked?</htmltext>
<tokenext>so what happens when the battery that keeps the RTC running dies or can not be recharged again ?
if there 's no way to write a new date or remotely synchronize it with sony servers , would the console be effectively bricked ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so what happens when the battery that keeps the RTC running dies or cannot be recharged again?
if there's no way to write a new date or remotely synchronize it with sony servers, would the console be effectively bricked?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333634</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334114</id>
	<title>Re:Sony's Official Announcement</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267561980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Other way around, it was the consoles that thought it was the 29th.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Other way around , it was the consoles that thought it was the 29th .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Other way around, it was the consoles that thought it was the 29th.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334328</id>
	<title>Re:Here's a patch</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267562820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>date = new Date();<br><br>if( date.isLeapYear() ) {<nobr> <wbr></nobr>//...<br>}<br><br>I mean, doesn't every platform has a proper time library by now? Does the IT sector at least have the VERY BASICS in order?</htmltext>
<tokenext>date = new Date ( ) ; if ( date.isLeapYear ( ) ) { //... } I mean , does n't every platform has a proper time library by now ?
Does the IT sector at least have the VERY BASICS in order ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>date = new Date();if( date.isLeapYear() ) { //...}I mean, doesn't every platform has a proper time library by now?
Does the IT sector at least have the VERY BASICS in order?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333042</id>
	<title>I can't wait for April Fool's Day...</title>
	<author>VinylRecords</author>
	<datestamp>1267558200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is SONY going to make my PS3 explode?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is SONY going to make my PS3 explode ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is SONY going to make my PS3 explode?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31343874</id>
	<title>Re:Here's a patch</title>
	<author>Megane</author>
	<datestamp>1267623540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Great. Except that the bug is probably in a hardware RTC circuit. Please try again in Verilog or VHDL and include the process by which the silicon can be updated to use your glorious patch.
</p><p>It is very likely that the clock chip used BCD for the date and time, and used "bcd\_year \% 4" to determine a leap year. 10 is not divisible by 4, but 0x10 is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Great .
Except that the bug is probably in a hardware RTC circuit .
Please try again in Verilog or VHDL and include the process by which the silicon can be updated to use your glorious patch .
It is very likely that the clock chip used BCD for the date and time , and used " bcd \ _year \ % 4 " to determine a leap year .
10 is not divisible by 4 , but 0x10 is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Great.
Except that the bug is probably in a hardware RTC circuit.
Please try again in Verilog or VHDL and include the process by which the silicon can be updated to use your glorious patch.
It is very likely that the clock chip used BCD for the date and time, and used "bcd\_year \% 4" to determine a leap year.
10 is not divisible by 4, but 0x10 is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334818</id>
	<title>Re:Here's a patch</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1267521660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>(year \% 4) is enough. Next leap year exception is 2100, I will no longer be in office by then.</p><p>Before someone complains and compares it to Y2K: We're talking about a game console here with an expected lifetime of less than a decade. Not a supercomputer whose programs might outlive its makers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>( year \ % 4 ) is enough .
Next leap year exception is 2100 , I will no longer be in office by then.Before someone complains and compares it to Y2K : We 're talking about a game console here with an expected lifetime of less than a decade .
Not a supercomputer whose programs might outlive its makers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(year \% 4) is enough.
Next leap year exception is 2100, I will no longer be in office by then.Before someone complains and compares it to Y2K: We're talking about a game console here with an expected lifetime of less than a decade.
Not a supercomputer whose programs might outlive its makers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333570</id>
	<title>I'm still pissed, though</title>
	<author>\_xeno\_</author>
	<datestamp>1267560300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As one of the owners of a console that got bit by this bug (and the last revision to support PS2 backwards-compatibility), I'm still rather pissed off by this bug.</p><p>First off, it's ridiculously stupid. I'd love to hear an explanation from Sony about how, exactly, they managed to have this bug exist in the first place. First off, I'd love to know <a href="http://blog.us.playstation.com/2010/03/playstation-network-service-restored/" title="playstation.com">why the internal clock considers 2010 a leap year</a> [playstation.com] but what I'd <em>also</em> like to know is 1) why this "internal clock" is different from the PS3 clock, which knows 2010 isn't a leap year, and 2) why this "internal clock" works on dates in the first place and <strong>not</strong> on "units of time offset from a known date."</p><p>I mean, it's apparently an internal hardware clock, right? It's not user visible. So why, exactly, is it storing dates and not just being a clock?</p><p>I'm sure someone's going to say that I should "just get over it, it's just a video game console" which is true. And honestly, I never really was angry at being locked out of my PS3 for 24 hours. What I'm still pissed about is Sony's piss-poor handling of the entire incident. Which, I suppose, given their track record, I really shouldn't be that surprised about.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As one of the owners of a console that got bit by this bug ( and the last revision to support PS2 backwards-compatibility ) , I 'm still rather pissed off by this bug.First off , it 's ridiculously stupid .
I 'd love to hear an explanation from Sony about how , exactly , they managed to have this bug exist in the first place .
First off , I 'd love to know why the internal clock considers 2010 a leap year [ playstation.com ] but what I 'd also like to know is 1 ) why this " internal clock " is different from the PS3 clock , which knows 2010 is n't a leap year , and 2 ) why this " internal clock " works on dates in the first place and not on " units of time offset from a known date .
" I mean , it 's apparently an internal hardware clock , right ?
It 's not user visible .
So why , exactly , is it storing dates and not just being a clock ? I 'm sure someone 's going to say that I should " just get over it , it 's just a video game console " which is true .
And honestly , I never really was angry at being locked out of my PS3 for 24 hours .
What I 'm still pissed about is Sony 's piss-poor handling of the entire incident .
Which , I suppose , given their track record , I really should n't be that surprised about .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As one of the owners of a console that got bit by this bug (and the last revision to support PS2 backwards-compatibility), I'm still rather pissed off by this bug.First off, it's ridiculously stupid.
I'd love to hear an explanation from Sony about how, exactly, they managed to have this bug exist in the first place.
First off, I'd love to know why the internal clock considers 2010 a leap year [playstation.com] but what I'd also like to know is 1) why this "internal clock" is different from the PS3 clock, which knows 2010 isn't a leap year, and 2) why this "internal clock" works on dates in the first place and not on "units of time offset from a known date.
"I mean, it's apparently an internal hardware clock, right?
It's not user visible.
So why, exactly, is it storing dates and not just being a clock?I'm sure someone's going to say that I should "just get over it, it's just a video game console" which is true.
And honestly, I never really was angry at being locked out of my PS3 for 24 hours.
What I'm still pissed about is Sony's piss-poor handling of the entire incident.
Which, I suppose, given their track record, I really shouldn't be that surprised about.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334160</id>
	<title>Expect a repeat performance in 2014</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267562100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>These sorts of bugs have a tendency to repeat themselves. I fully expect this to happen in 2014. After all, 2010 was the first even non-leap year since the PS3's release.</htmltext>
<tokenext>These sorts of bugs have a tendency to repeat themselves .
I fully expect this to happen in 2014 .
After all , 2010 was the first even non-leap year since the PS3 's release .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These sorts of bugs have a tendency to repeat themselves.
I fully expect this to happen in 2014.
After all, 2010 was the first even non-leap year since the PS3's release.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334860</id>
	<title>Re:Expect a repeat performance in 2014</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267521840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You mean to tell me that they didn't hard code a leap year bug for 2010?   And that since they didn't issue a fix the bug will not fix itself for future dates as well?</p><p>Thanks for the help, Captain Obvious.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You mean to tell me that they did n't hard code a leap year bug for 2010 ?
And that since they did n't issue a fix the bug will not fix itself for future dates as well ? Thanks for the help , Captain Obvious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You mean to tell me that they didn't hard code a leap year bug for 2010?
And that since they didn't issue a fix the bug will not fix itself for future dates as well?Thanks for the help, Captain Obvious.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334160</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333484</id>
	<title>Sony Timer</title>
	<author>Neon Spiral Injector</author>
	<datestamp>1267559880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a theory there's an unseen clock running inside the PS3.  Since the passage of time solved the problem, shouldn't too have setting the system time forward a day?  I tried that, yet the system was still bugged.  It would make sense if there was a hidden clock not able to be directly set by the end user for things like DRM.  Since Sony has downloadable movie rentals, which can only be viewed for 48 hours after payment.  It would follow that there's an extra timer which one can't over-ride to get more time with the rental.  It also makes sense to tie this to game DRM, and trophy acquisition so users couldn't forge earlier time stamps.  The other observation I made is that when I manually set the clock the system would keep time as long as it was on.  But shutting down and restarting would cause the displayed time to revert to the time I had previously set.  So the system clock wasn't being updated by the hidden clock, while it was in the buggy 29th day of February.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a theory there 's an unseen clock running inside the PS3 .
Since the passage of time solved the problem , should n't too have setting the system time forward a day ?
I tried that , yet the system was still bugged .
It would make sense if there was a hidden clock not able to be directly set by the end user for things like DRM .
Since Sony has downloadable movie rentals , which can only be viewed for 48 hours after payment .
It would follow that there 's an extra timer which one ca n't over-ride to get more time with the rental .
It also makes sense to tie this to game DRM , and trophy acquisition so users could n't forge earlier time stamps .
The other observation I made is that when I manually set the clock the system would keep time as long as it was on .
But shutting down and restarting would cause the displayed time to revert to the time I had previously set .
So the system clock was n't being updated by the hidden clock , while it was in the buggy 29th day of February .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a theory there's an unseen clock running inside the PS3.
Since the passage of time solved the problem, shouldn't too have setting the system time forward a day?
I tried that, yet the system was still bugged.
It would make sense if there was a hidden clock not able to be directly set by the end user for things like DRM.
Since Sony has downloadable movie rentals, which can only be viewed for 48 hours after payment.
It would follow that there's an extra timer which one can't over-ride to get more time with the rental.
It also makes sense to tie this to game DRM, and trophy acquisition so users couldn't forge earlier time stamps.
The other observation I made is that when I manually set the clock the system would keep time as long as it was on.
But shutting down and restarting would cause the displayed time to revert to the time I had previously set.
So the system clock wasn't being updated by the hidden clock, while it was in the buggy 29th day of February.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333708</id>
	<title>Re:Sony Timer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267560780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The RTC is not a theory or a myth!  The RTC exists.  Take the battery out of your PS3 for ten minutes if you want to reset the RTC.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The RTC is not a theory or a myth !
The RTC exists .
Take the battery out of your PS3 for ten minutes if you want to reset the RTC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The RTC is not a theory or a myth!
The RTC exists.
Take the battery out of your PS3 for ten minutes if you want to reset the RTC.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333484</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_170221_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_170221_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31343570
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333570
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_170221_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31336318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333570
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_170221_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_170221_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31336418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333222
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_170221_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333606
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333170
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_170221_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333042
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_170221_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31340086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333634
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_170221_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334532
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333570
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_170221_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31358454
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333634
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_170221_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31337210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31332998
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_170221_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333788
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333042
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_170221_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334782
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333570
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_170221_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31337432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333170
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_170221_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334732
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31332998
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_170221_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_170221_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333042
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_170221_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334710
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333222
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_170221_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334114
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31332998
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_170221_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333170
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_170221_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334368
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333222
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_170221_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31343874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333170
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_170221_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334074
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333070
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_170221_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_170221_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31337672
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333222
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_170221_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31347974
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333170
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_170221_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31340322
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333634
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_170221_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31349528
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333634
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_170221_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31337606
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333042
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_170221_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333170
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_02_170221_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334860
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334160
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_02_170221.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333042
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334844
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333788
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333138
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31337606
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_02_170221.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333062
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_02_170221.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333170
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31343874
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333606
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31347974
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334818
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31337432
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334328
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_02_170221.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333570
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31343570
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334782
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334532
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31336318
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_02_170221.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333222
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334368
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334710
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31336418
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31337672
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_02_170221.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334160
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334860
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_02_170221.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334578
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_02_170221.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31332998
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31337210
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334732
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333256
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334114
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_02_170221.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333634
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31340086
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31349528
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31358454
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31340322
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_02_170221.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333484
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333770
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333708
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333874
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333918
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_02_170221.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333394
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_02_170221.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333070
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31334074
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_02_170221.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31335556
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_02_170221.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_02_170221.31333784
</commentlist>
</conversation>
