<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_06_0227224</id>
	<title>YouTube Makes Captioning Available To All</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1267898100000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>adeelarshad82 writes <i>"Google's YouTube announced that it has <a href="http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2360955,00.asp">moved its automatic speech-recognition and closed-captioning technology out of beta</a> and has now made it available to the YouTube community at large. Most, if not all, YouTube videos now include a 'CC' button that, if pressed, will automatically generate the closed-captioning technology. The technology processes the audio feed using the speech-recognition technology used in the core voice search feature that has also been built into the Android voice search feature, the GOOG-411 phone search, and other products."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>adeelarshad82 writes " Google 's YouTube announced that it has moved its automatic speech-recognition and closed-captioning technology out of beta and has now made it available to the YouTube community at large .
Most , if not all , YouTube videos now include a 'CC ' button that , if pressed , will automatically generate the closed-captioning technology .
The technology processes the audio feed using the speech-recognition technology used in the core voice search feature that has also been built into the Android voice search feature , the GOOG-411 phone search , and other products .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>adeelarshad82 writes "Google's YouTube announced that it has moved its automatic speech-recognition and closed-captioning technology out of beta and has now made it available to the YouTube community at large.
Most, if not all, YouTube videos now include a 'CC' button that, if pressed, will automatically generate the closed-captioning technology.
The technology processes the audio feed using the speech-recognition technology used in the core voice search feature that has also been built into the Android voice search feature, the GOOG-411 phone search, and other products.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31382704</id>
	<title>Now easier to catch unwanted content</title>
	<author>Aoet\_325</author>
	<datestamp>1267908180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Soon (now?) they can generate captions of everything heard (or sung) in a video immediately after upload and match the captions against lyrics and transcriptions of copyrighted works or even just search them for specific keywords. Then they can flag those videos as possible copyright violations or even prevent them from being displayed until after being reviewed by someone.</p><p>I'm not saying captioning isn't a good idea, only that it can be used for more than just assisting the hard of hearing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Soon ( now ?
) they can generate captions of everything heard ( or sung ) in a video immediately after upload and match the captions against lyrics and transcriptions of copyrighted works or even just search them for specific keywords .
Then they can flag those videos as possible copyright violations or even prevent them from being displayed until after being reviewed by someone.I 'm not saying captioning is n't a good idea , only that it can be used for more than just assisting the hard of hearing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Soon (now?
) they can generate captions of everything heard (or sung) in a video immediately after upload and match the captions against lyrics and transcriptions of copyrighted works or even just search them for specific keywords.
Then they can flag those videos as possible copyright violations or even prevent them from being displayed until after being reviewed by someone.I'm not saying captioning isn't a good idea, only that it can be used for more than just assisting the hard of hearing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379156</id>
	<title>CC this...</title>
	<author>flogger</author>
	<datestamp>1267816860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I looked but I can;t find google's CC button for this video:

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZA1NoOOoaNw" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZA1NoOOoaNw</a> [youtube.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>I looked but I can ; t find google 's CC button for this video : http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = ZA1NoOOoaNw [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I looked but I can;t find google's CC button for this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZA1NoOOoaNw [youtube.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31381494</id>
	<title>Re:As long as they don't use GVoice Tech.</title>
	<author>assassinator42</author>
	<datestamp>1267898820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wouldn't say the transcripts have been 99\% accurate word for word for me, but I can almost always get the meaning. The one exception being a friend with a speech impediment.<br>The YouTube transcripts are pretty much useless from what I can tell.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would n't say the transcripts have been 99 \ % accurate word for word for me , but I can almost always get the meaning .
The one exception being a friend with a speech impediment.The YouTube transcripts are pretty much useless from what I can tell .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wouldn't say the transcripts have been 99\% accurate word for word for me, but I can almost always get the meaning.
The one exception being a friend with a speech impediment.The YouTube transcripts are pretty much useless from what I can tell.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379328</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379804</id>
	<title>It hates Bono</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267875120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't think it likes Bono. I was watching a speech by George Bush where he says about Bono: "he is a man of depth and great heart". The caption was: "he is a man of death and great whore"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think it likes Bono .
I was watching a speech by George Bush where he says about Bono : " he is a man of depth and great heart " .
The caption was : " he is a man of death and great whore "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think it likes Bono.
I was watching a speech by George Bush where he says about Bono: "he is a man of depth and great heart".
The caption was: "he is a man of death and great whore"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379118</id>
	<title>Automatically generate the technology?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267816380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Talk about advanced! Back in my day, we had to <i>pay engineers</i> to generate technology for us!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Talk about advanced !
Back in my day , we had to pay engineers to generate technology for us !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Talk about advanced!
Back in my day, we had to pay engineers to generate technology for us!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379480</id>
	<title>Whatever happened to</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267867380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Whatever happened to the Berger Liaw speech recognition system?  One article (from 11 years ago) is  <a href="http://www.usc.edu/uscnews/stories/4829.html" title="usc.edu" rel="nofollow">here</a> [usc.edu].  It had the ability to track multiple (dozens) of voices simultaneously, could process speech spoken in a continuous stream, and could detect speech in very high noise environments (in some tests, human listeners could only tell what words were being spoken with 50\% accuracy, and the voice recognition system could still tell what was being spoken 85\% of the time ---very high noise environments like someone speaking in normal room conversation voice, beside a jet engine.  The US Navy (submarine service) was a strong advocate of the technology, but I've heard very little about it since.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Whatever happened to the Berger Liaw speech recognition system ?
One article ( from 11 years ago ) is here [ usc.edu ] .
It had the ability to track multiple ( dozens ) of voices simultaneously , could process speech spoken in a continuous stream , and could detect speech in very high noise environments ( in some tests , human listeners could only tell what words were being spoken with 50 \ % accuracy , and the voice recognition system could still tell what was being spoken 85 \ % of the time ---very high noise environments like someone speaking in normal room conversation voice , beside a jet engine .
The US Navy ( submarine service ) was a strong advocate of the technology , but I 've heard very little about it since .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whatever happened to the Berger Liaw speech recognition system?
One article (from 11 years ago) is  here [usc.edu].
It had the ability to track multiple (dozens) of voices simultaneously, could process speech spoken in a continuous stream, and could detect speech in very high noise environments (in some tests, human listeners could only tell what words were being spoken with 50\% accuracy, and the voice recognition system could still tell what was being spoken 85\% of the time ---very high noise environments like someone speaking in normal room conversation voice, beside a jet engine.
The US Navy (submarine service) was a strong advocate of the technology, but I've heard very little about it since.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379076</id>
	<title>As long as they don't use GVoice Tech.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267815420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or you'll end up with captions like this:<p><div class="quote"><p>Hey glum, Jen tonight. It's apologize for it, interrupting our conversation in early as this afternoon, yes, so I wanted to returning your call and you know check in with you further. Alright, hope you, I hope you're doing well done. Sounded like you, works but alright. Well I'll call me later. I'll talk to you soon. Bye.</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or you 'll end up with captions like this : Hey glum , Jen tonight .
It 's apologize for it , interrupting our conversation in early as this afternoon , yes , so I wanted to returning your call and you know check in with you further .
Alright , hope you , I hope you 're doing well done .
Sounded like you , works but alright .
Well I 'll call me later .
I 'll talk to you soon .
Bye .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or you'll end up with captions like this:Hey glum, Jen tonight.
It's apologize for it, interrupting our conversation in early as this afternoon, yes, so I wanted to returning your call and you know check in with you further.
Alright, hope you, I hope you're doing well done.
Sounded like you, works but alright.
Well I'll call me later.
I'll talk to you soon.
Bye.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379448</id>
	<title>About as good as I expected</title>
	<author>Clovert Agent</author>
	<datestamp>1267866660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Which is to say, pretty darned feeble. Clever work, but basically rubbish when compared to user expectation.</p><p>One of my favourite videos is this one (<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYAw79386WI" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYAw79386WI</a> [youtube.com]), dating from the '30s, about how differential gears work. The voice-over is that beautifully clear, precise American newsreader accent of the period, and there isn't any background music to confuse things. If anything should be a perfect candidate for a computer to analyse, it's this.</p><p>But the captions are worse than I'd expect from off the shelf software like Dragon Dictate, which isn't particular special itself. A perfectly enunciated "road" with a very clear final D, is misheard as "role", for example. There are mistakes in nearly every line, and while sometimes they're obvious, sometimes they're just bizarre.</p><p>I'm tempted to say "nice try, good work for a first shot, and hey, it's a beta so it'll get better." But I've been exposed to software dictation software for over a decade, and it just hasn't, really. So I don't think it will, and I don't think most people will get much use out of it, apart from the odd giggle at the YouTube equivalent of "Dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all..."</p><p>What I <i>would</i> be interested in hearing is whether this, flawed as it is, is useable enough for a deaf person. In context, you'd probably figure out that "role"="road", but would you guess that "outmoded"="are mounted"? Maybe, maybe not - watch the video on mute with the captions on, and it's kinda tricky but you can get the gist of it. But then I'm reminded that this is the best case video I could find, and most will probably be worse. It'll be interesting to see what the feedback is from deaf people, and whether it really makes a difference, and whether the context makes up for the poor quality. I'd like to hope it might do just that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Which is to say , pretty darned feeble .
Clever work , but basically rubbish when compared to user expectation.One of my favourite videos is this one ( http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = yYAw79386WI [ youtube.com ] ) , dating from the '30s , about how differential gears work .
The voice-over is that beautifully clear , precise American newsreader accent of the period , and there is n't any background music to confuse things .
If anything should be a perfect candidate for a computer to analyse , it 's this.But the captions are worse than I 'd expect from off the shelf software like Dragon Dictate , which is n't particular special itself .
A perfectly enunciated " road " with a very clear final D , is misheard as " role " , for example .
There are mistakes in nearly every line , and while sometimes they 're obvious , sometimes they 're just bizarre.I 'm tempted to say " nice try , good work for a first shot , and hey , it 's a beta so it 'll get better .
" But I 've been exposed to software dictation software for over a decade , and it just has n't , really .
So I do n't think it will , and I do n't think most people will get much use out of it , apart from the odd giggle at the YouTube equivalent of " Dear aunt , let 's set so double the killer delete select all... " What I would be interested in hearing is whether this , flawed as it is , is useable enough for a deaf person .
In context , you 'd probably figure out that " role " = " road " , but would you guess that " outmoded " = " are mounted " ?
Maybe , maybe not - watch the video on mute with the captions on , and it 's kinda tricky but you can get the gist of it .
But then I 'm reminded that this is the best case video I could find , and most will probably be worse .
It 'll be interesting to see what the feedback is from deaf people , and whether it really makes a difference , and whether the context makes up for the poor quality .
I 'd like to hope it might do just that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which is to say, pretty darned feeble.
Clever work, but basically rubbish when compared to user expectation.One of my favourite videos is this one (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYAw79386WI [youtube.com]), dating from the '30s, about how differential gears work.
The voice-over is that beautifully clear, precise American newsreader accent of the period, and there isn't any background music to confuse things.
If anything should be a perfect candidate for a computer to analyse, it's this.But the captions are worse than I'd expect from off the shelf software like Dragon Dictate, which isn't particular special itself.
A perfectly enunciated "road" with a very clear final D, is misheard as "role", for example.
There are mistakes in nearly every line, and while sometimes they're obvious, sometimes they're just bizarre.I'm tempted to say "nice try, good work for a first shot, and hey, it's a beta so it'll get better.
" But I've been exposed to software dictation software for over a decade, and it just hasn't, really.
So I don't think it will, and I don't think most people will get much use out of it, apart from the odd giggle at the YouTube equivalent of "Dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all..."What I would be interested in hearing is whether this, flawed as it is, is useable enough for a deaf person.
In context, you'd probably figure out that "role"="road", but would you guess that "outmoded"="are mounted"?
Maybe, maybe not - watch the video on mute with the captions on, and it's kinda tricky but you can get the gist of it.
But then I'm reminded that this is the best case video I could find, and most will probably be worse.
It'll be interesting to see what the feedback is from deaf people, and whether it really makes a difference, and whether the context makes up for the poor quality.
I'd like to hope it might do just that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31381088</id>
	<title>2 Girls and 1 Cup Reactions</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267894680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does this mean they can now enjoy the 2 Girls and 1 Cup Reaction videos?</p><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggaWaK5d23Y" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggaWaK5d23Y</a> [youtube.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does this mean they can now enjoy the 2 Girls and 1 Cup Reaction videos ? http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = ggaWaK5d23Y [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does this mean they can now enjoy the 2 Girls and 1 Cup Reaction videos?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggaWaK5d23Y [youtube.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31380810</id>
	<title>Hitler Parodies the easy way</title>
	<author>BenJeremy</author>
	<datestamp>1267891740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I like the "CC" feature... it makes it very simple to do those Hitler Downfall parodies... but I was surprised that <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vc4C4v-sxmo" title="youtube.com">I was the first to actually make one using the feature</a> [youtube.com]. My video features closed captions for both the original German-to-English translation, and a Lost parody script. I also provide a handy download to a text-editable SRT file so others can make their own (does that make me a bad person?).</p><p>The nice thing is that you can add as many subtitle files as you like... and give each of them separate titles. It understands language, so presumably, my parody can be run through translator (on the fly) for any other language. Now, one "blank" can provide hundreds of alternate parodies from one YouTube video.</p><p>I just wonder if this "automatic" feature will try and create subtitles on my blank, with subtitles already loaded.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I like the " CC " feature... it makes it very simple to do those Hitler Downfall parodies... but I was surprised that I was the first to actually make one using the feature [ youtube.com ] .
My video features closed captions for both the original German-to-English translation , and a Lost parody script .
I also provide a handy download to a text-editable SRT file so others can make their own ( does that make me a bad person ?
) .The nice thing is that you can add as many subtitle files as you like... and give each of them separate titles .
It understands language , so presumably , my parody can be run through translator ( on the fly ) for any other language .
Now , one " blank " can provide hundreds of alternate parodies from one YouTube video.I just wonder if this " automatic " feature will try and create subtitles on my blank , with subtitles already loaded .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like the "CC" feature... it makes it very simple to do those Hitler Downfall parodies... but I was surprised that I was the first to actually make one using the feature [youtube.com].
My video features closed captions for both the original German-to-English translation, and a Lost parody script.
I also provide a handy download to a text-editable SRT file so others can make their own (does that make me a bad person?
).The nice thing is that you can add as many subtitle files as you like... and give each of them separate titles.
It understands language, so presumably, my parody can be run through translator (on the fly) for any other language.
Now, one "blank" can provide hundreds of alternate parodies from one YouTube video.I just wonder if this "automatic" feature will try and create subtitles on my blank, with subtitles already loaded.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379988</id>
	<title>Re:Noteable, but still very much experimental</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267880340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With None-English you mean English?</p><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzV3wIrFa3U" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzV3wIrFa3U</a> [youtube.com]</p><p>turning it on on Rocketboom video's it messes up (hard). however people talking Slack (USA) English will render correctly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With None-English you mean English ? http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = EzV3wIrFa3U [ youtube.com ] turning it on on Rocketboom video 's it messes up ( hard ) .
however people talking Slack ( USA ) English will render correctly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With None-English you mean English?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzV3wIrFa3U [youtube.com]turning it on on Rocketboom video's it messes up (hard).
however people talking Slack (USA) English will render correctly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379124</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31384676</id>
	<title>Re:I don't have the captions</title>
	<author>rduke15</author>
	<datestamp>1267879860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I tried the video mentioned here, but it just tells me "Captions are not availabel". Strange.</p><p>Is it because I'm in Europe?<br>Because I use Firefox on Linux?</p><p>The video mentioned a few posts before that is even weirder: it seems to have captions, I can turn them on, but no captions are displayed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I tried the video mentioned here , but it just tells me " Captions are not availabel " .
Strange.Is it because I 'm in Europe ? Because I use Firefox on Linux ? The video mentioned a few posts before that is even weirder : it seems to have captions , I can turn them on , but no captions are displayed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I tried the video mentioned here, but it just tells me "Captions are not availabel".
Strange.Is it because I'm in Europe?Because I use Firefox on Linux?The video mentioned a few posts before that is even weirder: it seems to have captions, I can turn them on, but no captions are displayed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379448</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31380054</id>
	<title>Re:As long as they don't use GVoice Tech.</title>
	<author>dominious</author>
	<datestamp>1267882260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It would really be funny if the developers planted a message when listening to standard fax negotiation tones:
<br> <br>
Hey, how are you?
<br>Not much going on. This new "Exchange Server" is such an asshole I wish he dies!
<br>Yeah I know what you're sayin.. I think they're gonna throw me away soon:(
<br>Oh well...here's the fax anyway. Hope to hear from you soon..Bye!
<br>bip-bip bip bip bip bip-bip....
<br>bib bip bip-bip...</htmltext>
<tokenext>It would really be funny if the developers planted a message when listening to standard fax negotiation tones : Hey , how are you ?
Not much going on .
This new " Exchange Server " is such an asshole I wish he dies !
Yeah I know what you 're sayin.. I think they 're gon na throw me away soon : ( Oh well...here 's the fax anyway .
Hope to hear from you soon..Bye !
bip-bip bip bip bip bip-bip... . bib bip bip-bip.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would really be funny if the developers planted a message when listening to standard fax negotiation tones:
 
Hey, how are you?
Not much going on.
This new "Exchange Server" is such an asshole I wish he dies!
Yeah I know what you're sayin.. I think they're gonna throw me away soon:(
Oh well...here's the fax anyway.
Hope to hear from you soon..Bye!
bip-bip bip bip bip bip-bip....
bib bip bip-bip...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379264</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31380972</id>
	<title>Netflix needs to get away from SilverDimGlow</title>
	<author>mrflash818</author>
	<datestamp>1267893420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is why Google rocks<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...and M$'s tarnished SilverDimGlow does not.</p><p>Srongly wish Netflix would realign themselves to use a youtube-like setup instead, but I strongly suspect M$ either threw them 'an offer they could not refuse', or this will become yet another mutual lock-in, like Intel\_M$.</p><p>(Really irritated that I cannot, yet, watch Netflix from my Debian machines.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is why Google rocks ...and M $ 's tarnished SilverDimGlow does not.Srongly wish Netflix would realign themselves to use a youtube-like setup instead , but I strongly suspect M $ either threw them 'an offer they could not refuse ' , or this will become yet another mutual lock-in , like Intel \ _M $ .
( Really irritated that I can not , yet , watch Netflix from my Debian machines .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is why Google rocks ...and M$'s tarnished SilverDimGlow does not.Srongly wish Netflix would realign themselves to use a youtube-like setup instead, but I strongly suspect M$ either threw them 'an offer they could not refuse', or this will become yet another mutual lock-in, like Intel\_M$.
(Really irritated that I cannot, yet, watch Netflix from my Debian machines.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379078</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31381018</id>
	<title>Might mean videos could be searchable by content</title>
	<author>mrflash818</author>
	<datestamp>1267893840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>An interesting upside to all this might be that, if Google keeps the dialog from youtube content in their searchable database, people may soon be able to search for videos via content.</p><p>Right now, I believe keywords need to be done, but the auto-captioning would remove that barrier, perhaps.</p><p>"Here's looking at you, kid."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>An interesting upside to all this might be that , if Google keeps the dialog from youtube content in their searchable database , people may soon be able to search for videos via content.Right now , I believe keywords need to be done , but the auto-captioning would remove that barrier , perhaps .
" Here 's looking at you , kid .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An interesting upside to all this might be that, if Google keeps the dialog from youtube content in their searchable database, people may soon be able to search for videos via content.Right now, I believe keywords need to be done, but the auto-captioning would remove that barrier, perhaps.
"Here's looking at you, kid.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31380216</id>
	<title>Really? most?</title>
	<author>crossmr</author>
	<datestamp>1267885320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Most, if not all, YouTube videos now include a 'CC' button that, if pressed, will automatically generate the closed-captioning technology.</p></div></blockquote><p>The first 10 videos I've been to don't include it. Including suggested and front page vids.</p><p>Is this a metric most?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Most , if not all , YouTube videos now include a 'CC ' button that , if pressed , will automatically generate the closed-captioning technology.The first 10 videos I 've been to do n't include it .
Including suggested and front page vids.Is this a metric most ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most, if not all, YouTube videos now include a 'CC' button that, if pressed, will automatically generate the closed-captioning technology.The first 10 videos I've been to don't include it.
Including suggested and front page vids.Is this a metric most?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379284</id>
	<title>Wish commercial TV stations would use this tech!</title>
	<author>Alwin Henseler</author>
	<datestamp>1267905780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Wish this technology would be used by TV stations to provide 'sort of' subtitling for programs that don't have any. This could be helpful for deaf/hearing impaired viewers.
</p><p>
Where I live (Netherlands), there's a few public TV channels. Most programs on there are subtitled using a dedicated teletext page (888). For the bulk of commercial channels, there's also subtitles for things like prime time movies, and specific (popular) TV shows. But a lot of it is not, like average day time shows / late night documentaries / commercials etc. etc. This is due to manpower/cost issues: you have a limited audience, a limited percentage of viewers that is deaf/hearing impaired, and (proper) subtitling needs humans. Read money = eating into commercial TV stations' bottom line. It's entirely up to these stations to decide what to subtitle, and what not.
</p><p>
This technology (combined with automated translation) would be a nice complement for those programmes where human-provided subtitling is deemed to expensive. Automated translation is still bad at times, but for deaf/hearing impaired people, subtitles with a bad translation can still be better than no subtitles at all. An automated system shouldn't be very expensive when applied to mass media like national TV, and would be easy to provide for <em>all</em> programmes. And perhaps speech recognition / automated translation would improve over time, to the point where humans aren't needed anymore to get good results.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wish this technology would be used by TV stations to provide 'sort of ' subtitling for programs that do n't have any .
This could be helpful for deaf/hearing impaired viewers .
Where I live ( Netherlands ) , there 's a few public TV channels .
Most programs on there are subtitled using a dedicated teletext page ( 888 ) .
For the bulk of commercial channels , there 's also subtitles for things like prime time movies , and specific ( popular ) TV shows .
But a lot of it is not , like average day time shows / late night documentaries / commercials etc .
etc. This is due to manpower/cost issues : you have a limited audience , a limited percentage of viewers that is deaf/hearing impaired , and ( proper ) subtitling needs humans .
Read money = eating into commercial TV stations ' bottom line .
It 's entirely up to these stations to decide what to subtitle , and what not .
This technology ( combined with automated translation ) would be a nice complement for those programmes where human-provided subtitling is deemed to expensive .
Automated translation is still bad at times , but for deaf/hearing impaired people , subtitles with a bad translation can still be better than no subtitles at all .
An automated system should n't be very expensive when applied to mass media like national TV , and would be easy to provide for all programmes .
And perhaps speech recognition / automated translation would improve over time , to the point where humans are n't needed anymore to get good results .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Wish this technology would be used by TV stations to provide 'sort of' subtitling for programs that don't have any.
This could be helpful for deaf/hearing impaired viewers.
Where I live (Netherlands), there's a few public TV channels.
Most programs on there are subtitled using a dedicated teletext page (888).
For the bulk of commercial channels, there's also subtitles for things like prime time movies, and specific (popular) TV shows.
But a lot of it is not, like average day time shows / late night documentaries / commercials etc.
etc. This is due to manpower/cost issues: you have a limited audience, a limited percentage of viewers that is deaf/hearing impaired, and (proper) subtitling needs humans.
Read money = eating into commercial TV stations' bottom line.
It's entirely up to these stations to decide what to subtitle, and what not.
This technology (combined with automated translation) would be a nice complement for those programmes where human-provided subtitling is deemed to expensive.
Automated translation is still bad at times, but for deaf/hearing impaired people, subtitles with a bad translation can still be better than no subtitles at all.
An automated system shouldn't be very expensive when applied to mass media like national TV, and would be easy to provide for all programmes.
And perhaps speech recognition / automated translation would improve over time, to the point where humans aren't needed anymore to get good results.
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379368</id>
	<title>Re:Automatically generate the technology?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267907400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Rofl</htmltext>
<tokenext>Rofl</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Rofl</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379118</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31381098</id>
	<title>Re:As long as they don't use GVoice Tech.</title>
	<author>bertoelcon</author>
	<datestamp>1267894800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Except one friend, with a Texan accent, who usually is closer to 50\% accurate.</p></div><p>Of course if you live in Texas and get called by mostly people with Texan accents you get 50\% accuracy.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Except one friend , with a Texan accent , who usually is closer to 50 \ % accurate.Of course if you live in Texas and get called by mostly people with Texan accents you get 50 \ % accuracy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except one friend, with a Texan accent, who usually is closer to 50\% accurate.Of course if you live in Texas and get called by mostly people with Texan accents you get 50\% accuracy.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379328</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379124</id>
	<title>Noteable, but still very much experimental</title>
	<author>Coopjust</author>
	<datestamp>1267816440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>The results are still very funny, especially for non-English speakers.
<br> <br>
However, it's a technology that is still relatively young. One hopes that applying it to Youtube will help Google improve the accuracy.
<br> <br>
However, except for spoken videos with a native English speaker with absolutely no background noise, it's nothing more than a novelty at this point. Trying this on several videos not only yielded hilarious results, but delays of several seconds in some cases.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The results are still very funny , especially for non-English speakers .
However , it 's a technology that is still relatively young .
One hopes that applying it to Youtube will help Google improve the accuracy .
However , except for spoken videos with a native English speaker with absolutely no background noise , it 's nothing more than a novelty at this point .
Trying this on several videos not only yielded hilarious results , but delays of several seconds in some cases .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The results are still very funny, especially for non-English speakers.
However, it's a technology that is still relatively young.
One hopes that applying it to Youtube will help Google improve the accuracy.
However, except for spoken videos with a native English speaker with absolutely no background noise, it's nothing more than a novelty at this point.
Trying this on several videos not only yielded hilarious results, but delays of several seconds in some cases.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31380492</id>
	<title>Re:Noteable, but still very much experimental</title>
	<author>oztiks</author>
	<datestamp>1267888740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Im the first to agree but then i saw Microsoft's attempt at voice recognition and its just as poor.</p><p>There needs to be significant improvements as whole until this stuff works properly, sadly i think it's still got a long way to go.</p><p>Accents play a big part, also the rate at people speak join words, you can tell youtube's voice recognition is good, but it doesn't keep up in those areas at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Im the first to agree but then i saw Microsoft 's attempt at voice recognition and its just as poor.There needs to be significant improvements as whole until this stuff works properly , sadly i think it 's still got a long way to go.Accents play a big part , also the rate at people speak join words , you can tell youtube 's voice recognition is good , but it does n't keep up in those areas at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Im the first to agree but then i saw Microsoft's attempt at voice recognition and its just as poor.There needs to be significant improvements as whole until this stuff works properly, sadly i think it's still got a long way to go.Accents play a big part, also the rate at people speak join words, you can tell youtube's voice recognition is good, but it doesn't keep up in those areas at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379124</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379618</id>
	<title>Can they combine this with lip reading?</title>
	<author>wisebabo</author>
	<datestamp>1267870680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Could you combine this with the lip reading technology that was introduce to allow "voiceless" cell phone calls? <a href="http://www.ubergizmo.com/15/archives/2010/03/lip\_reading\_technology\_unveiled.html" title="ubergizmo.com">http://www.ubergizmo.com/15/archives/2010/03/lip\_reading\_technology\_unveiled.html</a> [ubergizmo.com]  Wouldn't that improve the accuracy for those scenes where the speakers mouth is visible?</p><p>Or how about using the subtitle tracks that are in a different language and reverse translating them to provide additional clues as to what the speaker might have been saying?  It might help a little.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Could you combine this with the lip reading technology that was introduce to allow " voiceless " cell phone calls ?
http : //www.ubergizmo.com/15/archives/2010/03/lip \ _reading \ _technology \ _unveiled.html [ ubergizmo.com ] Would n't that improve the accuracy for those scenes where the speakers mouth is visible ? Or how about using the subtitle tracks that are in a different language and reverse translating them to provide additional clues as to what the speaker might have been saying ?
It might help a little .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Could you combine this with the lip reading technology that was introduce to allow "voiceless" cell phone calls?
http://www.ubergizmo.com/15/archives/2010/03/lip\_reading\_technology\_unveiled.html [ubergizmo.com]  Wouldn't that improve the accuracy for those scenes where the speakers mouth is visible?Or how about using the subtitle tracks that are in a different language and reverse translating them to provide additional clues as to what the speaker might have been saying?
It might help a little.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379338</id>
	<title>Re: Interactive Transcripts vs. Captions</title>
	<author>Alwin Henseler</author>
	<datestamp>1267906740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
I can imagine Google would cache intermediate results, possibly improve those results from time to time, and create a good coupling to its own search engine. Other search engines might have to 'distill' searchable text from the video (=difficult?), so that Google can search YouTube video content better than other search engines? Just a guess, FWIW.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can imagine Google would cache intermediate results , possibly improve those results from time to time , and create a good coupling to its own search engine .
Other search engines might have to 'distill ' searchable text from the video ( = difficult ?
) , so that Google can search YouTube video content better than other search engines ?
Just a guess , FWIW .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
I can imagine Google would cache intermediate results, possibly improve those results from time to time, and create a good coupling to its own search engine.
Other search engines might have to 'distill' searchable text from the video (=difficult?
), so that Google can search YouTube video content better than other search engines?
Just a guess, FWIW.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379114</id>
	<title>Re:As long as they don't use GVoice Tech.</title>
	<author>The MAZZTer</author>
	<datestamp>1267816320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Phone audio quality is generally much poorer than online videos, in my experience.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Phone audio quality is generally much poorer than online videos , in my experience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Phone audio quality is generally much poorer than online videos, in my experience.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379076</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31381222</id>
	<title>Is this Gaudi?</title>
	<author>snsh</author>
	<datestamp>1267896360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is good news.  I've been looking at speech-to-text and audiomining for a while.  My goal was not captioning, but search, so in a long video or large set of videos, a user can quickly find snippets of video mentioning a word or phrase, and replay the found snippets.  I found a bunch of options but budget was always in issue.

Google Audio (Gaudi) was free (cool!) but seemed like a dead-end project after the 2008 elections.  Blinx- spinoff from BBN focused on media companies.  $$$$$$.  Autonomy- enterprise search/monitoring company bought tech from Virage.  $$$$$$.  Virage- sold their tech to autonomy, then redeveloped it.  Coveo- audiomining software using Nuance SDK and Silverlight front end.  $$$$$ .  TVeyes- does a lot of real-time monitoring.  $$$$$.  Nexidia-  audiomining software uses their own phoneme tools.  $$$$$$.

Is this YouTube service an incarnation of Gaudi?  Either way, it's nice that it's finally out there.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is good news .
I 've been looking at speech-to-text and audiomining for a while .
My goal was not captioning , but search , so in a long video or large set of videos , a user can quickly find snippets of video mentioning a word or phrase , and replay the found snippets .
I found a bunch of options but budget was always in issue .
Google Audio ( Gaudi ) was free ( cool !
) but seemed like a dead-end project after the 2008 elections .
Blinx- spinoff from BBN focused on media companies .
$ $ $ $ $ $ . Autonomy- enterprise search/monitoring company bought tech from Virage .
$ $ $ $ $ $ . Virage- sold their tech to autonomy , then redeveloped it .
Coveo- audiomining software using Nuance SDK and Silverlight front end .
$ $ $ $ $ .
TVeyes- does a lot of real-time monitoring .
$ $ $ $ $ . Nexidia- audiomining software uses their own phoneme tools .
$ $ $ $ $ $ . Is this YouTube service an incarnation of Gaudi ?
Either way , it 's nice that it 's finally out there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is good news.
I've been looking at speech-to-text and audiomining for a while.
My goal was not captioning, but search, so in a long video or large set of videos, a user can quickly find snippets of video mentioning a word or phrase, and replay the found snippets.
I found a bunch of options but budget was always in issue.
Google Audio (Gaudi) was free (cool!
) but seemed like a dead-end project after the 2008 elections.
Blinx- spinoff from BBN focused on media companies.
$$$$$$.  Autonomy- enterprise search/monitoring company bought tech from Virage.
$$$$$$.  Virage- sold their tech to autonomy, then redeveloped it.
Coveo- audiomining software using Nuance SDK and Silverlight front end.
$$$$$ .
TVeyes- does a lot of real-time monitoring.
$$$$$.  Nexidia-  audiomining software uses their own phoneme tools.
$$$$$$.

Is this YouTube service an incarnation of Gaudi?
Either way, it's nice that it's finally out there.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379544</id>
	<title>"automatically generate the technology"</title>
	<author>Daniel Dvorkin</author>
	<datestamp>1267869180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/results?search\_query=buzzword+bingo&amp;search\_type=&amp;aq=2&amp;oq=buzzwor" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/results?search\_query=buzzword+bingo&amp;search\_type=&amp;aq=2&amp;oq=buzzwor</a> [youtube.com] seems appropriate here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.youtube.com/results ? search \ _query = buzzword + bingo&amp;search \ _type = &amp;aq = 2&amp;oq = buzzwor [ youtube.com ] seems appropriate here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.youtube.com/results?search\_query=buzzword+bingo&amp;search\_type=&amp;aq=2&amp;oq=buzzwor [youtube.com] seems appropriate here.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379670</id>
	<title>Oh goody.</title>
	<author>Pyrion</author>
	<datestamp>1267871820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just what we all needed: something dumber than user comments to read on YouTube.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just what we all needed : something dumber than user comments to read on YouTube .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just what we all needed: something dumber than user comments to read on YouTube.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31381858</id>
	<title>Re:As long as they don't use GVoice Tech.</title>
	<author>rockNme2349</author>
	<datestamp>1267902420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google Voice Voicemail Transcriptions! Now with <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mad\_Gab" title="wikipedia.org">Mad Gab</a> [wikipedia.org] embedded puzzles!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google Voice Voicemail Transcriptions !
Now with Mad Gab [ wikipedia.org ] embedded puzzles !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google Voice Voicemail Transcriptions!
Now with Mad Gab [wikipedia.org] embedded puzzles!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379076</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31381030</id>
	<title>Re:As long as they don't use GVoice Tech.</title>
	<author>crossmr</author>
	<datestamp>1267894080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>it doesn't matter. I just checked out a couple of high quality videos with a normal person speaking english without background noise..it was a jumbled mess of garbage. Another fine google production.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it does n't matter .
I just checked out a couple of high quality videos with a normal person speaking english without background noise..it was a jumbled mess of garbage .
Another fine google production .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it doesn't matter.
I just checked out a couple of high quality videos with a normal person speaking english without background noise..it was a jumbled mess of garbage.
Another fine google production.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379114</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379308</id>
	<title>Go to youtube RIGHT NOW for some laughs...for now</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267906080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm sure they will improve it dramatically in the coming months and years, but I have not laughed so hard in a while at some of the stuff it comes up with.  It's as funny as using a translator to translate a word into Korean and back again.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure they will improve it dramatically in the coming months and years , but I have not laughed so hard in a while at some of the stuff it comes up with .
It 's as funny as using a translator to translate a word into Korean and back again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure they will improve it dramatically in the coming months and years, but I have not laughed so hard in a while at some of the stuff it comes up with.
It's as funny as using a translator to translate a word into Korean and back again.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379734</id>
	<title>Re:Automatically generate the technology?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1267873320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I pay technology to generate engineers, you insensitive clod!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I pay technology to generate engineers , you insensitive clod !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I pay technology to generate engineers, you insensitive clod!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379118</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379366</id>
	<title>Dear Aunt,</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267907340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>let's set so double the killer delete select all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>let 's set so double the killer delete select all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>let's set so double the killer delete select all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379160</id>
	<title>Search?</title>
	<author>Spy Hunter</author>
	<datestamp>1267816920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I haven't seen any mention of search, which seems odd.  Google is adding captions to every YouTube video, and nobody is interested in whether you'll be able to search the captions or not?  Seems to me like it could be quite useful to search the captions of every video on YouTube.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have n't seen any mention of search , which seems odd .
Google is adding captions to every YouTube video , and nobody is interested in whether you 'll be able to search the captions or not ?
Seems to me like it could be quite useful to search the captions of every video on YouTube .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I haven't seen any mention of search, which seems odd.
Google is adding captions to every YouTube video, and nobody is interested in whether you'll be able to search the captions or not?
Seems to me like it could be quite useful to search the captions of every video on YouTube.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379084</id>
	<title>Not only that</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267815480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They also changed the way videos are sent to the browser, many flash video players are failing because of that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They also changed the way videos are sent to the browser , many flash video players are failing because of that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They also changed the way videos are sent to the browser, many flash video players are failing because of that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379704</id>
	<title>Re:As long as they don't use GVoice Tech.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267872600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Isn&rsquo;t that essentially what modem negotiation actually is? The two modems talking to each other, saying &ldquo;hello&rdquo; at length?</p><p>My goodness. It&rsquo;s alive, and it can understand V.34...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Isn    t that essentially what modem negotiation actually is ?
The two modems talking to each other , saying    hello    at length ? My goodness .
It    s alive , and it can understand V.34.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn’t that essentially what modem negotiation actually is?
The two modems talking to each other, saying “hello” at length?My goodness.
It’s alive, and it can understand V.34...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379264</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379150</id>
	<title>Interactive Transcripts vs. Captions</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267816800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm trying to understand the difference between an interactive transcript, as seen at protranscript.com, and a caption.  Why did Google go the embedded captioning route?  Isn't the goal to create searchable content? If so, captions don't seem to be the solution.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm trying to understand the difference between an interactive transcript , as seen at protranscript.com , and a caption .
Why did Google go the embedded captioning route ?
Is n't the goal to create searchable content ?
If so , captions do n't seem to be the solution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm trying to understand the difference between an interactive transcript, as seen at protranscript.com, and a caption.
Why did Google go the embedded captioning route?
Isn't the goal to create searchable content?
If so, captions don't seem to be the solution.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379764</id>
	<title>Re:Interactive Transcripts vs. Captions</title>
	<author>phantomfive</author>
	<datestamp>1267874100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Google has no problem searching it, they have the data. The problem will be for other bots searching youtube, and I can imagine reasons why Google would not want to make it easy for others to search their site.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google has no problem searching it , they have the data .
The problem will be for other bots searching youtube , and I can imagine reasons why Google would not want to make it easy for others to search their site .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google has no problem searching it, they have the data.
The problem will be for other bots searching youtube, and I can imagine reasons why Google would not want to make it easy for others to search their site.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31380788</id>
	<title>Good timing</title>
	<author>RealGrouchy</author>
	<datestamp>1267891440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is excellent timing; I clicked on the link to a video on the previous<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. story but my sound was not working. I thought, "man, I wish more videos were closed-captioned," not just for lazy people like me but also for the hearing impaired.</p><p>Finally it'll be easier for me to share these videos with my deaf and hard-of-hearing friends!</p><p>- RG&gt;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is excellent timing ; I clicked on the link to a video on the previous / .
story but my sound was not working .
I thought , " man , I wish more videos were closed-captioned , " not just for lazy people like me but also for the hearing impaired.Finally it 'll be easier for me to share these videos with my deaf and hard-of-hearing friends ! - RG &gt;</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is excellent timing; I clicked on the link to a video on the previous /.
story but my sound was not working.
I thought, "man, I wish more videos were closed-captioned," not just for lazy people like me but also for the hearing impaired.Finally it'll be easier for me to share these videos with my deaf and hard-of-hearing friends!- RG&gt;</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379306</id>
	<title>"Technology"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267906080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And the overused buzzword of the day is<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And the overused buzzword of the day is .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And the overused buzzword of the day is ...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379182</id>
	<title>Re:Automatically generate the technology?</title>
	<author>MichaelSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1267817280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can sell you a UML modeller which will do that. Just $100k per license. Believe me its cheap at the price. Let me demonstrate how you refactor the code. Just drag this little icon from <i>here</i> to <i>here</i> and the other little icons reorganise themselves around it. Buy this and you will never have to hire an engineer again!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can sell you a UML modeller which will do that .
Just $ 100k per license .
Believe me its cheap at the price .
Let me demonstrate how you refactor the code .
Just drag this little icon from here to here and the other little icons reorganise themselves around it .
Buy this and you will never have to hire an engineer again !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can sell you a UML modeller which will do that.
Just $100k per license.
Believe me its cheap at the price.
Let me demonstrate how you refactor the code.
Just drag this little icon from here to here and the other little icons reorganise themselves around it.
Buy this and you will never have to hire an engineer again!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379118</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379172</id>
	<title>All yore soup tittles Arnie belong two arse.</title>
	<author>idji</author>
	<datestamp>1267817100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext> Just imagine when they hook this up to Google translation and text2speech. You can choose your language for youtube audio.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just imagine when they hook this up to Google translation and text2speech .
You can choose your language for youtube audio .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Just imagine when they hook this up to Google translation and text2speech.
You can choose your language for youtube audio.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379120</id>
	<title>Technology, technology, baked beans and technology</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267816380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Have they got anything without technology in it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have they got anything without technology in it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have they got anything without technology in it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379596</id>
	<title>Re:CC this...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267870260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh! My! Non-existent-deity-of-choice!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh !
My ! Non-existent-deity-of-choice !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh!
My! Non-existent-deity-of-choice!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379156</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379772</id>
	<title>Let me guess, Youtube.ru</title>
	<author>santax</author>
	<datestamp>1267874280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>reads the caption and then produces the video?</htmltext>
<tokenext>reads the caption and then produces the video ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>reads the caption and then produces the video?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379328</id>
	<title>Re:As long as they don't use GVoice Tech.</title>
	<author>Joe Tie.</author>
	<datestamp>1267906560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wonder what accounts for the difference. I'd say in general most people who call me come out 99\% perfect on the transcripts. Except one friend, with a Texan accent, who usually is closer to 50\% accurate.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder what accounts for the difference .
I 'd say in general most people who call me come out 99 \ % perfect on the transcripts .
Except one friend , with a Texan accent , who usually is closer to 50 \ % accurate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder what accounts for the difference.
I'd say in general most people who call me come out 99\% perfect on the transcripts.
Except one friend, with a Texan accent, who usually is closer to 50\% accurate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379076</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31390114</id>
	<title>Re:Which?</title>
	<author>the\_lesser\_gatsby</author>
	<datestamp>1267979100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's simple - just google it and use the phrase which returns the most hits.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's simple - just google it and use the phrase which returns the most hits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's simple - just google it and use the phrase which returns the most hits.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379652</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379078</id>
	<title>The once and future Deaf accessible internet.</title>
	<author>flerchin</author>
	<datestamp>1267815420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Huzzah! Now if we can just get subtitling/captioning on Netflix streams, the net will be accessible to the Deaf again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Huzzah !
Now if we can just get subtitling/captioning on Netflix streams , the net will be accessible to the Deaf again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Huzzah!
Now if we can just get subtitling/captioning on Netflix streams, the net will be accessible to the Deaf again.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379264</id>
	<title>Re:As long as they don't use GVoice Tech.</title>
	<author>uncqual</author>
	<datestamp>1267818960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>My most intersting one:<blockquote><div><p> Hey  Hello  hello,  hi  bye  hello  hello.  Bye  bye  hey  hello,  test,  Hello  bye  hello.  Bye  hi  hello.  Bye,  hello  hey  hey  hello  hello  hello.  Bye  bye  hello.  Call  hey  bye  hello  hello  hello  hello  hello,  hey  bye  bye  bye  hello.  Bye  hello.  Bye  hello  hello.  Bye.  Hello  S  hello.  Bye  bye.  Hello.  Hello.  Yeah,  hello.  Bye  hello  hello  hello  hello,  hey,  hey,  yeah.</p></div>  </blockquote><p>
Some of the words <i>hello</i> and <i>bye</i> were dark, the rest were mostly light gray.
</p><p>
What, one may wonder, was the <i>actual</i> message? Well, it appeared to be someone trying to fax something - although, the tones didn't sound <i>quite</i> like FAX negotiation tones, but surely no one would be mis-dialing a modem number in this day and age.
</p><p>
I was intrigued by the limited vocabulary it produced here. Almost as if the most common words are these greeting words (hello, hey, hi) and sign off words (bye) and these words are so preferred that line noise ends up just being these top few words.
</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>My most intersting one : Hey Hello hello , hi bye hello hello .
Bye bye hey hello , test , Hello bye hello .
Bye hi hello .
Bye , hello hey hey hello hello hello .
Bye bye hello .
Call hey bye hello hello hello hello hello , hey bye bye bye hello .
Bye hello .
Bye hello hello .
Bye. Hello S hello .
Bye bye .
Hello. Hello .
Yeah , hello .
Bye hello hello hello hello , hey , hey , yeah .
Some of the words hello and bye were dark , the rest were mostly light gray .
What , one may wonder , was the actual message ?
Well , it appeared to be someone trying to fax something - although , the tones did n't sound quite like FAX negotiation tones , but surely no one would be mis-dialing a modem number in this day and age .
I was intrigued by the limited vocabulary it produced here .
Almost as if the most common words are these greeting words ( hello , hey , hi ) and sign off words ( bye ) and these words are so preferred that line noise ends up just being these top few words .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My most intersting one: Hey  Hello  hello,  hi  bye  hello  hello.
Bye  bye  hey  hello,  test,  Hello  bye  hello.
Bye  hi  hello.
Bye,  hello  hey  hey  hello  hello  hello.
Bye  bye  hello.
Call  hey  bye  hello  hello  hello  hello  hello,  hey  bye  bye  bye  hello.
Bye  hello.
Bye  hello  hello.
Bye.  Hello  S  hello.
Bye  bye.
Hello.  Hello.
Yeah,  hello.
Bye  hello  hello  hello  hello,  hey,  hey,  yeah.
Some of the words hello and bye were dark, the rest were mostly light gray.
What, one may wonder, was the actual message?
Well, it appeared to be someone trying to fax something - although, the tones didn't sound quite like FAX negotiation tones, but surely no one would be mis-dialing a modem number in this day and age.
I was intrigued by the limited vocabulary it produced here.
Almost as if the most common words are these greeting words (hello, hey, hi) and sign off words (bye) and these words are so preferred that line noise ends up just being these top few words.

	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379076</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379652</id>
	<title>Which?</title>
	<author>WGFCrafty</author>
	<datestamp>1267871340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Fish sticks <i>or</i> Fish dicks?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Fish sticks or Fish dicks ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fish sticks or Fish dicks?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379226</id>
	<title>Re:As long as they don't use GVoice Tech.</title>
	<author>TheJokeExplainer</author>
	<datestamp>1267818240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Parent is referring to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google\_Voice" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Google Voice's</a> [wikipedia.org] less-than-perfect voicemail transcription technology which often leads to <a href="http://gvscrewups.blogspot.com/" title="blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">odd or hilarious transcriptions</a> [blogspot.com].</htmltext>
<tokenext>Parent is referring to Google Voice 's [ wikipedia.org ] less-than-perfect voicemail transcription technology which often leads to odd or hilarious transcriptions [ blogspot.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Parent is referring to Google Voice's [wikipedia.org] less-than-perfect voicemail transcription technology which often leads to odd or hilarious transcriptions [blogspot.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379076</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_0227224_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31380492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379124
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_0227224_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379182
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379118
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_0227224_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31380054
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379264
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379076
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_0227224_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31380972
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379078
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_0227224_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379338
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379150
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_0227224_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379368
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379118
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_0227224_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379596
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379156
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_0227224_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31384676
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379448
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_0227224_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31381858
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379076
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_0227224_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379118
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_0227224_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31381098
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379076
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_0227224_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379150
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_0227224_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31390114
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379652
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_0227224_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379704
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379264
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379076
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_0227224_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379226
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379076
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_0227224_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31381494
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379076
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_0227224_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379124
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_0227224_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31381030
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379114
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379076
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_06_0227224.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379448
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31384676
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_06_0227224.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379124
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379988
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31380492
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_06_0227224.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31380216
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_06_0227224.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379076
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379226
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31381858
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379328
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31381098
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31381494
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379264
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379704
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31380054
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379114
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31381030
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_06_0227224.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379084
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_06_0227224.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379772
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_06_0227224.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31381088
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_06_0227224.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379308
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_06_0227224.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31380810
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_06_0227224.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379150
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379764
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379338
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_06_0227224.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379284
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_06_0227224.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379078
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31380972
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_06_0227224.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379652
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31390114
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_06_0227224.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379160
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_06_0227224.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379156
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379596
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_06_0227224.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379118
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379368
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379182
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_0227224.31379734
</commentlist>
</conversation>
