<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_06_1533254</id>
	<title>The Evolution of Reading In the Digital Age</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1267892820000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Doofus writes <i>"'Print is dying. Digital is surging. Everyone is confused.' is the subtitle of Craig Mod's thoughtful  <a href="http://craigmod.com/journal/ipad\_and\_books/">discussion aboutthe evolution of reading material</a> from printed dead-tree to flowing digital content.  I stumbled upon his blog post from a related NYTimes article, <a href="http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/05/a-former-book-designer-says-good-riddance-to-print/?hpw">Former Book Designer Says Good Riddance to Print</a>.  He breaks reading material down into two basic categories: 'Formless,' in which the content and meaning of the writing has no dependency on presentation, and 'Definite,' in which layout and presentation play a role in conveying meaning.  Mod makes the point that as digital presentation improves, devices such as the iPad will bring authors newer and improved platforms upon which to display Definite content.  Despite this, he says, some works will be better consumed in physical print because 'They're books that embrace their physicality or have stood the test of time. They're the kinds of books the iPad can't displace because they're complete objects.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Doofus writes " 'Print is dying .
Digital is surging .
Everyone is confused .
' is the subtitle of Craig Mod 's thoughtful discussion aboutthe evolution of reading material from printed dead-tree to flowing digital content .
I stumbled upon his blog post from a related NYTimes article , Former Book Designer Says Good Riddance to Print .
He breaks reading material down into two basic categories : 'Formless, ' in which the content and meaning of the writing has no dependency on presentation , and 'Definite, ' in which layout and presentation play a role in conveying meaning .
Mod makes the point that as digital presentation improves , devices such as the iPad will bring authors newer and improved platforms upon which to display Definite content .
Despite this , he says , some works will be better consumed in physical print because 'They 're books that embrace their physicality or have stood the test of time .
They 're the kinds of books the iPad ca n't displace because they 're complete objects .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doofus writes "'Print is dying.
Digital is surging.
Everyone is confused.
' is the subtitle of Craig Mod's thoughtful  discussion aboutthe evolution of reading material from printed dead-tree to flowing digital content.
I stumbled upon his blog post from a related NYTimes article, Former Book Designer Says Good Riddance to Print.
He breaks reading material down into two basic categories: 'Formless,' in which the content and meaning of the writing has no dependency on presentation, and 'Definite,' in which layout and presentation play a role in conveying meaning.
Mod makes the point that as digital presentation improves, devices such as the iPad will bring authors newer and improved platforms upon which to display Definite content.
Despite this, he says, some works will be better consumed in physical print because 'They're books that embrace their physicality or have stood the test of time.
They're the kinds of books the iPad can't displace because they're complete objects.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381848</id>
	<title>Re:battery life</title>
	<author>viralburn</author>
	<datestamp>1267902300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How about a usb solar charger ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How about a usb solar charger ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about a usb solar charger ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381288</id>
	<title>Problems....</title>
	<author>Darkness404</author>
	<datestamp>1267896960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The main problems with e-readers is A) books are expensive B) there are no libraries. How many people actually -buy- all the books they read? Yes, occasionally there is the odd book where the waiting list in the library would give me a copy sometime in the next decade and I will buy a book. Or the odd book on sale at Barnes and Nobel for $3 that is a hardback, and occasionally I wish to annotate a classic work of literature so I will buy it, but for the rest, I just go to a library. As for newspapers, I generally don't read any. I don't see the point. Any community event traditionally advertised in the local paper is easily found via Facebook or Twitter. National or international news is best found online where you can see all sides of the story rather than the one or two expressed via print media. It allows for more specialized interest stories, good luck finding a newspaper with coverage as complete as even Endgadget. Newspapers also rarely follow up stories or allow for user feedback except for some cherry picked editorials. <br> <br>

In short, E-Readers aren't going to replace print media when it comes to literature and print is already dead for most people under 40 for news.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The main problems with e-readers is A ) books are expensive B ) there are no libraries .
How many people actually -buy- all the books they read ?
Yes , occasionally there is the odd book where the waiting list in the library would give me a copy sometime in the next decade and I will buy a book .
Or the odd book on sale at Barnes and Nobel for $ 3 that is a hardback , and occasionally I wish to annotate a classic work of literature so I will buy it , but for the rest , I just go to a library .
As for newspapers , I generally do n't read any .
I do n't see the point .
Any community event traditionally advertised in the local paper is easily found via Facebook or Twitter .
National or international news is best found online where you can see all sides of the story rather than the one or two expressed via print media .
It allows for more specialized interest stories , good luck finding a newspaper with coverage as complete as even Endgadget .
Newspapers also rarely follow up stories or allow for user feedback except for some cherry picked editorials .
In short , E-Readers are n't going to replace print media when it comes to literature and print is already dead for most people under 40 for news .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The main problems with e-readers is A) books are expensive B) there are no libraries.
How many people actually -buy- all the books they read?
Yes, occasionally there is the odd book where the waiting list in the library would give me a copy sometime in the next decade and I will buy a book.
Or the odd book on sale at Barnes and Nobel for $3 that is a hardback, and occasionally I wish to annotate a classic work of literature so I will buy it, but for the rest, I just go to a library.
As for newspapers, I generally don't read any.
I don't see the point.
Any community event traditionally advertised in the local paper is easily found via Facebook or Twitter.
National or international news is best found online where you can see all sides of the story rather than the one or two expressed via print media.
It allows for more specialized interest stories, good luck finding a newspaper with coverage as complete as even Endgadget.
Newspapers also rarely follow up stories or allow for user feedback except for some cherry picked editorials.
In short, E-Readers aren't going to replace print media when it comes to literature and print is already dead for most people under 40 for news.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31399426</id>
	<title>Re:Problems....</title>
	<author>tehcyder</author>
	<datestamp>1268054940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> National or international news is best found online where you can see all sides of the story rather than the one or two expressed via print media.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
In my opinion, you get a much more balanced view of the world's news by reading all/most of a quality newspaper each day rather than hopping about between a dozen different web sites.
<br>
Even if you're just skimming a lot of the articles, you get to see a much wider selection of news, not just the usual headline-grabbing stuff.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>National or international news is best found online where you can see all sides of the story rather than the one or two expressed via print media .
In my opinion , you get a much more balanced view of the world 's news by reading all/most of a quality newspaper each day rather than hopping about between a dozen different web sites .
Even if you 're just skimming a lot of the articles , you get to see a much wider selection of news , not just the usual headline-grabbing stuff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> National or international news is best found online where you can see all sides of the story rather than the one or two expressed via print media.
In my opinion, you get a much more balanced view of the world's news by reading all/most of a quality newspaper each day rather than hopping about between a dozen different web sites.
Even if you're just skimming a lot of the articles, you get to see a much wider selection of news, not just the usual headline-grabbing stuff.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31383632</id>
	<title>Re:Ahh.</title>
	<author>Phoobarnvaz</author>
	<datestamp>1267871220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Too bad Playboy &amp; other men's magazines never developed the pop-up or scratch-n-sniff.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Too bad Playboy &amp; other men 's magazines never developed the pop-up or scratch-n-sniff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Too bad Playboy &amp; other men's magazines never developed the pop-up or scratch-n-sniff.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381824</id>
	<title>Re:iPad's Killer App</title>
	<author>ceoyoyo</author>
	<datestamp>1267902060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Textbooks.  They must have diagrams and a lot of them also require colour.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Textbooks .
They must have diagrams and a lot of them also require colour .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Textbooks.
They must have diagrams and a lot of them also require colour.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381360</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31382370</id>
	<title>Re:Problems....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267906320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ah, hate to wake you up, but that already exists in most libraries that lend ebooks.</p><p>Most of the use Adobe Digital Editions, and the OverDrive servers, which assures that the library lends only as many copies as they have paid for, and ebooks are "returned" automatically at the end of the lend period.</p><p>Ebook readers already enforce the rules, and you can also read on your computer.  Usually this all costs the reader zero money.</p><p>You have re-invented what is already in common usage all across north america.<br><a href="http://www.adobe.com/products/digitaleditions/" title="adobe.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.adobe.com/products/digitaleditions/</a> [adobe.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ah , hate to wake you up , but that already exists in most libraries that lend ebooks.Most of the use Adobe Digital Editions , and the OverDrive servers , which assures that the library lends only as many copies as they have paid for , and ebooks are " returned " automatically at the end of the lend period.Ebook readers already enforce the rules , and you can also read on your computer .
Usually this all costs the reader zero money.You have re-invented what is already in common usage all across north america.http : //www.adobe.com/products/digitaleditions/ [ adobe.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ah, hate to wake you up, but that already exists in most libraries that lend ebooks.Most of the use Adobe Digital Editions, and the OverDrive servers, which assures that the library lends only as many copies as they have paid for, and ebooks are "returned" automatically at the end of the lend period.Ebook readers already enforce the rules, and you can also read on your computer.
Usually this all costs the reader zero money.You have re-invented what is already in common usage all across north america.http://www.adobe.com/products/digitaleditions/ [adobe.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381526</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31382182</id>
	<title>Re:iPad's Killer App</title>
	<author>itsdapead</author>
	<datestamp>1267905120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Think about <i>A Young Lady's Illustrated Primer</i>
</p></div><p>Interesting example in this context, given that, in <i>The Diamond Age</i>:
</p><ul>
<li>the Primer relied on human actors to provide the interaction (Outsourcing FTW!).</li>
<li>the Primer was designed to be a unique, one-off physical object, in a world where nanotech replicators were the norm.</li>
</ul><p>So, not your Kindle or iPad (unless Steve has some manufacturing problems he's not letting on about).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Think about A Young Lady 's Illustrated Primer Interesting example in this context , given that , in The Diamond Age : the Primer relied on human actors to provide the interaction ( Outsourcing FTW ! ) .
the Primer was designed to be a unique , one-off physical object , in a world where nanotech replicators were the norm .
So , not your Kindle or iPad ( unless Steve has some manufacturing problems he 's not letting on about ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Think about A Young Lady's Illustrated Primer
Interesting example in this context, given that, in The Diamond Age:

the Primer relied on human actors to provide the interaction (Outsourcing FTW!).
the Primer was designed to be a unique, one-off physical object, in a world where nanotech replicators were the norm.
So, not your Kindle or iPad (unless Steve has some manufacturing problems he's not letting on about).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381360</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381478</id>
	<title>There's a bigger shift at hand</title>
	<author>ErichTheRed</author>
	<datestamp>1267898580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Although the format change is a big part of this, the real change afoot is the amount of effort it takes to publish something. In the past, with the exception of self-publishing, the only way to get your work out there was to pitch your idea to a book publisher, who would then decide what was and was not print-worthy. Today, I can go to blogspot.com, sign up for an account, and spout off about anything I want, making it accessible for the world to see.</p><p>That means big changes for the publishing business. I'm actually not thrilled about paper books going away; it's not easy for me to read a sceen, even a Kindle screen, for hours on end. But the publishers and bookstores are really terrified. I could defintiely see Barnes and Noble or Borders turning into something like a coffeehouse/social club, marketing e-books and e-media, and still making money off of ancillary stuff. Problem is that you can't support thousands of places like that. Time, Random House, McGraw-Hill and all those guys in New York are probably shaking in their boots. Eventually, they're going to have to find a way to make money on something that's easy to disseminate and hard to resell. It's similar to the music industry...they've been on the same talent search --&gt; contract --&gt; album --&gt; hit song(s) --&gt; concert revenue --&gt; album business cycle forever. Now publishing has to switch to something else from talent search --&gt; contract --&gt; book --&gt; sales revenue --&gt; book.</p><p>It's also going to be extremely difficult to make a living writing material. I really love to write, but I know it's not a sustainable career. Those of us with the itch to write have had magazines to submit articles to, but even that might dry up. The worst change IMO is going to be journalism. Instead of a newspaper of record, we're going to have thousands of bloggers, all with their own agenda, Twittering and blogging all over the Web about current events. I really think investigative journalism is going to go downhill, which is bad. You need to pay reporters to go out and spend the time digging up actual facts, not posting opinions. That's how we get the conspiracy theorists sneaking into the mainstream with things like Obama's citizenship being questioned.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Although the format change is a big part of this , the real change afoot is the amount of effort it takes to publish something .
In the past , with the exception of self-publishing , the only way to get your work out there was to pitch your idea to a book publisher , who would then decide what was and was not print-worthy .
Today , I can go to blogspot.com , sign up for an account , and spout off about anything I want , making it accessible for the world to see.That means big changes for the publishing business .
I 'm actually not thrilled about paper books going away ; it 's not easy for me to read a sceen , even a Kindle screen , for hours on end .
But the publishers and bookstores are really terrified .
I could defintiely see Barnes and Noble or Borders turning into something like a coffeehouse/social club , marketing e-books and e-media , and still making money off of ancillary stuff .
Problem is that you ca n't support thousands of places like that .
Time , Random House , McGraw-Hill and all those guys in New York are probably shaking in their boots .
Eventually , they 're going to have to find a way to make money on something that 's easy to disseminate and hard to resell .
It 's similar to the music industry...they 've been on the same talent search -- &gt; contract -- &gt; album -- &gt; hit song ( s ) -- &gt; concert revenue -- &gt; album business cycle forever .
Now publishing has to switch to something else from talent search -- &gt; contract -- &gt; book -- &gt; sales revenue -- &gt; book.It 's also going to be extremely difficult to make a living writing material .
I really love to write , but I know it 's not a sustainable career .
Those of us with the itch to write have had magazines to submit articles to , but even that might dry up .
The worst change IMO is going to be journalism .
Instead of a newspaper of record , we 're going to have thousands of bloggers , all with their own agenda , Twittering and blogging all over the Web about current events .
I really think investigative journalism is going to go downhill , which is bad .
You need to pay reporters to go out and spend the time digging up actual facts , not posting opinions .
That 's how we get the conspiracy theorists sneaking into the mainstream with things like Obama 's citizenship being questioned .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Although the format change is a big part of this, the real change afoot is the amount of effort it takes to publish something.
In the past, with the exception of self-publishing, the only way to get your work out there was to pitch your idea to a book publisher, who would then decide what was and was not print-worthy.
Today, I can go to blogspot.com, sign up for an account, and spout off about anything I want, making it accessible for the world to see.That means big changes for the publishing business.
I'm actually not thrilled about paper books going away; it's not easy for me to read a sceen, even a Kindle screen, for hours on end.
But the publishers and bookstores are really terrified.
I could defintiely see Barnes and Noble or Borders turning into something like a coffeehouse/social club, marketing e-books and e-media, and still making money off of ancillary stuff.
Problem is that you can't support thousands of places like that.
Time, Random House, McGraw-Hill and all those guys in New York are probably shaking in their boots.
Eventually, they're going to have to find a way to make money on something that's easy to disseminate and hard to resell.
It's similar to the music industry...they've been on the same talent search --&gt; contract --&gt; album --&gt; hit song(s) --&gt; concert revenue --&gt; album business cycle forever.
Now publishing has to switch to something else from talent search --&gt; contract --&gt; book --&gt; sales revenue --&gt; book.It's also going to be extremely difficult to make a living writing material.
I really love to write, but I know it's not a sustainable career.
Those of us with the itch to write have had magazines to submit articles to, but even that might dry up.
The worst change IMO is going to be journalism.
Instead of a newspaper of record, we're going to have thousands of bloggers, all with their own agenda, Twittering and blogging all over the Web about current events.
I really think investigative journalism is going to go downhill, which is bad.
You need to pay reporters to go out and spend the time digging up actual facts, not posting opinions.
That's how we get the conspiracy theorists sneaking into the mainstream with things like Obama's citizenship being questioned.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31386822</id>
	<title>Re:iPad's Killer App</title>
	<author>c++0xFF</author>
	<datestamp>1267900860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Electronic books are probably one of the iPad's killer apps.  Maybe not the ones we'll see immediately -- the ones basically just ported from the Kindle or something -- but the next generation of books, or the ones after that.  Interacting with the book is where the technology will really shine.  Think about <i>A Young Lady's Illustrated Primer</i> (from <a href="http://search.barnesandnoble.com/The-Diamond-Age/Neal-Stephenson/e/9780553380965/?itm=2&amp;USRI=diamond+age" title="barnesandnoble.com" rel="nofollow">The Diamond Age</a> [barnesandnoble.com]).</p></div><p>Books as a killer app?  I don't think that'll be quite enough.  Remember that the killer app for the iPod was not the music, but the store to access that music at a reasonable price.</p><p>Likewise, the killer app for the iPad has to be much more than just the books, no matter how you dress them up.</p><p>Unfortunately for Apple, electronic book stores already exist.  And they haven't shown too much promise (yet?).  There's no need for an equivalent to iTunes, either (organizing a bookshelf isn't nearly as difficult as a music library).</p><p>So, what else can be offered by the iPad?  Color?  Not good enough.</p><p>So, like you said, maybe interactive books: a touch screen opens some opportunities there.  But even here I'm skeptical: interactive content is one of the most difficult products to make well.  And it's not the sort of thing that Apple can control.</p><p>Textbooks, however, might be the key.  Here is where an eReader can provide many advantages, even without providing anything more than a basic book.  Searching and note-taking, to name a few<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... and so, so much more portable.  Even at a lower price the publisher makes more money.  If it's done right, every student <i>will</i> have one.  I would have bought one, for sure (and that's saying something!).</p><p>The key, though, is the target demographic.  Remember that, at least to general perception, Apple targets the young and hip (or at least those that want to appear young and hip).  Literature (in general) has the perception of appealing to the old and intellectual.</p><p>Even then, I don't think we've seen what the killer app could be for the iPad or any other eReader.  Maybe that's why there's so many skeptics of the lastest Apple product -- and maybe they have a point this time.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Electronic books are probably one of the iPad 's killer apps .
Maybe not the ones we 'll see immediately -- the ones basically just ported from the Kindle or something -- but the next generation of books , or the ones after that .
Interacting with the book is where the technology will really shine .
Think about A Young Lady 's Illustrated Primer ( from The Diamond Age [ barnesandnoble.com ] ) .Books as a killer app ?
I do n't think that 'll be quite enough .
Remember that the killer app for the iPod was not the music , but the store to access that music at a reasonable price.Likewise , the killer app for the iPad has to be much more than just the books , no matter how you dress them up.Unfortunately for Apple , electronic book stores already exist .
And they have n't shown too much promise ( yet ? ) .
There 's no need for an equivalent to iTunes , either ( organizing a bookshelf is n't nearly as difficult as a music library ) .So , what else can be offered by the iPad ?
Color ? Not good enough.So , like you said , maybe interactive books : a touch screen opens some opportunities there .
But even here I 'm skeptical : interactive content is one of the most difficult products to make well .
And it 's not the sort of thing that Apple can control.Textbooks , however , might be the key .
Here is where an eReader can provide many advantages , even without providing anything more than a basic book .
Searching and note-taking , to name a few ... and so , so much more portable .
Even at a lower price the publisher makes more money .
If it 's done right , every student will have one .
I would have bought one , for sure ( and that 's saying something !
) .The key , though , is the target demographic .
Remember that , at least to general perception , Apple targets the young and hip ( or at least those that want to appear young and hip ) .
Literature ( in general ) has the perception of appealing to the old and intellectual.Even then , I do n't think we 've seen what the killer app could be for the iPad or any other eReader .
Maybe that 's why there 's so many skeptics of the lastest Apple product -- and maybe they have a point this time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Electronic books are probably one of the iPad's killer apps.
Maybe not the ones we'll see immediately -- the ones basically just ported from the Kindle or something -- but the next generation of books, or the ones after that.
Interacting with the book is where the technology will really shine.
Think about A Young Lady's Illustrated Primer (from The Diamond Age [barnesandnoble.com]).Books as a killer app?
I don't think that'll be quite enough.
Remember that the killer app for the iPod was not the music, but the store to access that music at a reasonable price.Likewise, the killer app for the iPad has to be much more than just the books, no matter how you dress them up.Unfortunately for Apple, electronic book stores already exist.
And they haven't shown too much promise (yet?).
There's no need for an equivalent to iTunes, either (organizing a bookshelf isn't nearly as difficult as a music library).So, what else can be offered by the iPad?
Color?  Not good enough.So, like you said, maybe interactive books: a touch screen opens some opportunities there.
But even here I'm skeptical: interactive content is one of the most difficult products to make well.
And it's not the sort of thing that Apple can control.Textbooks, however, might be the key.
Here is where an eReader can provide many advantages, even without providing anything more than a basic book.
Searching and note-taking, to name a few ... and so, so much more portable.
Even at a lower price the publisher makes more money.
If it's done right, every student will have one.
I would have bought one, for sure (and that's saying something!
).The key, though, is the target demographic.
Remember that, at least to general perception, Apple targets the young and hip (or at least those that want to appear young and hip).
Literature (in general) has the perception of appealing to the old and intellectual.Even then, I don't think we've seen what the killer app could be for the iPad or any other eReader.
Maybe that's why there's so many skeptics of the lastest Apple product -- and maybe they have a point this time.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381360</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381292</id>
	<title>Can't displace?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267897020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"'They're books that embrace their physicality or have stood the test of time. They're the kinds of books the iPad can't displace because they're complete objects.'"</p><p>Depends on how cheap e-book readers become, doesn't it?  iPad, now, he's right.</p><p>But I've sometimes bought books that cost $100.  While a single-purpose/publication e-book reader would be ridiculously extravagant right now, I'm not confident that will always be the case.  If cost came down sufficiently maybe I could end up stacking my e-books on the shelf beside the paper ones.  "Buy the book and get a free, reusable e-book reader" isn't *that* far off, I think.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" 'They 're books that embrace their physicality or have stood the test of time .
They 're the kinds of books the iPad ca n't displace because they 're complete objects .
' " Depends on how cheap e-book readers become , does n't it ?
iPad , now , he 's right.But I 've sometimes bought books that cost $ 100 .
While a single-purpose/publication e-book reader would be ridiculously extravagant right now , I 'm not confident that will always be the case .
If cost came down sufficiently maybe I could end up stacking my e-books on the shelf beside the paper ones .
" Buy the book and get a free , reusable e-book reader " is n't * that * far off , I think .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"'They're books that embrace their physicality or have stood the test of time.
They're the kinds of books the iPad can't displace because they're complete objects.
'"Depends on how cheap e-book readers become, doesn't it?
iPad, now, he's right.But I've sometimes bought books that cost $100.
While a single-purpose/publication e-book reader would be ridiculously extravagant right now, I'm not confident that will always be the case.
If cost came down sufficiently maybe I could end up stacking my e-books on the shelf beside the paper ones.
"Buy the book and get a free, reusable e-book reader" isn't *that* far off, I think.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381884</id>
	<title>Re:iPad</title>
	<author>godrik</author>
	<datestamp>1267902660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>but, but, it is from APPLE!!!!<br>*faints*</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>but , but , it is from APPLE ! ! ! !
* faints *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but, but, it is from APPLE!!!!
*faints*</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381406</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381870</id>
	<title>Re:embrace their physicality?</title>
	<author>jenik</author>
	<datestamp>1267902540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Proper typography, book design, binding, nice paper, interesting format, etc. can make a book into a work of art. Unfortunately most books produced these days are anything but that. For a good example of great book design look at Robert Bringhurst's <em>The Elements of Typographic Style</em> or Edward Tufte's books. I doubt their electronic versions would be anywhere as beautiful.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Proper typography , book design , binding , nice paper , interesting format , etc .
can make a book into a work of art .
Unfortunately most books produced these days are anything but that .
For a good example of great book design look at Robert Bringhurst 's The Elements of Typographic Style or Edward Tufte 's books .
I doubt their electronic versions would be anywhere as beautiful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Proper typography, book design, binding, nice paper, interesting format, etc.
can make a book into a work of art.
Unfortunately most books produced these days are anything but that.
For a good example of great book design look at Robert Bringhurst's The Elements of Typographic Style or Edward Tufte's books.
I doubt their electronic versions would be anywhere as beautiful.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31382746</id>
	<title>We're all different!</title>
	<author>Quiet\_Desperation</author>
	<datestamp>1267908480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Crowd: YES! Everyone is confused!</p><p>Me: (raises hand) I'm not.</p><p>Crowd: SSHHHH!</p><p><div class="quote"><p> 'Definite,' in which layout and presentation play a role in conveying meaning.</p></div><p>But... wait... I thought the CSS purists said we're supposed to separate layout and content and spew semantics all over the place?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Crowd : YES !
Everyone is confused ! Me : ( raises hand ) I 'm not.Crowd : SSHHHH !
'Definite, ' in which layout and presentation play a role in conveying meaning.But... wait... I thought the CSS purists said we 're supposed to separate layout and content and spew semantics all over the place ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Crowd: YES!
Everyone is confused!Me: (raises hand) I'm not.Crowd: SSHHHH!
'Definite,' in which layout and presentation play a role in conveying meaning.But... wait... I thought the CSS purists said we're supposed to separate layout and content and spew semantics all over the place?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381346</id>
	<title>Mod points</title>
	<author>ndogg</author>
	<datestamp>1267897500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><em> Mod makes the point...</em></p><p>Well, what kind of point?  Insightful? Funny? Interesting?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mod makes the point...Well , what kind of point ?
Insightful ? Funny ?
Interesting ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Mod makes the point...Well, what kind of point?
Insightful? Funny?
Interesting?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381372</id>
	<title>embrace their physicality?</title>
	<author>derGoldstein</author>
	<datestamp>1267897740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>'They're books that embrace their physicality or have stood the test of time. They're the kinds of books the iPad can't displace because they're complete objects'</p></div><p>
A) Leave the iPad out of this. We're talking about consuming text which isn't printed on paper, and we've been doing that since even before the *gasp* kindle.<br>
B) Is this some kind of metaphysical crap? <i>"they're complete objects"</i>? WTF does that mean? I've been reading Descartes' <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/59" title="gutenberg.org">Discourse on the Method</a> [gutenberg.org] off the screen of a netbook. Does this mean that somehow the information that I've consumed isn't "real enough"? If I printed that out on paper, read it, and then burned the paper, would that have made the content "embrace its physicality"?<br> <br>

Either I'm missing something, or this is a serious case of "get off my lawn".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>'They 're books that embrace their physicality or have stood the test of time .
They 're the kinds of books the iPad ca n't displace because they 're complete objects ' A ) Leave the iPad out of this .
We 're talking about consuming text which is n't printed on paper , and we 've been doing that since even before the * gasp * kindle .
B ) Is this some kind of metaphysical crap ?
" they 're complete objects " ?
WTF does that mean ?
I 've been reading Descartes ' Discourse on the Method [ gutenberg.org ] off the screen of a netbook .
Does this mean that somehow the information that I 've consumed is n't " real enough " ?
If I printed that out on paper , read it , and then burned the paper , would that have made the content " embrace its physicality " ?
Either I 'm missing something , or this is a serious case of " get off my lawn " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'They're books that embrace their physicality or have stood the test of time.
They're the kinds of books the iPad can't displace because they're complete objects'
A) Leave the iPad out of this.
We're talking about consuming text which isn't printed on paper, and we've been doing that since even before the *gasp* kindle.
B) Is this some kind of metaphysical crap?
"they're complete objects"?
WTF does that mean?
I've been reading Descartes' Discourse on the Method [gutenberg.org] off the screen of a netbook.
Does this mean that somehow the information that I've consumed isn't "real enough"?
If I printed that out on paper, read it, and then burned the paper, would that have made the content "embrace its physicality"?
Either I'm missing something, or this is a serious case of "get off my lawn".
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381408</id>
	<title>Re:Not yet</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267898100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How exactly is theft a real consideration for ebook readers over print media? I suggest you consider other reasons for their failure to overtake print media, like the <i> egregiously expensive readers and books, as well as the limited selection of books</i>. More books are being offered as ebooks every day but there are still some that are not available in digital format yet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How exactly is theft a real consideration for ebook readers over print media ?
I suggest you consider other reasons for their failure to overtake print media , like the egregiously expensive readers and books , as well as the limited selection of books .
More books are being offered as ebooks every day but there are still some that are not available in digital format yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How exactly is theft a real consideration for ebook readers over print media?
I suggest you consider other reasons for their failure to overtake print media, like the  egregiously expensive readers and books, as well as the limited selection of books.
More books are being offered as ebooks every day but there are still some that are not available in digital format yet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381342</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381654</id>
	<title>Re:iPad</title>
	<author>derGoldstein</author>
	<datestamp>1267900500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's just SEO. Also, this article wouldn't have been slashdotted if it didn't heavily feature the iPad (or at the very least, it would have had a lower chance). The iPad is what people are looking to read about right now, so why not adjust the article you were writing (possibly with e-ink readers in mind) to include it -- surely you'll only attract more attention.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's just SEO .
Also , this article would n't have been slashdotted if it did n't heavily feature the iPad ( or at the very least , it would have had a lower chance ) .
The iPad is what people are looking to read about right now , so why not adjust the article you were writing ( possibly with e-ink readers in mind ) to include it -- surely you 'll only attract more attention .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's just SEO.
Also, this article wouldn't have been slashdotted if it didn't heavily feature the iPad (or at the very least, it would have had a lower chance).
The iPad is what people are looking to read about right now, so why not adjust the article you were writing (possibly with e-ink readers in mind) to include it -- surely you'll only attract more attention.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381406</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31397738</id>
	<title>Re:Ahh. e-books marketplace</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267988220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Like pop-up books. Or scratch-n-sniff.</p></div><p>The ClickBank Marketplace is an organized directory of over 30,000 products supplied by vendors and listed<br>in order of popularity across a number of categories.The Marketplace listings are ranked by popularity, so you can see which are the in-demand items. Popularity<br>is determined by a number of factors, the main being the amount of sales and the number of affiliates making<br>sales over the last 8 weeks. Note therefore that a product at the low end may still turn out to be popular<br>especially if it is new. More detail on<br>http://jackiss.marketplace.hop.clickbank.net</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Like pop-up books .
Or scratch-n-sniff.The ClickBank Marketplace is an organized directory of over 30,000 products supplied by vendors and listedin order of popularity across a number of categories.The Marketplace listings are ranked by popularity , so you can see which are the in-demand items .
Popularityis determined by a number of factors , the main being the amount of sales and the number of affiliates makingsales over the last 8 weeks .
Note therefore that a product at the low end may still turn out to be popularespecially if it is new .
More detail onhttp : //jackiss.marketplace.hop.clickbank.net</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like pop-up books.
Or scratch-n-sniff.The ClickBank Marketplace is an organized directory of over 30,000 products supplied by vendors and listedin order of popularity across a number of categories.The Marketplace listings are ranked by popularity, so you can see which are the in-demand items.
Popularityis determined by a number of factors, the main being the amount of sales and the number of affiliates makingsales over the last 8 weeks.
Note therefore that a product at the low end may still turn out to be popularespecially if it is new.
More detail onhttp://jackiss.marketplace.hop.clickbank.net
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381398</id>
	<title>Content vs. Presentation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267897980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sometimes content includes presentation, but not always content needs it. Most books in particular, as flow of words, of ideas, not of something physical, should be independent of presentation, so any way to transmit it, comfortably enogh for the receiver, should be equivalent, so either  audio, reading in a cellphone, pdf, computer montior, printed book or wallscreen should be more or less the same.<br><br>There are some special books that pushes the possibilities of that media, that does some trick with the material, the pagination, what you should see at once in that physical form, etc. But for most of them don't matter that much how you "read" them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sometimes content includes presentation , but not always content needs it .
Most books in particular , as flow of words , of ideas , not of something physical , should be independent of presentation , so any way to transmit it , comfortably enogh for the receiver , should be equivalent , so either audio , reading in a cellphone , pdf , computer montior , printed book or wallscreen should be more or less the same.There are some special books that pushes the possibilities of that media , that does some trick with the material , the pagination , what you should see at once in that physical form , etc .
But for most of them do n't matter that much how you " read " them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sometimes content includes presentation, but not always content needs it.
Most books in particular, as flow of words, of ideas, not of something physical, should be independent of presentation, so any way to transmit it, comfortably enogh for the receiver, should be equivalent, so either  audio, reading in a cellphone, pdf, computer montior, printed book or wallscreen should be more or less the same.There are some special books that pushes the possibilities of that media, that does some trick with the material, the pagination, what you should see at once in that physical form, etc.
But for most of them don't matter that much how you "read" them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381574</id>
	<title>Re:iPad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267899420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While it is a distinct possibility, I think it's more likely that it's just cult of Mac.</p><p>That is, until Apple does it, it is irrelevant and unimportant. It's born of the fact that Apple is a major brand that commands control of what's "hip" and "cool" so anything they do is a hot topic that needs to be discussed at every opportunity [to prove how cool and with-the-times you are]. Ironically, this will usually involve talking about how great Apple's products are and how nothing like it existed before &mdash; Reality Distortion Field [Willful Ignorance] FTW.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While it is a distinct possibility , I think it 's more likely that it 's just cult of Mac.That is , until Apple does it , it is irrelevant and unimportant .
It 's born of the fact that Apple is a major brand that commands control of what 's " hip " and " cool " so anything they do is a hot topic that needs to be discussed at every opportunity [ to prove how cool and with-the-times you are ] .
Ironically , this will usually involve talking about how great Apple 's products are and how nothing like it existed before    Reality Distortion Field [ Willful Ignorance ] FTW .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While it is a distinct possibility, I think it's more likely that it's just cult of Mac.That is, until Apple does it, it is irrelevant and unimportant.
It's born of the fact that Apple is a major brand that commands control of what's "hip" and "cool" so anything they do is a hot topic that needs to be discussed at every opportunity [to prove how cool and with-the-times you are].
Ironically, this will usually involve talking about how great Apple's products are and how nothing like it existed before — Reality Distortion Field [Willful Ignorance] FTW.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381406</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31383024</id>
	<title>The ID10T only knows about the iPad?</title>
	<author>Paracelcus</author>
	<datestamp>1267867020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And not the other (AT LEAST) 33 other, much better (IMHO) ebook readers!</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison\_of\_e-book\_readers" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison\_of\_e-book\_readers</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>I have the Astak EZReader Pocket Pro and the<br>Ectaco JetBook Lite<br>And I've been collecting ebooks from various sources in many formats for at least fifteen years.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And not the other ( AT LEAST ) 33 other , much better ( IMHO ) ebook readers ! http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison \ _of \ _e-book \ _readers [ wikipedia.org ] I have the Astak EZReader Pocket Pro and theEctaco JetBook LiteAnd I 've been collecting ebooks from various sources in many formats for at least fifteen years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And not the other (AT LEAST) 33 other, much better (IMHO) ebook readers!http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison\_of\_e-book\_readers [wikipedia.org]I have the Astak EZReader Pocket Pro and theEctaco JetBook LiteAnd I've been collecting ebooks from various sources in many formats for at least fifteen years.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31382904</id>
	<title>Re:Print is dying. Digital is surging-Nobody confu</title>
	<author>BrokenHalo</author>
	<datestamp>1267866300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nobody is confused, but not for the reasons you give.<br> <br>
The digital option is attractive for texts that will only be read once, or for texts that are expensive and bulky in their dead-tree form. I have a lot of the latter in the form of biochemistry and molecular biology textbooks which never followed me very far from home because they were/are too fucking heavy to carry.<br> <br>
On the other hand, digital reproduction has to be REALLY GOOD and detailed to be even remotely useful for that kind of text. I have never yet seen a digital text of this type that really passes muster. It's just a pity that the technology just wasn't there when I was doing my undergrad degree, but then I guess I have no right to complain when preceding generations didn't even have the advantages of the internet.<br> <br>
But for novels, poetry or anything I read for actual pleasure, dead trees are still where it's at for me. The feel and smell of the paper and print are part of the experience.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nobody is confused , but not for the reasons you give .
The digital option is attractive for texts that will only be read once , or for texts that are expensive and bulky in their dead-tree form .
I have a lot of the latter in the form of biochemistry and molecular biology textbooks which never followed me very far from home because they were/are too fucking heavy to carry .
On the other hand , digital reproduction has to be REALLY GOOD and detailed to be even remotely useful for that kind of text .
I have never yet seen a digital text of this type that really passes muster .
It 's just a pity that the technology just was n't there when I was doing my undergrad degree , but then I guess I have no right to complain when preceding generations did n't even have the advantages of the internet .
But for novels , poetry or anything I read for actual pleasure , dead trees are still where it 's at for me .
The feel and smell of the paper and print are part of the experience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nobody is confused, but not for the reasons you give.
The digital option is attractive for texts that will only be read once, or for texts that are expensive and bulky in their dead-tree form.
I have a lot of the latter in the form of biochemistry and molecular biology textbooks which never followed me very far from home because they were/are too fucking heavy to carry.
On the other hand, digital reproduction has to be REALLY GOOD and detailed to be even remotely useful for that kind of text.
I have never yet seen a digital text of this type that really passes muster.
It's just a pity that the technology just wasn't there when I was doing my undergrad degree, but then I guess I have no right to complain when preceding generations didn't even have the advantages of the internet.
But for novels, poetry or anything I read for actual pleasure, dead trees are still where it's at for me.
The feel and smell of the paper and print are part of the experience.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381330</id>
	<title>The new canvas</title>
	<author>maeka</author>
	<datestamp>1267897320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of all the recent discussions / ruminations on the apparently inevitable replacement of bound paper by ebooks I think this article is one of the more insightful.<br>It is midway down in the article (around figures 7 and 8) where I think Craig really gets to the thrust of his argument.  Few books (and no traditional novels that I am aware of) have attempted to break out of the "two page spread canvas" convention.  The coming dawn of larger-format (and colour) "readers" of all sorts, however, will allow content creators to create nearly unlimited canvas types - even if only in abstraction.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of all the recent discussions / ruminations on the apparently inevitable replacement of bound paper by ebooks I think this article is one of the more insightful.It is midway down in the article ( around figures 7 and 8 ) where I think Craig really gets to the thrust of his argument .
Few books ( and no traditional novels that I am aware of ) have attempted to break out of the " two page spread canvas " convention .
The coming dawn of larger-format ( and colour ) " readers " of all sorts , however , will allow content creators to create nearly unlimited canvas types - even if only in abstraction .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of all the recent discussions / ruminations on the apparently inevitable replacement of bound paper by ebooks I think this article is one of the more insightful.It is midway down in the article (around figures 7 and 8) where I think Craig really gets to the thrust of his argument.
Few books (and no traditional novels that I am aware of) have attempted to break out of the "two page spread canvas" convention.
The coming dawn of larger-format (and colour) "readers" of all sorts, however, will allow content creators to create nearly unlimited canvas types - even if only in abstraction.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381544</id>
	<title>I'm a digital reader and I say...</title>
	<author>Giant Ape Skeleton</author>
	<datestamp>1267899180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>tl;dr<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</htmltext>
<tokenext>tl ; dr ; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>tl;dr ;-)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31382062</id>
	<title>Re:iPad</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1267904340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes. It was the first product from Apple, that was so crappy, that not even the fanbois liked it. Let alone people who did&rsquo;t have money to throw out of the window.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>I realized that the way Apple marketing works, is very similar to trolling: The more you fight it, the more you mention it... and hence the more publicity/hype it will get. Especially since fanbois are so drowning everything else out right after it.<br>You may hate it. But you have to admire its elegance.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes .
It was the first product from Apple , that was so crappy , that not even the fanbois liked it .
Let alone people who did    t have money to throw out of the window .
; ) I realized that the way Apple marketing works , is very similar to trolling : The more you fight it , the more you mention it... and hence the more publicity/hype it will get .
Especially since fanbois are so drowning everything else out right after it.You may hate it .
But you have to admire its elegance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes.
It was the first product from Apple, that was so crappy, that not even the fanbois liked it.
Let alone people who did’t have money to throw out of the window.
;)I realized that the way Apple marketing works, is very similar to trolling: The more you fight it, the more you mention it... and hence the more publicity/hype it will get.
Especially since fanbois are so drowning everything else out right after it.You may hate it.
But you have to admire its elegance.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381406</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381248</id>
	<title>Ahh.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267896600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Like pop-up books. Or scratch-n-sniff.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Like pop-up books .
Or scratch-n-sniff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like pop-up books.
Or scratch-n-sniff.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381484</id>
	<title>battery life</title>
	<author>Katchu</author>
	<datestamp>1267898700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I love eBooks and readers a lot. I have over 100 books loaded onto my iPhone. But a paper book or journal doesn't go blank after a few hours reading. I want to read in a dark tent at night after 2 weeks backpacking in the Rockies.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I love eBooks and readers a lot .
I have over 100 books loaded onto my iPhone .
But a paper book or journal does n't go blank after a few hours reading .
I want to read in a dark tent at night after 2 weeks backpacking in the Rockies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love eBooks and readers a lot.
I have over 100 books loaded onto my iPhone.
But a paper book or journal doesn't go blank after a few hours reading.
I want to read in a dark tent at night after 2 weeks backpacking in the Rockies.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381844</id>
	<title>Re:There's a bigger shift at hand</title>
	<author>ceoyoyo</author>
	<datestamp>1267902300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The worst change IMO is going to be journalism."</p><p>Journalism, newspapers and magazines are in for some lean years.  Then we'll all realize that no, a million random bloggers on the Internet are not a replacement for a trained, professional journalist/writer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The worst change IMO is going to be journalism .
" Journalism , newspapers and magazines are in for some lean years .
Then we 'll all realize that no , a million random bloggers on the Internet are not a replacement for a trained , professional journalist/writer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The worst change IMO is going to be journalism.
"Journalism, newspapers and magazines are in for some lean years.
Then we'll all realize that no, a million random bloggers on the Internet are not a replacement for a trained, professional journalist/writer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381478</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381406</id>
	<title>iPad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267898100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do people get paid to throw Apple branding around like this? Are any of these issues in any way unique to, or only now forthcoming because of, Apple's late entry into the tablet computing market?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do people get paid to throw Apple branding around like this ?
Are any of these issues in any way unique to , or only now forthcoming because of , Apple 's late entry into the tablet computing market ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do people get paid to throw Apple branding around like this?
Are any of these issues in any way unique to, or only now forthcoming because of, Apple's late entry into the tablet computing market?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381342</id>
	<title>Not yet</title>
	<author>ClosedSource</author>
	<datestamp>1267897500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If we get to the point where leaving your reader behind in a public place isn't any more likely to result in theft than leaving a book, readers will be well positioned to overtake printed books.</p><p>I think that day is still far off.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If we get to the point where leaving your reader behind in a public place is n't any more likely to result in theft than leaving a book , readers will be well positioned to overtake printed books.I think that day is still far off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If we get to the point where leaving your reader behind in a public place isn't any more likely to result in theft than leaving a book, readers will be well positioned to overtake printed books.I think that day is still far off.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381638</id>
	<title>Re:Content vs. Presentation</title>
	<author>Compholio</author>
	<datestamp>1267900320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Sometimes content includes presentation, but not always content needs it. Most books in particular, as flow of words, of ideas, not of something physical, should be independent of presentation, so any way to transmit it, comfortably enogh for the receiver, should be equivalent, so either audio, reading in a cellphone, pdf, computer montior, printed book or wallscreen should be more or less the same.</p></div></blockquote><p>
I have two reasons I won't buy electronic books:
</p><ul>
<li>DRM, a solvable problem - if I can actually "own" my book and not worry about losing it then I won't care.  After they are eventually forced to solve this problem I might actually end up trying more books, but I'm not holding my breath.</li><li>Collecting, an unsolvable problem - a hardbound book is very much the equivalent of a "collector's edition" and you will not be able to replicate that with an eBook.</li></ul></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sometimes content includes presentation , but not always content needs it .
Most books in particular , as flow of words , of ideas , not of something physical , should be independent of presentation , so any way to transmit it , comfortably enogh for the receiver , should be equivalent , so either audio , reading in a cellphone , pdf , computer montior , printed book or wallscreen should be more or less the same .
I have two reasons I wo n't buy electronic books : DRM , a solvable problem - if I can actually " own " my book and not worry about losing it then I wo n't care .
After they are eventually forced to solve this problem I might actually end up trying more books , but I 'm not holding my breath.Collecting , an unsolvable problem - a hardbound book is very much the equivalent of a " collector 's edition " and you will not be able to replicate that with an eBook .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sometimes content includes presentation, but not always content needs it.
Most books in particular, as flow of words, of ideas, not of something physical, should be independent of presentation, so any way to transmit it, comfortably enogh for the receiver, should be equivalent, so either audio, reading in a cellphone, pdf, computer montior, printed book or wallscreen should be more or less the same.
I have two reasons I won't buy electronic books:

DRM, a solvable problem - if I can actually "own" my book and not worry about losing it then I won't care.
After they are eventually forced to solve this problem I might actually end up trying more books, but I'm not holding my breath.Collecting, an unsolvable problem - a hardbound book is very much the equivalent of a "collector's edition" and you will not be able to replicate that with an eBook.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31413032</id>
	<title>Smartphones Work Pretty Well</title>
	<author>lxrslh</author>
	<datestamp>1268147520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have been reading ebooks for ten years, since acquiring my first Palm Pilot.  I've

evolved my devices to a Toshiba Pocket PC PDA, then a Samsung (Palm) smartphone, and

now a  Palm Treo Pro (WM).  My sources are RSS feeds, Gutenberg classics, free ebooks,

and occasionally books downloaded from usenet.  About 90\% of my reading is electronic,

excepting technical books and new fiction I borrow from the library.

The small screen sizes have never bothered me nor have I suffered any eyestrain in my

60+year old eyes, which have actually improved with age.  I have enjoyed many happy

hours reading in lines, in airports, on trains, backpacking, etc. while others fretted

or were bored.

The only thing I have lost is viewing images and maps, sometimes of value in travel

books or some fiction, or reading electronically at a beach, for which I have a supply

of paperback "beach" books. However, I can curl up on a sofa or bed and read quite

comfortably, without a lamp, or when someone else is driving.

Although I do it a lot, I don't "really like" reading online using my 6 lb. 15"

notebook and have considered moving to a netbook.  But today's smartphones give me

nearly everything I need in single device that fits in my shirt pocket, including

music, and even limited TV and a basic GPS.

However, physical size and professional layout is necessary for most technical books,

such as Tufte's, with maps, diagrams, images, etc.  So I suspect I will always need

some device with the resolution of paper or a bigger screen, until such time as direct

eyeball projection devices are perfected and comfortable.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have been reading ebooks for ten years , since acquiring my first Palm Pilot .
I 've evolved my devices to a Toshiba Pocket PC PDA , then a Samsung ( Palm ) smartphone , and now a Palm Treo Pro ( WM ) .
My sources are RSS feeds , Gutenberg classics , free ebooks , and occasionally books downloaded from usenet .
About 90 \ % of my reading is electronic , excepting technical books and new fiction I borrow from the library .
The small screen sizes have never bothered me nor have I suffered any eyestrain in my 60 + year old eyes , which have actually improved with age .
I have enjoyed many happy hours reading in lines , in airports , on trains , backpacking , etc .
while others fretted or were bored .
The only thing I have lost is viewing images and maps , sometimes of value in travel books or some fiction , or reading electronically at a beach , for which I have a supply of paperback " beach " books .
However , I can curl up on a sofa or bed and read quite comfortably , without a lamp , or when someone else is driving .
Although I do it a lot , I do n't " really like " reading online using my 6 lb .
15 " notebook and have considered moving to a netbook .
But today 's smartphones give me nearly everything I need in single device that fits in my shirt pocket , including music , and even limited TV and a basic GPS .
However , physical size and professional layout is necessary for most technical books , such as Tufte 's , with maps , diagrams , images , etc .
So I suspect I will always need some device with the resolution of paper or a bigger screen , until such time as direct eyeball projection devices are perfected and comfortable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have been reading ebooks for ten years, since acquiring my first Palm Pilot.
I've

evolved my devices to a Toshiba Pocket PC PDA, then a Samsung (Palm) smartphone, and

now a  Palm Treo Pro (WM).
My sources are RSS feeds, Gutenberg classics, free ebooks,

and occasionally books downloaded from usenet.
About 90\% of my reading is electronic,

excepting technical books and new fiction I borrow from the library.
The small screen sizes have never bothered me nor have I suffered any eyestrain in my

60+year old eyes, which have actually improved with age.
I have enjoyed many happy

hours reading in lines, in airports, on trains, backpacking, etc.
while others fretted

or were bored.
The only thing I have lost is viewing images and maps, sometimes of value in travel

books or some fiction, or reading electronically at a beach, for which I have a supply

of paperback "beach" books.
However, I can curl up on a sofa or bed and read quite

comfortably, without a lamp, or when someone else is driving.
Although I do it a lot, I don't "really like" reading online using my 6 lb.
15"

notebook and have considered moving to a netbook.
But today's smartphones give me

nearly everything I need in single device that fits in my shirt pocket, including

music, and even limited TV and a basic GPS.
However, physical size and professional layout is necessary for most technical books,

such as Tufte's, with maps, diagrams, images, etc.
So I suspect I will always need

some device with the resolution of paper or a bigger screen, until such time as direct

eyeball projection devices are perfected and comfortable.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31382018</id>
	<title>Confused??</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1267904100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Print is dying. Digital is surging. Everyone is confused.</p></div><p>Yeah. Everybody. Except everybody.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)<br>Really only publishers are confused.</p><p>That&rsquo;s all there is to say.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Print is dying .
Digital is surging .
Everyone is confused.Yeah .
Everybody. Except everybody .
; ) Really only publishers are confused.That    s all there is to say .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Print is dying.
Digital is surging.
Everyone is confused.Yeah.
Everybody. Except everybody.
;)Really only publishers are confused.That’s all there is to say.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381736</id>
	<title>I don't think so...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267901160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Having read the article (yes, I know that's not a Slashdot procedure), two things strike me;</p><p>i    Its a piece of puffery in favour of the latest piece of Apple product.<br>ii     He has a point.</p><p>I won't bother arguing about i because you'll either like or dislike Apple product and either have a use for the iPad or not.</p><p>Point ii is more interesting.  The thing is, as defined in the article, books that fall into the "formless" category are those that people buy to read on holiday, at a whim and so onb, but they won't necessarily want to tote a piece of electronics about to consume them.  Book v1 doesn't need a power source or access to the internet to enjoy, in most cases it doesn't matter if they get left out in the rain or fall into the bath or get lost.  Most people can lose quite expensive things quite easily.  The photographer Roger Deakin was sacked by Vogue magazine for repeatedly "losing" Rolleiflex cameras in taxis.  Its cheaper to lose the latest boink/blockbuster airport novel than it is to lose your Kindle or iPad.  And you can lend it, or give it to a charity shop or whatever.</p><p>Even in his "definite" category, booklike publications score higher in usability and utility than an electronic version. And again, once you've finished with a technical book you can sell it, lend it or give it away.  Try doing that with a DRM encumbered software for an iPad.</p><p>The only form of "definite" product that his analysis does support is for the consumption of magazines and newspapers.  These relatively disposable products are ideal fodder for a jazzy colour display though you'd have to be quite mad to want to pay for the medium of display and STILL fork out fot the product subscription!</p><p>Of course, I'm of the older generation and my attention span is longer than that of 20-30 yos who are the target audience for product these days.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Having read the article ( yes , I know that 's not a Slashdot procedure ) , two things strike me ; i Its a piece of puffery in favour of the latest piece of Apple product.ii He has a point.I wo n't bother arguing about i because you 'll either like or dislike Apple product and either have a use for the iPad or not.Point ii is more interesting .
The thing is , as defined in the article , books that fall into the " formless " category are those that people buy to read on holiday , at a whim and so onb , but they wo n't necessarily want to tote a piece of electronics about to consume them .
Book v1 does n't need a power source or access to the internet to enjoy , in most cases it does n't matter if they get left out in the rain or fall into the bath or get lost .
Most people can lose quite expensive things quite easily .
The photographer Roger Deakin was sacked by Vogue magazine for repeatedly " losing " Rolleiflex cameras in taxis .
Its cheaper to lose the latest boink/blockbuster airport novel than it is to lose your Kindle or iPad .
And you can lend it , or give it to a charity shop or whatever.Even in his " definite " category , booklike publications score higher in usability and utility than an electronic version .
And again , once you 've finished with a technical book you can sell it , lend it or give it away .
Try doing that with a DRM encumbered software for an iPad.The only form of " definite " product that his analysis does support is for the consumption of magazines and newspapers .
These relatively disposable products are ideal fodder for a jazzy colour display though you 'd have to be quite mad to want to pay for the medium of display and STILL fork out fot the product subscription ! Of course , I 'm of the older generation and my attention span is longer than that of 20-30 yos who are the target audience for product these days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having read the article (yes, I know that's not a Slashdot procedure), two things strike me;i    Its a piece of puffery in favour of the latest piece of Apple product.ii     He has a point.I won't bother arguing about i because you'll either like or dislike Apple product and either have a use for the iPad or not.Point ii is more interesting.
The thing is, as defined in the article, books that fall into the "formless" category are those that people buy to read on holiday, at a whim and so onb, but they won't necessarily want to tote a piece of electronics about to consume them.
Book v1 doesn't need a power source or access to the internet to enjoy, in most cases it doesn't matter if they get left out in the rain or fall into the bath or get lost.
Most people can lose quite expensive things quite easily.
The photographer Roger Deakin was sacked by Vogue magazine for repeatedly "losing" Rolleiflex cameras in taxis.
Its cheaper to lose the latest boink/blockbuster airport novel than it is to lose your Kindle or iPad.
And you can lend it, or give it to a charity shop or whatever.Even in his "definite" category, booklike publications score higher in usability and utility than an electronic version.
And again, once you've finished with a technical book you can sell it, lend it or give it away.
Try doing that with a DRM encumbered software for an iPad.The only form of "definite" product that his analysis does support is for the consumption of magazines and newspapers.
These relatively disposable products are ideal fodder for a jazzy colour display though you'd have to be quite mad to want to pay for the medium of display and STILL fork out fot the product subscription!Of course, I'm of the older generation and my attention span is longer than that of 20-30 yos who are the target audience for product these days.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31385714</id>
	<title>The Joy of Reading</title>
	<author>knghtrider</author>
	<datestamp>1267888560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Part of the joy of reading (at least for me) is the physical act of holding the book, opening the book, turning the pages, even the act of actually sitting in a bookstore with the book and a comfy chair giving it a test read before I buy. I really am not a fan of 'digital' readers. I don't even read tech manuals online; I print them out, because I actually take notes, use a highlighter, mark important pages with post-its, add them to binders, etc. </p><p>Aside from that, I wear bifocals; I've yet to find one of those readers that is comfortable to read for long periods of time; nor can you lay it across your face when you take a nap in the hammock<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)  </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Part of the joy of reading ( at least for me ) is the physical act of holding the book , opening the book , turning the pages , even the act of actually sitting in a bookstore with the book and a comfy chair giving it a test read before I buy .
I really am not a fan of 'digital ' readers .
I do n't even read tech manuals online ; I print them out , because I actually take notes , use a highlighter , mark important pages with post-its , add them to binders , etc .
Aside from that , I wear bifocals ; I 've yet to find one of those readers that is comfortable to read for long periods of time ; nor can you lay it across your face when you take a nap in the hammock : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Part of the joy of reading (at least for me) is the physical act of holding the book, opening the book, turning the pages, even the act of actually sitting in a bookstore with the book and a comfy chair giving it a test read before I buy.
I really am not a fan of 'digital' readers.
I don't even read tech manuals online; I print them out, because I actually take notes, use a highlighter, mark important pages with post-its, add them to binders, etc.
Aside from that, I wear bifocals; I've yet to find one of those readers that is comfortable to read for long periods of time; nor can you lay it across your face when you take a nap in the hammock :)  </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31382156</id>
	<title>Re:embrace their physicality?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1267904940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just answer with a &ldquo;UNDEFINED\_TERM\_ERROR: In this context, this term is not defined.&rdquo; ^^<br>And follow up with a &ldquo;INVALID\_ARGUMENTS\_ERROR: Your arguments are invalid, because they contain undefined terms.&rdquo;</p><p>It has nothing to do with lawn-related age.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>Some people use perfectly cromulent words to elevate themselves above you. So they can act as if they were wiser and exclude you from the discussion. Or in short: So that it&rsquo;s harder to tell them that they are talking stupid bullshit.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>Medicine is well-known for this. Especially classical psychology, since they actually don&rsquo;t know what they are talking about. (Still mostly not based on neurology, and hence on physics.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;) Also management buzzwords like &ldquo;synergistic vertical chunnels&rdquo; fall into this category. Really the area doesn&rsquo;t matter, and i&rsquo;m sure we &ldquo;IT&rdquo; people have those types too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just answer with a    UNDEFINED \ _TERM \ _ERROR : In this context , this term is not defined.    ^ ^ And follow up with a    INVALID \ _ARGUMENTS \ _ERROR : Your arguments are invalid , because they contain undefined terms.    It has nothing to do with lawn-related age .
; ) Some people use perfectly cromulent words to elevate themselves above you .
So they can act as if they were wiser and exclude you from the discussion .
Or in short : So that it    s harder to tell them that they are talking stupid bullshit .
; ) Medicine is well-known for this .
Especially classical psychology , since they actually don    t know what they are talking about .
( Still mostly not based on neurology , and hence on physics .
; ) Also management buzzwords like    synergistic vertical chunnels    fall into this category .
Really the area doesn    t matter , and i    m sure we    IT    people have those types too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just answer with a “UNDEFINED\_TERM\_ERROR: In this context, this term is not defined.” ^^And follow up with a “INVALID\_ARGUMENTS\_ERROR: Your arguments are invalid, because they contain undefined terms.”It has nothing to do with lawn-related age.
;)Some people use perfectly cromulent words to elevate themselves above you.
So they can act as if they were wiser and exclude you from the discussion.
Or in short: So that it’s harder to tell them that they are talking stupid bullshit.
;)Medicine is well-known for this.
Especially classical psychology, since they actually don’t know what they are talking about.
(Still mostly not based on neurology, and hence on physics.
;) Also management buzzwords like “synergistic vertical chunnels” fall into this category.
Really the area doesn’t matter, and i’m sure we “IT” people have those types too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381866</id>
	<title>Re:Problems....</title>
	<author>godrik</author>
	<datestamp>1267902540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So do I. I never use library for several reasons:</p><p>-The books are ripped off, broken or people wrote on them.</p><p>-Last time I checked the 3 libraries close to me, they had less than 30\% of the book I have at home.</p><p>-I think book is one of the cheapest entertainment. I read approximatively a page in 1 minute to 1.5 minutes (non native english speaker). The last 3 books I read are "halting state" by charles stross, 8 USD for 324 pages, "the dreaming void" by peter hamilton 9 USD for 600 pages and "the engines of god" by jack mcdevitt 8 USD for 418 pages. The price per hour are respectively 1.18 USD, 0.72 USD, 0.91 USD. This is approximatively 5 time cheaper than a movie at the cinema (just for me, not talking about my gf that join me for this 'boring science fiction' movie or if I join her to the latest 'same over again love story' ).</p><p>-I can still lend them to friend or even give them as gift.</p><p>-(Call this one luxury if you want) I like to have at home several books that I haven't read yet but that I will so that when I want to read a book, I can just pick the one that fit my mood NOW.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So do I. I never use library for several reasons : -The books are ripped off , broken or people wrote on them.-Last time I checked the 3 libraries close to me , they had less than 30 \ % of the book I have at home.-I think book is one of the cheapest entertainment .
I read approximatively a page in 1 minute to 1.5 minutes ( non native english speaker ) .
The last 3 books I read are " halting state " by charles stross , 8 USD for 324 pages , " the dreaming void " by peter hamilton 9 USD for 600 pages and " the engines of god " by jack mcdevitt 8 USD for 418 pages .
The price per hour are respectively 1.18 USD , 0.72 USD , 0.91 USD .
This is approximatively 5 time cheaper than a movie at the cinema ( just for me , not talking about my gf that join me for this 'boring science fiction ' movie or if I join her to the latest 'same over again love story ' ) .-I can still lend them to friend or even give them as gift.- ( Call this one luxury if you want ) I like to have at home several books that I have n't read yet but that I will so that when I want to read a book , I can just pick the one that fit my mood NOW .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So do I. I never use library for several reasons:-The books are ripped off, broken or people wrote on them.-Last time I checked the 3 libraries close to me, they had less than 30\% of the book I have at home.-I think book is one of the cheapest entertainment.
I read approximatively a page in 1 minute to 1.5 minutes (non native english speaker).
The last 3 books I read are "halting state" by charles stross, 8 USD for 324 pages, "the dreaming void" by peter hamilton 9 USD for 600 pages and "the engines of god" by jack mcdevitt 8 USD for 418 pages.
The price per hour are respectively 1.18 USD, 0.72 USD, 0.91 USD.
This is approximatively 5 time cheaper than a movie at the cinema (just for me, not talking about my gf that join me for this 'boring science fiction' movie or if I join her to the latest 'same over again love story' ).-I can still lend them to friend or even give them as gift.-(Call this one luxury if you want) I like to have at home several books that I haven't read yet but that I will so that when I want to read a book, I can just pick the one that fit my mood NOW.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381412</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31383656</id>
	<title>Re:Problems....</title>
	<author>Phoobarnvaz</author>
	<datestamp>1267871400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As I've gotten older with my eyesight getting worse for close-up reading...E/digital books have been a lifesaver by allowing me to enjoy reading again. I can set the font up as high as I want/need and see the print as clearly as possible. Having print in your hands is nice...but when I can't set the font size to what I want/need...who needs it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As I 've gotten older with my eyesight getting worse for close-up reading...E/digital books have been a lifesaver by allowing me to enjoy reading again .
I can set the font up as high as I want/need and see the print as clearly as possible .
Having print in your hands is nice...but when I ca n't set the font size to what I want/need...who needs it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As I've gotten older with my eyesight getting worse for close-up reading...E/digital books have been a lifesaver by allowing me to enjoy reading again.
I can set the font up as high as I want/need and see the print as clearly as possible.
Having print in your hands is nice...but when I can't set the font size to what I want/need...who needs it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31384626</id>
	<title>Re:There's a bigger shift at hand</title>
	<author>grcumb</author>
	<datestamp>1267879380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"The worst change IMO is going to be journalism."</p><p>Journalism, newspapers and magazines are in for some lean years.  Then we'll all realize that no, a million random bloggers on the Internet are not a replacement for a trained, professional journalist/writer.</p></div><p>I agree completely with your first statement. Journalism is undergoing a radical transformation. 'Interesting Times' (pun  intended) in the worst sense of the Chinese curse.</p><p>Your conclusion, though, is too reductive. You're begging the question by implying that the only way to be a skilled journalist is to have training and to be a professional. History tells us otherwise. Many, if not most, of the stars of journalism never went near J-school and a substantial number of the ones who did the most to define journalism spent their careers working against the grain of Establishment attitudes. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William\_Howard\_Russell" title="wikipedia.org">Billy Russell</a> [wikipedia.org], <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter\_Arnett" title="wikipedia.org">Peter Arnett</a> [wikipedia.org], <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert\_Capa" title="wikipedia.org">Robert Capa</a> [wikipedia.org] and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don\_McCullin" title="wikipedia.org">Don McCullen</a> [wikipedia.org] are just a few who fell sideways into print and photo journalism, but who were each revolutionary in their own small way.</p><p>If I were looking for the future of journalism, I'd be looking carefully at <a href="http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/" title="firedoglake.com">Marcy Wheeler</a> [firedoglake.com] and <a href="http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/" title="fivethirtyeight.com">Nate Silver</a> [fivethirtyeight.com] - people whose extraordinary skill at research and analysis has been enabled by their ability to start a blog and work on their own terms, spending time on subjects and approaches that most bean-counters would never allow.</p><p>Full disclosure: I'm biased in favour of such an outcome because I do my own <a href="http://scriptorum.imagicity.com/" title="imagicity.com">writing</a> [imagicity.com] and <a href="http://www.imagicity.com/" title="imagicity.com">photography</a> [imagicity.com] on those terms. I don't really care whether I earn money from it (though I do derive a modest income), because I long ago learned that it's just something I love to do. </p><p>Maybe my work will never be of more than regional interest. I don't care. The beauty of the format is just this: <em>It doesn't have to be popular. It can just be good.</em> I can focus on quality for its own sake; I can write and photograph what <em>I</em> consider to be in the public interest and allow people to make of it what they will.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" The worst change IMO is going to be journalism .
" Journalism , newspapers and magazines are in for some lean years .
Then we 'll all realize that no , a million random bloggers on the Internet are not a replacement for a trained , professional journalist/writer.I agree completely with your first statement .
Journalism is undergoing a radical transformation .
'Interesting Times ' ( pun intended ) in the worst sense of the Chinese curse.Your conclusion , though , is too reductive .
You 're begging the question by implying that the only way to be a skilled journalist is to have training and to be a professional .
History tells us otherwise .
Many , if not most , of the stars of journalism never went near J-school and a substantial number of the ones who did the most to define journalism spent their careers working against the grain of Establishment attitudes .
Billy Russell [ wikipedia.org ] , Peter Arnett [ wikipedia.org ] , Robert Capa [ wikipedia.org ] and Don McCullen [ wikipedia.org ] are just a few who fell sideways into print and photo journalism , but who were each revolutionary in their own small way.If I were looking for the future of journalism , I 'd be looking carefully at Marcy Wheeler [ firedoglake.com ] and Nate Silver [ fivethirtyeight.com ] - people whose extraordinary skill at research and analysis has been enabled by their ability to start a blog and work on their own terms , spending time on subjects and approaches that most bean-counters would never allow.Full disclosure : I 'm biased in favour of such an outcome because I do my own writing [ imagicity.com ] and photography [ imagicity.com ] on those terms .
I do n't really care whether I earn money from it ( though I do derive a modest income ) , because I long ago learned that it 's just something I love to do .
Maybe my work will never be of more than regional interest .
I do n't care .
The beauty of the format is just this : It does n't have to be popular .
It can just be good .
I can focus on quality for its own sake ; I can write and photograph what I consider to be in the public interest and allow people to make of it what they will .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The worst change IMO is going to be journalism.
"Journalism, newspapers and magazines are in for some lean years.
Then we'll all realize that no, a million random bloggers on the Internet are not a replacement for a trained, professional journalist/writer.I agree completely with your first statement.
Journalism is undergoing a radical transformation.
'Interesting Times' (pun  intended) in the worst sense of the Chinese curse.Your conclusion, though, is too reductive.
You're begging the question by implying that the only way to be a skilled journalist is to have training and to be a professional.
History tells us otherwise.
Many, if not most, of the stars of journalism never went near J-school and a substantial number of the ones who did the most to define journalism spent their careers working against the grain of Establishment attitudes.
Billy Russell [wikipedia.org], Peter Arnett [wikipedia.org], Robert Capa [wikipedia.org] and Don McCullen [wikipedia.org] are just a few who fell sideways into print and photo journalism, but who were each revolutionary in their own small way.If I were looking for the future of journalism, I'd be looking carefully at Marcy Wheeler [firedoglake.com] and Nate Silver [fivethirtyeight.com] - people whose extraordinary skill at research and analysis has been enabled by their ability to start a blog and work on their own terms, spending time on subjects and approaches that most bean-counters would never allow.Full disclosure: I'm biased in favour of such an outcome because I do my own writing [imagicity.com] and photography [imagicity.com] on those terms.
I don't really care whether I earn money from it (though I do derive a modest income), because I long ago learned that it's just something I love to do.
Maybe my work will never be of more than regional interest.
I don't care.
The beauty of the format is just this: It doesn't have to be popular.
It can just be good.
I can focus on quality for its own sake; I can write and photograph what I consider to be in the public interest and allow people to make of it what they will.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381622</id>
	<title>Rechargeable books = total loss</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267900080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Until e-book readers come with batteries that can be replaced, and some standard battery format for these rechargeable devices emerges similar to the good old AAA battery, e-books will be a total loss. Imagine sitting down for an multiple-hour wait in a hospital, pulling out your e-book, and the battery dying. That doesn't happen with paper! What we need is some kind of standard, replaceable battery so you can put a totally charged, fresh one in your e-book reader/MP3 player/etc before you leave. The real flaw in all these devices at this time is they have a totally contained battery that can't be replaced, so the only way they can be recharged is to be taken out of action during the recharge. There is no way to recharge an old battery by itself and put a fresh one in the device that has already charged. Until this is fixed, I wouldn't even consider an e-book reader. My paper book is always available. I already bought a digital camera that used AA batteries instead of the batteries that can't be removed, so if I am outdoors photographing and the battery dies, I can just put new batteries in.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Until e-book readers come with batteries that can be replaced , and some standard battery format for these rechargeable devices emerges similar to the good old AAA battery , e-books will be a total loss .
Imagine sitting down for an multiple-hour wait in a hospital , pulling out your e-book , and the battery dying .
That does n't happen with paper !
What we need is some kind of standard , replaceable battery so you can put a totally charged , fresh one in your e-book reader/MP3 player/etc before you leave .
The real flaw in all these devices at this time is they have a totally contained battery that ca n't be replaced , so the only way they can be recharged is to be taken out of action during the recharge .
There is no way to recharge an old battery by itself and put a fresh one in the device that has already charged .
Until this is fixed , I would n't even consider an e-book reader .
My paper book is always available .
I already bought a digital camera that used AA batteries instead of the batteries that ca n't be removed , so if I am outdoors photographing and the battery dies , I can just put new batteries in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Until e-book readers come with batteries that can be replaced, and some standard battery format for these rechargeable devices emerges similar to the good old AAA battery, e-books will be a total loss.
Imagine sitting down for an multiple-hour wait in a hospital, pulling out your e-book, and the battery dying.
That doesn't happen with paper!
What we need is some kind of standard, replaceable battery so you can put a totally charged, fresh one in your e-book reader/MP3 player/etc before you leave.
The real flaw in all these devices at this time is they have a totally contained battery that can't be replaced, so the only way they can be recharged is to be taken out of action during the recharge.
There is no way to recharge an old battery by itself and put a fresh one in the device that has already charged.
Until this is fixed, I wouldn't even consider an e-book reader.
My paper book is always available.
I already bought a digital camera that used AA batteries instead of the batteries that can't be removed, so if I am outdoors photographing and the battery dies, I can just put new batteries in.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31382022</id>
	<title>Environment</title>
	<author>DaMattster</author>
	<datestamp>1267904100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In the present age when resources are becoming scarce and we have to conserve more, I see the value of the electronic reader.  I prefer reading in print to reading on a screen because I have the freedom to highlight and make notes in margins.  But, seeing as trees are very important, it may be time to make the adjustment.  I am sure the cost to operate say, a kindle, is far less than the cost to the environment to produce the paper, the ink to print, and the energy to run the presses.  The trick to making the e-reader environmentally friendly is to slow down the pace at which they are being rendered obsolete.  Whereas a book lasts centuries, we may be adding to a silicon garbage pile at the rate of our present innovation.  I will adopt the e-reader when there is no DRM and there is a standard so I can freely move what I rightfully purchased between devices.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In the present age when resources are becoming scarce and we have to conserve more , I see the value of the electronic reader .
I prefer reading in print to reading on a screen because I have the freedom to highlight and make notes in margins .
But , seeing as trees are very important , it may be time to make the adjustment .
I am sure the cost to operate say , a kindle , is far less than the cost to the environment to produce the paper , the ink to print , and the energy to run the presses .
The trick to making the e-reader environmentally friendly is to slow down the pace at which they are being rendered obsolete .
Whereas a book lasts centuries , we may be adding to a silicon garbage pile at the rate of our present innovation .
I will adopt the e-reader when there is no DRM and there is a standard so I can freely move what I rightfully purchased between devices .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the present age when resources are becoming scarce and we have to conserve more, I see the value of the electronic reader.
I prefer reading in print to reading on a screen because I have the freedom to highlight and make notes in margins.
But, seeing as trees are very important, it may be time to make the adjustment.
I am sure the cost to operate say, a kindle, is far less than the cost to the environment to produce the paper, the ink to print, and the energy to run the presses.
The trick to making the e-reader environmentally friendly is to slow down the pace at which they are being rendered obsolete.
Whereas a book lasts centuries, we may be adding to a silicon garbage pile at the rate of our present innovation.
I will adopt the e-reader when there is no DRM and there is a standard so I can freely move what I rightfully purchased between devices.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381700</id>
	<title>Re:Content vs. Presentation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267900800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So for example, if a particular translation were to print Dante's Inferno so as to continue the rule of 3 which he has established?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So for example , if a particular translation were to print Dante 's Inferno so as to continue the rule of 3 which he has established ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So for example, if a particular translation were to print Dante's Inferno so as to continue the rule of 3 which he has established?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31385574</id>
	<title>First, tackle BASIC book characteristics.</title>
	<author>dpbsmith</author>
	<datestamp>1267886880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Some primary characteristics of a book: it can loaned to a friend; it can be resold; it can be purchased second-hand; it can be purchased once by a library and read by many people; it has a useful life of at least twenty-five years (for the cheapest paperbacks) to well over a century (just about any hardbound). Although there are minor changes in e.g. typefaces, punctuation, and other stylistic elements, the format is stable enough for a century-old book to be easily read. If you are able to read a Macmillan books, you can read a Houghton Mifflin or Random House book; there are no vendor compatibility issues. If you can read a book when it was published, you can continue to read it after the publisher goes out of business and shuts down all of its operations.</p><p>These have been characteristic of books for centuries. They are a fundamental part of the definition of a book.</p><p>Modern so-called "eBooks" have none of these characteristics. They are not books at all. It's self-indulgent to fuss about things like "formless" versus "definite" content. First things first: we need eBooks that are <em>books</em>.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Some primary characteristics of a book : it can loaned to a friend ; it can be resold ; it can be purchased second-hand ; it can be purchased once by a library and read by many people ; it has a useful life of at least twenty-five years ( for the cheapest paperbacks ) to well over a century ( just about any hardbound ) .
Although there are minor changes in e.g .
typefaces , punctuation , and other stylistic elements , the format is stable enough for a century-old book to be easily read .
If you are able to read a Macmillan books , you can read a Houghton Mifflin or Random House book ; there are no vendor compatibility issues .
If you can read a book when it was published , you can continue to read it after the publisher goes out of business and shuts down all of its operations.These have been characteristic of books for centuries .
They are a fundamental part of the definition of a book.Modern so-called " eBooks " have none of these characteristics .
They are not books at all .
It 's self-indulgent to fuss about things like " formless " versus " definite " content .
First things first : we need eBooks that are books .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some primary characteristics of a book: it can loaned to a friend; it can be resold; it can be purchased second-hand; it can be purchased once by a library and read by many people; it has a useful life of at least twenty-five years (for the cheapest paperbacks) to well over a century (just about any hardbound).
Although there are minor changes in e.g.
typefaces, punctuation, and other stylistic elements, the format is stable enough for a century-old book to be easily read.
If you are able to read a Macmillan books, you can read a Houghton Mifflin or Random House book; there are no vendor compatibility issues.
If you can read a book when it was published, you can continue to read it after the publisher goes out of business and shuts down all of its operations.These have been characteristic of books for centuries.
They are a fundamental part of the definition of a book.Modern so-called "eBooks" have none of these characteristics.
They are not books at all.
It's self-indulgent to fuss about things like "formless" versus "definite" content.
First things first: we need eBooks that are books.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381258</id>
	<title>Definite and Formless</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267896660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Also known as PDF and anything but PDF. PDF and fixed layout where it's needed, but please stop producing novels as PDF. They don't reflow nicely on smaller screens.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Also known as PDF and anything but PDF .
PDF and fixed layout where it 's needed , but please stop producing novels as PDF .
They do n't reflow nicely on smaller screens .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also known as PDF and anything but PDF.
PDF and fixed layout where it's needed, but please stop producing novels as PDF.
They don't reflow nicely on smaller screens.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31382562</id>
	<title>Re:Books are tangible objects</title>
	<author>Joe Mucchiello</author>
	<datestamp>1267907280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>How will future authors cope at book signings?</p></div></blockquote><p>The same way actors and actresses do at conventions? They'll sign an 8x10 picture of themselves.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How will future authors cope at book signings ? The same way actors and actresses do at conventions ?
They 'll sign an 8x10 picture of themselves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How will future authors cope at book signings?The same way actors and actresses do at conventions?
They'll sign an 8x10 picture of themselves.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31382082</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381916</id>
	<title>Re:battery life</title>
	<author>Sulphur</author>
	<datestamp>1267902960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do you have "Dial M for Murder?"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you have " Dial M for Murder ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you have "Dial M for Murder?
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31478496</id>
	<title>very nice</title>
	<author>jamesfolke2</author>
	<datestamp>1268592780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>its really wonderful information give me and valuable and i like your site because this site has good information all of user.


<a href="http://www.articlesbase.com/health-articles/smoke-relief-electronic-cigarette-review-does-it-help-to-quit-smoke-1971509.html" title="articlesbase.com" rel="nofollow">SMoke Relief</a> [articlesbase.com]

<a href="http://www.articlesbase.com/health-articles/smoke-relief-electronic-cigarette-review-does-smoke-relief-really-work--1966373.html" title="articlesbase.com" rel="nofollow">SMoke Relief</a> [articlesbase.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>its really wonderful information give me and valuable and i like your site because this site has good information all of user .
SMoke Relief [ articlesbase.com ] SMoke Relief [ articlesbase.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>its really wonderful information give me and valuable and i like your site because this site has good information all of user.
SMoke Relief [articlesbase.com]

SMoke Relief [articlesbase.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381830</id>
	<title>Re:Problems....</title>
	<author>maxwell demon</author>
	<datestamp>1267902120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>C) The readers themselves are expensive (but then, over time this will probably change)<br>D) They are more easily damaged.<br>E) Books <em>never</em> run out of battery.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>C ) The readers themselves are expensive ( but then , over time this will probably change ) D ) They are more easily damaged.E ) Books never run out of battery .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>C) The readers themselves are expensive (but then, over time this will probably change)D) They are more easily damaged.E) Books never run out of battery.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381282</id>
	<title>Read this to someone in a third world country</title>
	<author>voodoo cheesecake</author>
	<datestamp>1267896900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Save the books..... burn the ipads!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Save the books..... burn the ipads !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Save the books..... burn the ipads!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381514</id>
	<title>Re:The new canvas</title>
	<author>zappepcs</author>
	<datestamp>1267899000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, there are a few other things that seem to fall out when you go to ebooks, diagrams and pictures can 'move' if you want. The book's language can change. If your eyes are tired, the book can read to you. The book can remember what page you last read. It can find related material regarding any of the characters, both fictional and real. It can find a map for you of the country the story is set in. The list gets longer if you want, and all things you can't get from a printed version. When people eventually have fond memories of sitting in the front room reading a story on their ebook, paper books will be a thing of the past. When there is an ebook laying in a basket in the bathroom with Readers Digest and that almanac thingy on it, paper books will be a thing of the past. When you can go to a library and 'borrow' a cartridge with a book or two on it, paper books will be a thing of the past. The problems are part cultural and part functionality. Both will be overcome. ebooks have the capability of combining moving images with text, creating an art form that does not yet truly exist. Remember when people used to say the book was much better than the movie? Any of these features can increase the value of the media, the price, or the DRM capabilities. Publishers will have to get over the desire to sell a separate copy to every person who reads and just let them share. Anyone remember when they thought photocopiers were going to ruin their business? This is more or less the same thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , there are a few other things that seem to fall out when you go to ebooks , diagrams and pictures can 'move ' if you want .
The book 's language can change .
If your eyes are tired , the book can read to you .
The book can remember what page you last read .
It can find related material regarding any of the characters , both fictional and real .
It can find a map for you of the country the story is set in .
The list gets longer if you want , and all things you ca n't get from a printed version .
When people eventually have fond memories of sitting in the front room reading a story on their ebook , paper books will be a thing of the past .
When there is an ebook laying in a basket in the bathroom with Readers Digest and that almanac thingy on it , paper books will be a thing of the past .
When you can go to a library and 'borrow ' a cartridge with a book or two on it , paper books will be a thing of the past .
The problems are part cultural and part functionality .
Both will be overcome .
ebooks have the capability of combining moving images with text , creating an art form that does not yet truly exist .
Remember when people used to say the book was much better than the movie ?
Any of these features can increase the value of the media , the price , or the DRM capabilities .
Publishers will have to get over the desire to sell a separate copy to every person who reads and just let them share .
Anyone remember when they thought photocopiers were going to ruin their business ?
This is more or less the same thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, there are a few other things that seem to fall out when you go to ebooks, diagrams and pictures can 'move' if you want.
The book's language can change.
If your eyes are tired, the book can read to you.
The book can remember what page you last read.
It can find related material regarding any of the characters, both fictional and real.
It can find a map for you of the country the story is set in.
The list gets longer if you want, and all things you can't get from a printed version.
When people eventually have fond memories of sitting in the front room reading a story on their ebook, paper books will be a thing of the past.
When there is an ebook laying in a basket in the bathroom with Readers Digest and that almanac thingy on it, paper books will be a thing of the past.
When you can go to a library and 'borrow' a cartridge with a book or two on it, paper books will be a thing of the past.
The problems are part cultural and part functionality.
Both will be overcome.
ebooks have the capability of combining moving images with text, creating an art form that does not yet truly exist.
Remember when people used to say the book was much better than the movie?
Any of these features can increase the value of the media, the price, or the DRM capabilities.
Publishers will have to get over the desire to sell a separate copy to every person who reads and just let them share.
Anyone remember when they thought photocopiers were going to ruin their business?
This is more or less the same thing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381360</id>
	<title>iPad's Killer App</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267897680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Electronic books are probably one of the iPad's killer apps.  Maybe not the ones we'll see immediately -- the ones basically just ported from the Kindle or something -- but the next generation of books, or the ones after that.  Interacting with the book is where the technology will really shine.  Think about <i>A Young Lady's Illustrated Primer</i> (from <a href="http://search.barnesandnoble.com/The-Diamond-Age/Neal-Stephenson/e/9780553380965/?itm=2&amp;USRI=diamond+age" title="barnesandnoble.com">The Diamond Age</a> [barnesandnoble.com]).
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Electronic books are probably one of the iPad 's killer apps .
Maybe not the ones we 'll see immediately -- the ones basically just ported from the Kindle or something -- but the next generation of books , or the ones after that .
Interacting with the book is where the technology will really shine .
Think about A Young Lady 's Illustrated Primer ( from The Diamond Age [ barnesandnoble.com ] ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Electronic books are probably one of the iPad's killer apps.
Maybe not the ones we'll see immediately -- the ones basically just ported from the Kindle or something -- but the next generation of books, or the ones after that.
Interacting with the book is where the technology will really shine.
Think about A Young Lady's Illustrated Primer (from The Diamond Age [barnesandnoble.com]).
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381438</id>
	<title>Re:Not yet</title>
	<author>AndrewBC</author>
	<datestamp>1267898220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think it's even further off than that. It's unlikely to happen until everyone who comes across it already has one, and isn't just a prick. (There are lots of those...) <br> <br>It's more akin to leaving a bookshelf of all your books, and room for new books to be added as well, complete with a dolly for easy carrying by one person -- much more valuable than just one tattered eared paperback.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think it 's even further off than that .
It 's unlikely to happen until everyone who comes across it already has one , and is n't just a prick .
( There are lots of those... ) It 's more akin to leaving a bookshelf of all your books , and room for new books to be added as well , complete with a dolly for easy carrying by one person -- much more valuable than just one tattered eared paperback .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think it's even further off than that.
It's unlikely to happen until everyone who comes across it already has one, and isn't just a prick.
(There are lots of those...)  It's more akin to leaving a bookshelf of all your books, and room for new books to be added as well, complete with a dolly for easy carrying by one person -- much more valuable than just one tattered eared paperback.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381342</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381724</id>
	<title>Here's the best digital book</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267901040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>(1:47) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZRhlcqPef0</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>( 1 : 47 ) http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = zZRhlcqPef0</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(1:47) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZRhlcqPef0</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31382082</id>
	<title>Books are tangible objects</title>
	<author>itsdapead</author>
	<datestamp>1267904460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>B) Is this some kind of metaphysical crap? "they're complete objects"? WTF does that mean?</p></div><p>I don't know why people are talking about pop-up books: all books are tangible. Your "copy" of a book is forever linked to a physical object that, as time passes, becomes different from all other instances of that book.

</p><p>Can you imagine someone <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8529504.stm?lsm" title="bbc.co.uk">paying $1m for a first edition</a> [bbc.co.uk] of an ebook download? (that's just a recent, extreme example that happens to be a comic book - people cherish rare editions of books of all kinds, even when the content is widely available elsewhere).

</p><p>Imagine you were giving someone a gift or a presentation? Which would be better: (a) hardback copy of their favorite author's latest work with a suitable inscription or (b) an iTunes gift card.

</p><p>How will future authors cope at book signings? <i>Hey, Mr Pullman, could you validate this X.509 certificate and write it back to the SD card? Its not for me, you understand, its for my daemon...</i>

</p><p>My 1979 paperback copy of "The Hitchhikers Guide" (the yellowed and dogeared one) is certainly a "complete object". It's still got the price tag on the back (80p!?)

</p><p>...and what is that funny stain on page 30 of "American Gods"...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>B ) Is this some kind of metaphysical crap ?
" they 're complete objects " ?
WTF does that mean ? I do n't know why people are talking about pop-up books : all books are tangible .
Your " copy " of a book is forever linked to a physical object that , as time passes , becomes different from all other instances of that book .
Can you imagine someone paying $ 1m for a first edition [ bbc.co.uk ] of an ebook download ?
( that 's just a recent , extreme example that happens to be a comic book - people cherish rare editions of books of all kinds , even when the content is widely available elsewhere ) .
Imagine you were giving someone a gift or a presentation ?
Which would be better : ( a ) hardback copy of their favorite author 's latest work with a suitable inscription or ( b ) an iTunes gift card .
How will future authors cope at book signings ?
Hey , Mr Pullman , could you validate this X.509 certificate and write it back to the SD card ?
Its not for me , you understand , its for my daemon.. . My 1979 paperback copy of " The Hitchhikers Guide " ( the yellowed and dogeared one ) is certainly a " complete object " .
It 's still got the price tag on the back ( 80p ! ?
) ...and what is that funny stain on page 30 of " American Gods " ... : - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>B) Is this some kind of metaphysical crap?
"they're complete objects"?
WTF does that mean?I don't know why people are talking about pop-up books: all books are tangible.
Your "copy" of a book is forever linked to a physical object that, as time passes, becomes different from all other instances of that book.
Can you imagine someone paying $1m for a first edition [bbc.co.uk] of an ebook download?
(that's just a recent, extreme example that happens to be a comic book - people cherish rare editions of books of all kinds, even when the content is widely available elsewhere).
Imagine you were giving someone a gift or a presentation?
Which would be better: (a) hardback copy of their favorite author's latest work with a suitable inscription or (b) an iTunes gift card.
How will future authors cope at book signings?
Hey, Mr Pullman, could you validate this X.509 certificate and write it back to the SD card?
Its not for me, you understand, its for my daemon...

My 1979 paperback copy of "The Hitchhikers Guide" (the yellowed and dogeared one) is certainly a "complete object".
It's still got the price tag on the back (80p!?
)

...and what is that funny stain on page 30 of "American Gods"... :-)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381312</id>
	<title>Dredge?</title>
	<author>srussia</author>
	<datestamp>1267897140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>From TFA: <i>We&rsquo;re losing the <b>dredge</b> of the publishing world: disposable books.</i>
<br> <br>
Sounds like "dregs" I guess--if you talk like Sean Connery. I stopped reading right there. That's just a bit too much illiteracy for an article about books.</htmltext>
<tokenext>From TFA : We    re losing the dredge of the publishing world : disposable books .
Sounds like " dregs " I guess--if you talk like Sean Connery .
I stopped reading right there .
That 's just a bit too much illiteracy for an article about books .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From TFA: We’re losing the dredge of the publishing world: disposable books.
Sounds like "dregs" I guess--if you talk like Sean Connery.
I stopped reading right there.
That's just a bit too much illiteracy for an article about books.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381272</id>
	<title>Print is dying. Digital is surging-Nobody confused</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267896780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except for the print dinosaurs that are little more than scare merchants for fretful mothers and defenders of the status quo. The dead tree merchants are the only ones confused. And they think they only need a re-branding when what they need is what they will get - nothing. You will become history because of your sad performance.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except for the print dinosaurs that are little more than scare merchants for fretful mothers and defenders of the status quo .
The dead tree merchants are the only ones confused .
And they think they only need a re-branding when what they need is what they will get - nothing .
You will become history because of your sad performance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except for the print dinosaurs that are little more than scare merchants for fretful mothers and defenders of the status quo.
The dead tree merchants are the only ones confused.
And they think they only need a re-branding when what they need is what they will get - nothing.
You will become history because of your sad performance.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31386256</id>
	<title>My Issues: Book's BLANK pages in PDF's !!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267893840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, it's great that we see more &amp; more eBooks (by which I mean PDF files) potentially replacing dead-tree printed books (hear at least).</p><p>What I don't get, however, is WHY the Adobe folks don't have a simple check-box that would preclude inclusion &amp; (possible) printing of<br>BLANK pages, eg, if anybody intentionally or accidentally prints an eBook.</p><p>Blank pages take time to skip, ie, while reading the book, and would cost trees whenever the eBook is printed, later.</p><p>Adobe, PLEASE make it easy to save eBooks (as PDF's without BLANK pages), thanks.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , it 's great that we see more &amp; more eBooks ( by which I mean PDF files ) potentially replacing dead-tree printed books ( hear at least ) .What I do n't get , however , is WHY the Adobe folks do n't have a simple check-box that would preclude inclusion &amp; ( possible ) printing ofBLANK pages , eg , if anybody intentionally or accidentally prints an eBook.Blank pages take time to skip , ie , while reading the book , and would cost trees whenever the eBook is printed , later.Adobe , PLEASE make it easy to save eBooks ( as PDF 's without BLANK pages ) , thanks .
: -/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, it's great that we see more &amp; more eBooks (by which I mean PDF files) potentially replacing dead-tree printed books (hear at least).What I don't get, however, is WHY the Adobe folks don't have a simple check-box that would preclude inclusion &amp; (possible) printing ofBLANK pages, eg, if anybody intentionally or accidentally prints an eBook.Blank pages take time to skip, ie, while reading the book, and would cost trees whenever the eBook is printed, later.Adobe, PLEASE make it easy to save eBooks (as PDF's without BLANK pages), thanks.
:-/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31385598</id>
	<title>Re:Problems....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267887120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the logic that print media wont be replaced because of a lack of digital libraries is flawed.... netlibrary and others exist... seattle public library allows it's members to access a trove of digital materials! they're just one example.</p><p>all they need to do is make these things easy to access on an smaller eBook readers screen and BAM, no contest.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the logic that print media wont be replaced because of a lack of digital libraries is flawed.... netlibrary and others exist... seattle public library allows it 's members to access a trove of digital materials !
they 're just one example.all they need to do is make these things easy to access on an smaller eBook readers screen and BAM , no contest .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the logic that print media wont be replaced because of a lack of digital libraries is flawed.... netlibrary and others exist... seattle public library allows it's members to access a trove of digital materials!
they're just one example.all they need to do is make these things easy to access on an smaller eBook readers screen and BAM, no contest.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31382028</id>
	<title>Re:Dredge?</title>
	<author>korean.ian</author>
	<datestamp>1267904160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He's probably confused the verb "to dredge" with the noun "dregs". Give the chap a break, he's only a writer after all, not an editor.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>you hear me slashdot editors? *shakes fist in rage* we expect perfection from editors. (I know, I know, I must be new here.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He 's probably confused the verb " to dredge " with the noun " dregs " .
Give the chap a break , he 's only a writer after all , not an editor .
; ) you hear me slashdot editors ?
* shakes fist in rage * we expect perfection from editors .
( I know , I know , I must be new here .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He's probably confused the verb "to dredge" with the noun "dregs".
Give the chap a break, he's only a writer after all, not an editor.
;)you hear me slashdot editors?
*shakes fist in rage* we expect perfection from editors.
(I know, I know, I must be new here.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381312</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31384684</id>
	<title>i must be a dinosaur</title>
	<author>buddyglass</author>
	<datestamp>1267879980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I like reading a newspaper more than reading news online.  I like reading paper books more than ebooks.  To be honest, while I do read online news, I'd never really consider buying an e-reader, unless I was going on a hiking trip or something where I expected to read 3-4 books and didn't have the space to pack them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I like reading a newspaper more than reading news online .
I like reading paper books more than ebooks .
To be honest , while I do read online news , I 'd never really consider buying an e-reader , unless I was going on a hiking trip or something where I expected to read 3-4 books and did n't have the space to pack them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like reading a newspaper more than reading news online.
I like reading paper books more than ebooks.
To be honest, while I do read online news, I'd never really consider buying an e-reader, unless I was going on a hiking trip or something where I expected to read 3-4 books and didn't have the space to pack them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31387766</id>
	<title>Re:There's a bigger shift at hand</title>
	<author>Ostracus</author>
	<datestamp>1267956840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Although the format change is a big part of this, the real change afoot is the amount of effort it takes to publish something. In the past, with the exception of self-publishing, the only way to get your work out there was to pitch your idea to a book publisher, who would then decide what was and was not print-worthy. Today, I can go to blogspot.com, sign up for an account, and spout off about anything I want, making it accessible for the world to see."</p><p>The only issue the publishing  industry has to address is the quality issue. The quantity of Youtube shouldn't be equated with the quality of Youtube. If the publishing industry should worry about anything? That's their readership has possession of technology to break the whole reciprocal agreement that commerce is based upon. Changing the means by which content is delivered doesn't fundamentally change that fact.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Although the format change is a big part of this , the real change afoot is the amount of effort it takes to publish something .
In the past , with the exception of self-publishing , the only way to get your work out there was to pitch your idea to a book publisher , who would then decide what was and was not print-worthy .
Today , I can go to blogspot.com , sign up for an account , and spout off about anything I want , making it accessible for the world to see .
" The only issue the publishing industry has to address is the quality issue .
The quantity of Youtube should n't be equated with the quality of Youtube .
If the publishing industry should worry about anything ?
That 's their readership has possession of technology to break the whole reciprocal agreement that commerce is based upon .
Changing the means by which content is delivered does n't fundamentally change that fact .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Although the format change is a big part of this, the real change afoot is the amount of effort it takes to publish something.
In the past, with the exception of self-publishing, the only way to get your work out there was to pitch your idea to a book publisher, who would then decide what was and was not print-worthy.
Today, I can go to blogspot.com, sign up for an account, and spout off about anything I want, making it accessible for the world to see.
"The only issue the publishing  industry has to address is the quality issue.
The quantity of Youtube shouldn't be equated with the quality of Youtube.
If the publishing industry should worry about anything?
That's their readership has possession of technology to break the whole reciprocal agreement that commerce is based upon.
Changing the means by which content is delivered doesn't fundamentally change that fact.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381478</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381886</id>
	<title>Re:battery life</title>
	<author>godrik</author>
	<datestamp>1267902720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>or perhaps, you should get a real e book reader instead of using a mobile phone to do that...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>or perhaps , you should get a real e book reader instead of using a mobile phone to do that.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>or perhaps, you should get a real e book reader instead of using a mobile phone to do that...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381526</id>
	<title>Re:Problems....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267899120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Regarding libraries - I think there's actually a fairly simple solution (though the publishers may dislike it):<br> <br>
A library buys a digital copy of a book when someone requests it for the first time.  They have a "check out" iPad application (and/or other application) that will log in a database that the book is checked out for 2 weeks, and not let that copy be checked out until that copy is either manually checked back in or it automatically expires after two weeks.  When a book is attempted to be opened in the application it makes sure that the check out is still valid before allowing the book to be opened.  If there is more than a 2 - 3 month wait for a book, another digital copy is purchased and added to the pool.  This could easily be a national library as there are no physical copies to store (only servers storing the files) and no need to check things out in person.  I would love this system and would probably use it even if it was not government funded and had a monthly fee.  I'm aware of safari books online, but I'd like something with a broader appeal.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Regarding libraries - I think there 's actually a fairly simple solution ( though the publishers may dislike it ) : A library buys a digital copy of a book when someone requests it for the first time .
They have a " check out " iPad application ( and/or other application ) that will log in a database that the book is checked out for 2 weeks , and not let that copy be checked out until that copy is either manually checked back in or it automatically expires after two weeks .
When a book is attempted to be opened in the application it makes sure that the check out is still valid before allowing the book to be opened .
If there is more than a 2 - 3 month wait for a book , another digital copy is purchased and added to the pool .
This could easily be a national library as there are no physical copies to store ( only servers storing the files ) and no need to check things out in person .
I would love this system and would probably use it even if it was not government funded and had a monthly fee .
I 'm aware of safari books online , but I 'd like something with a broader appeal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Regarding libraries - I think there's actually a fairly simple solution (though the publishers may dislike it): 
A library buys a digital copy of a book when someone requests it for the first time.
They have a "check out" iPad application (and/or other application) that will log in a database that the book is checked out for 2 weeks, and not let that copy be checked out until that copy is either manually checked back in or it automatically expires after two weeks.
When a book is attempted to be opened in the application it makes sure that the check out is still valid before allowing the book to be opened.
If there is more than a 2 - 3 month wait for a book, another digital copy is purchased and added to the pool.
This could easily be a national library as there are no physical copies to store (only servers storing the files) and no need to check things out in person.
I would love this system and would probably use it even if it was not government funded and had a monthly fee.
I'm aware of safari books online, but I'd like something with a broader appeal.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31384632</id>
	<title>Re:Problems....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267879440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ohhhhh... you mean DRM!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ohhhhh... you mean DRM !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ohhhhh... you mean DRM!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381526</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381412</id>
	<title>Re:Problems....</title>
	<author>1s44c</author>
	<datestamp>1267898100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>B) there are no libraries. How many people actually -buy- all the books they read?</p></div><p>I do. I thought everyone did.</p><p>Without access to a university library the only option is a public library, in which case I wait a month and have a very long trip to get a copy of a book with every third word underlined and some pages ripped out. Most books are so cheap that buying a new one is worth it just to save the pain of having to deal with a library. The exception would be out of print or hard to find books.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>B ) there are no libraries .
How many people actually -buy- all the books they read ? I do .
I thought everyone did.Without access to a university library the only option is a public library , in which case I wait a month and have a very long trip to get a copy of a book with every third word underlined and some pages ripped out .
Most books are so cheap that buying a new one is worth it just to save the pain of having to deal with a library .
The exception would be out of print or hard to find books .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>B) there are no libraries.
How many people actually -buy- all the books they read?I do.
I thought everyone did.Without access to a university library the only option is a public library, in which case I wait a month and have a very long trip to get a copy of a book with every third word underlined and some pages ripped out.
Most books are so cheap that buying a new one is worth it just to save the pain of having to deal with a library.
The exception would be out of print or hard to find books.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31400246</id>
	<title>Re:iPad's Killer App</title>
	<author>tehcyder</author>
	<datestamp>1268061540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Electronic books are probably one of the iPad's killer apps</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Isn't it a bit too big?  I like being able to put a paperback in a reasonably sized jacket pocket.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Electronic books are probably one of the iPad 's killer apps Is n't it a bit too big ?
I like being able to put a paperback in a reasonably sized jacket pocket .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Electronic books are probably one of the iPad's killer apps

Isn't it a bit too big?
I like being able to put a paperback in a reasonably sized jacket pocket.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381360</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31382716</id>
	<title>Re:iPad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267908300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Slashdotters don't understand that there are people from other backgrounds who are interested in different things than them.</p><p>To a designer (in this case, someone who designs book layouts), a netbook or a kindle, does not particularly excite them, because it's nothing particularly new for them to take advantage of. The kindle is limited to black and white and can't support video (even black and white video) due to the screen's refresh rate. The netbook doesn't give you anything you can't already do on a laptop today, except uh, it's smaller and more underpowered.</p><p>To a designer, the iPad present an entirely new way of interacting with media. It supports the same cool stuff you can do with computers and even netbooks, such as video and interactive content, but then presents it in a much more book-like fashion: A) it's portable, and you hold it in your hand like a book (not like a netbook!), B) it's got a cutting-edge touch-based interface, not just like, but similar to the intuitive way we navigate books with our fingers, and C) the iPad's industrial design is simple and allows the content on the screen to take over the user's experience.</p><p>This is why they are specifically talking about Apple's product. Nothing else similarly interests someone who's job and passion is to design the formats in which media is consumed.</p><p>Believe it or not, Apple does not find random people and pay them millions out of their evil advertising budget to talk about their products. It happens on its own, and I'm sorry you can't appreciate the significance of that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Slashdotters do n't understand that there are people from other backgrounds who are interested in different things than them.To a designer ( in this case , someone who designs book layouts ) , a netbook or a kindle , does not particularly excite them , because it 's nothing particularly new for them to take advantage of .
The kindle is limited to black and white and ca n't support video ( even black and white video ) due to the screen 's refresh rate .
The netbook does n't give you anything you ca n't already do on a laptop today , except uh , it 's smaller and more underpowered.To a designer , the iPad present an entirely new way of interacting with media .
It supports the same cool stuff you can do with computers and even netbooks , such as video and interactive content , but then presents it in a much more book-like fashion : A ) it 's portable , and you hold it in your hand like a book ( not like a netbook !
) , B ) it 's got a cutting-edge touch-based interface , not just like , but similar to the intuitive way we navigate books with our fingers , and C ) the iPad 's industrial design is simple and allows the content on the screen to take over the user 's experience.This is why they are specifically talking about Apple 's product .
Nothing else similarly interests someone who 's job and passion is to design the formats in which media is consumed.Believe it or not , Apple does not find random people and pay them millions out of their evil advertising budget to talk about their products .
It happens on its own , and I 'm sorry you ca n't appreciate the significance of that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slashdotters don't understand that there are people from other backgrounds who are interested in different things than them.To a designer (in this case, someone who designs book layouts), a netbook or a kindle, does not particularly excite them, because it's nothing particularly new for them to take advantage of.
The kindle is limited to black and white and can't support video (even black and white video) due to the screen's refresh rate.
The netbook doesn't give you anything you can't already do on a laptop today, except uh, it's smaller and more underpowered.To a designer, the iPad present an entirely new way of interacting with media.
It supports the same cool stuff you can do with computers and even netbooks, such as video and interactive content, but then presents it in a much more book-like fashion: A) it's portable, and you hold it in your hand like a book (not like a netbook!
), B) it's got a cutting-edge touch-based interface, not just like, but similar to the intuitive way we navigate books with our fingers, and C) the iPad's industrial design is simple and allows the content on the screen to take over the user's experience.This is why they are specifically talking about Apple's product.
Nothing else similarly interests someone who's job and passion is to design the formats in which media is consumed.Believe it or not, Apple does not find random people and pay them millions out of their evil advertising budget to talk about their products.
It happens on its own, and I'm sorry you can't appreciate the significance of that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381406</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31382182
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31384626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381478
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381408
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381342
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381372
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381406
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31383656
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381438
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381342
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381866
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381700
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31382904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381272
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381886
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31382028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381312
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31382562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31382082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381372
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31382156
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381372
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31382062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381406
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31384632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381526
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31397738
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381638
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31400246
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381574
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381406
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31387766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381478
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31385598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31399426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31383632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31382370
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381526
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31382716
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381406
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31386822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_06_1533254_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381654
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381406
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_06_1533254.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381292
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_06_1533254.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381342
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381408
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381438
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_06_1533254.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381372
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381870
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31382156
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31382082
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31382562
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_06_1533254.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381478
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31387766
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381844
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31384626
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_06_1533254.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381330
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381514
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_06_1533254.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381258
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_06_1533254.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381346
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_06_1533254.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381398
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381700
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381638
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_06_1533254.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381288
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31385598
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381412
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381866
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31383656
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31399426
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381830
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381526
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31382370
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31384632
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_06_1533254.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381736
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_06_1533254.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381484
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381916
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381886
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381848
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_06_1533254.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381406
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381574
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31382716
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31382062
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381654
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381884
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_06_1533254.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381248
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31383632
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31397738
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_06_1533254.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381272
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31382904
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_06_1533254.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381360
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31400246
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381824
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31386822
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31382182
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_06_1533254.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31381312
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_06_1533254.31382028
</commentlist>
</conversation>
