<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_04_1754225</id>
	<title>Hulu May Begin Charging For Video Content</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1244139240000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"According to Jonathan Miller, News Corp's CDO, <a href="http://techfragments.com/news/866/Tech/Hulu\_To\_Begin\_Charging\_For\_Video\_Content.html">Hulu may soon begin charging subscription fees</a> for some of their online content. News Corp is the parent company of Fox, which owns a huge portion of Hulu. When Miller of Newscorp was asked if Hulu would begin charging for online content during an Interview with Daily Finance, he said that 'the answer could be yes.' He went on to say that he doesn't 'see why over time that shouldn't happen.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " According to Jonathan Miller , News Corp 's CDO , Hulu may soon begin charging subscription fees for some of their online content .
News Corp is the parent company of Fox , which owns a huge portion of Hulu .
When Miller of Newscorp was asked if Hulu would begin charging for online content during an Interview with Daily Finance , he said that 'the answer could be yes .
' He went on to say that he does n't 'see why over time that should n't happen .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "According to Jonathan Miller, News Corp's CDO, Hulu may soon begin charging subscription fees for some of their online content.
News Corp is the parent company of Fox, which owns a huge portion of Hulu.
When Miller of Newscorp was asked if Hulu would begin charging for online content during an Interview with Daily Finance, he said that 'the answer could be yes.
' He went on to say that he doesn't 'see why over time that shouldn't happen.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213031</id>
	<title>Re:Worst Source Ever</title>
	<author>Hadlock</author>
	<datestamp>1244144580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know I'm quoting your quote, but "I went from paying $14 to The Wall Street Journal to paying $10 to Amazon. Now the splits there, and I think this is relatively well known, are very, very much in favor of Amazon." - I'm reasonably sure the profit based on digital distribution is equal or higher than printing on paper and then distributing it. You never end up with unsold copies at the end of the day.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I know I 'm quoting your quote , but " I went from paying $ 14 to The Wall Street Journal to paying $ 10 to Amazon .
Now the splits there , and I think this is relatively well known , are very , very much in favor of Amazon .
" - I 'm reasonably sure the profit based on digital distribution is equal or higher than printing on paper and then distributing it .
You never end up with unsold copies at the end of the day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know I'm quoting your quote, but "I went from paying $14 to The Wall Street Journal to paying $10 to Amazon.
Now the splits there, and I think this is relatively well known, are very, very much in favor of Amazon.
" - I'm reasonably sure the profit based on digital distribution is equal or higher than printing on paper and then distributing it.
You never end up with unsold copies at the end of the day.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212591</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212939</id>
	<title>I predict</title>
	<author>nausea\_malvarma</author>
	<datestamp>1244144160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>fans of hulu will migrate to a competing web video service, if they are forced to pay.</htmltext>
<tokenext>fans of hulu will migrate to a competing web video service , if they are forced to pay .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>fans of hulu will migrate to a competing web video service, if they are forced to pay.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213681</id>
	<title>I'll never pay!</title>
	<author>Jerinaw</author>
	<datestamp>1244147160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Never!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Never !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Never!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212771</id>
	<title>So what? The internet will do...</title>
	<author>kclittle</author>
	<datestamp>1244143560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>... what it was always designed to do, though admittedly at a higher, more general level than originally envisioned: It will route around the blockage.<br> <br>

              -k</htmltext>
<tokenext>... what it was always designed to do , though admittedly at a higher , more general level than originally envisioned : It will route around the blockage .
-k</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... what it was always designed to do, though admittedly at a higher, more general level than originally envisioned: It will route around the blockage.
-k</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213657</id>
	<title>Re:Bastards</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1244147040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My friend just bought a digital TV. I wrote a letter to a local weekly about it in response to their story about a local PBS station being dropped from basic cable and put on digital-only.</p><p><a href="http://illinoistimes.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid\%3A10041" title="illinoistimes.com">Digital backslide</a> [illinoistimes.com]<br>A friend who uses an indoor antenna bought a digital TV, and now only has four stations, two in analog, one of which is a Catholic religion station, and two in digital.</p><p>I fear this will happen to cable subscribers too after the loss of Channel 8 [see "Channel 8 goes blank for some WSEC viewers," by Amanda Robert, IT, April 23]. I can see channels going digital one by one until there are no analog signals left.</p><p>I was using an indoor antenna (before the digital switch). If I remember correctly, I had channels 12, 17, 19, 20, 28, 48 and 55. Now it seems that in the digital age, digital TV users have only two stations.</p><p>Welcome back to 1955 St. Louis!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My friend just bought a digital TV .
I wrote a letter to a local weekly about it in response to their story about a local PBS station being dropped from basic cable and put on digital-only.Digital backslide [ illinoistimes.com ] A friend who uses an indoor antenna bought a digital TV , and now only has four stations , two in analog , one of which is a Catholic religion station , and two in digital.I fear this will happen to cable subscribers too after the loss of Channel 8 [ see " Channel 8 goes blank for some WSEC viewers , " by Amanda Robert , IT , April 23 ] .
I can see channels going digital one by one until there are no analog signals left.I was using an indoor antenna ( before the digital switch ) .
If I remember correctly , I had channels 12 , 17 , 19 , 20 , 28 , 48 and 55 .
Now it seems that in the digital age , digital TV users have only two stations.Welcome back to 1955 St. Louis !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My friend just bought a digital TV.
I wrote a letter to a local weekly about it in response to their story about a local PBS station being dropped from basic cable and put on digital-only.Digital backslide [illinoistimes.com]A friend who uses an indoor antenna bought a digital TV, and now only has four stations, two in analog, one of which is a Catholic religion station, and two in digital.I fear this will happen to cable subscribers too after the loss of Channel 8 [see "Channel 8 goes blank for some WSEC viewers," by Amanda Robert, IT, April 23].
I can see channels going digital one by one until there are no analog signals left.I was using an indoor antenna (before the digital switch).
If I remember correctly, I had channels 12, 17, 19, 20, 28, 48 and 55.
Now it seems that in the digital age, digital TV users have only two stations.Welcome back to 1955 St. Louis!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212897</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28217687</id>
	<title>Pay for streaming - sure, if the connection works</title>
	<author>itslifejimbutnotaswe</author>
	<datestamp>1244128080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ignoring the fact that this "news" is just blog-generated rubbish, personally I'd be quite happy to pay for a streaming service, under the assumption that we had the connection speeds to give suitable content.

720p h264 at 6Mbit (maybe 5Mbit if they really have to stretch it) with AC3 sound, and an open protocol, and that'll be just fine.  You need a pretty damn good connection to ensure you get it without problems.  The current stuff they have is ridiculously rubbish quality in comparison.

Given that the net connections aren't at that level yet, and likely won't be for a while, I'd also be quite happy with downloads - 6Mbit for 720p or 12Mbit for 1080p.  Allow me to download in an open container (mkv is fine) and I'll be quite happy to pay the current going rate for Bluray pricing per season (even without all the extras), for the convenience of not having to rip it myself.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ignoring the fact that this " news " is just blog-generated rubbish , personally I 'd be quite happy to pay for a streaming service , under the assumption that we had the connection speeds to give suitable content .
720p h264 at 6Mbit ( maybe 5Mbit if they really have to stretch it ) with AC3 sound , and an open protocol , and that 'll be just fine .
You need a pretty damn good connection to ensure you get it without problems .
The current stuff they have is ridiculously rubbish quality in comparison .
Given that the net connections are n't at that level yet , and likely wo n't be for a while , I 'd also be quite happy with downloads - 6Mbit for 720p or 12Mbit for 1080p .
Allow me to download in an open container ( mkv is fine ) and I 'll be quite happy to pay the current going rate for Bluray pricing per season ( even without all the extras ) , for the convenience of not having to rip it myself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ignoring the fact that this "news" is just blog-generated rubbish, personally I'd be quite happy to pay for a streaming service, under the assumption that we had the connection speeds to give suitable content.
720p h264 at 6Mbit (maybe 5Mbit if they really have to stretch it) with AC3 sound, and an open protocol, and that'll be just fine.
You need a pretty damn good connection to ensure you get it without problems.
The current stuff they have is ridiculously rubbish quality in comparison.
Given that the net connections aren't at that level yet, and likely won't be for a while, I'd also be quite happy with downloads - 6Mbit for 720p or 12Mbit for 1080p.
Allow me to download in an open container (mkv is fine) and I'll be quite happy to pay the current going rate for Bluray pricing per season (even without all the extras), for the convenience of not having to rip it myself.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212635</id>
	<title>Not Smart</title>
	<author>shma</author>
	<datestamp>1244143080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>If they charge for on demand content, then people will just go back to downloading it for free.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If they charge for on demand content , then people will just go back to downloading it for free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they charge for on demand content, then people will just go back to downloading it for free.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28216257</id>
	<title>Plug and Play Required</title>
	<author>pcardno</author>
	<datestamp>1244116680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's only going to work when all I have to do is plug in the TV that I've just bought and it'll immediately hook up to Digital TV (Freeview in the UK), then I plug in my network connection and it immediately connects to Hulu, YouTube and others and offers them as channels.

Until then, how the hell are the majority of people in the next 20 years (40+ years old) supposed to do it?</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's only going to work when all I have to do is plug in the TV that I 've just bought and it 'll immediately hook up to Digital TV ( Freeview in the UK ) , then I plug in my network connection and it immediately connects to Hulu , YouTube and others and offers them as channels .
Until then , how the hell are the majority of people in the next 20 years ( 40 + years old ) supposed to do it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's only going to work when all I have to do is plug in the TV that I've just bought and it'll immediately hook up to Digital TV (Freeview in the UK), then I plug in my network connection and it immediately connects to Hulu, YouTube and others and offers them as channels.
Until then, how the hell are the majority of people in the next 20 years (40+ years old) supposed to do it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214645</id>
	<title>Re:Surprised?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244108460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I consider PBS pledge drives to be very costly to my mental stability. Therefore, broadcast television is not free. I refuse to call and donate and it doesn't matter how many old washed up singers perform or how many muppets encourage me!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I consider PBS pledge drives to be very costly to my mental stability .
Therefore , broadcast television is not free .
I refuse to call and donate and it does n't matter how many old washed up singers perform or how many muppets encourage me !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I consider PBS pledge drives to be very costly to my mental stability.
Therefore, broadcast television is not free.
I refuse to call and donate and it doesn't matter how many old washed up singers perform or how many muppets encourage me!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212837</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212713</id>
	<title>Sound familiar?</title>
	<author>BlueKitties</author>
	<datestamp>1244143320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Slashdot has paid subscription and I don't see people throwing hiss fits here. I'd see nothing wrong with a pay-to-remove-the-ads service (assuming they don't double up on the ads just to annoy people into paying.) What if they charge so you can stream movies still at the theatre? There are a lot of reasons pay content might not be a bad thing. It all depends on how they go about doing it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Slashdot has paid subscription and I do n't see people throwing hiss fits here .
I 'd see nothing wrong with a pay-to-remove-the-ads service ( assuming they do n't double up on the ads just to annoy people into paying .
) What if they charge so you can stream movies still at the theatre ?
There are a lot of reasons pay content might not be a bad thing .
It all depends on how they go about doing it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slashdot has paid subscription and I don't see people throwing hiss fits here.
I'd see nothing wrong with a pay-to-remove-the-ads service (assuming they don't double up on the ads just to annoy people into paying.
) What if they charge so you can stream movies still at the theatre?
There are a lot of reasons pay content might not be a bad thing.
It all depends on how they go about doing it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212941</id>
	<title>Re:Why not?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244144160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not likely.  If history is an indicator, it will be both ads and service charges.  Mr. Big Cheese needs another penthouse condo.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not likely .
If history is an indicator , it will be both ads and service charges .
Mr. Big Cheese needs another penthouse condo .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not likely.
If history is an indicator, it will be both ads and service charges.
Mr. Big Cheese needs another penthouse condo.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212653</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28217919</id>
	<title>Available internationally and commercial free?</title>
	<author>blankoboy</author>
	<datestamp>1244130840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If so, sign me up! But if they are looking to have their cake and eat it too by running commercials to paying customers I would not even think about it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If so , sign me up !
But if they are looking to have their cake and eat it too by running commercials to paying customers I would not even think about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If so, sign me up!
But if they are looking to have their cake and eat it too by running commercials to paying customers I would not even think about it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28215217</id>
	<title>Re:Bye Hulu!</title>
	<author>Eli Gottlieb</author>
	<datestamp>1244111100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, but with Tivo you pay for cable, internet, and Tivo.  If we got all that stuff from Hulu, we could reduce it to internet + Hulu (or other streaming service).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , but with Tivo you pay for cable , internet , and Tivo .
If we got all that stuff from Hulu , we could reduce it to internet + Hulu ( or other streaming service ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, but with Tivo you pay for cable, internet, and Tivo.
If we got all that stuff from Hulu, we could reduce it to internet + Hulu (or other streaming service).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214201</id>
	<title>Re:Bye Hulu!</title>
	<author>Cro Magnon</author>
	<datestamp>1244106000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can get that with my Tivo.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can get that with my Tivo .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can get that with my Tivo.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213103</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212633</id>
	<title>real headline should be...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244143080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>real headline should be "Hulu expects viewership to drop off significantly."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>real headline should be " Hulu expects viewership to drop off significantly .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>real headline should be "Hulu expects viewership to drop off significantly.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212899</id>
	<title>Re:Why not?</title>
	<author>SwordsmanLuke</author>
	<datestamp>1244143980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Tell that to the cable company.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Tell that to the cable company .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tell that to the cable company.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212653</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213017</id>
	<title>And when it fails, they'll blame piracy</title>
	<author>sircastor</author>
	<datestamp>1244144520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I admit that when I heard about Hulu, I was skeptical. Very skeptical. I also thought it was a bad idea, I thought it would never fly. I was wrong. I watched my first episodes of Firefly on Hulu. My wife and I use Hulu daily for our television. We don't own a television that we use and we don't particularly care. We liked Hulu... when we're watching actual television we're appalled at the number of ads we have to sit through.

Anyway, I see this (surprise) as a bad move for Hulu. They've got a good gig going. My suspicion (with evidence to back me up) is that Hulu was doing fine the way it was going, that it was not taking away viewers from television, and that it was overall a productive means of legally watching content online. Hulu will curl up and die if people have to shell out for it. Might as well start buying the shows you care about on Amazon or iTunes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I admit that when I heard about Hulu , I was skeptical .
Very skeptical .
I also thought it was a bad idea , I thought it would never fly .
I was wrong .
I watched my first episodes of Firefly on Hulu .
My wife and I use Hulu daily for our television .
We do n't own a television that we use and we do n't particularly care .
We liked Hulu... when we 're watching actual television we 're appalled at the number of ads we have to sit through .
Anyway , I see this ( surprise ) as a bad move for Hulu .
They 've got a good gig going .
My suspicion ( with evidence to back me up ) is that Hulu was doing fine the way it was going , that it was not taking away viewers from television , and that it was overall a productive means of legally watching content online .
Hulu will curl up and die if people have to shell out for it .
Might as well start buying the shows you care about on Amazon or iTunes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I admit that when I heard about Hulu, I was skeptical.
Very skeptical.
I also thought it was a bad idea, I thought it would never fly.
I was wrong.
I watched my first episodes of Firefly on Hulu.
My wife and I use Hulu daily for our television.
We don't own a television that we use and we don't particularly care.
We liked Hulu... when we're watching actual television we're appalled at the number of ads we have to sit through.
Anyway, I see this (surprise) as a bad move for Hulu.
They've got a good gig going.
My suspicion (with evidence to back me up) is that Hulu was doing fine the way it was going, that it was not taking away viewers from television, and that it was overall a productive means of legally watching content online.
Hulu will curl up and die if people have to shell out for it.
Might as well start buying the shows you care about on Amazon or iTunes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214225</id>
	<title>Youtube is suddenly dead</title>
	<author>denshao2</author>
	<datestamp>1244106120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I sense a conspiracy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I sense a conspiracy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I sense a conspiracy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213861</id>
	<title>Here are the conditions under which I will agree t</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244147820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here are the conditions under which I will agree to pay my money for Hulu:</p><p>1. No ads in the paid content. AT ALL. Not now, not ever.<br>2. Cheap, a-la carte subscriptions for individual shows. If I only need a few shows from Discovery, Nickelodeon and Food Network, I should be able to sign-up for only those shows.<br>3. Compatibility with an inexpensive hardware device of some sort (Apple TV, Xbox or PS3 will do).<br>4. Content is served in \_at least\_ 720p with high encoding quality.</p><p>These conditions are not negotiable. If all four are fulfilled, I, for one, will welcome our money charging overlords.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here are the conditions under which I will agree to pay my money for Hulu : 1 .
No ads in the paid content .
AT ALL .
Not now , not ever.2 .
Cheap , a-la carte subscriptions for individual shows .
If I only need a few shows from Discovery , Nickelodeon and Food Network , I should be able to sign-up for only those shows.3 .
Compatibility with an inexpensive hardware device of some sort ( Apple TV , Xbox or PS3 will do ) .4 .
Content is served in \ _at least \ _ 720p with high encoding quality.These conditions are not negotiable .
If all four are fulfilled , I , for one , will welcome our money charging overlords .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here are the conditions under which I will agree to pay my money for Hulu:1.
No ads in the paid content.
AT ALL.
Not now, not ever.2.
Cheap, a-la carte subscriptions for individual shows.
If I only need a few shows from Discovery, Nickelodeon and Food Network, I should be able to sign-up for only those shows.3.
Compatibility with an inexpensive hardware device of some sort (Apple TV, Xbox or PS3 will do).4.
Content is served in \_at least\_ 720p with high encoding quality.These conditions are not negotiable.
If all four are fulfilled, I, for one, will welcome our money charging overlords.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212643</id>
	<title>Here we go again?</title>
	<author>ITJC68</author>
	<datestamp>1244143140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Another company who isn't satisfied with the revenue stream from ads now wants to charge for content. Sorry. Not interested. I can watch my cable TV that I already pay for and if I want get a DVR and record my shows and watch them when I want!!! WOW what an idea!!! No I don't work for the cable company or a satellite TV company. I haven't been to their site but my kids have. Not worth the subscription unless it was like 2 or 3 bucks a year. 10 bucks a month can be spent more wisely in other areas.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Another company who is n't satisfied with the revenue stream from ads now wants to charge for content .
Sorry. Not interested .
I can watch my cable TV that I already pay for and if I want get a DVR and record my shows and watch them when I want ! ! !
WOW what an idea ! ! !
No I do n't work for the cable company or a satellite TV company .
I have n't been to their site but my kids have .
Not worth the subscription unless it was like 2 or 3 bucks a year .
10 bucks a month can be spent more wisely in other areas .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another company who isn't satisfied with the revenue stream from ads now wants to charge for content.
Sorry. Not interested.
I can watch my cable TV that I already pay for and if I want get a DVR and record my shows and watch them when I want!!!
WOW what an idea!!!
No I don't work for the cable company or a satellite TV company.
I haven't been to their site but my kids have.
Not worth the subscription unless it was like 2 or 3 bucks a year.
10 bucks a month can be spent more wisely in other areas.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212897</id>
	<title>Bastards</title>
	<author>Niris</author>
	<datestamp>1244143980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>The whole reason I even watch Hulu is because I don't want to deal with getting the digital converter box when the change happens, and it's cool being able to watch things when you want to. Having to pay for Hulu just ruins the entire great idea of it being like DTV with the normal free channels. Hell, I'd even be cool with more commercials in their shows to keep it free for me. Plus I can watch all the Firefly episodes on there. That's just awesome .</htmltext>
<tokenext>The whole reason I even watch Hulu is because I do n't want to deal with getting the digital converter box when the change happens , and it 's cool being able to watch things when you want to .
Having to pay for Hulu just ruins the entire great idea of it being like DTV with the normal free channels .
Hell , I 'd even be cool with more commercials in their shows to keep it free for me .
Plus I can watch all the Firefly episodes on there .
That 's just awesome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The whole reason I even watch Hulu is because I don't want to deal with getting the digital converter box when the change happens, and it's cool being able to watch things when you want to.
Having to pay for Hulu just ruins the entire great idea of it being like DTV with the normal free channels.
Hell, I'd even be cool with more commercials in their shows to keep it free for me.
Plus I can watch all the Firefly episodes on there.
That's just awesome .</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214245</id>
	<title>the name of the suscription management server...</title>
	<author>Junior J. Junior III</author>
	<datestamp>1244106180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...should be ct.hulu.com</p><p>ct = content toll.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...should be ct.hulu.comct = content toll .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...should be ct.hulu.comct = content toll.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213595</id>
	<title>So much for pudding...</title>
	<author>argent</author>
	<datestamp>1244146740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess they're not getting enough resale value from those brains they're slurping.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess they 're not getting enough resale value from those brains they 're slurping .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess they're not getting enough resale value from those brains they're slurping.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213581</id>
	<title>Re:Still not available</title>
	<author>Taeolas</author>
	<datestamp>1244146680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If there were someone really visionary, this could be the opening they need. (Not that it'll happen).

Charge a subscription to access it (you could even charge a subscription to access subsets of the library, like only "Sci Fi" shows, or only Cop Dramas), and do NOT do any geocaching. If someone in South Africa wants to Sub to Hulu to watch USian Cop Dramas, go for it.

Won't happen but it's something I'd love to see some day.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If there were someone really visionary , this could be the opening they need .
( Not that it 'll happen ) .
Charge a subscription to access it ( you could even charge a subscription to access subsets of the library , like only " Sci Fi " shows , or only Cop Dramas ) , and do NOT do any geocaching .
If someone in South Africa wants to Sub to Hulu to watch USian Cop Dramas , go for it .
Wo n't happen but it 's something I 'd love to see some day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If there were someone really visionary, this could be the opening they need.
(Not that it'll happen).
Charge a subscription to access it (you could even charge a subscription to access subsets of the library, like only "Sci Fi" shows, or only Cop Dramas), and do NOT do any geocaching.
If someone in South Africa wants to Sub to Hulu to watch USian Cop Dramas, go for it.
Won't happen but it's something I'd love to see some day.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213229</id>
	<title>Re:Save the animals</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244145360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Save the animals for my dinner.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Save the animals for my dinner .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Save the animals for my dinner.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212841</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28223983</id>
	<title>make it available</title>
	<author>vuffi\_raa</author>
	<datestamp>1244222580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>make it compatible on platforms other than a pc (mobile browsers, ps3, psp, wii, etc) and it might be worth it- it isn't worth it if I have to be tethered to the pc-</htmltext>
<tokenext>make it compatible on platforms other than a pc ( mobile browsers , ps3 , psp , wii , etc ) and it might be worth it- it is n't worth it if I have to be tethered to the pc-</tokentext>
<sentencetext>make it compatible on platforms other than a pc (mobile browsers, ps3, psp, wii, etc) and it might be worth it- it isn't worth it if I have to be tethered to the pc-</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214765</id>
	<title>Re:Still not available</title>
	<author>BikeHelmet</author>
	<datestamp>1244108940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd happily pay them $15/mo to get access to all their shows. It'd save me money!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd happily pay them $ 15/mo to get access to all their shows .
It 'd save me money !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd happily pay them $15/mo to get access to all their shows.
It'd save me money!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214751</id>
	<title>Re:Why not?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244108880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Tell that to the cable company.</p></div><p>I'll tell them, but what does my ISP have to do with TV shows?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Tell that to the cable company.I 'll tell them , but what does my ISP have to do with TV shows ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tell that to the cable company.I'll tell them, but what does my ISP have to do with TV shows?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212899</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213239</id>
	<title>Cable?</title>
	<author>somethinghollow</author>
	<datestamp>1244145420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have one of these already.  It's called "cable."  You pay a monthly fee and you get to watch a bunch of different channels with lots of different content.  The only difference I can tell between a paid Hulu and cable is that Hulu is only "on demand," has less content, and wants to be PC-only.  So, basically, Hulu will be the crappy version of cable.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have one of these already .
It 's called " cable .
" You pay a monthly fee and you get to watch a bunch of different channels with lots of different content .
The only difference I can tell between a paid Hulu and cable is that Hulu is only " on demand , " has less content , and wants to be PC-only .
So , basically , Hulu will be the crappy version of cable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have one of these already.
It's called "cable.
"  You pay a monthly fee and you get to watch a bunch of different channels with lots of different content.
The only difference I can tell between a paid Hulu and cable is that Hulu is only "on demand," has less content, and wants to be PC-only.
So, basically, Hulu will be the crappy version of cable.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213295</id>
	<title>I'll pay for Hulu if...</title>
	<author>HertzaHaeon</author>
	<datestamp>1244145600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'll gladly pay for a service like Hulu if I can watch it from outside the US. No silly "this video isn't available in your region". Just show the damn thing and take my money. Preferably, there's a choice between a small fee per episode or a subcription model.</p><p>But I expect they won't do that. So in effect, they don't want my money, they like to trouble me online and would rather see me download tv series.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll gladly pay for a service like Hulu if I can watch it from outside the US .
No silly " this video is n't available in your region " .
Just show the damn thing and take my money .
Preferably , there 's a choice between a small fee per episode or a subcription model.But I expect they wo n't do that .
So in effect , they do n't want my money , they like to trouble me online and would rather see me download tv series .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll gladly pay for a service like Hulu if I can watch it from outside the US.
No silly "this video isn't available in your region".
Just show the damn thing and take my money.
Preferably, there's a choice between a small fee per episode or a subcription model.But I expect they won't do that.
So in effect, they don't want my money, they like to trouble me online and would rather see me download tv series.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213729</id>
	<title>Re:Surprised?</title>
	<author>Acer500</author>
	<datestamp>1244147340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <i>Did anyone really think they were going to give away their content for free forever?</i>

What, you mean like broadcast television?</p></div><p>Do they actually give away something of value where you live? I had a TV set... and I gave it away, since I thought cable a waste of money for someone living alone, the over-the-air TV has NOTHING in terms of programming (the few things I could be interested in are either not aired - most likely, or, in the rare event they air something worthwhile, aired at an inconvenient time), and I mostly watch stuff on my PC anyways.<br> <br>
 I won't stop watching "tv" or pretend I'm "holier-than-thou" because I don't own a TV*<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I just switched the medium, and waste as much if not more time than before, only, on my terms.
<br> <br>
* actually, I am<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did anyone really think they were going to give away their content for free forever ?
What , you mean like broadcast television ? Do they actually give away something of value where you live ?
I had a TV set... and I gave it away , since I thought cable a waste of money for someone living alone , the over-the-air TV has NOTHING in terms of programming ( the few things I could be interested in are either not aired - most likely , or , in the rare event they air something worthwhile , aired at an inconvenient time ) , and I mostly watch stuff on my PC anyways .
I wo n't stop watching " tv " or pretend I 'm " holier-than-thou " because I do n't own a TV * ... I just switched the medium , and waste as much if not more time than before , only , on my terms .
* actually , I am : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Did anyone really think they were going to give away their content for free forever?
What, you mean like broadcast television?Do they actually give away something of value where you live?
I had a TV set... and I gave it away, since I thought cable a waste of money for someone living alone, the over-the-air TV has NOTHING in terms of programming (the few things I could be interested in are either not aired - most likely, or, in the rare event they air something worthwhile, aired at an inconvenient time), and I mostly watch stuff on my PC anyways.
I won't stop watching "tv" or pretend I'm "holier-than-thou" because I don't own a TV* ... I just switched the medium, and waste as much if not more time than before, only, on my terms.
* actually, I am :)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212837</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212673</id>
	<title>Another Obligatory</title>
	<author>mandark1967</author>
	<datestamp>1244143140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In Soviet Russia, Hulu pays you to watch!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In Soviet Russia , Hulu pays you to watch !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Soviet Russia, Hulu pays you to watch!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212581</id>
	<title>Still not available</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244142840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since we still can't watch Hulu in Canada, I won't be paying anything.  It's probably cheaper than cable anyways.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since we still ca n't watch Hulu in Canada , I wo n't be paying anything .
It 's probably cheaper than cable anyways .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since we still can't watch Hulu in Canada, I won't be paying anything.
It's probably cheaper than cable anyways.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28216281</id>
	<title>Re:I wouldn't pay for streaming...</title>
	<author>sexconker</author>
	<datestamp>1244116800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1 GB / hour?<br>In before bandwidth cap calculations.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 GB / hour ? In before bandwidth cap calculations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1 GB / hour?In before bandwidth cap calculations.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213349</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212627</id>
	<title>Alt title: How to kill an extraordinary service</title>
	<author>ecolossal</author>
	<datestamp>1244143020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do they feel the need to add a subscription fee when they already show commercials....? Isn't that what drives dissatisfaction with cable?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do they feel the need to add a subscription fee when they already show commercials.... ?
Is n't that what drives dissatisfaction with cable ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do they feel the need to add a subscription fee when they already show commercials....?
Isn't that what drives dissatisfaction with cable?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213869</id>
	<title>Re:Still not available</title>
	<author>gilgongo</author>
	<datestamp>1244147880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And since we still can't watch Hulu in Europe, I won't be paying anything either. Oh well, The Pirate Bay is easier anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And since we still ca n't watch Hulu in Europe , I wo n't be paying anything either .
Oh well , The Pirate Bay is easier anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And since we still can't watch Hulu in Europe, I won't be paying anything either.
Oh well, The Pirate Bay is easier anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212591</id>
	<title>Worst Source Ever</title>
	<author>eldavojohn</author>
	<datestamp>1244142900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>

It came from words spoken at <a href="http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content\_display/technology/news/e3i22db2de2f279e316e965eaca55ef769a" title="hollywoodreporter.com" rel="nofollow">Hollywood Reporter's Internet Week</a> [hollywoodreporter.com] (which seems to be the origin of this report).

And from <a href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/2009/06/03/soon-youll-have-to-pay-for-hulu/" title="dailyfinance.com" rel="nofollow">Jeff Bercovici at Daily Finance</a> [dailyfinance.com] who reoprts that Jonathan Miller, Chief Digital Officer of News Corp said:<p><div class="quote"><p>I think what works for consumers most likely -- and this has to be tested, frankly -- is bundles. I think you have to figure out what are the right bundles that people buy and what's contained in that bundle. For example, you could have -- and I'm making this up entirely -- you could have a New York bundle, and that could consist of various papers or publications that are relevant to the audience in New York, and you could make that all, potentially, a bundle to a consumer at one price.</p></div><p>For what it's worth, he also made this statement:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>I went from paying $14 to The Wall Street Journal to paying $10 to Amazon. Now the splits there, and I think this is relatively well known, are very, very much in favor of Amazon. So I became very much less valuable to The Wall Street Journal. That's part one. Part two is they don't know I exist. I went from being someone who's their subscriber to being someone who is an Amazon subscriber, which The Wall Street Journal has no visibility back to and cannot manage that customer relationship. . . . So they've lost both the customer management and, trust me, the lion's share of the economics.</p></div><p>You know I hate to be voice of calm reason, folks but this is all the original source reported:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Asked specifically about the future of online video joint venture Hulu, which is currently advertising-supported, he said it "is an environment for premium content." Pointing to the popularity of iPhone applications, he added: "We're seeing the beginning of a very strong app economy."</p>  </div><p>From there, you can trace a very hilarious wave of the telephone game from blog to blog of people slowly blowing it out of proportion as it's put together that this guy is talking about paid subscriptions and he's in charge of Hulu therefore Hulu must be becoming a paid subscription service.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It came from words spoken at Hollywood Reporter 's Internet Week [ hollywoodreporter.com ] ( which seems to be the origin of this report ) .
And from Jeff Bercovici at Daily Finance [ dailyfinance.com ] who reoprts that Jonathan Miller , Chief Digital Officer of News Corp said : I think what works for consumers most likely -- and this has to be tested , frankly -- is bundles .
I think you have to figure out what are the right bundles that people buy and what 's contained in that bundle .
For example , you could have -- and I 'm making this up entirely -- you could have a New York bundle , and that could consist of various papers or publications that are relevant to the audience in New York , and you could make that all , potentially , a bundle to a consumer at one price.For what it 's worth , he also made this statement : I went from paying $ 14 to The Wall Street Journal to paying $ 10 to Amazon .
Now the splits there , and I think this is relatively well known , are very , very much in favor of Amazon .
So I became very much less valuable to The Wall Street Journal .
That 's part one .
Part two is they do n't know I exist .
I went from being someone who 's their subscriber to being someone who is an Amazon subscriber , which The Wall Street Journal has no visibility back to and can not manage that customer relationship .
. .
. So they 've lost both the customer management and , trust me , the lion 's share of the economics.You know I hate to be voice of calm reason , folks but this is all the original source reported : Asked specifically about the future of online video joint venture Hulu , which is currently advertising-supported , he said it " is an environment for premium content .
" Pointing to the popularity of iPhone applications , he added : " We 're seeing the beginning of a very strong app economy .
" From there , you can trace a very hilarious wave of the telephone game from blog to blog of people slowly blowing it out of proportion as it 's put together that this guy is talking about paid subscriptions and he 's in charge of Hulu therefore Hulu must be becoming a paid subscription service .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>

It came from words spoken at Hollywood Reporter's Internet Week [hollywoodreporter.com] (which seems to be the origin of this report).
And from Jeff Bercovici at Daily Finance [dailyfinance.com] who reoprts that Jonathan Miller, Chief Digital Officer of News Corp said:I think what works for consumers most likely -- and this has to be tested, frankly -- is bundles.
I think you have to figure out what are the right bundles that people buy and what's contained in that bundle.
For example, you could have -- and I'm making this up entirely -- you could have a New York bundle, and that could consist of various papers or publications that are relevant to the audience in New York, and you could make that all, potentially, a bundle to a consumer at one price.For what it's worth, he also made this statement:I went from paying $14 to The Wall Street Journal to paying $10 to Amazon.
Now the splits there, and I think this is relatively well known, are very, very much in favor of Amazon.
So I became very much less valuable to The Wall Street Journal.
That's part one.
Part two is they don't know I exist.
I went from being someone who's their subscriber to being someone who is an Amazon subscriber, which The Wall Street Journal has no visibility back to and cannot manage that customer relationship.
. .
. So they've lost both the customer management and, trust me, the lion's share of the economics.You know I hate to be voice of calm reason, folks but this is all the original source reported:Asked specifically about the future of online video joint venture Hulu, which is currently advertising-supported, he said it "is an environment for premium content.
" Pointing to the popularity of iPhone applications, he added: "We're seeing the beginning of a very strong app economy.
"  From there, you can trace a very hilarious wave of the telephone game from blog to blog of people slowly blowing it out of proportion as it's put together that this guy is talking about paid subscriptions and he's in charge of Hulu therefore Hulu must be becoming a paid subscription service.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212841</id>
	<title>Save the animals</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244143800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have been asked to <a href="http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com/" title="theanimalrescuesite.com" rel="nofollow">click on this site</a> [theanimalrescuesite.com] by my boss to help save animals.  Any help is appreciated.  Thanks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have been asked to click on this site [ theanimalrescuesite.com ] by my boss to help save animals .
Any help is appreciated .
Thanks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have been asked to click on this site [theanimalrescuesite.com] by my boss to help save animals.
Any help is appreciated.
Thanks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213775</id>
	<title>Re:Still not available</title>
	<author>afidel</author>
	<datestamp>1244147520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>No, it's because of exclusive redistribution contracts with foreign media companies. They could find plenty of international advertisers and even national advertisers using IP location services just like everything else on the web. The problem is that the media companies have divided up the world into a ton of little markets and their existing contracts don't allow them to do internet based distribution. It's an old business model that will change over time but it could take quite a while.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , it 's because of exclusive redistribution contracts with foreign media companies .
They could find plenty of international advertisers and even national advertisers using IP location services just like everything else on the web .
The problem is that the media companies have divided up the world into a ton of little markets and their existing contracts do n't allow them to do internet based distribution .
It 's an old business model that will change over time but it could take quite a while .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, it's because of exclusive redistribution contracts with foreign media companies.
They could find plenty of international advertisers and even national advertisers using IP location services just like everything else on the web.
The problem is that the media companies have divided up the world into a ton of little markets and their existing contracts don't allow them to do internet based distribution.
It's an old business model that will change over time but it could take quite a while.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213111</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28223279</id>
	<title>Huge portion</title>
	<author>slapout</author>
	<datestamp>1244220060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"which owns a huge portion of Hulu"</p><p>huge = 27\%<br>--http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hulu</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" which owns a huge portion of Hulu " huge = 27 \ % --http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hulu</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"which owns a huge portion of Hulu"huge = 27\%--http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hulu</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213969</id>
	<title>Re:Not Smart</title>
	<author>SparkleMotion88</author>
	<datestamp>1244148240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>If they charge for on demand content, then people will just go back to downloading it for free.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>

Exactly.  This is why nobody subscribes to cable, Directv, HBO, Netflix, XM, etc.  It's because these services cost money and because we can get all the content for free.  There are no other factors involved.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If they charge for on demand content , then people will just go back to downloading it for free .
Exactly. This is why nobody subscribes to cable , Directv , HBO , Netflix , XM , etc .
It 's because these services cost money and because we can get all the content for free .
There are no other factors involved .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they charge for on demand content, then people will just go back to downloading it for free.
Exactly.  This is why nobody subscribes to cable, Directv, HBO, Netflix, XM, etc.
It's because these services cost money and because we can get all the content for free.
There are no other factors involved.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212635</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213577</id>
	<title>Re:Surprised?</title>
	<author>jmcvetta</author>
	<datestamp>1244146680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Did anyone really think they were going to give away their content for free forever?</p></div><p>I use Hulu because it's a lot more convenient than locating and downloading a liberated copy of the same content.  As the price for that convenience, I am willing to tolerate advertisements inserted into the content.</p><p>However, the moment they start charging money, that calculus will change.  If the price is low enough, and comes with advertising removed, the balance might still favor Hulu.  But if the price is too high, or the advertising is not removed, most likely I'll go back to watching only liberated video content.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did anyone really think they were going to give away their content for free forever ? I use Hulu because it 's a lot more convenient than locating and downloading a liberated copy of the same content .
As the price for that convenience , I am willing to tolerate advertisements inserted into the content.However , the moment they start charging money , that calculus will change .
If the price is low enough , and comes with advertising removed , the balance might still favor Hulu .
But if the price is too high , or the advertising is not removed , most likely I 'll go back to watching only liberated video content .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did anyone really think they were going to give away their content for free forever?I use Hulu because it's a lot more convenient than locating and downloading a liberated copy of the same content.
As the price for that convenience, I am willing to tolerate advertisements inserted into the content.However, the moment they start charging money, that calculus will change.
If the price is low enough, and comes with advertising removed, the balance might still favor Hulu.
But if the price is too high, or the advertising is not removed, most likely I'll go back to watching only liberated video content.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212621</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213175</id>
	<title>Re:Why not?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244145180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Fine, but it's either subscription or ads. You don't get to do both.</i></p><p>Why not?  It worked for the newspaper industry for hundreds of years.  The newspapers that still produce content instead of reprinting AP articles (like the WSJ, etc) will continue to do this for a long time. Shouting "nuh-uh, one or the other" with no justification is petty whinging.</p><p>If they start charging, however, they will need ensure that customers can easily watch shows using a couch, remote, and TV, since that is still a popular way to watch the content.  No randomly breaking Slingbox support, etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Fine , but it 's either subscription or ads .
You do n't get to do both.Why not ?
It worked for the newspaper industry for hundreds of years .
The newspapers that still produce content instead of reprinting AP articles ( like the WSJ , etc ) will continue to do this for a long time .
Shouting " nuh-uh , one or the other " with no justification is petty whinging.If they start charging , however , they will need ensure that customers can easily watch shows using a couch , remote , and TV , since that is still a popular way to watch the content .
No randomly breaking Slingbox support , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fine, but it's either subscription or ads.
You don't get to do both.Why not?
It worked for the newspaper industry for hundreds of years.
The newspapers that still produce content instead of reprinting AP articles (like the WSJ, etc) will continue to do this for a long time.
Shouting "nuh-uh, one or the other" with no justification is petty whinging.If they start charging, however, they will need ensure that customers can easily watch shows using a couch, remote, and TV, since that is still a popular way to watch the content.
No randomly breaking Slingbox support, etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212653</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212723</id>
	<title>Re:Surprised?</title>
	<author>ecolossal</author>
	<datestamp>1244143380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well- they don't exactly "give away their content for free forever" .</p><p>Commercials are interspersed throughout every movie and show. Also, for most shows, they only make a handful of episodes available at a time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well- they do n't exactly " give away their content for free forever " .Commercials are interspersed throughout every movie and show .
Also , for most shows , they only make a handful of episodes available at a time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well- they don't exactly "give away their content for free forever" .Commercials are interspersed throughout every movie and show.
Also, for most shows, they only make a handful of episodes available at a time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212621</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28215057</id>
	<title>Re:Not Smart</title>
	<author>Hoopeskidoodle</author>
	<datestamp>1244110500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If they charge for on demand content, then people will just go back to downloading it for free.</p></div><p>Go back??? I never stopped.
I won't watch Hulu for free. I'm certainly not going to pay for it.
I'm never going to watch commercials on the internet. Nor am I going to pay for online content.
I pay my isp bill. That's it.

FYI: I don't pay for cable television either. Anything that I want to watch can be acquired elsewhere for free.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If they charge for on demand content , then people will just go back to downloading it for free.Go back ? ? ?
I never stopped .
I wo n't watch Hulu for free .
I 'm certainly not going to pay for it .
I 'm never going to watch commercials on the internet .
Nor am I going to pay for online content .
I pay my isp bill .
That 's it .
FYI : I do n't pay for cable television either .
Anything that I want to watch can be acquired elsewhere for free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they charge for on demand content, then people will just go back to downloading it for free.Go back???
I never stopped.
I won't watch Hulu for free.
I'm certainly not going to pay for it.
I'm never going to watch commercials on the internet.
Nor am I going to pay for online content.
I pay my isp bill.
That's it.
FYI: I don't pay for cable television either.
Anything that I want to watch can be acquired elsewhere for free.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212635</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28215309</id>
	<title>Re:Can't use it...</title>
	<author>grouchomarxist</author>
	<datestamp>1244111520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In my experience Hotspot Shield doesn't work for me. It messes up my network settings and puts useless search results on top of my browser view and didn't let me view Hulu at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In my experience Hotspot Shield does n't work for me .
It messes up my network settings and puts useless search results on top of my browser view and did n't let me view Hulu at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my experience Hotspot Shield doesn't work for me.
It messes up my network settings and puts useless search results on top of my browser view and didn't let me view Hulu at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213029</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212747</id>
	<title>Reason for free?</title>
	<author>Jugalator</author>
	<datestamp>1244143440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>He went on to say that he doesn't 'see why over time that shouldn't happen.'</p></div><p>To keep their users? *shrug*</p><p>Sometimes I think the ad model works better here. There are so many other free sources for video these days, especially online-based.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-p</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>He went on to say that he does n't 'see why over time that should n't happen .
'To keep their users ?
* shrug * Sometimes I think the ad model works better here .
There are so many other free sources for video these days , especially online-based .
: -p</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He went on to say that he doesn't 'see why over time that shouldn't happen.
'To keep their users?
*shrug*Sometimes I think the ad model works better here.
There are so many other free sources for video these days, especially online-based.
:-p
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214607</id>
	<title>Re:Not Smart</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244108220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>It will also push people to other services, e.g. iTunes.<br> <br>

Currently the advantage of Hulu is that it doesn't require a subscription. It has a real low barrier to entry: just surf to the site and click and watch. The only nuissance is ads.<br> <br>

If Hulu tries to directly compete with things like iTunes, it will lose its advantage. iTunes has higher quality and the fact that it downloads the file makes playback smoother and more useful (e.g. downloading files for a trip). A streaming service will not compete with that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It will also push people to other services , e.g .
iTunes . Currently the advantage of Hulu is that it does n't require a subscription .
It has a real low barrier to entry : just surf to the site and click and watch .
The only nuissance is ads .
If Hulu tries to directly compete with things like iTunes , it will lose its advantage .
iTunes has higher quality and the fact that it downloads the file makes playback smoother and more useful ( e.g .
downloading files for a trip ) .
A streaming service will not compete with that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It will also push people to other services, e.g.
iTunes. 

Currently the advantage of Hulu is that it doesn't require a subscription.
It has a real low barrier to entry: just surf to the site and click and watch.
The only nuissance is ads.
If Hulu tries to directly compete with things like iTunes, it will lose its advantage.
iTunes has higher quality and the fact that it downloads the file makes playback smoother and more useful (e.g.
downloading files for a trip).
A streaming service will not compete with that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212635</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212961</id>
	<title>Re:Worst Source Ever</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244144220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Your information is very much appreciated.  I would have modded you up but I spent my last this morning.  Too bad... this was far more deserving.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Your information is very much appreciated .
I would have modded you up but I spent my last this morning .
Too bad... this was far more deserving .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your information is very much appreciated.
I would have modded you up but I spent my last this morning.
Too bad... this was far more deserving.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212591</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213103</id>
	<title>Re:Bye Hulu!</title>
	<author>Eli Gottlieb</author>
	<datestamp>1244144940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, if it means that I get to watch what I want, when I want, in HD or SD, and without ads, I'll gladly pay a subscription fee to Hulu.  That's damn better than cable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , if it means that I get to watch what I want , when I want , in HD or SD , and without ads , I 'll gladly pay a subscription fee to Hulu .
That 's damn better than cable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, if it means that I get to watch what I want, when I want, in HD or SD, and without ads, I'll gladly pay a subscription fee to Hulu.
That's damn better than cable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212905</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213357</id>
	<title>Re:Oblig. Star Wars Quote</title>
	<author>paeanblack</author>
	<datestamp>1244145840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I sense a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror, and were suddenly driven back to piracy.</i></p><p>iTunes is doing just fine with all of its for-pay content available via piracy.  Netflix does fine with its subscription model.</p><p>The only thing they need to do is make hulu-for-pay easier/faster/more reliable than piracy.  They have, for the most part, already accomplished that.  As long as they don't break that simplicity with the fee structure, they are going to do just fine.  They will, however, need to not break things like Slingbox if their users are watching hulu through it.</p><p>For the American market, that means a flat monthly fee, independent of usage.  Americans in general resent being nickeled and dimed, and will typically pay more in flat rates so they don't have to meter their usage.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I sense a great disturbance in the Force , as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror , and were suddenly driven back to piracy.iTunes is doing just fine with all of its for-pay content available via piracy .
Netflix does fine with its subscription model.The only thing they need to do is make hulu-for-pay easier/faster/more reliable than piracy .
They have , for the most part , already accomplished that .
As long as they do n't break that simplicity with the fee structure , they are going to do just fine .
They will , however , need to not break things like Slingbox if their users are watching hulu through it.For the American market , that means a flat monthly fee , independent of usage .
Americans in general resent being nickeled and dimed , and will typically pay more in flat rates so they do n't have to meter their usage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I sense a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror, and were suddenly driven back to piracy.iTunes is doing just fine with all of its for-pay content available via piracy.
Netflix does fine with its subscription model.The only thing they need to do is make hulu-for-pay easier/faster/more reliable than piracy.
They have, for the most part, already accomplished that.
As long as they don't break that simplicity with the fee structure, they are going to do just fine.
They will, however, need to not break things like Slingbox if their users are watching hulu through it.For the American market, that means a flat monthly fee, independent of usage.
Americans in general resent being nickeled and dimed, and will typically pay more in flat rates so they don't have to meter their usage.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212729</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212653</id>
	<title>Why not?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244143140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>He went on to say that he doesn't 'see why over time that shouldn't happen.'"</p></div></blockquote><p>Fine, but it's either subscription or ads. You don't get to do both.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>He went on to say that he does n't 'see why over time that should n't happen .
' " Fine , but it 's either subscription or ads .
You do n't get to do both .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He went on to say that he doesn't 'see why over time that shouldn't happen.
'"Fine, but it's either subscription or ads.
You don't get to do both.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213539</id>
	<title>I suggest the "telephonegame" tag</title>
	<author>whiledo</author>
	<datestamp>1244146500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>See subject.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>See subject .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>See subject.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212591</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212917</id>
	<title>Re:Why not?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244144040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why not? Cable TV sure does.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why not ?
Cable TV sure does .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why not?
Cable TV sure does.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212653</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28218397</id>
	<title>I for one</title>
	<author>cstacy</author>
	<datestamp>1244136000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I for one welcome our tentacled video-induced braingoo slurping overlords...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I for one welcome our tentacled video-induced braingoo slurping overlords.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I for one welcome our tentacled video-induced braingoo slurping overlords...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28220707</id>
	<title>Re:Ohhhhh, goooood for you.</title>
	<author>Blimey85</author>
	<datestamp>1244208000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Best. Fucking. Comment. Ever.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Best .
Fucking. Comment .
Ever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Best.
Fucking. Comment.
Ever.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28216757</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213143</id>
	<title>Re:Worst Source Ever</title>
	<author>Rycross</author>
	<datestamp>1244145060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Great, just great.  Now what am I supposed to do with all these torches and pitchforks!?  Ass.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Great , just great .
Now what am I supposed to do with all these torches and pitchforks ! ?
Ass .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Great, just great.
Now what am I supposed to do with all these torches and pitchforks!?
Ass.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212591</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213223</id>
	<title>OK, now people, DO NOT PAY and it will pass...</title>
	<author>rAiNsT0rm</author>
	<datestamp>1244145360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously I try to get this through people's heads all the time... for geeks we sure can be dumb. It is and has been free. If everyone ignores the service if/when it goes pay or even if only parts go pay only IGNORE them, also make it known you are NOT going to pay for the content... ads are enough to deal with for the content. Then Hulu (which is already successful) will find alternate avenues for revenue. If everyone just jumps in right off the bat you have instantly ensured all future video services like this will be pay-only. Wake up! Please.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously I try to get this through people 's heads all the time... for geeks we sure can be dumb .
It is and has been free .
If everyone ignores the service if/when it goes pay or even if only parts go pay only IGNORE them , also make it known you are NOT going to pay for the content... ads are enough to deal with for the content .
Then Hulu ( which is already successful ) will find alternate avenues for revenue .
If everyone just jumps in right off the bat you have instantly ensured all future video services like this will be pay-only .
Wake up !
Please .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously I try to get this through people's heads all the time... for geeks we sure can be dumb.
It is and has been free.
If everyone ignores the service if/when it goes pay or even if only parts go pay only IGNORE them, also make it known you are NOT going to pay for the content... ads are enough to deal with for the content.
Then Hulu (which is already successful) will find alternate avenues for revenue.
If everyone just jumps in right off the bat you have instantly ensured all future video services like this will be pay-only.
Wake up!
Please.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212637</id>
	<title>Just like a drug dealer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244143080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Get them hooked with freebies - then hit them in the wallet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Get them hooked with freebies - then hit them in the wallet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Get them hooked with freebies - then hit them in the wallet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212729</id>
	<title>Oblig. Star Wars Quote</title>
	<author>neochubbz</author>
	<datestamp>1244143380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I sense a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror, and were suddenly driven back to piracy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I sense a great disturbance in the Force , as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror , and were suddenly driven back to piracy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I sense a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror, and were suddenly driven back to piracy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213633</id>
	<title>I already pay for cable</title>
	<author>SCHecklerX</author>
	<datestamp>1244146920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>which has the same shows.  Why would I pay for this too?  I use hulu every now and then.  Usually when comcrap's service (which I'm paying for) craps out (the SA HD DVR is a piece of flaming shit).  It's nice for when on the road too.  But, really, I'm already paying for that content, so why would I pay for it again?  I'm sure the cable companies don't want to pay for this... but aren't they already, and that's why they charge us?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>which has the same shows .
Why would I pay for this too ?
I use hulu every now and then .
Usually when comcrap 's service ( which I 'm paying for ) craps out ( the SA HD DVR is a piece of flaming shit ) .
It 's nice for when on the road too .
But , really , I 'm already paying for that content , so why would I pay for it again ?
I 'm sure the cable companies do n't want to pay for this... but are n't they already , and that 's why they charge us ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>which has the same shows.
Why would I pay for this too?
I use hulu every now and then.
Usually when comcrap's service (which I'm paying for) craps out (the SA HD DVR is a piece of flaming shit).
It's nice for when on the road too.
But, really, I'm already paying for that content, so why would I pay for it again?
I'm sure the cable companies don't want to pay for this... but aren't they already, and that's why they charge us?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28215943</id>
	<title>Hulu is just this close...</title>
	<author>prometx42</author>
	<datestamp>1244115000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><nobr> <wbr></nobr>...to the edge. Try to pull a stunt like that and you are dead to me; dead!

There are plenty of good books to read and I am, impolitely, going to mention the commercial-free, dvd-quality availability of virtually anything via Usenet, to which the subscription fee for a decent server would be vastly preferable.

Hulu.com, count your blessings and quit while you are ahead. To a man standing on the edge of a cliff, wise advice is to take two steps backward...

'nuff said...</htmltext>
<tokenext>...to the edge .
Try to pull a stunt like that and you are dead to me ; dead !
There are plenty of good books to read and I am , impolitely , going to mention the commercial-free , dvd-quality availability of virtually anything via Usenet , to which the subscription fee for a decent server would be vastly preferable .
Hulu.com , count your blessings and quit while you are ahead .
To a man standing on the edge of a cliff , wise advice is to take two steps backward.. . 'nuff said.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...to the edge.
Try to pull a stunt like that and you are dead to me; dead!
There are plenty of good books to read and I am, impolitely, going to mention the commercial-free, dvd-quality availability of virtually anything via Usenet, to which the subscription fee for a decent server would be vastly preferable.
Hulu.com, count your blessings and quit while you are ahead.
To a man standing on the edge of a cliff, wise advice is to take two steps backward...

'nuff said...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214125</id>
	<title>Re:Why not?</title>
	<author>crabboy.com</author>
	<datestamp>1244148840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It has worked for the cable companies up until now.  I don't imagine the cable companies will be able to continue in the face of real competition...</htmltext>
<tokenext>It has worked for the cable companies up until now .
I do n't imagine the cable companies will be able to continue in the face of real competition.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It has worked for the cable companies up until now.
I don't imagine the cable companies will be able to continue in the face of real competition...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212899</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212701</id>
	<title>FOX is EVIIILLLLLL!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244143260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess that is what you shout when you have an useless article with so little information.</p><p>I thought fox's HUGE ownership position was exactly the same as the other partners, NBC and ABC.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess that is what you shout when you have an useless article with so little information.I thought fox 's HUGE ownership position was exactly the same as the other partners , NBC and ABC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess that is what you shout when you have an useless article with so little information.I thought fox's HUGE ownership position was exactly the same as the other partners, NBC and ABC.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212739</id>
	<title>Nice while it lasted</title>
	<author>jgtg32a</author>
	<datestamp>1244143440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Back to TPB</htmltext>
<tokenext>Back to TPB</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Back to TPB</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214489</id>
	<title>Re:Alt title: How to kill an extraordinary service</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244107500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Cable company doesn't foot the bill for content creation, only delivery, so the networks still need to include the commercials. Of course, with what the cable companies charge they probably could work something out where they pay the content producers a share of the... heh yeah like that would ever happen...</p><p>Hulu is a different story since it's owned primarily by the same people who make the content. They had a great idea, and now that they see it's working they are getting greedy and looking for ways to shoot themselves in the foot...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Cable company does n't foot the bill for content creation , only delivery , so the networks still need to include the commercials .
Of course , with what the cable companies charge they probably could work something out where they pay the content producers a share of the... heh yeah like that would ever happen...Hulu is a different story since it 's owned primarily by the same people who make the content .
They had a great idea , and now that they see it 's working they are getting greedy and looking for ways to shoot themselves in the foot.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Cable company doesn't foot the bill for content creation, only delivery, so the networks still need to include the commercials.
Of course, with what the cable companies charge they probably could work something out where they pay the content producers a share of the... heh yeah like that would ever happen...Hulu is a different story since it's owned primarily by the same people who make the content.
They had a great idea, and now that they see it's working they are getting greedy and looking for ways to shoot themselves in the foot...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212627</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212621</id>
	<title>Surprised?</title>
	<author>whisper\_jeff</author>
	<datestamp>1244143020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is anyone seriously surprised? Did anyone really think they were going to give away their content for free forever? Of course they were giving it away free initially to generate interest and then later going to tack on a price tag...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is anyone seriously surprised ?
Did anyone really think they were going to give away their content for free forever ?
Of course they were giving it away free initially to generate interest and then later going to tack on a price tag.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is anyone seriously surprised?
Did anyone really think they were going to give away their content for free forever?
Of course they were giving it away free initially to generate interest and then later going to tack on a price tag...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212979</id>
	<title>lol! it's happening again!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244144280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>as soon as you mention money the entire slashdont community goes into a frenzy.<br> <br>cheap is as cheap does. good luck with that second rate operating system boys.</htmltext>
<tokenext>as soon as you mention money the entire slashdont community goes into a frenzy .
cheap is as cheap does .
good luck with that second rate operating system boys .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>as soon as you mention money the entire slashdont community goes into a frenzy.
cheap is as cheap does.
good luck with that second rate operating system boys.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28216757</id>
	<title>Ohhhhh, goooood for you.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244119620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I want you off the fucking comments, you prick. Don't just be sorry, think for one fucking second.  What the FUCK are you DOING?  Are you professional or not?</p><p>Am I going to walk around and make off-topic shit comments, in the middle of your Canadian threads? Then why the fuck are you posting your shit here?  Ah da da dah, no Hulu in Canada, like this in the background.  What the fuck is it with you?  What don't you fucking understand?</p><p>You got any fucking idea about, hey, it's fucking distracting having somebody modding up clutter at the beginning of the fucking comments?  Give me a fucking answer!  What don't you get about it?</p><p>How was it? I hope it was fucking good, because it's useless now, isn't it? Fuck-sake man, you're amateur.  CmdrTaco, you got fucking something to say to this prick?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I want you off the fucking comments , you prick .
Do n't just be sorry , think for one fucking second .
What the FUCK are you DOING ?
Are you professional or not ? Am I going to walk around and make off-topic shit comments , in the middle of your Canadian threads ?
Then why the fuck are you posting your shit here ?
Ah da da dah , no Hulu in Canada , like this in the background .
What the fuck is it with you ?
What do n't you fucking understand ? You got any fucking idea about , hey , it 's fucking distracting having somebody modding up clutter at the beginning of the fucking comments ?
Give me a fucking answer !
What do n't you get about it ? How was it ?
I hope it was fucking good , because it 's useless now , is n't it ?
Fuck-sake man , you 're amateur .
CmdrTaco , you got fucking something to say to this prick ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I want you off the fucking comments, you prick.
Don't just be sorry, think for one fucking second.
What the FUCK are you DOING?
Are you professional or not?Am I going to walk around and make off-topic shit comments, in the middle of your Canadian threads?
Then why the fuck are you posting your shit here?
Ah da da dah, no Hulu in Canada, like this in the background.
What the fuck is it with you?
What don't you fucking understand?You got any fucking idea about, hey, it's fucking distracting having somebody modding up clutter at the beginning of the fucking comments?
Give me a fucking answer!
What don't you get about it?How was it?
I hope it was fucking good, because it's useless now, isn't it?
Fuck-sake man, you're amateur.
CmdrTaco, you got fucking something to say to this prick?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28219061</id>
	<title>Re:Still not available</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244144040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Check out http://delx.net.au/blog/2009/03/who-wants-hulu/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Check out http : //delx.net.au/blog/2009/03/who-wants-hulu/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Check out http://delx.net.au/blog/2009/03/who-wants-hulu/</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213817</id>
	<title>Re:OK, now people, DO NOT PAY and it will pass...</title>
	<author>netscan</author>
	<datestamp>1244147640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>What do you have against paying for the content? <br> I wouldn't mind paying a nominal fee to have all of my shows in one spot available on demand, even if they tack a commercial onto the begining.<br> <br>

I would of course demand a level of service to match however, including the ability to watch on my TV via Boxee / Xbox Live or similar.<br> <br>

Not everything can be totally free, I'm cool with paying for things I use.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What do you have against paying for the content ?
I would n't mind paying a nominal fee to have all of my shows in one spot available on demand , even if they tack a commercial onto the begining .
I would of course demand a level of service to match however , including the ability to watch on my TV via Boxee / Xbox Live or similar .
Not everything can be totally free , I 'm cool with paying for things I use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What do you have against paying for the content?
I wouldn't mind paying a nominal fee to have all of my shows in one spot available on demand, even if they tack a commercial onto the begining.
I would of course demand a level of service to match however, including the ability to watch on my TV via Boxee / Xbox Live or similar.
Not everything can be totally free, I'm cool with paying for things I use.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28218117</id>
	<title>Re:OK, now people, DO NOT PAY and it will pass...</title>
	<author>trawg</author>
	<datestamp>1244133060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>ads are enough to deal with for the content.</p> </div><p> Holy fucking shit, a statement by someone on slashdot that got modded +5 insightful that refers to using ads as a way to supplement a free service!</p><p>I'd much rather ad-supported services than to have to pay for content. By miles. By such a long shot it's not even funny. No, I don't block ads.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>ads are enough to deal with for the content .
Holy fucking shit , a statement by someone on slashdot that got modded + 5 insightful that refers to using ads as a way to supplement a free service ! I 'd much rather ad-supported services than to have to pay for content .
By miles .
By such a long shot it 's not even funny .
No , I do n't block ads .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ads are enough to deal with for the content.
Holy fucking shit, a statement by someone on slashdot that got modded +5 insightful that refers to using ads as a way to supplement a free service!I'd much rather ad-supported services than to have to pay for content.
By miles.
By such a long shot it's not even funny.
No, I don't block ads.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28215441</id>
	<title>Re:Why not?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244112360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The ads on cable tv are by the broadcasting company or channel you are watching, and they get the money.  Not the cable company you subscribe to for your monthly access.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The ads on cable tv are by the broadcasting company or channel you are watching , and they get the money .
Not the cable company you subscribe to for your monthly access .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The ads on cable tv are by the broadcasting company or channel you are watching, and they get the money.
Not the cable company you subscribe to for your monthly access.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212899</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213597</id>
	<title>Re:Why not?</title>
	<author>listed</author>
	<datestamp>1244146740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is a different situation from regular cable as your monthly cable payment goes to the cable company. The ad revenue generated by ads goes to networks and has nothing to do with the cable company.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a different situation from regular cable as your monthly cable payment goes to the cable company .
The ad revenue generated by ads goes to networks and has nothing to do with the cable company .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a different situation from regular cable as your monthly cable payment goes to the cable company.
The ad revenue generated by ads goes to networks and has nothing to do with the cable company.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212899</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214077</id>
	<title>Re:Worst Source Ever</title>
	<author>Curunir\_wolf</author>
	<datestamp>1244148660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wait - I'm confused.  Can't they just ask the brain-sucking aliens to chip in a few more bucks?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait - I 'm confused .
Ca n't they just ask the brain-sucking aliens to chip in a few more bucks ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait - I'm confused.
Can't they just ask the brain-sucking aliens to chip in a few more bucks?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212591</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28215647</id>
	<title>Re:Worst Source Ever</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244113320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>that's how ESPN 360 works. they require ISPs to pay them for the privilege of support the espn 360 website. that means that even if you never go to their website your bill still went up because your ISP is now seeing websites as premium content. how long before you have to get the premium content package from your ISP if you want to use youtube or google?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>that 's how ESPN 360 works .
they require ISPs to pay them for the privilege of support the espn 360 website .
that means that even if you never go to their website your bill still went up because your ISP is now seeing websites as premium content .
how long before you have to get the premium content package from your ISP if you want to use youtube or google ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that's how ESPN 360 works.
they require ISPs to pay them for the privilege of support the espn 360 website.
that means that even if you never go to their website your bill still went up because your ISP is now seeing websites as premium content.
how long before you have to get the premium content package from your ISP if you want to use youtube or google?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213043</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28216707</id>
	<title>Choose bittorrent!</title>
	<author>kimvette</author>
	<datestamp>1244119320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey News Corp, wake yup! You successfully drew people away from bittorrent and earn revenue through ads. Don't fuck it up now by encouraging everyone to go back to bittorrents, where you receive ZERO revenue!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey News Corp , wake yup !
You successfully drew people away from bittorrent and earn revenue through ads .
Do n't fuck it up now by encouraging everyone to go back to bittorrents , where you receive ZERO revenue !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey News Corp, wake yup!
You successfully drew people away from bittorrent and earn revenue through ads.
Don't fuck it up now by encouraging everyone to go back to bittorrents, where you receive ZERO revenue!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212605</id>
	<title>Over time</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244142960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Then I see myself watching Hulu less and less</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Then I see myself watching Hulu less and less</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then I see myself watching Hulu less and less</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28222309</id>
	<title>Re:Not Smart</title>
	<author>Neeperando</author>
	<datestamp>1244216400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm not sure if you're trolling here, and if you are I apologize to everyone else, but seriously?  When the ISP's start forwarding their (supposedly) vast profits on to the internet content providers maybe you'll have an argument.  A lot of people are able to give away their stuff for free, and good for them.  But all you're accomplishing is getting your favorite TV shows canceled because the majority of their viewers are people like you.  Or, if you consider that the question for the content providers is not "how many people are watching this show?", but "how many people are watching this show's ads?", then basically no one is watching.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure if you 're trolling here , and if you are I apologize to everyone else , but seriously ?
When the ISP 's start forwarding their ( supposedly ) vast profits on to the internet content providers maybe you 'll have an argument .
A lot of people are able to give away their stuff for free , and good for them .
But all you 're accomplishing is getting your favorite TV shows canceled because the majority of their viewers are people like you .
Or , if you consider that the question for the content providers is not " how many people are watching this show ?
" , but " how many people are watching this show 's ads ?
" , then basically no one is watching .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure if you're trolling here, and if you are I apologize to everyone else, but seriously?
When the ISP's start forwarding their (supposedly) vast profits on to the internet content providers maybe you'll have an argument.
A lot of people are able to give away their stuff for free, and good for them.
But all you're accomplishing is getting your favorite TV shows canceled because the majority of their viewers are people like you.
Or, if you consider that the question for the content providers is not "how many people are watching this show?
", but "how many people are watching this show's ads?
", then basically no one is watching.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28215057</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213043</id>
	<title>Re:Worst Source Ever</title>
	<author>mooingyak</author>
	<datestamp>1244144640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So you're confirming that we'll have to pay for hulu, even if we don't use it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So you 're confirming that we 'll have to pay for hulu , even if we do n't use it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you're confirming that we'll have to pay for hulu, even if we don't use it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212591</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212923</id>
	<title>Is it worth paying for?</title>
	<author>Cro Magnon</author>
	<datestamp>1244144100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I haven't really used Hulu much, but from what I saw, it's not really worth paying for.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have n't really used Hulu much , but from what I saw , it 's not really worth paying for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I haven't really used Hulu much, but from what I saw, it's not really worth paying for.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212685</id>
	<title>Can't use it...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244143200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Many of us outside the US can't use Hulu anyway; so it doesn't matter<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Many of us outside the US ca n't use Hulu anyway ; so it does n't matter ; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Many of us outside the US can't use Hulu anyway; so it doesn't matter ;-)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213133</id>
	<title>Maybe they will then change their stupid policy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244145060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>"This video is not available in your country" <br> <br>If video are associated with a price maybe they will start considering offering their video to more than the small US market...</htmltext>
<tokenext>" This video is not available in your country " If video are associated with a price maybe they will start considering offering their video to more than the small US market.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"This video is not available in your country"  If video are associated with a price maybe they will start considering offering their video to more than the small US market...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28217269</id>
	<title>Begin Slashdot Hysteria...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244123640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Full speed ahead!</p><p>Don't bother reading the article.  Don't even care about the possible options, just rant on brothers!   Declare the providers of HULU to be soul-less monsters!   Attack their alien plans!</p><p>Yeah, seriously, Slashdotters, learn to take a chill pill.  Nobody respects the folks who froth at the mouth.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Full speed ahead ! Do n't bother reading the article .
Do n't even care about the possible options , just rant on brothers !
Declare the providers of HULU to be soul-less monsters !
Attack their alien plans ! Yeah , seriously , Slashdotters , learn to take a chill pill .
Nobody respects the folks who froth at the mouth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Full speed ahead!Don't bother reading the article.
Don't even care about the possible options, just rant on brothers!
Declare the providers of HULU to be soul-less monsters!
Attack their alien plans!Yeah, seriously, Slashdotters, learn to take a chill pill.
Nobody respects the folks who froth at the mouth.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28219997</id>
	<title>Not available in your region</title>
	<author>AbRASiON</author>
	<datestamp>1244200740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm sorry, this reply is not available in your region.</p><p>(summary: fuck Hulu anyhow.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sorry , this reply is not available in your region .
( summary : fuck Hulu anyhow .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sorry, this reply is not available in your region.
(summary: fuck Hulu anyhow.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213259</id>
	<title>Re:Can't use it...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244145480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Which is stupid, because they could inject their ads into the stream for international users too. Of course, the ads wouldn't be precisely targeted for those who live outside the US, but, for example, a Toyota ad would increase brand recognition no matter where the viewer lives.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Which is stupid , because they could inject their ads into the stream for international users too .
Of course , the ads would n't be precisely targeted for those who live outside the US , but , for example , a Toyota ad would increase brand recognition no matter where the viewer lives .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which is stupid, because they could inject their ads into the stream for international users too.
Of course, the ads wouldn't be precisely targeted for those who live outside the US, but, for example, a Toyota ad would increase brand recognition no matter where the viewer lives.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212685</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213177</id>
	<title>Re:Still not available</title>
	<author>PrinceAshitaka</author>
	<datestamp>1244145180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is a good thing, maybe I can watch Hulu programs in Europe soon. ( yes I have a work-around for the region problem). I will pay for content I want to see. (I don't pay for cable as I don't want to see most of that content. (see the others' al &#224; carte option posts)</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a good thing , maybe I can watch Hulu programs in Europe soon .
( yes I have a work-around for the region problem ) .
I will pay for content I want to see .
( I do n't pay for cable as I do n't want to see most of that content .
( see the others ' al   carte option posts )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a good thing, maybe I can watch Hulu programs in Europe soon.
( yes I have a work-around for the region problem).
I will pay for content I want to see.
(I don't pay for cable as I don't want to see most of that content.
(see the others' al à carte option posts)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213393</id>
	<title>Customer Management?</title>
	<author>eliphalet</author>
	<datestamp>1244145960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>As a reader of a newspaper, his "customer relationship" is Not My Problem.  I do not choose to be the target of marketers' "customer management" fantasies.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a reader of a newspaper , his " customer relationship " is Not My Problem .
I do not choose to be the target of marketers ' " customer management " fantasies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a reader of a newspaper, his "customer relationship" is Not My Problem.
I do not choose to be the target of marketers' "customer management" fantasies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212591</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28217547</id>
	<title>Re:Still not available</title>
	<author>timlyg</author>
	<datestamp>1244126160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>well, go ahead, charge.</p><p>What were those sites we were on before hulu again? anyone? Don't mind the speed, as long as they don't take advantage of the public for $$$.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>well , go ahead , charge.What were those sites we were on before hulu again ?
anyone ? Do n't mind the speed , as long as they do n't take advantage of the public for $ $ $ .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>well, go ahead, charge.What were those sites we were on before hulu again?
anyone? Don't mind the speed, as long as they don't take advantage of the public for $$$.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213311</id>
	<title>Oh yeah?</title>
	<author>NervousNerd</author>
	<datestamp>1244145660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well fuck them, then. I could just download the shows off BitTorrent and get higher quality, and less ads, all for the whopping price of $0.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well fuck them , then .
I could just download the shows off BitTorrent and get higher quality , and less ads , all for the whopping price of $ 0 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well fuck them, then.
I could just download the shows off BitTorrent and get higher quality, and less ads, all for the whopping price of $0.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213085</id>
	<title>Re:Surprised?</title>
	<author>Grishnakh</author>
	<datestamp>1244144820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Over-the-air TV has been giving away their content for free for at least 6 decades now, by allowing advertisers to pay for it.  They're still doing that.</p><p>Lots of companies have been giving away content for free on the internet, using the same model, for over a decade now.</p><p>Now, all of a sudden, some companies want to start charging consumers directly for this content.  I think they're going to have a rude wake-up call when very few people bother to subscribe.  There's so much stuff available for free that I'm certainly not going to miss the stuff that's not.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Over-the-air TV has been giving away their content for free for at least 6 decades now , by allowing advertisers to pay for it .
They 're still doing that.Lots of companies have been giving away content for free on the internet , using the same model , for over a decade now.Now , all of a sudden , some companies want to start charging consumers directly for this content .
I think they 're going to have a rude wake-up call when very few people bother to subscribe .
There 's so much stuff available for free that I 'm certainly not going to miss the stuff that 's not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Over-the-air TV has been giving away their content for free for at least 6 decades now, by allowing advertisers to pay for it.
They're still doing that.Lots of companies have been giving away content for free on the internet, using the same model, for over a decade now.Now, all of a sudden, some companies want to start charging consumers directly for this content.
I think they're going to have a rude wake-up call when very few people bother to subscribe.
There's so much stuff available for free that I'm certainly not going to miss the stuff that's not.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212621</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212749</id>
	<title>Bizarre tags</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244143500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>What's with the "republicans" tag?  I don't see any obvious political connection.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's with the " republicans " tag ?
I do n't see any obvious political connection .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's with the "republicans" tag?
I don't see any obvious political connection.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212657</id>
	<title>Newscorp</title>
	<author>TheDarkener</author>
	<datestamp>1244143140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They own pretty much everything, don't they?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They own pretty much everything , do n't they ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They own pretty much everything, don't they?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214609</id>
	<title>Re:Surprised?</title>
	<author>Nitar</author>
	<datestamp>1244108280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The only thing I'm seriously surprised about is that you thought they were giving away their content for free.  It sounds to me like you may want to watch a show or two on Hulu before commenting.</p><p>Hulu has commercials.  Not as many as cable (thank goodness), but they do have commercials.  They are given money in exchange for those commercials.</p><p>Now, if what you were trying to say is that they were giving content for "free" to the user.  I'd only partially agree with that.  When I used to have cable, I used TiVo to skip commercials.  I own no time shifting devices or software for skipping commercials on Hulu.  I would much rather pay for content than have to suffer through inane commercials.</p><p>Now, if Hulu starts charging subscription fees, AND removes commercials, that would be completely fine with me.  If they keep commercials AND charge a subscription, they are no different than a cable company, or satellite (with the exception of maybe offering an al a cart subscription).  In which case, I'd probably sign up for satellite where I could watch programming commercial free again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The only thing I 'm seriously surprised about is that you thought they were giving away their content for free .
It sounds to me like you may want to watch a show or two on Hulu before commenting.Hulu has commercials .
Not as many as cable ( thank goodness ) , but they do have commercials .
They are given money in exchange for those commercials.Now , if what you were trying to say is that they were giving content for " free " to the user .
I 'd only partially agree with that .
When I used to have cable , I used TiVo to skip commercials .
I own no time shifting devices or software for skipping commercials on Hulu .
I would much rather pay for content than have to suffer through inane commercials.Now , if Hulu starts charging subscription fees , AND removes commercials , that would be completely fine with me .
If they keep commercials AND charge a subscription , they are no different than a cable company , or satellite ( with the exception of maybe offering an al a cart subscription ) .
In which case , I 'd probably sign up for satellite where I could watch programming commercial free again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only thing I'm seriously surprised about is that you thought they were giving away their content for free.
It sounds to me like you may want to watch a show or two on Hulu before commenting.Hulu has commercials.
Not as many as cable (thank goodness), but they do have commercials.
They are given money in exchange for those commercials.Now, if what you were trying to say is that they were giving content for "free" to the user.
I'd only partially agree with that.
When I used to have cable, I used TiVo to skip commercials.
I own no time shifting devices or software for skipping commercials on Hulu.
I would much rather pay for content than have to suffer through inane commercials.Now, if Hulu starts charging subscription fees, AND removes commercials, that would be completely fine with me.
If they keep commercials AND charge a subscription, they are no different than a cable company, or satellite (with the exception of maybe offering an al a cart subscription).
In which case, I'd probably sign up for satellite where I could watch programming commercial free again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212621</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213439</id>
	<title>Re:Sound familiar?</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1244146140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>yes, but slashdot's non-subscribers still get all of slashdot. They still see all the stories, and can comment on all the stories, still get journals, etc. I had a subscription for a while, and money's a bit tight right now but maybe I'd resubscribe if money were looser. But it wouldn't be to see stories before they're posted, or for the "subscriber bonus" (I already have a karma bonus). It would be because I like slashdot and want to support it.</p><p>My journals are and have always been free, but I've had people practically begging me to put the old K5 "Paxil Diaries" in book for so thay could buy copies.</p><p>News Corp is evil, yes (love of money, all corporations are evil) but not because they want to charge for subscriptions. That doesn't make them evil, it makes them stupid.</p><p>I can't figure out why the <i>Illinois Times</i> can make money giving their newspapers away for free (both online and dead tree versions) while the Chicago Tribune and New York Times seem to be struggling with paid for paper versions with lots of ads. Hmm....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>yes , but slashdot 's non-subscribers still get all of slashdot .
They still see all the stories , and can comment on all the stories , still get journals , etc .
I had a subscription for a while , and money 's a bit tight right now but maybe I 'd resubscribe if money were looser .
But it would n't be to see stories before they 're posted , or for the " subscriber bonus " ( I already have a karma bonus ) .
It would be because I like slashdot and want to support it.My journals are and have always been free , but I 've had people practically begging me to put the old K5 " Paxil Diaries " in book for so thay could buy copies.News Corp is evil , yes ( love of money , all corporations are evil ) but not because they want to charge for subscriptions .
That does n't make them evil , it makes them stupid.I ca n't figure out why the Illinois Times can make money giving their newspapers away for free ( both online and dead tree versions ) while the Chicago Tribune and New York Times seem to be struggling with paid for paper versions with lots of ads .
Hmm... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yes, but slashdot's non-subscribers still get all of slashdot.
They still see all the stories, and can comment on all the stories, still get journals, etc.
I had a subscription for a while, and money's a bit tight right now but maybe I'd resubscribe if money were looser.
But it wouldn't be to see stories before they're posted, or for the "subscriber bonus" (I already have a karma bonus).
It would be because I like slashdot and want to support it.My journals are and have always been free, but I've had people practically begging me to put the old K5 "Paxil Diaries" in book for so thay could buy copies.News Corp is evil, yes (love of money, all corporations are evil) but not because they want to charge for subscriptions.
That doesn't make them evil, it makes them stupid.I can't figure out why the Illinois Times can make money giving their newspapers away for free (both online and dead tree versions) while the Chicago Tribune and New York Times seem to be struggling with paid for paper versions with lots of ads.
Hmm....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212713</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212631</id>
	<title>Really?</title>
	<author>goffster</author>
	<datestamp>1244143080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was wondering when it was going to happen.  The commercials were not terribly long, and many of them were simply blank.<br>The whole thing did not seem like a viable business venture, except in the very rare case where you wanted to buy a DVD<br>of a show.    I don't know about you, but why would I want to do that ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was wondering when it was going to happen .
The commercials were not terribly long , and many of them were simply blank.The whole thing did not seem like a viable business venture , except in the very rare case where you wanted to buy a DVDof a show .
I do n't know about you , but why would I want to do that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was wondering when it was going to happen.
The commercials were not terribly long, and many of them were simply blank.The whole thing did not seem like a viable business venture, except in the very rare case where you wanted to buy a DVDof a show.
I don't know about you, but why would I want to do that ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213029</id>
	<title>Re:Can't use it...</title>
	<author>shma</author>
	<datestamp>1244144580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Try <a href="http://www.anchorfree.com/" title="anchorfree.com">Hotspot Shield</a> [anchorfree.com]. Works for me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Try Hotspot Shield [ anchorfree.com ] .
Works for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Try Hotspot Shield [anchorfree.com].
Works for me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212685</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212817</id>
	<title>I'd welcome it...but</title>
	<author>codeonezero</author>
	<datestamp>1244143740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I really don't have a problem with a subscription model.  It would be great if they kept a lot of the stuff they have now, and say let me pay a subscription to watch episodes of The Office and other shows I watch on the same day they are released on live TV.   Or let me subscribe and let me watch every episode of The Office, American Dad, or Family Guy whenever I want while keeping the 10 or so episodes they currently do available for free.<p>
Also if the subscription meant the option to watch a full series without commercial interruption that would be great too.</p><p>
I have to admit the only reason I downloaded a few Stargate episodes was because I didn't have a TV set I could watch it on.   If instead I had the option to pay a minimal monthly fee and pick and choose the shows I wanted to watch with the plus of seeing the show the day it aired, I would have had zero desire to download anything.   As it was, a few times I downloaded something, there were no sound or special effects added in, and many times I opted to just buy the video off iTunes, due to the quality of the content.
A subscription fee on the range of $10-$15 month would be nice.   Anything more, good luck with that Hulu, I'd rather just buy DVDs and episodes of iTunes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I really do n't have a problem with a subscription model .
It would be great if they kept a lot of the stuff they have now , and say let me pay a subscription to watch episodes of The Office and other shows I watch on the same day they are released on live TV .
Or let me subscribe and let me watch every episode of The Office , American Dad , or Family Guy whenever I want while keeping the 10 or so episodes they currently do available for free .
Also if the subscription meant the option to watch a full series without commercial interruption that would be great too .
I have to admit the only reason I downloaded a few Stargate episodes was because I did n't have a TV set I could watch it on .
If instead I had the option to pay a minimal monthly fee and pick and choose the shows I wanted to watch with the plus of seeing the show the day it aired , I would have had zero desire to download anything .
As it was , a few times I downloaded something , there were no sound or special effects added in , and many times I opted to just buy the video off iTunes , due to the quality of the content .
A subscription fee on the range of $ 10- $ 15 month would be nice .
Anything more , good luck with that Hulu , I 'd rather just buy DVDs and episodes of iTunes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I really don't have a problem with a subscription model.
It would be great if they kept a lot of the stuff they have now, and say let me pay a subscription to watch episodes of The Office and other shows I watch on the same day they are released on live TV.
Or let me subscribe and let me watch every episode of The Office, American Dad, or Family Guy whenever I want while keeping the 10 or so episodes they currently do available for free.
Also if the subscription meant the option to watch a full series without commercial interruption that would be great too.
I have to admit the only reason I downloaded a few Stargate episodes was because I didn't have a TV set I could watch it on.
If instead I had the option to pay a minimal monthly fee and pick and choose the shows I wanted to watch with the plus of seeing the show the day it aired, I would have had zero desire to download anything.
As it was, a few times I downloaded something, there were no sound or special effects added in, and many times I opted to just buy the video off iTunes, due to the quality of the content.
A subscription fee on the range of $10-$15 month would be nice.
Anything more, good luck with that Hulu, I'd rather just buy DVDs and episodes of iTunes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213963</id>
	<title>Finnaly!!! What great news! Yea!</title>
	<author>docbrody</author>
	<datestamp>1244148180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>To bad this story is bogus.  I was really looking forward to paying money to Hulu AND being forced to watch commercials.</htmltext>
<tokenext>To bad this story is bogus .
I was really looking forward to paying money to Hulu AND being forced to watch commercials .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To bad this story is bogus.
I was really looking forward to paying money to Hulu AND being forced to watch commercials.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214237</id>
	<title>Hulu - will lose me as a customer</title>
	<author>UttBuggly</author>
	<datestamp>1244106120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been fond of Hulu since Day One. There's stuff there I like, I send it to my 32 inch Sony HDTV in the living room via a 25' VGA cable to the RGB port. It's pretty good quality (at 480p), which the Sony upconverts to 1080p. I do get smearing from time to time, but it's infrequent enough not to bother me too much.</p><p>If Hulu wants my money, however, I'm done. They have advertising....they don't need subscription revenue. Of course, they may WANT more $$$, but I don't feel there's a compelling need to charge for watching old Speed Racer cartoons!</p><p>I'll see what they come up with, but right now, it's a non-starter for me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been fond of Hulu since Day One .
There 's stuff there I like , I send it to my 32 inch Sony HDTV in the living room via a 25 ' VGA cable to the RGB port .
It 's pretty good quality ( at 480p ) , which the Sony upconverts to 1080p .
I do get smearing from time to time , but it 's infrequent enough not to bother me too much.If Hulu wants my money , however , I 'm done .
They have advertising....they do n't need subscription revenue .
Of course , they may WANT more $ $ $ , but I do n't feel there 's a compelling need to charge for watching old Speed Racer cartoons ! I 'll see what they come up with , but right now , it 's a non-starter for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been fond of Hulu since Day One.
There's stuff there I like, I send it to my 32 inch Sony HDTV in the living room via a 25' VGA cable to the RGB port.
It's pretty good quality (at 480p), which the Sony upconverts to 1080p.
I do get smearing from time to time, but it's infrequent enough not to bother me too much.If Hulu wants my money, however, I'm done.
They have advertising....they don't need subscription revenue.
Of course, they may WANT more $$$, but I don't feel there's a compelling need to charge for watching old Speed Racer cartoons!I'll see what they come up with, but right now, it's a non-starter for me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213095</id>
	<title>Re:Surprised?</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1244144880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Did anyone really think they were going to give away their content for free forever?</i></p><p>I see no reason why not. I give my content away for free, so do people who are actually read, like Lessig and Doctorow, whose novels are free online but yet he still manages to make the NYT best sellers list.</p><p>Oh, Murdoch... no, you shouldn't expect someone who worships money to give anything away for free. A greedhead would rather make $100 and not give anything away than make 1,000 giving it away.</p><p>"The love of money is the root of all evil".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did anyone really think they were going to give away their content for free forever ? I see no reason why not .
I give my content away for free , so do people who are actually read , like Lessig and Doctorow , whose novels are free online but yet he still manages to make the NYT best sellers list.Oh , Murdoch... no , you should n't expect someone who worships money to give anything away for free .
A greedhead would rather make $ 100 and not give anything away than make 1,000 giving it away .
" The love of money is the root of all evil " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did anyone really think they were going to give away their content for free forever?I see no reason why not.
I give my content away for free, so do people who are actually read, like Lessig and Doctorow, whose novels are free online but yet he still manages to make the NYT best sellers list.Oh, Murdoch... no, you shouldn't expect someone who worships money to give anything away for free.
A greedhead would rather make $100 and not give anything away than make 1,000 giving it away.
"The love of money is the root of all evil".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212621</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212759</id>
	<title>Re:Surprised?</title>
	<author>nine-times</author>
	<datestamp>1244143500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well I think ultimately the issue is this: Everyone sees the writing on the wall.  TV shows and movies are going to have to be offered available online, or else people will get it through pirate channels.  So the movie studios and everyone are starting to reluctantly jump on board, but they don't have the business model all worked out.
</p><p>So can they make enough money from advertisements?  Can they make enough money from subscriptions, or a la carte sales?  Can they work out some kind of combination, or will consumers balk at the idea of paying for a subscription <i>and still</i> watching ads?  People already do that with cable (pay for it and still watch tons of ads), so it's not unthinkable.
</p><p>iTunes is doing the a la carte sales, Hulu is doing ads.  If someone else isn't doing subscriptions, someone will probably try it soon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well I think ultimately the issue is this : Everyone sees the writing on the wall .
TV shows and movies are going to have to be offered available online , or else people will get it through pirate channels .
So the movie studios and everyone are starting to reluctantly jump on board , but they do n't have the business model all worked out .
So can they make enough money from advertisements ?
Can they make enough money from subscriptions , or a la carte sales ?
Can they work out some kind of combination , or will consumers balk at the idea of paying for a subscription and still watching ads ?
People already do that with cable ( pay for it and still watch tons of ads ) , so it 's not unthinkable .
iTunes is doing the a la carte sales , Hulu is doing ads .
If someone else is n't doing subscriptions , someone will probably try it soon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well I think ultimately the issue is this: Everyone sees the writing on the wall.
TV shows and movies are going to have to be offered available online, or else people will get it through pirate channels.
So the movie studios and everyone are starting to reluctantly jump on board, but they don't have the business model all worked out.
So can they make enough money from advertisements?
Can they make enough money from subscriptions, or a la carte sales?
Can they work out some kind of combination, or will consumers balk at the idea of paying for a subscription and still watching ads?
People already do that with cable (pay for it and still watch tons of ads), so it's not unthinkable.
iTunes is doing the a la carte sales, Hulu is doing ads.
If someone else isn't doing subscriptions, someone will probably try it soon.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212621</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28215157</id>
	<title>Re:Bye Hulu!</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1244110920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I have learned anything from the Alien conspiracy nuts is that Aliens are incompetent beings that can't even fly straight~</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I have learned anything from the Alien conspiracy nuts is that Aliens are incompetent beings that ca n't even fly straight ~</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I have learned anything from the Alien conspiracy nuts is that Aliens are incompetent beings that can't even fly straight~</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212905</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212791</id>
	<title>We are going back on the main ad point</title>
	<author>gubers33</author>
	<datestamp>1244143620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can't say I didn't expect this because I did. NewsCorp pretty much monopolized the  cable television network market. Hulu better come up for a new advertising pitch however since their main draw on all of those commercials was the whole it's free thing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't say I did n't expect this because I did .
NewsCorp pretty much monopolized the cable television network market .
Hulu better come up for a new advertising pitch however since their main draw on all of those commercials was the whole it 's free thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't say I didn't expect this because I did.
NewsCorp pretty much monopolized the  cable television network market.
Hulu better come up for a new advertising pitch however since their main draw on all of those commercials was the whole it's free thing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212871</id>
	<title>Re:Why not?</title>
	<author>bdleonard</author>
	<datestamp>1244143920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>TiVo, Inc. disagrees with this statement<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... unfortunately.</htmltext>
<tokenext>TiVo , Inc. disagrees with this statement ... unfortunately .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>TiVo, Inc. disagrees with this statement ... unfortunately.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212653</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214585</id>
	<title>Re:Still not available</title>
	<author>Sethus</author>
	<datestamp>1244108100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm shocked no one has made this connection.  This is lue of the <a href="http://www.hulu.com/labs/hulu-desktop" title="hulu.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.hulu.com/labs/hulu-desktop</a> [hulu.com] Hulu desktop that JUST has been released recently? <br> <br>

Step 1:  Release Desktop Client.<br>
Step 2:  Make users pay for some content.<br>
Step 3:  PROFIT!!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm shocked no one has made this connection .
This is lue of the http : //www.hulu.com/labs/hulu-desktop [ hulu.com ] Hulu desktop that JUST has been released recently ?
Step 1 : Release Desktop Client .
Step 2 : Make users pay for some content .
Step 3 : PROFIT ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm shocked no one has made this connection.
This is lue of the http://www.hulu.com/labs/hulu-desktop [hulu.com] Hulu desktop that JUST has been released recently?
Step 1:  Release Desktop Client.
Step 2:  Make users pay for some content.
Step 3:  PROFIT!!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212837</id>
	<title>Re:Surprised?</title>
	<author>sunderland56</author>
	<datestamp>1244143800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Did anyone really think they were going to give away their content for free forever?</i>
<br> <br>
What, you mean like broadcast television?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did anyone really think they were going to give away their content for free forever ?
What , you mean like broadcast television ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did anyone really think they were going to give away their content for free forever?
What, you mean like broadcast television?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212621</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213613</id>
	<title>Already ahead</title>
	<author>HermMunster</author>
	<datestamp>1244146860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've already stopped watching them and have stopped using them as demos in my shop.  No more recommendations.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've already stopped watching them and have stopped using them as demos in my shop .
No more recommendations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've already stopped watching them and have stopped using them as demos in my shop.
No more recommendations.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213717</id>
	<title>Problem</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244147280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's the nice thing about magazines. They're really really cheap if you buy 1-year subscriptions. Problem is cable companies charge higher prices and give you the same amount of commercials as OTA TV. It's not like cable companies are using the money to give you premium, cable-only content. Well, of course they do but most of it is crap.</p><p>They're pocketing the money. That's not going to change.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's the nice thing about magazines .
They 're really really cheap if you buy 1-year subscriptions .
Problem is cable companies charge higher prices and give you the same amount of commercials as OTA TV .
It 's not like cable companies are using the money to give you premium , cable-only content .
Well , of course they do but most of it is crap.They 're pocketing the money .
That 's not going to change .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's the nice thing about magazines.
They're really really cheap if you buy 1-year subscriptions.
Problem is cable companies charge higher prices and give you the same amount of commercials as OTA TV.
It's not like cable companies are using the money to give you premium, cable-only content.
Well, of course they do but most of it is crap.They're pocketing the money.
That's not going to change.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212953</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214547</id>
	<title>Re:Can't use it...</title>
	<author>Bill, Shooter of Bul</author>
	<datestamp>1244107860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Exactly like how soccer doesn't matter in the USA. Heck, we even created a new name for it to further stigmatize it, while taking its international name and associating it with a sport that has only occasionally to do with foot manipulation of a ball.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly like how soccer does n't matter in the USA .
Heck , we even created a new name for it to further stigmatize it , while taking its international name and associating it with a sport that has only occasionally to do with foot manipulation of a ball .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly like how soccer doesn't matter in the USA.
Heck, we even created a new name for it to further stigmatize it, while taking its international name and associating it with a sport that has only occasionally to do with foot manipulation of a ball.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212685</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28218907</id>
	<title>Re:I wouldn't pay for streaming...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244142060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wish list.  You've already conceded the important points, they're just going to haggle you up from there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wish list .
You 've already conceded the important points , they 're just going to haggle you up from there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wish list.
You've already conceded the important points, they're just going to haggle you up from there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213349</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214207</id>
	<title>Uh. No thanks!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244106000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No Thanks.  If I want to pay to watch content, I might as well sign up for cable or Satellite.<br>At least it never buffers that way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No Thanks .
If I want to pay to watch content , I might as well sign up for cable or Satellite.At least it never buffers that way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No Thanks.
If I want to pay to watch content, I might as well sign up for cable or Satellite.At least it never buffers that way.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213225</id>
	<title>Is Slashdot Slow With Web 2.0? +1, True</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244145360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>because this will surely lead to its demise ( +4, PlusVeryExcellent).</p><p>Yours Seditiously,<br>Kilgore Trout</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>because this will surely lead to its demise ( + 4 , PlusVeryExcellent ) .Yours Seditiously,Kilgore Trout</tokentext>
<sentencetext>because this will surely lead to its demise ( +4, PlusVeryExcellent).Yours Seditiously,Kilgore Trout</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212855</id>
	<title>Re:Still not available</title>
	<author>sopssa</author>
	<datestamp>1244143860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Neither do they show anything here in Europe. Oh well, I would actually liked to pay for such service, as I'm already paying here for similar ones but which more like let you download<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.ts etc recorded from tv (just to note, legally). However I dont really want to wait to watch the shows I like, so I have to get them otherwise. I do like the easy of things however, and with gaming Steam has done great job. Same for spotify here in europe with music streaming (its actually better than you even have in usa). But I hope tv stations etc also see the opportunity with providing such service worldwide, because I would gladly pay for it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Neither do they show anything here in Europe .
Oh well , I would actually liked to pay for such service , as I 'm already paying here for similar ones but which more like let you download .ts etc recorded from tv ( just to note , legally ) .
However I dont really want to wait to watch the shows I like , so I have to get them otherwise .
I do like the easy of things however , and with gaming Steam has done great job .
Same for spotify here in europe with music streaming ( its actually better than you even have in usa ) .
But I hope tv stations etc also see the opportunity with providing such service worldwide , because I would gladly pay for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Neither do they show anything here in Europe.
Oh well, I would actually liked to pay for such service, as I'm already paying here for similar ones but which more like let you download .ts etc recorded from tv (just to note, legally).
However I dont really want to wait to watch the shows I like, so I have to get them otherwise.
I do like the easy of things however, and with gaming Steam has done great job.
Same for spotify here in europe with music streaming (its actually better than you even have in usa).
But I hope tv stations etc also see the opportunity with providing such service worldwide, because I would gladly pay for it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214557</id>
	<title>epic fail</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244107920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the whole point of having advertising is to not charge for content.</p><p>the whole point of charging for content is not having advertising.</p><p>having both is the epic fail.</p><p>they're going to find out just how fast the consumer rules the Internet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the whole point of having advertising is to not charge for content.the whole point of charging for content is not having advertising.having both is the epic fail.they 're going to find out just how fast the consumer rules the Internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the whole point of having advertising is to not charge for content.the whole point of charging for content is not having advertising.having both is the epic fail.they're going to find out just how fast the consumer rules the Internet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212879</id>
	<title>Buh Bah</title>
	<author>matt\_martin</author>
	<datestamp>1244143920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hulu, nice knowin' ya...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hulu , nice knowin ' ya.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hulu, nice knowin' ya...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212703</id>
	<title>If it's true then Hulu's future is easy to predict</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244143260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The day they start charging for content is the day they start down the path of constantly losing visitors until they become another clueless Web 2.0 failure.</p><p>When it comes to media on the internet, customers always have the option of getting a particular show, movie, song, etc. for free. When a site charges for content, the customer then sees himself as having two options: pay for an item or go somewhere else to get the same item for free. Pretty obvious choice, isn't it? I don't know why it's so hard for some content providers to grasp.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The day they start charging for content is the day they start down the path of constantly losing visitors until they become another clueless Web 2.0 failure.When it comes to media on the internet , customers always have the option of getting a particular show , movie , song , etc .
for free .
When a site charges for content , the customer then sees himself as having two options : pay for an item or go somewhere else to get the same item for free .
Pretty obvious choice , is n't it ?
I do n't know why it 's so hard for some content providers to grasp .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The day they start charging for content is the day they start down the path of constantly losing visitors until they become another clueless Web 2.0 failure.When it comes to media on the internet, customers always have the option of getting a particular show, movie, song, etc.
for free.
When a site charges for content, the customer then sees himself as having two options: pay for an item or go somewhere else to get the same item for free.
Pretty obvious choice, isn't it?
I don't know why it's so hard for some content providers to grasp.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214463</id>
	<title>Fun while it lasted...</title>
	<author>eiMichael</author>
	<datestamp>1244107320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Assuming ISP's start have usage caps, who is going to seriously double pay for Internet content?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Assuming ISP 's start have usage caps , who is going to seriously double pay for Internet content ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Assuming ISP's start have usage caps, who is going to seriously double pay for Internet content?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214123</id>
	<title>Re:I wouldn't pay for streaming...</title>
	<author>Rakishi</author>
	<datestamp>1244148840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It doesn't take a whole lot to screw up a stream with those sorts of bandwith requirements. Downloads just go a little slower for a bit.</p></div><p>And streaming simply uses the buffered download for a bit, your point? Plenty of services already provide hd streaming without too many problems including amazon on-demand and netflix. Downloading is an inconvenient mess since I don't want to wait two hours to watch a show or have to download, and buy, every show I may watch at some point in the future.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It does n't take a whole lot to screw up a stream with those sorts of bandwith requirements .
Downloads just go a little slower for a bit.And streaming simply uses the buffered download for a bit , your point ?
Plenty of services already provide hd streaming without too many problems including amazon on-demand and netflix .
Downloading is an inconvenient mess since I do n't want to wait two hours to watch a show or have to download , and buy , every show I may watch at some point in the future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It doesn't take a whole lot to screw up a stream with those sorts of bandwith requirements.
Downloads just go a little slower for a bit.And streaming simply uses the buffered download for a bit, your point?
Plenty of services already provide hd streaming without too many problems including amazon on-demand and netflix.
Downloading is an inconvenient mess since I don't want to wait two hours to watch a show or have to download, and buy, every show I may watch at some point in the future.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213349</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213957</id>
	<title>I'll pay..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244148180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>..as long as they lose the stupid web-browser-needed part (maie it easy to curl/wget the files) and use nonproprietary formats/codecs.  Gimme a way to fill up my mythvideo database with stuff I'm not getting OTA, and you can have some money.
</p><p>Do you want money?  <em>Do</em> you, punk?  (Or is your goal to do something other than make money?  If money is not your aim, I can oblige you too.  I'll find someone else to accept the money, or if no one steps up, there's always the pirates and their <em>great</em> totally free stuff.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>..as long as they lose the stupid web-browser-needed part ( maie it easy to curl/wget the files ) and use nonproprietary formats/codecs .
Gim me a way to fill up my mythvideo database with stuff I 'm not getting OTA , and you can have some money .
Do you want money ?
Do you , punk ?
( Or is your goal to do something other than make money ?
If money is not your aim , I can oblige you too .
I 'll find someone else to accept the money , or if no one steps up , there 's always the pirates and their great totally free stuff .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>..as long as they lose the stupid web-browser-needed part (maie it easy to curl/wget the files) and use nonproprietary formats/codecs.
Gimme a way to fill up my mythvideo database with stuff I'm not getting OTA, and you can have some money.
Do you want money?
Do you, punk?
(Or is your goal to do something other than make money?
If money is not your aim, I can oblige you too.
I'll find someone else to accept the money, or if no one steps up, there's always the pirates and their great totally free stuff.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28217251</id>
	<title>Sounds great</title>
	<author>Myopic</author>
	<datestamp>1244123400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This sounds pretty good, pretty smart. So long as there are no commercials on the site or in the videos, I would gladly pay a fair amount for a TV show. Say, maybe ten cents per episode, or a dollar for a whole season.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This sounds pretty good , pretty smart .
So long as there are no commercials on the site or in the videos , I would gladly pay a fair amount for a TV show .
Say , maybe ten cents per episode , or a dollar for a whole season .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This sounds pretty good, pretty smart.
So long as there are no commercials on the site or in the videos, I would gladly pay a fair amount for a TV show.
Say, maybe ten cents per episode, or a dollar for a whole season.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28215771</id>
	<title>Re:Worst Source Ever</title>
	<author>howman</author>
	<datestamp>1244114040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oh you will pay when people start capping their bandwidth allowances and the telcos come to the conclusion that everyone must pay more to cover the bandwidth hogs.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh you will pay when people start capping their bandwidth allowances and the telcos come to the conclusion that everyone must pay more to cover the bandwidth hogs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh you will pay when people start capping their bandwidth allowances and the telcos come to the conclusion that everyone must pay more to cover the bandwidth hogs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213043</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213967</id>
	<title>ironic</title>
	<author>Malenx</author>
	<datestamp>1244148240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would pay for Hulu if they let me download ad-free shows to watch later on.</p><p>Honestly, why doesn't Hulu develop a P2P service with a business model similar to Napster?</p><p>Imagine if Hulu would let you stream online for free with ads, or pay 7$-10$ a month to download the shows through a custom p2p application?  I'd gladly pay to be able to take the shows with me on the road.  Along with that, they could offset they're costs by using p2p.</p><p>This is how I see the future of television.  A better version of netflix basically.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would pay for Hulu if they let me download ad-free shows to watch later on.Honestly , why does n't Hulu develop a P2P service with a business model similar to Napster ? Imagine if Hulu would let you stream online for free with ads , or pay 7 $ -10 $ a month to download the shows through a custom p2p application ?
I 'd gladly pay to be able to take the shows with me on the road .
Along with that , they could offset they 're costs by using p2p.This is how I see the future of television .
A better version of netflix basically .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would pay for Hulu if they let me download ad-free shows to watch later on.Honestly, why doesn't Hulu develop a P2P service with a business model similar to Napster?Imagine if Hulu would let you stream online for free with ads, or pay 7$-10$ a month to download the shows through a custom p2p application?
I'd gladly pay to be able to take the shows with me on the road.
Along with that, they could offset they're costs by using p2p.This is how I see the future of television.
A better version of netflix basically.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212953</id>
	<title>Re:Why not?</title>
	<author>Red Flayer</author>
	<datestamp>1244144220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Fine, but it's either subscription or ads. You don't get to do both.</p></div></blockquote><p>Why not?  Why shouldn't ads subsidize some of the content so that subscription fees are manageable?<br> <br>It doesn't have to be an either/or situation.<br> <br>Why not offer ad-free content to "gold" subscribers, limited ads to "silver" subscribers, and normal ad levels to "brown" (free) subscribers.<br> <br>Then everybody wins, since it's the choice of the subscriber.<br> <br>I know that the magazine-subscription model is very different, largely due to the cost of producing and distributing a magazine, and the difficulty of publishing different versions... but at a broader scale, this is what we have.  Ad-heavy magazines with low subscription prices, ad-light magazines with high subscription prices.  And, of course, the expensive mags with lots of advertising, where the advertising is considered part of the content (fashion mags especially).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Fine , but it 's either subscription or ads .
You do n't get to do both.Why not ?
Why should n't ads subsidize some of the content so that subscription fees are manageable ?
It does n't have to be an either/or situation .
Why not offer ad-free content to " gold " subscribers , limited ads to " silver " subscribers , and normal ad levels to " brown " ( free ) subscribers .
Then everybody wins , since it 's the choice of the subscriber .
I know that the magazine-subscription model is very different , largely due to the cost of producing and distributing a magazine , and the difficulty of publishing different versions... but at a broader scale , this is what we have .
Ad-heavy magazines with low subscription prices , ad-light magazines with high subscription prices .
And , of course , the expensive mags with lots of advertising , where the advertising is considered part of the content ( fashion mags especially ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fine, but it's either subscription or ads.
You don't get to do both.Why not?
Why shouldn't ads subsidize some of the content so that subscription fees are manageable?
It doesn't have to be an either/or situation.
Why not offer ad-free content to "gold" subscribers, limited ads to "silver" subscribers, and normal ad levels to "brown" (free) subscribers.
Then everybody wins, since it's the choice of the subscriber.
I know that the magazine-subscription model is very different, largely due to the cost of producing and distributing a magazine, and the difficulty of publishing different versions... but at a broader scale, this is what we have.
Ad-heavy magazines with low subscription prices, ad-light magazines with high subscription prices.
And, of course, the expensive mags with lots of advertising, where the advertising is considered part of the content (fashion mags especially).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212653</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28217275</id>
	<title>Re:I wouldn't pay for streaming...</title>
	<author>merreborn</author>
	<datestamp>1244123640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>For a download based service, sure, I can see that. But streaming sucks, more so on video. Unless connections get a whole lot better, I'm not the least bit interested in streaming.</p></div></blockquote><p>I don't share your experience at all.</p><p>My wife and I have fallen in love with netflix streaming on the xbox 360.  Watch anything from their streaming library, in DVD quality, whenever we want, instantly?  No driving to Blockbuster?  No waiting 3 days for it to turn up in the mail? Sold.</p><p>On our crappy old CRT, netflix streaming is indistinguishable from DVD, and we've only had a handful of connection issues in hundreds of hours of viewing.</p><p>You're right, there's absolutely a contingent that won't pay for streaming.  But there's also a significant audience that can't wait to.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For a download based service , sure , I can see that .
But streaming sucks , more so on video .
Unless connections get a whole lot better , I 'm not the least bit interested in streaming.I do n't share your experience at all.My wife and I have fallen in love with netflix streaming on the xbox 360 .
Watch anything from their streaming library , in DVD quality , whenever we want , instantly ?
No driving to Blockbuster ?
No waiting 3 days for it to turn up in the mail ?
Sold.On our crappy old CRT , netflix streaming is indistinguishable from DVD , and we 've only had a handful of connection issues in hundreds of hours of viewing.You 're right , there 's absolutely a contingent that wo n't pay for streaming .
But there 's also a significant audience that ca n't wait to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For a download based service, sure, I can see that.
But streaming sucks, more so on video.
Unless connections get a whole lot better, I'm not the least bit interested in streaming.I don't share your experience at all.My wife and I have fallen in love with netflix streaming on the xbox 360.
Watch anything from their streaming library, in DVD quality, whenever we want, instantly?
No driving to Blockbuster?
No waiting 3 days for it to turn up in the mail?
Sold.On our crappy old CRT, netflix streaming is indistinguishable from DVD, and we've only had a handful of connection issues in hundreds of hours of viewing.You're right, there's absolutely a contingent that won't pay for streaming.
But there's also a significant audience that can't wait to.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213349</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28219087</id>
	<title>Re:Sound familiar?</title>
	<author>visible.frylock</author>
	<datestamp>1244144520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>BIG difference between slashdot and hulu. Slashdot just provides a medium. The users and other organizations supply nearly all the content.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>BIG difference between slashdot and hulu .
Slashdot just provides a medium .
The users and other organizations supply nearly all the content .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>BIG difference between slashdot and hulu.
Slashdot just provides a medium.
The users and other organizations supply nearly all the content.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212713</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213561</id>
	<title>REFUSE TO PAY</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244146620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I won't be paying a dime.  There are too many other alternatives to pay for your content AND to watch your commercials.  Why not go after a little more commercial revenue like the over the air broadcasters?  Not to mention the cat and mouse game that you seem to be playing with my media center software constantly breaking things so people have to go to your crappy website.  If you go forward with this you will experience a horrible backlash from your users.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wo n't be paying a dime .
There are too many other alternatives to pay for your content AND to watch your commercials .
Why not go after a little more commercial revenue like the over the air broadcasters ?
Not to mention the cat and mouse game that you seem to be playing with my media center software constantly breaking things so people have to go to your crappy website .
If you go forward with this you will experience a horrible backlash from your users .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I won't be paying a dime.
There are too many other alternatives to pay for your content AND to watch your commercials.
Why not go after a little more commercial revenue like the over the air broadcasters?
Not to mention the cat and mouse game that you seem to be playing with my media center software constantly breaking things so people have to go to your crappy website.
If you go forward with this you will experience a horrible backlash from your users.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213349</id>
	<title>I wouldn't pay for streaming...</title>
	<author>Big Boss</author>
	<datestamp>1244145780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For a download based service, sure, I can see that. But streaming sucks, more so on video. Unless connections get a whole lot better, I'm not the least bit interested in streaming. With downloads, I can do HD, no problems. About 1GB per hour at the standard illegal sources last time I checked. It doesn't take a whole lot to screw up a stream with those sorts of bandwith requirements. Downloads just go a little slower for a bit. Unencrypted, 720p or 1080p, h264 video (3Mbit/sec minimum, probably about 6Mbit/sec for 1080p), AC3 audio, MKV container preferred.</p><p>Sell me that, with a fast server to download from and an RSS feed I can automate the process from, for a reasonable price, and I *WILL* buy. Reasonable price would be about half what the season goes for on Blu-Ray. I'm not getting media, packaging, shipping, etc., so I won't pay for it either. And if I'm paying, it must be ad-free. If I'm not paying, or getting a significant discount, ads would be acceptable. I personally wouldn't take any more than about 5min/hour of ads though. If I'm paying, it must also include re-download rights. Perhaps restricted to off-peak, or with a small fee for using up said capacity, but a very small fraction of the original purchase price. I would also require that the episodes be made available by midnight of the original air date. If they want to compete with PirateBay and friends, they have to provide all of the above. People will pay for the convenience, quality, and knowing they are legal. Cause paying customers issues, and they will go elsewhere, or just not bother. The studios have the ability to take the online market by storm and keep it. They just have to step up. Not that they will.</p><p>Streaming crap quality with encryption... Not interested.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For a download based service , sure , I can see that .
But streaming sucks , more so on video .
Unless connections get a whole lot better , I 'm not the least bit interested in streaming .
With downloads , I can do HD , no problems .
About 1GB per hour at the standard illegal sources last time I checked .
It does n't take a whole lot to screw up a stream with those sorts of bandwith requirements .
Downloads just go a little slower for a bit .
Unencrypted , 720p or 1080p , h264 video ( 3Mbit/sec minimum , probably about 6Mbit/sec for 1080p ) , AC3 audio , MKV container preferred.Sell me that , with a fast server to download from and an RSS feed I can automate the process from , for a reasonable price , and I * WILL * buy .
Reasonable price would be about half what the season goes for on Blu-Ray .
I 'm not getting media , packaging , shipping , etc. , so I wo n't pay for it either .
And if I 'm paying , it must be ad-free .
If I 'm not paying , or getting a significant discount , ads would be acceptable .
I personally would n't take any more than about 5min/hour of ads though .
If I 'm paying , it must also include re-download rights .
Perhaps restricted to off-peak , or with a small fee for using up said capacity , but a very small fraction of the original purchase price .
I would also require that the episodes be made available by midnight of the original air date .
If they want to compete with PirateBay and friends , they have to provide all of the above .
People will pay for the convenience , quality , and knowing they are legal .
Cause paying customers issues , and they will go elsewhere , or just not bother .
The studios have the ability to take the online market by storm and keep it .
They just have to step up .
Not that they will.Streaming crap quality with encryption... Not interested .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For a download based service, sure, I can see that.
But streaming sucks, more so on video.
Unless connections get a whole lot better, I'm not the least bit interested in streaming.
With downloads, I can do HD, no problems.
About 1GB per hour at the standard illegal sources last time I checked.
It doesn't take a whole lot to screw up a stream with those sorts of bandwith requirements.
Downloads just go a little slower for a bit.
Unencrypted, 720p or 1080p, h264 video (3Mbit/sec minimum, probably about 6Mbit/sec for 1080p), AC3 audio, MKV container preferred.Sell me that, with a fast server to download from and an RSS feed I can automate the process from, for a reasonable price, and I *WILL* buy.
Reasonable price would be about half what the season goes for on Blu-Ray.
I'm not getting media, packaging, shipping, etc., so I won't pay for it either.
And if I'm paying, it must be ad-free.
If I'm not paying, or getting a significant discount, ads would be acceptable.
I personally wouldn't take any more than about 5min/hour of ads though.
If I'm paying, it must also include re-download rights.
Perhaps restricted to off-peak, or with a small fee for using up said capacity, but a very small fraction of the original purchase price.
I would also require that the episodes be made available by midnight of the original air date.
If they want to compete with PirateBay and friends, they have to provide all of the above.
People will pay for the convenience, quality, and knowing they are legal.
Cause paying customers issues, and they will go elsewhere, or just not bother.
The studios have the ability to take the online market by storm and keep it.
They just have to step up.
Not that they will.Streaming crap quality with encryption... Not interested.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213449</id>
	<title>add more commercials</title>
	<author>yawnmoth</author>
	<datestamp>1244146140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>TV networks generally have 15 minutes of commercials for every 45 minutes of programming and as loathsome as having that many commercials may be, I'd, personally, rather have that than have to pay $20.00 / month or whatever.  And I don't see pirating as a viable alternative, either - however unjustified the penalties for copyright violation may be, the fact remains that if you get caught, you're liable to be fined several thousand dollars.</htmltext>
<tokenext>TV networks generally have 15 minutes of commercials for every 45 minutes of programming and as loathsome as having that many commercials may be , I 'd , personally , rather have that than have to pay $ 20.00 / month or whatever .
And I do n't see pirating as a viable alternative , either - however unjustified the penalties for copyright violation may be , the fact remains that if you get caught , you 're liable to be fined several thousand dollars .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>TV networks generally have 15 minutes of commercials for every 45 minutes of programming and as loathsome as having that many commercials may be, I'd, personally, rather have that than have to pay $20.00 / month or whatever.
And I don't see pirating as a viable alternative, either - however unjustified the penalties for copyright violation may be, the fact remains that if you get caught, you're liable to be fined several thousand dollars.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214089</id>
	<title>hulu.. meet napster.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244148660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>napster.. meet hulu..</p><p>You guys should get to know each other as you'll be neighbors in the internet cemetery.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>napster.. meet hulu..You guys should get to know each other as you 'll be neighbors in the internet cemetery .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>napster.. meet hulu..You guys should get to know each other as you'll be neighbors in the internet cemetery.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28216261</id>
	<title>Broadcast doesn't come free</title>
	<author>westlake</author>
	<datestamp>1244116740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>What, you mean like broadcast television?</i> <p>
What makes this "Insightful?"</p><p>
Broadcast television is almost entirely supported by advertising. The evangelical religious broadcaster has his own product to sell.</p><p> Your PBS station subsists on a lighter diet of adds, foundation grants, government funding and nickel and dime contributions from viewers.</p><p>
Broadcast is inherently mass media.</p><p> Multicast digital might give you sixteen broadcast choices where there were only four before. But that is about the limit.</p><p>
You have to deliver big numbers or advertisers drift away. When too many advertisers drift away, the screen goes dark.</p><p>Competition from cable, satellite, home video, the video game and the Internet makes it very hard to get what you need.</p><p>
Games and reality shows are cheap to produce. But even WalMart knows that there is only so much room at the bottom.</p><p>
Historically, the big spenders in television were the automakers, tobacco companies, and brewers.</p><p>
It's still startling to see Fred Flintstone light it up for Winston. <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NAExoSozc2c" title="youtube.com">Flintstones Cigarette Commercial</a> [youtube.com] </p><p>
Take major league sports out of the picture, and these props have been mostly kicked away.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What , you mean like broadcast television ?
What makes this " Insightful ?
" Broadcast television is almost entirely supported by advertising .
The evangelical religious broadcaster has his own product to sell .
Your PBS station subsists on a lighter diet of adds , foundation grants , government funding and nickel and dime contributions from viewers .
Broadcast is inherently mass media .
Multicast digital might give you sixteen broadcast choices where there were only four before .
But that is about the limit .
You have to deliver big numbers or advertisers drift away .
When too many advertisers drift away , the screen goes dark.Competition from cable , satellite , home video , the video game and the Internet makes it very hard to get what you need .
Games and reality shows are cheap to produce .
But even WalMart knows that there is only so much room at the bottom .
Historically , the big spenders in television were the automakers , tobacco companies , and brewers .
It 's still startling to see Fred Flintstone light it up for Winston .
Flintstones Cigarette Commercial [ youtube.com ] Take major league sports out of the picture , and these props have been mostly kicked away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What, you mean like broadcast television?
What makes this "Insightful?
"
Broadcast television is almost entirely supported by advertising.
The evangelical religious broadcaster has his own product to sell.
Your PBS station subsists on a lighter diet of adds, foundation grants, government funding and nickel and dime contributions from viewers.
Broadcast is inherently mass media.
Multicast digital might give you sixteen broadcast choices where there were only four before.
But that is about the limit.
You have to deliver big numbers or advertisers drift away.
When too many advertisers drift away, the screen goes dark.Competition from cable, satellite, home video, the video game and the Internet makes it very hard to get what you need.
Games and reality shows are cheap to produce.
But even WalMart knows that there is only so much room at the bottom.
Historically, the big spenders in television were the automakers, tobacco companies, and brewers.
It's still startling to see Fred Flintstone light it up for Winston.
Flintstones Cigarette Commercial [youtube.com] 
Take major league sports out of the picture, and these props have been mostly kicked away.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212837</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212607</id>
	<title>And...</title>
	<author>Random2</author>
	<datestamp>1244142960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...You didn't see this coming?</htmltext>
<tokenext>...You did n't see this coming ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...You didn't see this coming?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212905</id>
	<title>Bye Hulu!</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1244143980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>People watched you because you were free.  You were a simple way to watch a show someone had missed that maybe the Tivo didn't record due to electrical storm.  Once you start charging, you lose your viewership.  No viewership?  No ad revenue.  No viewership?  No subscription revenue.  And no, you're not Too Big To Fail (TM), so no bailout revenue either.<br> <br>
Too bad.  You spent all that money on TV and movie ads about evil alien plots to get eyes on your site, just to screw it all up.</htmltext>
<tokenext>People watched you because you were free .
You were a simple way to watch a show someone had missed that maybe the Tivo did n't record due to electrical storm .
Once you start charging , you lose your viewership .
No viewership ?
No ad revenue .
No viewership ?
No subscription revenue .
And no , you 're not Too Big To Fail ( TM ) , so no bailout revenue either .
Too bad .
You spent all that money on TV and movie ads about evil alien plots to get eyes on your site , just to screw it all up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People watched you because you were free.
You were a simple way to watch a show someone had missed that maybe the Tivo didn't record due to electrical storm.
Once you start charging, you lose your viewership.
No viewership?
No ad revenue.
No viewership?
No subscription revenue.
And no, you're not Too Big To Fail (TM), so no bailout revenue either.
Too bad.
You spent all that money on TV and movie ads about evil alien plots to get eyes on your site, just to screw it all up.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28221307</id>
	<title>So now that you have dropped your cable/satellite</title>
	<author>RsJtSu</author>
	<datestamp>1244211840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Do you really think your cable/satellite provider is going to be happy that you have elected to bypass their service and are paying for an on-line TV programming lineup? NO! Just look at the recent article about Time Warner Cable talking about putting bandwidth caps for too much usage. Hell, it even says in the article that using their phone/video service won't count, but using other services will count against your download limit.<p>

This would be the largest set back to a fully on-line a-la-carte system that we all dream of. Our providers, unless they offer a-la-carte and FREE(with monthly cable bill) On demand streaming video then it seems that the big cable companies will do whatever they can possible to circumvent this type of system from working.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you really think your cable/satellite provider is going to be happy that you have elected to bypass their service and are paying for an on-line TV programming lineup ?
NO ! Just look at the recent article about Time Warner Cable talking about putting bandwidth caps for too much usage .
Hell , it even says in the article that using their phone/video service wo n't count , but using other services will count against your download limit .
This would be the largest set back to a fully on-line a-la-carte system that we all dream of .
Our providers , unless they offer a-la-carte and FREE ( with monthly cable bill ) On demand streaming video then it seems that the big cable companies will do whatever they can possible to circumvent this type of system from working .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you really think your cable/satellite provider is going to be happy that you have elected to bypass their service and are paying for an on-line TV programming lineup?
NO! Just look at the recent article about Time Warner Cable talking about putting bandwidth caps for too much usage.
Hell, it even says in the article that using their phone/video service won't count, but using other services will count against your download limit.
This would be the largest set back to a fully on-line a-la-carte system that we all dream of.
Our providers, unless they offer a-la-carte and FREE(with monthly cable bill) On demand streaming video then it seems that the big cable companies will do whatever they can possible to circumvent this type of system from working.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28215757</id>
	<title>Re:Still not available</title>
	<author>B\_SharpC</author>
	<datestamp>1244113980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hold out for selective pricing. One for all paying for cable, you are still charged for radical media like CNN, that you don't want, but still pay for.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hold out for selective pricing .
One for all paying for cable , you are still charged for radical media like CNN , that you do n't want , but still pay for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hold out for selective pricing.
One for all paying for cable, you are still charged for radical media like CNN, that you don't want, but still pay for.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213111</id>
	<title>Re:Still not available</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244145000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Perhaps they could allow you to pay instead or watching the ads. The reason Hulu works only in US is because its advertisers don't want to subsidize the videos watched in another country where the person who watched it won't be able to buy the advertised product.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps they could allow you to pay instead or watching the ads .
The reason Hulu works only in US is because its advertisers do n't want to subsidize the videos watched in another country where the person who watched it wo n't be able to buy the advertised product .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps they could allow you to pay instead or watching the ads.
The reason Hulu works only in US is because its advertisers don't want to subsidize the videos watched in another country where the person who watched it won't be able to buy the advertised product.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214253</id>
	<title>Re:OK, now people, DO NOT PAY and it will pass...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244106240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Paying for stuff is good.  People buy DVDs of their favorite movies all the time.  It's interesting how some of us think that everhything can be free. lol@u boycotting shit. it'll go out of business before they decide to make it all free again.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Paying for stuff is good .
People buy DVDs of their favorite movies all the time .
It 's interesting how some of us think that everhything can be free .
lol @ u boycotting shit .
it 'll go out of business before they decide to make it all free again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Paying for stuff is good.
People buy DVDs of their favorite movies all the time.
It's interesting how some of us think that everhything can be free.
lol@u boycotting shit.
it'll go out of business before they decide to make it all free again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28215189</id>
	<title>Re:Surprised?</title>
	<author>Radhruin</author>
	<datestamp>1244111040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Netflix has the subscription angle covered. They've definitely been pumping up their online offerings of late, likely in response to Hulu, iTunes, Amazon VOD, etc.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Netflix has the subscription angle covered .
They 've definitely been pumping up their online offerings of late , likely in response to Hulu , iTunes , Amazon VOD , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Netflix has the subscription angle covered.
They've definitely been pumping up their online offerings of late, likely in response to Hulu, iTunes, Amazon VOD, etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212759</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212653
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212899
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214125
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212581
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212855
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213349
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28218907
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212591
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212961
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212581
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213775
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212653
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212953
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213717
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212621
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212837
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214645
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212581
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213581
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212653
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212941
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212729
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213357
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212621
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213085
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212713
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28219087
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212581
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214585
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212905
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213103
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28215217
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212897
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213657
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212591
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214077
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28218117
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212653
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213175
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212621
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213577
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212581
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214765
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212591
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213393
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212713
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213439
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213349
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214123
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212621
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214609
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212621
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212837
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28216261
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213349
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28217275
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212635
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213969
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212581
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28216757
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28220707
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212627
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214489
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212581
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213177
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212591
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213031
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212685
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213259
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212685
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213029
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28215309
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212635
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214607
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212841
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213229
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212621
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213095
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212905
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28215157
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212581
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28219061
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212581
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28217547
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212591
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213043
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28215771
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212685
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214547
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212621
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212723
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213817
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212591
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213539
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212621
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212837
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213729
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212581
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28215757
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212591
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213043
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28215647
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212653
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212871
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212581
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213869
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212653
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212917
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212635
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28215057
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28222309
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212653
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212899
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214751
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212653
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212899
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213597
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212653
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212899
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28215441
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214253
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212621
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212759
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28215189
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212591
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213143
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_1754225_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213349
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28216281
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_1754225.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212621
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212759
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28215189
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213577
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213085
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212723
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213095
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212837
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28216261
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214645
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213729
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214609
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_1754225.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212643
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_1754225.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213239
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_1754225.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214237
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_1754225.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212685
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213259
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213029
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28215309
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214547
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_1754225.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213349
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28216281
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28218907
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214123
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28217275
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_1754225.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212581
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213581
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212855
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213111
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213775
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213177
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28215757
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213869
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28216757
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28220707
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214585
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28217547
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214765
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28219061
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_1754225.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212605
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_1754225.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212631
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_1754225.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213861
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_1754225.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212749
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_1754225.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28217251
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_1754225.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212729
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213357
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_1754225.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213633
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_1754225.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213449
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_1754225.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212627
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214489
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_1754225.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212653
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212899
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28215441
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214125
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213597
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214751
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212871
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212953
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213717
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213175
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212941
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212917
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_1754225.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212635
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28215057
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28222309
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213969
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214607
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_1754225.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212841
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213229
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_1754225.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212923
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_1754225.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212637
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_1754225.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212591
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213393
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213043
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28215771
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28215647
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214077
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213539
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213031
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213143
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212961
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_1754225.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212905
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28215157
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213103
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214201
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28215217
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_1754225.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214557
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_1754225.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212897
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213657
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_1754225.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28212713
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213439
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28219087
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_1754225.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213133
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_1754225.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213223
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28218117
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28213817
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_1754225.28214253
</commentlist>
</conversation>
