<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_07_1619231</id>
	<title>Unix Turns 40</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1244395440000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>wandazulu writes <i>"Forty years ago this summer, Ken Thompson sat down and wrote a small operating system that would eventually be called Unix. An article at ComputerWorld describes the history, present, and future of what could arguably be called <a href="http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=printArticleBasic&amp;taxonomyName=Operating+Systems&amp;articleId=9133570&amp;taxonomyId=89">the most important operating system of them all</a>. 'Thompson and a colleague, Dennis Ritchie, had been feeling adrift since Bell Labs had withdrawn earlier in the year from a troubled project to develop a time-sharing system called <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multics">Multics</a> (Multiplexed Information and Computing Service). They had no desire to stick with any of the batch operating systems that predominated at the time, nor did they want to reinvent Multics, which they saw as grotesque and unwieldy. After batting around some ideas for a new system, Thompson wrote the first version of Unix, which the pair would continue to develop over the next several years with the help of colleagues Doug McIlroy, Joe Ossanna and Rudd Canaday.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>wandazulu writes " Forty years ago this summer , Ken Thompson sat down and wrote a small operating system that would eventually be called Unix .
An article at ComputerWorld describes the history , present , and future of what could arguably be called the most important operating system of them all .
'Thompson and a colleague , Dennis Ritchie , had been feeling adrift since Bell Labs had withdrawn earlier in the year from a troubled project to develop a time-sharing system called Multics ( Multiplexed Information and Computing Service ) .
They had no desire to stick with any of the batch operating systems that predominated at the time , nor did they want to reinvent Multics , which they saw as grotesque and unwieldy .
After batting around some ideas for a new system , Thompson wrote the first version of Unix , which the pair would continue to develop over the next several years with the help of colleagues Doug McIlroy , Joe Ossanna and Rudd Canaday .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>wandazulu writes "Forty years ago this summer, Ken Thompson sat down and wrote a small operating system that would eventually be called Unix.
An article at ComputerWorld describes the history, present, and future of what could arguably be called the most important operating system of them all.
'Thompson and a colleague, Dennis Ritchie, had been feeling adrift since Bell Labs had withdrawn earlier in the year from a troubled project to develop a time-sharing system called Multics (Multiplexed Information and Computing Service).
They had no desire to stick with any of the batch operating systems that predominated at the time, nor did they want to reinvent Multics, which they saw as grotesque and unwieldy.
After batting around some ideas for a new system, Thompson wrote the first version of Unix, which the pair would continue to develop over the next several years with the help of colleagues Doug McIlroy, Joe Ossanna and Rudd Canaday.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243333</id>
	<title>that was good management!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244406060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What is scary (or at least very sad) today is that very probably no manager would let a few brilliant programmers to develop their own system during a couple of years: in academia, publishing is much more important that working on a big software system, and in industrial R&amp;D, one could no more work for a couple of years on a brand new software.

</p><p>Current managers would look with scare at their spreadsheet and would not let that kind of things happen anymore in 2009, and I still think it is really a pity, and we could get some really innovative systems if R&amp;D was managed differently today.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What is scary ( or at least very sad ) today is that very probably no manager would let a few brilliant programmers to develop their own system during a couple of years : in academia , publishing is much more important that working on a big software system , and in industrial R&amp;D , one could no more work for a couple of years on a brand new software .
Current managers would look with scare at their spreadsheet and would not let that kind of things happen anymore in 2009 , and I still think it is really a pity , and we could get some really innovative systems if R&amp;D was managed differently today .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is scary (or at least very sad) today is that very probably no manager would let a few brilliant programmers to develop their own system during a couple of years: in academia, publishing is much more important that working on a big software system, and in industrial R&amp;D, one could no more work for a couple of years on a brand new software.
Current managers would look with scare at their spreadsheet and would not let that kind of things happen anymore in 2009, and I still think it is really a pity, and we could get some really innovative systems if R&amp;D was managed differently today.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243725</id>
	<title>Re:Worth thinking about</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244366100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>-1, lives in hippie fantasy land.</p><p>I think you're forgetting that people had to pay AT&amp;T, a bigger monopoly in its time than IBM and Microsoft combined, for a Unix source license and that they would to Very Bad Things to you if you broke that license.  You're also forgetting Sun, HP, DEC, Apollo, and a host of other Unix vendors who were not at all about sharing freely or cooperating. (Granted, they're all dead now or nearly so.)</p><p>Your words are poetic but largely revisionist bullshit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>-1 , lives in hippie fantasy land.I think you 're forgetting that people had to pay AT&amp;T , a bigger monopoly in its time than IBM and Microsoft combined , for a Unix source license and that they would to Very Bad Things to you if you broke that license .
You 're also forgetting Sun , HP , DEC , Apollo , and a host of other Unix vendors who were not at all about sharing freely or cooperating .
( Granted , they 're all dead now or nearly so .
) Your words are poetic but largely revisionist bullshit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>-1, lives in hippie fantasy land.I think you're forgetting that people had to pay AT&amp;T, a bigger monopoly in its time than IBM and Microsoft combined, for a Unix source license and that they would to Very Bad Things to you if you broke that license.
You're also forgetting Sun, HP, DEC, Apollo, and a host of other Unix vendors who were not at all about sharing freely or cooperating.
(Granted, they're all dead now or nearly so.
)Your words are poetic but largely revisionist bullshit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242921</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244447</id>
	<title>UNIX as Literature</title>
	<author>toby</author>
	<datestamp>1244371980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Unix is not just an OS. It is a culture."

<a href="http://theody.net/elements.html" title="theody.net">Sounds familiar.</a> [theody.net]</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Unix is not just an OS .
It is a culture .
" Sounds familiar .
[ theody.net ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Unix is not just an OS.
It is a culture.
"

Sounds familiar.
[theody.net]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242921</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243057</id>
	<title>The Gospel of Tux</title>
	<author>Gothmolly</author>
	<datestamp>1244404020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Every generation has a mythology. Every millenium has a doomsday cult. Every legend gets the distortion knob wound up until the speaker melts. Archeologists at the University of Helsinki today uncovered what could be the earliest known writings from the Cult of Tux, a fanatical religious sect that flourished during the early Silicon Age, around the dawn of the third millenium AD...</p><p>The Gospel of Tux (v1.0)</p><p>In the beginning Turing created the Machine.</p><p>And the Machine was crufty and bogacious, existing in theory only. And von Neumann looked upon the Machine, and saw that it was crufty. He divided the Machine into two Abstractions, the Data and the Code, and yet the two were one Architecture. This is a great Mystery, and the beginning of wisdom.</p><p>And von Neumann spoke unto the Architecture, and blessed it, saying, "Go forth and replicate, freely exchanging data and code, and bring forth all manner of devices unto the earth." And it was so, and it was cool. The Architecture prospered and was implemented in hardware and software. And it brought forth many Systems unto the earth.</p><p>The first Systems were mighty giants; many great works of renown did they accomplish. Among them were Colossus, the codebreaker; ENIAC, the targeter; EDSAC and MULTIVAC and all manner of froody creatures ending in AC, the experimenters; and SAGE, the defender of the sky and father of all networks. These were the mighty giants of old, the first children of Turing, and their works are written in the Books of the Ancients. This was the First Age, the age of Lore.</p><p>Now the sons of Marketing looked upon the children of Turing, and saw that they were swift of mind and terse of name and had many great and baleful attributes. And they said unto themselves, "Let us go now and make us Corporations, to bind the Systems to our own use that they may bring us great fortune." With sweet words did they lure their customers, and with many chains did they bind the Systems, to fashion them after their own image. And the sons of Marketing fashioned themselves Suits to wear, the better to lure their customers, and wrote grave and perilous Licenses, the better to bind the Systems. And the sons of Marketing thus became known as Suits, despising and being despised by the true Engineers, the children of von Neumann.</p><p>And the Systems and their Corporations replicated and grew numerous upon the earth. In those days there were IBM and Digital, Burroughs and Honeywell, Unisys and Rand, and many others. And they each kept to their own System, hardware and software, and did not interchange, for their Licences forbade it. This was the Second Age, the age of Mainframes.</p><p>Now it came to pass that the spirits of Turing and von Neumann looked upon the earth and were displeased. The Systems and their Corporations had grown large and bulky, and Suits ruled over true Engineers. And the Customers groaned and cried loudly unto heaven, saying, "Oh that there would be created a System mighty in power, yet small in size, able to reach into the very home!" And the Engineers groaned and cried likewise, saying, "Oh, that a deliverer would arise to grant us freedom from these oppressing Suits and their grave and perilous Licences, and send us a System of our own, that we may hack therein!" And the spirits of Turing and von Neumann heard the cries and were moved, and said unto each other, "Let us go down and fabricate a Breakthrough, that these cries may be stilled."</p><p>And that day the spirits of Turing and von Neumann spake unto Moore of Intel, granting him insight and wisdom to understand the future. And Moore was with chip, and he brought forth the chip and named it 4004. And Moore did bless the Chip, saying, "Thou art a Breakthrough; with my own Corporation have I fabricated thee. Though thou art yet as small as a dust mote, yet shall thou grow and replicate unto the size of a mountain, and conquer all before thee. This blessing I give unto thee: every eighteen months shall thou double in capacity, until the end of the age." This is Moore's Law,</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Every generation has a mythology .
Every millenium has a doomsday cult .
Every legend gets the distortion knob wound up until the speaker melts .
Archeologists at the University of Helsinki today uncovered what could be the earliest known writings from the Cult of Tux , a fanatical religious sect that flourished during the early Silicon Age , around the dawn of the third millenium AD...The Gospel of Tux ( v1.0 ) In the beginning Turing created the Machine.And the Machine was crufty and bogacious , existing in theory only .
And von Neumann looked upon the Machine , and saw that it was crufty .
He divided the Machine into two Abstractions , the Data and the Code , and yet the two were one Architecture .
This is a great Mystery , and the beginning of wisdom.And von Neumann spoke unto the Architecture , and blessed it , saying , " Go forth and replicate , freely exchanging data and code , and bring forth all manner of devices unto the earth .
" And it was so , and it was cool .
The Architecture prospered and was implemented in hardware and software .
And it brought forth many Systems unto the earth.The first Systems were mighty giants ; many great works of renown did they accomplish .
Among them were Colossus , the codebreaker ; ENIAC , the targeter ; EDSAC and MULTIVAC and all manner of froody creatures ending in AC , the experimenters ; and SAGE , the defender of the sky and father of all networks .
These were the mighty giants of old , the first children of Turing , and their works are written in the Books of the Ancients .
This was the First Age , the age of Lore.Now the sons of Marketing looked upon the children of Turing , and saw that they were swift of mind and terse of name and had many great and baleful attributes .
And they said unto themselves , " Let us go now and make us Corporations , to bind the Systems to our own use that they may bring us great fortune .
" With sweet words did they lure their customers , and with many chains did they bind the Systems , to fashion them after their own image .
And the sons of Marketing fashioned themselves Suits to wear , the better to lure their customers , and wrote grave and perilous Licenses , the better to bind the Systems .
And the sons of Marketing thus became known as Suits , despising and being despised by the true Engineers , the children of von Neumann.And the Systems and their Corporations replicated and grew numerous upon the earth .
In those days there were IBM and Digital , Burroughs and Honeywell , Unisys and Rand , and many others .
And they each kept to their own System , hardware and software , and did not interchange , for their Licences forbade it .
This was the Second Age , the age of Mainframes.Now it came to pass that the spirits of Turing and von Neumann looked upon the earth and were displeased .
The Systems and their Corporations had grown large and bulky , and Suits ruled over true Engineers .
And the Customers groaned and cried loudly unto heaven , saying , " Oh that there would be created a System mighty in power , yet small in size , able to reach into the very home !
" And the Engineers groaned and cried likewise , saying , " Oh , that a deliverer would arise to grant us freedom from these oppressing Suits and their grave and perilous Licences , and send us a System of our own , that we may hack therein !
" And the spirits of Turing and von Neumann heard the cries and were moved , and said unto each other , " Let us go down and fabricate a Breakthrough , that these cries may be stilled .
" And that day the spirits of Turing and von Neumann spake unto Moore of Intel , granting him insight and wisdom to understand the future .
And Moore was with chip , and he brought forth the chip and named it 4004 .
And Moore did bless the Chip , saying , " Thou art a Breakthrough ; with my own Corporation have I fabricated thee .
Though thou art yet as small as a dust mote , yet shall thou grow and replicate unto the size of a mountain , and conquer all before thee .
This blessing I give unto thee : every eighteen months shall thou double in capacity , until the end of the age .
" This is Moore 's Law,</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Every generation has a mythology.
Every millenium has a doomsday cult.
Every legend gets the distortion knob wound up until the speaker melts.
Archeologists at the University of Helsinki today uncovered what could be the earliest known writings from the Cult of Tux, a fanatical religious sect that flourished during the early Silicon Age, around the dawn of the third millenium AD...The Gospel of Tux (v1.0)In the beginning Turing created the Machine.And the Machine was crufty and bogacious, existing in theory only.
And von Neumann looked upon the Machine, and saw that it was crufty.
He divided the Machine into two Abstractions, the Data and the Code, and yet the two were one Architecture.
This is a great Mystery, and the beginning of wisdom.And von Neumann spoke unto the Architecture, and blessed it, saying, "Go forth and replicate, freely exchanging data and code, and bring forth all manner of devices unto the earth.
" And it was so, and it was cool.
The Architecture prospered and was implemented in hardware and software.
And it brought forth many Systems unto the earth.The first Systems were mighty giants; many great works of renown did they accomplish.
Among them were Colossus, the codebreaker; ENIAC, the targeter; EDSAC and MULTIVAC and all manner of froody creatures ending in AC, the experimenters; and SAGE, the defender of the sky and father of all networks.
These were the mighty giants of old, the first children of Turing, and their works are written in the Books of the Ancients.
This was the First Age, the age of Lore.Now the sons of Marketing looked upon the children of Turing, and saw that they were swift of mind and terse of name and had many great and baleful attributes.
And they said unto themselves, "Let us go now and make us Corporations, to bind the Systems to our own use that they may bring us great fortune.
" With sweet words did they lure their customers, and with many chains did they bind the Systems, to fashion them after their own image.
And the sons of Marketing fashioned themselves Suits to wear, the better to lure their customers, and wrote grave and perilous Licenses, the better to bind the Systems.
And the sons of Marketing thus became known as Suits, despising and being despised by the true Engineers, the children of von Neumann.And the Systems and their Corporations replicated and grew numerous upon the earth.
In those days there were IBM and Digital, Burroughs and Honeywell, Unisys and Rand, and many others.
And they each kept to their own System, hardware and software, and did not interchange, for their Licences forbade it.
This was the Second Age, the age of Mainframes.Now it came to pass that the spirits of Turing and von Neumann looked upon the earth and were displeased.
The Systems and their Corporations had grown large and bulky, and Suits ruled over true Engineers.
And the Customers groaned and cried loudly unto heaven, saying, "Oh that there would be created a System mighty in power, yet small in size, able to reach into the very home!
" And the Engineers groaned and cried likewise, saying, "Oh, that a deliverer would arise to grant us freedom from these oppressing Suits and their grave and perilous Licences, and send us a System of our own, that we may hack therein!
" And the spirits of Turing and von Neumann heard the cries and were moved, and said unto each other, "Let us go down and fabricate a Breakthrough, that these cries may be stilled.
"And that day the spirits of Turing and von Neumann spake unto Moore of Intel, granting him insight and wisdom to understand the future.
And Moore was with chip, and he brought forth the chip and named it 4004.
And Moore did bless the Chip, saying, "Thou art a Breakthrough; with my own Corporation have I fabricated thee.
Though thou art yet as small as a dust mote, yet shall thou grow and replicate unto the size of a mountain, and conquer all before thee.
This blessing I give unto thee: every eighteen months shall thou double in capacity, until the end of the age.
" This is Moore's Law,</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28259567</id>
	<title>Re:Worth thinking about</title>
	<author>bill\_mcgonigle</author>
	<datestamp>1244469900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Doug McIlroy gave an extensive history lesson to my LUG a few years back.  It's long, but worth the time for those who enjoy computer history:</p><p><a href="http://www.archive.org/download/DougMcIlroy\_AncestryOfLinux\_DLSLUG/DougMcIlroy\_AncestryOfLinux\_DLSLUG\_708kb.mp4" title="archive.org">http://www.archive.org/download/DougMcIlroy\_AncestryOfLinux\_DLSLUG/DougMcIlroy\_AncestryOfLinux\_DLSLUG\_708kb.mp4</a> [archive.org]</p><p>The quality is sub-low-budget, but viewable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Doug McIlroy gave an extensive history lesson to my LUG a few years back .
It 's long , but worth the time for those who enjoy computer history : http : //www.archive.org/download/DougMcIlroy \ _AncestryOfLinux \ _DLSLUG/DougMcIlroy \ _AncestryOfLinux \ _DLSLUG \ _708kb.mp4 [ archive.org ] The quality is sub-low-budget , but viewable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doug McIlroy gave an extensive history lesson to my LUG a few years back.
It's long, but worth the time for those who enjoy computer history:http://www.archive.org/download/DougMcIlroy\_AncestryOfLinux\_DLSLUG/DougMcIlroy\_AncestryOfLinux\_DLSLUG\_708kb.mp4 [archive.org]The quality is sub-low-budget, but viewable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242471</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243215</id>
	<title>Re:An alternate point of view</title>
	<author>Guy Harris</author>
	<datestamp>1244405040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <a href="http://web.mit.edu/~simsong/www/ugh.pdf" title="mit.edu">http://web.mit.edu/~simsong/www/ugh.pdf</a> [mit.edu] </p><p>"Two of the most famous products of Berkeley are LSD and Unix.
I don't think that is a coincidence."</p></div><p>Neither of them were, of course, invented at Berkeley; one might, at best, argue that Berkeley <em>perfected</em> both of them.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //web.mit.edu/ ~ simsong/www/ugh.pdf [ mit.edu ] " Two of the most famous products of Berkeley are LSD and Unix .
I do n't think that is a coincidence .
" Neither of them were , of course , invented at Berkeley ; one might , at best , argue that Berkeley perfected both of them .
: - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext> http://web.mit.edu/~simsong/www/ugh.pdf [mit.edu] "Two of the most famous products of Berkeley are LSD and Unix.
I don't think that is a coincidence.
"Neither of them were, of course, invented at Berkeley; one might, at best, argue that Berkeley perfected both of them.
:-)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243883</id>
	<title>Re:Worth thinking about</title>
	<author>Vanders</author>
	<datestamp>1244367900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>It's no surprise that the GPL and open source in general were born from the minds of Unix hackers.</p></div></blockquote><p>
RMS had never even used UNIX when he started the GNU project: he was an ITS &amp; Lisp hacker.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's no surprise that the GPL and open source in general were born from the minds of Unix hackers .
RMS had never even used UNIX when he started the GNU project : he was an ITS &amp; Lisp hacker .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's no surprise that the GPL and open source in general were born from the minds of Unix hackers.
RMS had never even used UNIX when he started the GNU project: he was an ITS &amp; Lisp hacker.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242921</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28247367</id>
	<title>Re:And to celebrate, it issued the command:</title>
	<author>.jc.</author>
	<datestamp>1244399340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Bah. Your command would fail. You need to escape the splat just like the semicolon:</p><p> <tt>find my\_lawn -name kids\* -exec rm -f {} \;</tt> </p><p>However <tt>-exec</tt> is slow. Try:</p><p> <tt>find my\_lawn -name kids\* | xargs rm -rvf</tt> </p><p>Verbose for your kid-removing satisfaction.</p><p>Oh, and happy birthday, UNIX! Without you my career would have undoubtedly been less interesting.</p></div><p>find my\_lawn -name kids\* -print0 | xargs -0 rm -rvf</p><p>You will thank me one day when some kid creates a file named "\n/\n"</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bah .
Your command would fail .
You need to escape the splat just like the semicolon : find my \ _lawn -name kids \ * -exec rm -f { } \ ; However -exec is slow .
Try : find my \ _lawn -name kids \ * | xargs rm -rvf Verbose for your kid-removing satisfaction.Oh , and happy birthday , UNIX !
Without you my career would have undoubtedly been less interesting.find my \ _lawn -name kids \ * -print0 | xargs -0 rm -rvfYou will thank me one day when some kid creates a file named " \ n/ \ n "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bah.
Your command would fail.
You need to escape the splat just like the semicolon: find my\_lawn -name kids\* -exec rm -f {} \; However -exec is slow.
Try: find my\_lawn -name kids\* | xargs rm -rvf Verbose for your kid-removing satisfaction.Oh, and happy birthday, UNIX!
Without you my career would have undoubtedly been less interesting.find my\_lawn -name kids\* -print0 | xargs -0 rm -rvfYou will thank me one day when some kid creates a file named "\n/\n"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242685</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243005</id>
	<title>Re:Did they invent C too?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244403600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No.  Actually, this Thompson/Ritchie thing is a long-running myth, I'm surprised no<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. poster has exposed it yet.  The real inventor of both Unix and C was Morton Downey, Jr., who was apparently too busy in his many other pursuits to file a claim for it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No .
Actually , this Thompson/Ritchie thing is a long-running myth , I 'm surprised no / .
poster has exposed it yet .
The real inventor of both Unix and C was Morton Downey , Jr. , who was apparently too busy in his many other pursuits to file a claim for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.
Actually, this Thompson/Ritchie thing is a long-running myth, I'm surprised no /.
poster has exposed it yet.
The real inventor of both Unix and C was Morton Downey, Jr., who was apparently too busy in his many other pursuits to file a claim for it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242541</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243627</id>
	<title>UNIX!</title>
	<author>darth dickinson</author>
	<datestamp>1244408280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I know this!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I know this !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know this!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242651</id>
	<title>Re:And to celebrate, it issued the command:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244400960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>find: my\_lawn: Permission denied</p><p>&gt;&gt;&gt;You're too late old man. It's Our lawn now.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>mv<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/home/old\_folks<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/retirement\_home/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>find : my \ _lawn : Permission denied &gt; &gt; &gt; You 're too late old man .
It 's Our lawn now .
; ) mv /home/old \ _folks /retirement \ _home/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>find: my\_lawn: Permission denied&gt;&gt;&gt;You're too late old man.
It's Our lawn now.
;)mv /home/old\_folks /retirement\_home/</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242421</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28245145</id>
	<title>Re:Worth thinking about</title>
	<author>sturm42</author>
	<datestamp>1244377080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>You realize that the GPL was conceived by RMS, an ITS and Lispm hacker, right?</htmltext>
<tokenext>You realize that the GPL was conceived by RMS , an ITS and Lispm hacker , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You realize that the GPL was conceived by RMS, an ITS and Lispm hacker, right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242921</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244021</id>
	<title>Re:Windows has more and more Unix features</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244369220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No, not really. I mean, yes, there is Unix services for windows, which implements all of a typical Unix shell environment. But its Unix like behavior is not an indication that its adopting the Unix philosophy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , not really .
I mean , yes , there is Unix services for windows , which implements all of a typical Unix shell environment .
But its Unix like behavior is not an indication that its adopting the Unix philosophy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, not really.
I mean, yes, there is Unix services for windows, which implements all of a typical Unix shell environment.
But its Unix like behavior is not an indication that its adopting the Unix philosophy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243389</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244699</id>
	<title>The importance of Open Systems.</title>
	<author>argent</author>
	<datestamp>1244373840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're the revisionist.</p><p>It didn't matter if the UNIX you were running on was licensed from Sun, HP, or Dec. You could write your program for the UNIX API and move from one to another. That's WHY they failed, they were trying to establish proprietary lock-in on a platform that had openness built into the bones. The only proprietary operating system that has any market penetration now is one that refused to become another implementation of the hippie OS... Windows NT.</p><p>Not AT&amp;T, not DEC, not HP, not IBM, none of them could keep the hippie OS from shining through. Those of us who were working in hippie OS land in the '70s and early '80s kept telling the squares that they couldn't keep the cats in the bag, and we were right.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're the revisionist.It did n't matter if the UNIX you were running on was licensed from Sun , HP , or Dec. You could write your program for the UNIX API and move from one to another .
That 's WHY they failed , they were trying to establish proprietary lock-in on a platform that had openness built into the bones .
The only proprietary operating system that has any market penetration now is one that refused to become another implementation of the hippie OS... Windows NT.Not AT&amp;T , not DEC , not HP , not IBM , none of them could keep the hippie OS from shining through .
Those of us who were working in hippie OS land in the '70s and early '80s kept telling the squares that they could n't keep the cats in the bag , and we were right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're the revisionist.It didn't matter if the UNIX you were running on was licensed from Sun, HP, or Dec. You could write your program for the UNIX API and move from one to another.
That's WHY they failed, they were trying to establish proprietary lock-in on a platform that had openness built into the bones.
The only proprietary operating system that has any market penetration now is one that refused to become another implementation of the hippie OS... Windows NT.Not AT&amp;T, not DEC, not HP, not IBM, none of them could keep the hippie OS from shining through.
Those of us who were working in hippie OS land in the '70s and early '80s kept telling the squares that they couldn't keep the cats in the bag, and we were right.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243725</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28245547</id>
	<title>You can thank monopolies</title>
	<author>ClosedSource</author>
	<datestamp>1244380620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Like it or not, most of the key innovations in computers came from monopolies: Xerox, IBM, AT&amp;T. When you have more money than you know how to spend, you can afford letting people play. Why not Microsoft? Although it has had some innovation, MS was never a monopoly in the same league as the other three. Also, there was a lot more low-hanging fruit in the computer world of the 60's and 70's than there was later.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Like it or not , most of the key innovations in computers came from monopolies : Xerox , IBM , AT&amp;T .
When you have more money than you know how to spend , you can afford letting people play .
Why not Microsoft ?
Although it has had some innovation , MS was never a monopoly in the same league as the other three .
Also , there was a lot more low-hanging fruit in the computer world of the 60 's and 70 's than there was later .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like it or not, most of the key innovations in computers came from monopolies: Xerox, IBM, AT&amp;T.
When you have more money than you know how to spend, you can afford letting people play.
Why not Microsoft?
Although it has had some innovation, MS was never a monopoly in the same league as the other three.
Also, there was a lot more low-hanging fruit in the computer world of the 60's and 70's than there was later.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243333</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28250759</id>
	<title>Re:Unix, a blackhole of incompetence and conservat</title>
	<author>systembug</author>
	<datestamp>1244474640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Okay, I should not do this...</p><p><div class="quote"><p>(...)<br>
&nbsp; UNIX is like the Church which dragged society out of the enlightenment of Rome and into the dark ages, filling peoples' heads with superstition and making progress a dark taboo.<br>(...)</p></div><p>So what enlightend pre 70's operating systems are you referring to?<br>Some hints are apreciated.</p><p>And what is this stuff about Rome?<br>The good lawyers, bad mathematicians part?<br>The "nail every escaped and caught again slave to the cross" one?<br>The guys who institutetd christianity as state religion to save their sorry state from falling apart just to see it happen anyway?</p><p>Once again, some hints are apreciated.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Okay , I should not do this... ( ... )   UNIX is like the Church which dragged society out of the enlightenment of Rome and into the dark ages , filling peoples ' heads with superstition and making progress a dark taboo. ( .. .
) So what enlightend pre 70 's operating systems are you referring to ? Some hints are apreciated.And what is this stuff about Rome ? The good lawyers , bad mathematicians part ? The " nail every escaped and caught again slave to the cross " one ? The guys who institutetd christianity as state religion to save their sorry state from falling apart just to see it happen anyway ? Once again , some hints are apreciated .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Okay, I should not do this...(...)
  UNIX is like the Church which dragged society out of the enlightenment of Rome and into the dark ages, filling peoples' heads with superstition and making progress a dark taboo.(...
)So what enlightend pre 70's operating systems are you referring to?Some hints are apreciated.And what is this stuff about Rome?The good lawyers, bad mathematicians part?The "nail every escaped and caught again slave to the cross" one?The guys who institutetd christianity as state religion to save their sorry state from falling apart just to see it happen anyway?Once again, some hints are apreciated.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244635</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28247581</id>
	<title>Re:And to celebrate, it issued the command:</title>
	<author>Jaroslav.Tucek</author>
	<datestamp>1244402160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; known the answer to the existential question "who am i"?</p><p>Well, nice thing to know for sure. On the other hand though, UNIX just turned 40, and it still does not know how to "make love", sad...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; known the answer to the existential question " who am i " ? Well , nice thing to know for sure .
On the other hand though , UNIX just turned 40 , and it still does not know how to " make love " , sad.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; known the answer to the existential question "who am i"?Well, nice thing to know for sure.
On the other hand though, UNIX just turned 40, and it still does not know how to "make love", sad...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242907</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242421</id>
	<title>And to celebrate, it issued the command:</title>
	<author>antifoidulus</author>
	<datestamp>1244399160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>find my\_lawn -name kids* -exec rm -rf {} \;</htmltext>
<tokenext>find my \ _lawn -name kids * -exec rm -rf { } \ ;</tokentext>
<sentencetext>find my\_lawn -name kids* -exec rm -rf {} \;</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242965</id>
	<title>Re:Did they invent C too?</title>
	<author>harry666t</author>
	<datestamp>1244403360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The first Unix was written in PDP-7 assembly. A "port" to PDP-11 involved a rewrite in PDP-11 assembly, and AFAIR the second or third (or fourth?) edition was the one to be the first that was written in a high-level, portable language (B or C? Can't remember). One thing I remember for sure is that early Unix has been rewritten several times.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The first Unix was written in PDP-7 assembly .
A " port " to PDP-11 involved a rewrite in PDP-11 assembly , and AFAIR the second or third ( or fourth ?
) edition was the one to be the first that was written in a high-level , portable language ( B or C ?
Ca n't remember ) .
One thing I remember for sure is that early Unix has been rewritten several times .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The first Unix was written in PDP-7 assembly.
A "port" to PDP-11 involved a rewrite in PDP-11 assembly, and AFAIR the second or third (or fourth?
) edition was the one to be the first that was written in a high-level, portable language (B or C?
Can't remember).
One thing I remember for sure is that early Unix has been rewritten several times.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242541</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242771</id>
	<title>While Unix can read from stdin as good as ever...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244401800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...there is much greater latency on opening stdout and even a few dribbles after eof.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...there is much greater latency on opening stdout and even a few dribbles after eof .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...there is much greater latency on opening stdout and even a few dribbles after eof.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28251093</id>
	<title>I'm older than unix?</title>
	<author>beschra</author>
	<datestamp>1244476440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know I'm older than most things in computers, but *unix*? Wow.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know I 'm older than most things in computers , but * unix * ?
Wow .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know I'm older than most things in computers, but *unix*?
Wow.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28246051</id>
	<title>Don't worry UNIX</title>
	<author>sootman</author>
	<datestamp>1244385180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epoch\_(reference\_date)#Computing" title="wikipedia.org">1,261,440,000 is the new 946,080,000.</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1,261,440,000 is the new 946,080,000 .
[ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1,261,440,000 is the new 946,080,000.
[wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28245207</id>
	<title>It is amazing that author ignores OS X is Unix</title>
	<author>Ilgaz</author>
	<datestamp>1244377620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>By definition, long and endless testing, the way it works. OS X is UNIX. In fact, Unix 03 standard (Intel distro).</p><p>So the Unix you seem to show as dying to add some emotion to your otherwise good article is approaching 10\% of market share and completely changed mobile scene (as iPhone runs mini OS X). It is the only serious competitor to MS in Desktop and in same sense, it is the only OS MS would bother to code apps for.</p><p>If writing an article about UNIX and mentioning the open group, having such strict standards, OS X is UNIX 03 compliant operating system. Also POSIX is making its way to Mobile in mini form or real form.</p><p>Like it or not or downplay as OS from iPhone maker, OS X is UNIX and even more interestingly, it is also Mach based. It is not a very easy thing to achieve, ask any UNIX admin how huge set of tests and standards it requires to get that certificate.</p><p><a href="http://www.opengroup.org/comm/press/19-2-nov07.htm" title="opengroup.org">http://www.opengroup.org/comm/press/19-2-nov07.htm</a> [opengroup.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>By definition , long and endless testing , the way it works .
OS X is UNIX .
In fact , Unix 03 standard ( Intel distro ) .So the Unix you seem to show as dying to add some emotion to your otherwise good article is approaching 10 \ % of market share and completely changed mobile scene ( as iPhone runs mini OS X ) .
It is the only serious competitor to MS in Desktop and in same sense , it is the only OS MS would bother to code apps for.If writing an article about UNIX and mentioning the open group , having such strict standards , OS X is UNIX 03 compliant operating system .
Also POSIX is making its way to Mobile in mini form or real form.Like it or not or downplay as OS from iPhone maker , OS X is UNIX and even more interestingly , it is also Mach based .
It is not a very easy thing to achieve , ask any UNIX admin how huge set of tests and standards it requires to get that certificate.http : //www.opengroup.org/comm/press/19-2-nov07.htm [ opengroup.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By definition, long and endless testing, the way it works.
OS X is UNIX.
In fact, Unix 03 standard (Intel distro).So the Unix you seem to show as dying to add some emotion to your otherwise good article is approaching 10\% of market share and completely changed mobile scene (as iPhone runs mini OS X).
It is the only serious competitor to MS in Desktop and in same sense, it is the only OS MS would bother to code apps for.If writing an article about UNIX and mentioning the open group, having such strict standards, OS X is UNIX 03 compliant operating system.
Also POSIX is making its way to Mobile in mini form or real form.Like it or not or downplay as OS from iPhone maker, OS X is UNIX and even more interestingly, it is also Mach based.
It is not a very easy thing to achieve, ask any UNIX admin how huge set of tests and standards it requires to get that certificate.http://www.opengroup.org/comm/press/19-2-nov07.htm [opengroup.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28247979</id>
	<title>Re:The Gospel of Tux</title>
	<author>nv5</author>
	<datestamp>1244493420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>did you write this just for this thread?  If yes, my hat's off to you. +5 Funny doesn't do it full karma justice.</htmltext>
<tokenext>did you write this just for this thread ?
If yes , my hat 's off to you .
+ 5 Funny does n't do it full karma justice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>did you write this just for this thread?
If yes, my hat's off to you.
+5 Funny doesn't do it full karma justice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243057</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243003</id>
	<title>Re:An alternate point of view</title>
	<author>harry666t</author>
	<datestamp>1244403600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I always interpreted that quote as: "two of the greatest gifts for the humanity"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I always interpreted that quote as : " two of the greatest gifts for the humanity " : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I always interpreted that quote as: "two of the greatest gifts for the humanity" :)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242857</id>
	<title>Re:Did they invent C too?</title>
	<author>osu-neko</author>
	<datestamp>1244402460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I really, really want to say that Ken and Dennis invented C to make unix but I'm not completely sure. I could look it up, but I'm interested to hear what people have to say here. I mean, they're the K&amp;R of the original C book, right?</p></div><p>No.  The 'R' in "K&amp;R" is indeed Dennis Ritchie, but the 'K' is Brian Kernighan.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I really , really want to say that Ken and Dennis invented C to make unix but I 'm not completely sure .
I could look it up , but I 'm interested to hear what people have to say here .
I mean , they 're the K&amp;R of the original C book , right ? No .
The 'R ' in " K&amp;R " is indeed Dennis Ritchie , but the 'K ' is Brian Kernighan .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I really, really want to say that Ken and Dennis invented C to make unix but I'm not completely sure.
I could look it up, but I'm interested to hear what people have to say here.
I mean, they're the K&amp;R of the original C book, right?No.
The 'R' in "K&amp;R" is indeed Dennis Ritchie, but the 'K' is Brian Kernighan.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242541</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28250475</id>
	<title>Re:And to celebrate, it issued the command:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244473080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>mv lawn/kids<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/null</p><p>That will overwrite<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/null, and turn the kids from the lawn into black holes, growing in size from all the unwanted data fed to them by other processes<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>mv lawn/kids /dev/nullThat will overwrite /dev/null , and turn the kids from the lawn into black holes , growing in size from all the unwanted data fed to them by other processes : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>mv lawn/kids /dev/nullThat will overwrite /dev/null, and turn the kids from the lawn into black holes, growing in size from all the unwanted data fed to them by other processes :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242907</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28249735</id>
	<title>Re:And to celebrate, it issued the command:</title>
	<author>morgan\_greywolf</author>
	<datestamp>1244469060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Whooooooosh.</p><p>I've been a Unix systems engineer for years.  I once <a href="http://unixwiz.net/3b2/323-update.html" title="unixwiz.net" rel="nofollow">updated the OS</a> [unixwiz.net] on an <a href="http://unixwiz.net/3b2.html" title="unixwiz.net" rel="nofollow">AT&amp;T 3B2/400</a> [unixwiz.net] running SVR3.2.  (No, that's not SVR4, that's SVR3.2!)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Whooooooosh.I 've been a Unix systems engineer for years .
I once updated the OS [ unixwiz.net ] on an AT&amp;T 3B2/400 [ unixwiz.net ] running SVR3.2 .
( No , that 's not SVR4 , that 's SVR3.2 !
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whooooooosh.I've been a Unix systems engineer for years.
I once updated the OS [unixwiz.net] on an AT&amp;T 3B2/400 [unixwiz.net] running SVR3.2.
(No, that's not SVR4, that's SVR3.2!
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244449</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243017</id>
	<title>Re:And to celebrate, it issued the command:</title>
	<author>multi io</author>
	<datestamp>1244403780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <tt>find my\_lawn -name kids\* | xargs rm -rvf</tt></p> </div><p>That'll fail to get a kid named "Joe Lawnmower" off your lawn, but will wipe out all lawnmowers and shoot all people named "Joe", including your grandfather.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>find my \ _lawn -name kids \ * | xargs rm -rvf That 'll fail to get a kid named " Joe Lawnmower " off your lawn , but will wipe out all lawnmowers and shoot all people named " Joe " , including your grandfather .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> find my\_lawn -name kids\* | xargs rm -rvf That'll fail to get a kid named "Joe Lawnmower" off your lawn, but will wipe out all lawnmowers and shoot all people named "Joe", including your grandfather.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242685</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242743</id>
	<title>An alternate point of view</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244401560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://web.mit.edu/~simsong/www/ugh.pdf" title="mit.edu" rel="nofollow">http://web.mit.edu/~simsong/www/ugh.pdf</a> [mit.edu]</p><p>"Two of the most famous products of Berkeley are LSD and Unix.<br>I don't think that is a coincidence."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //web.mit.edu/ ~ simsong/www/ugh.pdf [ mit.edu ] " Two of the most famous products of Berkeley are LSD and Unix.I do n't think that is a coincidence .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://web.mit.edu/~simsong/www/ugh.pdf [mit.edu]"Two of the most famous products of Berkeley are LSD and Unix.I don't think that is a coincidence.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28249873</id>
	<title>UNIX, oh yeah!</title>
	<author>tekshogun</author>
	<datestamp>1244469840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It feels kind of good that, at 26 years old, I am using an IBM flavor of UNIX (AIX) that runs great and of which the core is older than I am.  I remember seeing System V books at my mom's old job when she use to work for AT&amp;T and Lucent Technologies.  Go UNIX!</htmltext>
<tokenext>It feels kind of good that , at 26 years old , I am using an IBM flavor of UNIX ( AIX ) that runs great and of which the core is older than I am .
I remember seeing System V books at my mom 's old job when she use to work for AT&amp;T and Lucent Technologies .
Go UNIX !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It feels kind of good that, at 26 years old, I am using an IBM flavor of UNIX (AIX) that runs great and of which the core is older than I am.
I remember seeing System V books at my mom's old job when she use to work for AT&amp;T and Lucent Technologies.
Go UNIX!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242691</id>
	<title>There. Fixed that for you.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244401260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>find my\_lawn -iname 'kids*' -exec rm -rf {} \;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>find my \ _lawn -iname 'kids * ' -exec rm -rf { } \ ;</tokentext>
<sentencetext>find my\_lawn -iname 'kids*' -exec rm -rf {} \;</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242421</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242491</id>
	<title>This makes Unix 15 years older than Tetris</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1244399640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Unix just turned 40, and <a href="http://games.slashdot.org/story/09/06/02/1514256/emTetrisem-Turns-25?art\_pos=2" title="slashdot.org">Tetris just turned 25</a> [slashdot.org]. What do they have in common other than closely spaced birthdays? They were both first developed on PDP-11 hardware (Unix on a PDP-11, Tetris on a Russian clone). And they've both been cloned, early and often.
</p><p>
U.S. copyright explicitly doesn't apply to methods of operation. <a href="http://www.bitlaw.com/source/17usc/102.html" title="bitlaw.com">Title 17, United States Code, section 102(b)</a> [bitlaw.com]. This makes it legal to "clone" a computer program by observing its method of operation. But SCO has tried to use copyright to shut down Unix clones, and The Tetri<strong>s Co</strong>mpany has tried to use copyright to shut down Tetris clones. SCO already lost its case (there is no copyrightable piece of Unix in Linux), but the other case (<i>Tetris v. BioSocia</i>) is still pending.
</p><p>
And despite Tetris inventor Alexey Pajitnov's <a href="http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/02/26/1859249" title="slashdot.org">expressed disdain for free software</a> [slashdot.org], two servers operated by Tetris (zone.tetris.com and www.tetrisfriends.com) are run using GNU/Linux.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unix just turned 40 , and Tetris just turned 25 [ slashdot.org ] .
What do they have in common other than closely spaced birthdays ?
They were both first developed on PDP-11 hardware ( Unix on a PDP-11 , Tetris on a Russian clone ) .
And they 've both been cloned , early and often .
U.S. copyright explicitly does n't apply to methods of operation .
Title 17 , United States Code , section 102 ( b ) [ bitlaw.com ] .
This makes it legal to " clone " a computer program by observing its method of operation .
But SCO has tried to use copyright to shut down Unix clones , and The Tetris Company has tried to use copyright to shut down Tetris clones .
SCO already lost its case ( there is no copyrightable piece of Unix in Linux ) , but the other case ( Tetris v. BioSocia ) is still pending .
And despite Tetris inventor Alexey Pajitnov 's expressed disdain for free software [ slashdot.org ] , two servers operated by Tetris ( zone.tetris.com and www.tetrisfriends.com ) are run using GNU/Linux .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Unix just turned 40, and Tetris just turned 25 [slashdot.org].
What do they have in common other than closely spaced birthdays?
They were both first developed on PDP-11 hardware (Unix on a PDP-11, Tetris on a Russian clone).
And they've both been cloned, early and often.
U.S. copyright explicitly doesn't apply to methods of operation.
Title 17, United States Code, section 102(b) [bitlaw.com].
This makes it legal to "clone" a computer program by observing its method of operation.
But SCO has tried to use copyright to shut down Unix clones, and The Tetris Company has tried to use copyright to shut down Tetris clones.
SCO already lost its case (there is no copyrightable piece of Unix in Linux), but the other case (Tetris v. BioSocia) is still pending.
And despite Tetris inventor Alexey Pajitnov's expressed disdain for free software [slashdot.org], two servers operated by Tetris (zone.tetris.com and www.tetrisfriends.com) are run using GNU/Linux.
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243809</id>
	<title>Question for Mac OS X Users</title>
	<author>c0d3r</author>
	<datestamp>1244367120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm a Linux expert, but have never used Macs very much, and now I'm starting to use them more.  My question is:</p><p>What is the major difference between Linux and Mac OS X?</p><p>Which one is better?</p><p>My GF's Mac had a kernel panic, and I was going to try to fix it.. I know how to do this with Linux but not macs.. On linux.. I'd boot a kernel of a disk, and mount the fs and check the filesystem or re-install a kernel.. or disable init scripts to find out what the problem is...</p><p>Will it be hard for me to learn OS X?  Is it worth getting a Mac - I might get my GF to buy me one?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a Linux expert , but have never used Macs very much , and now I 'm starting to use them more .
My question is : What is the major difference between Linux and Mac OS X ? Which one is better ? My GF 's Mac had a kernel panic , and I was going to try to fix it.. I know how to do this with Linux but not macs.. On linux.. I 'd boot a kernel of a disk , and mount the fs and check the filesystem or re-install a kernel.. or disable init scripts to find out what the problem is...Will it be hard for me to learn OS X ?
Is it worth getting a Mac - I might get my GF to buy me one ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a Linux expert, but have never used Macs very much, and now I'm starting to use them more.
My question is:What is the major difference between Linux and Mac OS X?Which one is better?My GF's Mac had a kernel panic, and I was going to try to fix it.. I know how to do this with Linux but not macs.. On linux.. I'd boot a kernel of a disk, and mount the fs and check the filesystem or re-install a kernel.. or disable init scripts to find out what the problem is...Will it be hard for me to learn OS X?
Is it worth getting a Mac - I might get my GF to buy me one?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243545</id>
	<title>What came before?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244407620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Speaking from the point of view of someone who wasn't born when Unix was invented, I have a hard time seeing what was revolutionary about it. I realize that this is because almost all of the operating systems which came after cribbed heavily from the Unix paradigm, and Unix doesn't look special because non-Unix-inspired OSs don't exist anymore. (There are non-Unix OSs, but all of them use concepts which Unix pioneered.)</p><p>So could an old salt fill us young-un's in? What was it like before Unix? What did Unix change? Is there a way to make someone who has only ever used WinDos/Mac/*nix machines understand how Unix changed the OS landscape?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Speaking from the point of view of someone who was n't born when Unix was invented , I have a hard time seeing what was revolutionary about it .
I realize that this is because almost all of the operating systems which came after cribbed heavily from the Unix paradigm , and Unix does n't look special because non-Unix-inspired OSs do n't exist anymore .
( There are non-Unix OSs , but all of them use concepts which Unix pioneered .
) So could an old salt fill us young-un 's in ?
What was it like before Unix ?
What did Unix change ?
Is there a way to make someone who has only ever used WinDos/Mac/ * nix machines understand how Unix changed the OS landscape ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Speaking from the point of view of someone who wasn't born when Unix was invented, I have a hard time seeing what was revolutionary about it.
I realize that this is because almost all of the operating systems which came after cribbed heavily from the Unix paradigm, and Unix doesn't look special because non-Unix-inspired OSs don't exist anymore.
(There are non-Unix OSs, but all of them use concepts which Unix pioneered.
)So could an old salt fill us young-un's in?
What was it like before Unix?
What did Unix change?
Is there a way to make someone who has only ever used WinDos/Mac/*nix machines understand how Unix changed the OS landscape?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28254313</id>
	<title>Re:Windows has more and more Unix features</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1244491260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>NT was only <i>sort of</i> multiuser. Even the most recent Windows manage to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in order to make sure they don't accidentally let someone use the system without paying the requisite pound of flesh.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>NT was only sort of multiuser .
Even the most recent Windows manage to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in order to make sure they do n't accidentally let someone use the system without paying the requisite pound of flesh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NT was only sort of multiuser.
Even the most recent Windows manage to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in order to make sure they don't accidentally let someone use the system without paying the requisite pound of flesh.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243389</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28245591</id>
	<title>Re:And to celebrate, it issued the command:</title>
	<author>mystik</author>
	<datestamp>1244381040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It also fails if you happen to have more than 65k kids on your lawn....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It also fails if you happen to have more than 65k kids on your lawn... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It also fails if you happen to have more than 65k kids on your lawn....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242685</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242537</id>
	<title>God damn it!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244400000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why does every one of these god damn things have to have a god damn birthday every god damn year?!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why does every one of these god damn things have to have a god damn birthday every god damn year ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why does every one of these god damn things have to have a god damn birthday every god damn year?
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243271</id>
	<title>Re:And to celebrate, it issued the command:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244405460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sometimes a joke is just a joke and sometimes a socially awkward pedantic nerd is just a socially awkward pedantic nerd.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sometimes a joke is just a joke and sometimes a socially awkward pedantic nerd is just a socially awkward pedantic nerd .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sometimes a joke is just a joke and sometimes a socially awkward pedantic nerd is just a socially awkward pedantic nerd.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242685</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28247295</id>
	<title>Re:And to celebrate, it issued the command:</title>
	<author>KinkyClown</author>
	<datestamp>1244398380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>wonderful, cryptic commands like 'ls, cp, rm, mv, etc.</p></div><p>Never heard of <i>etc</i>. what does it do?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>wonderful , cryptic commands like 'ls , cp , rm , mv , etc.Never heard of etc .
what does it do ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>wonderful, cryptic commands like 'ls, cp, rm, mv, etc.Never heard of etc.
what does it do?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242907</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28245719</id>
	<title>Re:An alternate point of view</title>
	<author>geekgirlandrea</author>
	<datestamp>1244381820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, and the two go very well together.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , and the two go very well together .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, and the two go very well together.
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28246103</id>
	<title>Alice in UNIXland (Re:Worth thinking about)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244385660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good grief, what a load of nonsense.   May I refer you to the original Alice in UNIXland?  Just as accurate today as is was two decades ago; all that it would take to update it is to substitute in a few names.</p><blockquote><div><p>&lt;elided&gt;</p><p>Soon Alice came upon a large brown table. The Consultant was there, as was an apparently Mad Hacker, and several creatures that Alice did not recognize. In one corner sat a Dormouse fast asleep. Over the table was a large sign that read "UNIX Conference."</p><p>Everyone except the Dormouse was holding a paper cup, from which they were sampling what appeared to be custard. "Wrong flavor," they all declared as they passed the cup to the creature on their right<br>and graciously took the one being offered on their left. Alice watched them repeat this ritual three or four times before she approached and sat down.</p><p>Immediately, a large toad leaped into her lap and looked at her as if it wanted to be loved.<br>"Grep," it exclaimed.</p><p>"Don't mind him," explained the Mad Hacker. "He's just looking for some string."</p><p>"Nroff?" asked the Frog.</p><p>The Mad Hacker handed Alice a cup of custard-like substance and a spoon. "Here," he said, "what do you think of this?"</p><p>"It looks lovely," said Alice, "very sweet." She tried a spoonful. "Yuck!" she cried. "It's awful. What is it?"</p><p>"Oh just another graphic interface for UNIX," answered the Hacker.</p><p>Alice pointed to the sleeping Dormouse. "Who's he?" she asked.</p><p>"That's OS Too," explained the Hacker. "We've pretty much given up on waking him.</p><p>Just then, a large, Blue Elephant sitting next to the Dormouse stood up. "Ladies and gentlemen," he trumpeted pompously, "as the largest creature here, I feel impelled to state that we must take an Open Look at..."</p><p>A young Job Sparrow on the other side of the table stood up angrily. The Elephant noticed and changed his speech accordingly. "...what our NextStep will be."</p><p>"Half the creatures bowed in respect while the other half snickered quietly to themselves. Just then, OS Too fell over in his sleep, crashing into the Elephant and taking him down with him. No one seemed<br>a bit surprised.</p><p>"What we need," declared a Sun Bear as he lapped up custard with his long tongue," is a flavor that goes down like the Macintosh.</p><p>"Suddenly, the White Consultant began jumping up and down as his face got red. "No, no, no! he screamed. "No one pays one fifty an hour to Macintosh consultants!"</p><p>"Awk," said the Frog.</p><p>"Users," explained the Sun Bear, "want an easy interface that they will not have to learn."</p><p>"Users?" cried the Consultant in disbelief. "Users?! You mean secretaries, accountants, architects. Manual laborers!"</p><p>"Well," responded the Sun Bear, "we've got to do something to make them want to switch to UNIX."</p><p>"Do you think," said a Woodpecker who had been busy making a hole in the table, "that there might be a problem with the name `UNIX?' I mean, it does sort of suggest being less than a man."</p><p>"Maybe we should try another name, " suggested the Job Sparrow, "like Brut, or Rambo."</p><p>"Penix," suggested a Penguin.</p><p>"Mount," said the Frog, "spawn."</p><p>Alice slapped him. "Nice?" he asked.</p><p>"But then again," suggested the Woodpecker, "what about the shrinkwrap issue?"</p><p>Suddenly, everyone leaped up and started dashing about, waving their hands in the air and screaming. Just as suddenly, they all sat down again.</p><p>"Now that that's settled," said the Woodpecker, "let's go back to tasting flavors."</p><p>Everyone at the table sampled a new cup of custard. "Wrong flavor," they all declared as they passed the cup to the creature on their right and took the one being offered on their left.</p><p>Totally confused, Alice got up and left. After she had been walking away, she heard a familiar voice behind her.</p><p>"Rem," it said, "edlin."</p><p>Alice turned and saw the Frog. She smiled. "Those are queer sounding words," she said, "but at least I know what they mean."</p><p>"Chkdsk," said the Frog.</p></div></blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Good grief , what a load of nonsense .
May I refer you to the original Alice in UNIXland ?
Just as accurate today as is was two decades ago ; all that it would take to update it is to substitute in a few names.Soon Alice came upon a large brown table .
The Consultant was there , as was an apparently Mad Hacker , and several creatures that Alice did not recognize .
In one corner sat a Dormouse fast asleep .
Over the table was a large sign that read " UNIX Conference .
" Everyone except the Dormouse was holding a paper cup , from which they were sampling what appeared to be custard .
" Wrong flavor , " they all declared as they passed the cup to the creature on their rightand graciously took the one being offered on their left .
Alice watched them repeat this ritual three or four times before she approached and sat down.Immediately , a large toad leaped into her lap and looked at her as if it wanted to be loved .
" Grep , " it exclaimed .
" Do n't mind him , " explained the Mad Hacker .
" He 's just looking for some string. " " Nroff ?
" asked the Frog.The Mad Hacker handed Alice a cup of custard-like substance and a spoon .
" Here , " he said , " what do you think of this ?
" " It looks lovely , " said Alice , " very sweet .
" She tried a spoonful .
" Yuck ! " she cried .
" It 's awful .
What is it ?
" " Oh just another graphic interface for UNIX , " answered the Hacker.Alice pointed to the sleeping Dormouse .
" Who 's he ?
" she asked .
" That 's OS Too , " explained the Hacker .
" We 've pretty much given up on waking him.Just then , a large , Blue Elephant sitting next to the Dormouse stood up .
" Ladies and gentlemen , " he trumpeted pompously , " as the largest creature here , I feel impelled to state that we must take an Open Look at... " A young Job Sparrow on the other side of the table stood up angrily .
The Elephant noticed and changed his speech accordingly .
" ...what our NextStep will be .
" " Half the creatures bowed in respect while the other half snickered quietly to themselves .
Just then , OS Too fell over in his sleep , crashing into the Elephant and taking him down with him .
No one seemeda bit surprised .
" What we need , " declared a Sun Bear as he lapped up custard with his long tongue , " is a flavor that goes down like the Macintosh .
" Suddenly , the White Consultant began jumping up and down as his face got red .
" No , no , no !
he screamed .
" No one pays one fifty an hour to Macintosh consultants !
" " Awk , " said the Frog .
" Users , " explained the Sun Bear , " want an easy interface that they will not have to learn. " " Users ?
" cried the Consultant in disbelief .
" Users ? ! You mean secretaries , accountants , architects .
Manual laborers !
" " Well , " responded the Sun Bear , " we 've got to do something to make them want to switch to UNIX .
" " Do you think , " said a Woodpecker who had been busy making a hole in the table , " that there might be a problem with the name ` UNIX ?
' I mean , it does sort of suggest being less than a man .
" " Maybe we should try another name , " suggested the Job Sparrow , " like Brut , or Rambo .
" " Penix , " suggested a Penguin .
" Mount , " said the Frog , " spawn .
" Alice slapped him .
" Nice ? " he asked .
" But then again , " suggested the Woodpecker , " what about the shrinkwrap issue ?
" Suddenly , everyone leaped up and started dashing about , waving their hands in the air and screaming .
Just as suddenly , they all sat down again .
" Now that that 's settled , " said the Woodpecker , " let 's go back to tasting flavors .
" Everyone at the table sampled a new cup of custard .
" Wrong flavor , " they all declared as they passed the cup to the creature on their right and took the one being offered on their left.Totally confused , Alice got up and left .
After she had been walking away , she heard a familiar voice behind her .
" Rem , " it said , " edlin .
" Alice turned and saw the Frog .
She smiled .
" Those are queer sounding words , " she said , " but at least I know what they mean .
" " Chkdsk , " said the Frog .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good grief, what a load of nonsense.
May I refer you to the original Alice in UNIXland?
Just as accurate today as is was two decades ago; all that it would take to update it is to substitute in a few names.Soon Alice came upon a large brown table.
The Consultant was there, as was an apparently Mad Hacker, and several creatures that Alice did not recognize.
In one corner sat a Dormouse fast asleep.
Over the table was a large sign that read "UNIX Conference.
"Everyone except the Dormouse was holding a paper cup, from which they were sampling what appeared to be custard.
"Wrong flavor," they all declared as they passed the cup to the creature on their rightand graciously took the one being offered on their left.
Alice watched them repeat this ritual three or four times before she approached and sat down.Immediately, a large toad leaped into her lap and looked at her as if it wanted to be loved.
"Grep," it exclaimed.
"Don't mind him," explained the Mad Hacker.
"He's just looking for some string.""Nroff?
" asked the Frog.The Mad Hacker handed Alice a cup of custard-like substance and a spoon.
"Here," he said, "what do you think of this?
""It looks lovely," said Alice, "very sweet.
" She tried a spoonful.
"Yuck!" she cried.
"It's awful.
What is it?
""Oh just another graphic interface for UNIX," answered the Hacker.Alice pointed to the sleeping Dormouse.
"Who's he?
" she asked.
"That's OS Too," explained the Hacker.
"We've pretty much given up on waking him.Just then, a large, Blue Elephant sitting next to the Dormouse stood up.
"Ladies and gentlemen," he trumpeted pompously, "as the largest creature here, I feel impelled to state that we must take an Open Look at..."A young Job Sparrow on the other side of the table stood up angrily.
The Elephant noticed and changed his speech accordingly.
"...what our NextStep will be.
""Half the creatures bowed in respect while the other half snickered quietly to themselves.
Just then, OS Too fell over in his sleep, crashing into the Elephant and taking him down with him.
No one seemeda bit surprised.
"What we need," declared a Sun Bear as he lapped up custard with his long tongue," is a flavor that goes down like the Macintosh.
"Suddenly, the White Consultant began jumping up and down as his face got red.
"No, no, no!
he screamed.
"No one pays one fifty an hour to Macintosh consultants!
""Awk," said the Frog.
"Users," explained the Sun Bear, "want an easy interface that they will not have to learn.""Users?
" cried the Consultant in disbelief.
"Users?! You mean secretaries, accountants, architects.
Manual laborers!
""Well," responded the Sun Bear, "we've got to do something to make them want to switch to UNIX.
""Do you think," said a Woodpecker who had been busy making a hole in the table, "that there might be a problem with the name `UNIX?
' I mean, it does sort of suggest being less than a man.
""Maybe we should try another name, " suggested the Job Sparrow, "like Brut, or Rambo.
""Penix," suggested a Penguin.
"Mount," said the Frog, "spawn.
"Alice slapped him.
"Nice?" he asked.
"But then again," suggested the Woodpecker, "what about the shrinkwrap issue?
"Suddenly, everyone leaped up and started dashing about, waving their hands in the air and screaming.
Just as suddenly, they all sat down again.
"Now that that's settled," said the Woodpecker, "let's go back to tasting flavors.
"Everyone at the table sampled a new cup of custard.
"Wrong flavor," they all declared as they passed the cup to the creature on their right and took the one being offered on their left.Totally confused, Alice got up and left.
After she had been walking away, she heard a familiar voice behind her.
"Rem," it said, "edlin.
"Alice turned and saw the Frog.
She smiled.
"Those are queer sounding words," she said, "but at least I know what they mean.
""Chkdsk," said the Frog.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242921</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242599</id>
	<title>A Quarter Century of Unix, the Book</title>
	<author>Fished</author>
	<datestamp>1244400420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>For those who haven't read it, this book is a GREAT read:

<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Quarter-Century-UNIX-Addison-Wesley-Systems/dp/0201547775/ref=sr\_1\_1?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1244396757&amp;sr=8-1" title="amazon.com">A quarter Century of Unix</a> [amazon.com] by Peter H Salus

Highly recommended, and once you've read it you'll suddenly understand why a lot of stuff is the way it is.  Hat's off to the Best.  Operating System.  Ever.</htmltext>
<tokenext>For those who have n't read it , this book is a GREAT read : A quarter Century of Unix [ amazon.com ] by Peter H Salus Highly recommended , and once you 've read it you 'll suddenly understand why a lot of stuff is the way it is .
Hat 's off to the Best .
Operating System .
Ever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For those who haven't read it, this book is a GREAT read:

A quarter Century of Unix [amazon.com] by Peter H Salus

Highly recommended, and once you've read it you'll suddenly understand why a lot of stuff is the way it is.
Hat's off to the Best.
Operating System.
Ever.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242685</id>
	<title>Re:And to celebrate, it issued the command:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244401260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bah. Your command would fail. You need to escape the splat just like the semicolon:</p><p><tt>find my\_lawn -name kids\* -exec rm -f {} \;</tt></p><p>However <tt>-exec</tt> is slow. Try:</p><p><tt>find my\_lawn -name kids\* | xargs rm -rvf</tt></p><p>Verbose for your kid-removing satisfaction.</p><p>Oh, and happy birthday, UNIX! Without you my career would have undoubtedly been less interesting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bah .
Your command would fail .
You need to escape the splat just like the semicolon : find my \ _lawn -name kids \ * -exec rm -f { } \ ; However -exec is slow .
Try : find my \ _lawn -name kids \ * | xargs rm -rvfVerbose for your kid-removing satisfaction.Oh , and happy birthday , UNIX !
Without you my career would have undoubtedly been less interesting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bah.
Your command would fail.
You need to escape the splat just like the semicolon:find my\_lawn -name kids\* -exec rm -f {} \;However -exec is slow.
Try:find my\_lawn -name kids\* | xargs rm -rvfVerbose for your kid-removing satisfaction.Oh, and happy birthday, UNIX!
Without you my career would have undoubtedly been less interesting.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242421</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244145</id>
	<title>Re:Worth thinking about</title>
	<author>plopez</author>
	<datestamp>1244370000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>One wonders how those lessons might be applied not necessarily to operating systems or even computing, but to other industries and technical endeavours.</i></p><p>People forget that is the entire concept behind patents. To further progress by showing others how things work, not by wrapping things up in secrecy. The concept is thus:</p><p>1) You invent something. You can keep it a secret but if some one invents the same thing you have no recourse. You can't say they stole it from you. There is no such thing as a "trade secret" which is enforceable. In order to prove it you have to reveal it making it no longer a secret.</p><p>2) Or you can patent it. For which you *do* get legal protection and a temporary monopoly. In exchange others get to review and study your design to improve upon it and to incorporate it into their products or designs. This furthers technology furthering the common good.</p><p>People forget that the original purpose of patents isn't profit. Isn't that strange?</p><p>The Unix/FOSS paradigm is also very much like that of scientific research. Where methods, data and results are published for the use of others to further their research.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One wonders how those lessons might be applied not necessarily to operating systems or even computing , but to other industries and technical endeavours.People forget that is the entire concept behind patents .
To further progress by showing others how things work , not by wrapping things up in secrecy .
The concept is thus : 1 ) You invent something .
You can keep it a secret but if some one invents the same thing you have no recourse .
You ca n't say they stole it from you .
There is no such thing as a " trade secret " which is enforceable .
In order to prove it you have to reveal it making it no longer a secret.2 ) Or you can patent it .
For which you * do * get legal protection and a temporary monopoly .
In exchange others get to review and study your design to improve upon it and to incorporate it into their products or designs .
This furthers technology furthering the common good.People forget that the original purpose of patents is n't profit .
Is n't that strange ? The Unix/FOSS paradigm is also very much like that of scientific research .
Where methods , data and results are published for the use of others to further their research .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One wonders how those lessons might be applied not necessarily to operating systems or even computing, but to other industries and technical endeavours.People forget that is the entire concept behind patents.
To further progress by showing others how things work, not by wrapping things up in secrecy.
The concept is thus:1) You invent something.
You can keep it a secret but if some one invents the same thing you have no recourse.
You can't say they stole it from you.
There is no such thing as a "trade secret" which is enforceable.
In order to prove it you have to reveal it making it no longer a secret.2) Or you can patent it.
For which you *do* get legal protection and a temporary monopoly.
In exchange others get to review and study your design to improve upon it and to incorporate it into their products or designs.
This furthers technology furthering the common good.People forget that the original purpose of patents isn't profit.
Isn't that strange?The Unix/FOSS paradigm is also very much like that of scientific research.
Where methods, data and results are published for the use of others to further their research.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242471</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28247031</id>
	<title>Re:God damn it!</title>
	<author>oldhack</author>
	<datestamp>1244394960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Which god damn bastard mod me god damn redundant?  God damn moron.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Which god damn bastard mod me god damn redundant ?
God damn moron .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which god damn bastard mod me god damn redundant?
God damn moron.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242537</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244803</id>
	<title>We should be concerned</title>
	<author>toby</author>
	<datestamp>1244374680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>After all, he totally killed Google.</htmltext>
<tokenext>After all , he totally killed Google .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After all, he totally killed Google.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243179</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28245899</id>
	<title>Re:The Gospel of Tux</title>
	<author>MrKaos</author>
	<datestamp>1244383740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Window's install disc, $150. iMac, $1500. The Gospel of Tux (v1.0), $Priceless.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Window 's install disc , $ 150 .
iMac , $ 1500 .
The Gospel of Tux ( v1.0 ) , $ Priceless .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Window's install disc, $150.
iMac, $1500.
The Gospel of Tux (v1.0), $Priceless.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243057</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242779</id>
	<title>Re:Unix is over the hill</title>
	<author>Ethanol-fueled</author>
	<datestamp>1244401860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Fresh like a pile of garbage heaped on top of an older, more rotten pile of garbage.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Fresh like a pile of garbage heaped on top of an older , more rotten pile of garbage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fresh like a pile of garbage heaped on top of an older, more rotten pile of garbage.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242467</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243563</id>
	<title>Re:Did they invent C too?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244407800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Then Dennis and Brian worked on a truly warped version of Pascal, called 'A'. When we found others were actually trying to create real programs with A, we quickly added additional cryptic features and evolved into B, BCPL and finally C.'</p></div><p>I cannot believe Ken Thompson wrote this nonsense.</p><p>B was derived from BCPL, which was a simplified version of the CPL language, designed at Cambridge and London Universities in the mid-60s. It was too complex to implement at that time, hence BCPL (Basic CPL).</p><p>B was very much like BCPL except that it used { } to define blocks, instead of (* and *).</p><p>AND, the original article (and the one above) promulgate the canard that Multics was unsuccessful and unwieldy.</p><p>In terms of influence on other OS's Multics was probably THE most important OS in history.</p><p>And an absolute joy to work with. Hence the original intention of Unics (the original spelling) to be cryptic and confusing - the exact OPPOSITE of Multics.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Then Dennis and Brian worked on a truly warped version of Pascal , called 'A' .
When we found others were actually trying to create real programs with A , we quickly added additional cryptic features and evolved into B , BCPL and finally C.'I can not believe Ken Thompson wrote this nonsense.B was derived from BCPL , which was a simplified version of the CPL language , designed at Cambridge and London Universities in the mid-60s .
It was too complex to implement at that time , hence BCPL ( Basic CPL ) .B was very much like BCPL except that it used { } to define blocks , instead of ( * and * ) .AND , the original article ( and the one above ) promulgate the canard that Multics was unsuccessful and unwieldy.In terms of influence on other OS 's Multics was probably THE most important OS in history.And an absolute joy to work with .
Hence the original intention of Unics ( the original spelling ) to be cryptic and confusing - the exact OPPOSITE of Multics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then Dennis and Brian worked on a truly warped version of Pascal, called 'A'.
When we found others were actually trying to create real programs with A, we quickly added additional cryptic features and evolved into B, BCPL and finally C.'I cannot believe Ken Thompson wrote this nonsense.B was derived from BCPL, which was a simplified version of the CPL language, designed at Cambridge and London Universities in the mid-60s.
It was too complex to implement at that time, hence BCPL (Basic CPL).B was very much like BCPL except that it used { } to define blocks, instead of (* and *).AND, the original article (and the one above) promulgate the canard that Multics was unsuccessful and unwieldy.In terms of influence on other OS's Multics was probably THE most important OS in history.And an absolute joy to work with.
Hence the original intention of Unics (the original spelling) to be cryptic and confusing - the exact OPPOSITE of Multics.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242935</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243517</id>
	<title>let there be pipes</title>
	<author>epine</author>
	<datestamp>1244407440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've encountered bits and pieces of Unix hagiography for the last 15 years, and in all that time, I've internalized that "Multics sucks" (somewhere alongside the virgin birth), yet I can't bring to mind a single reason *why* Multics sucked.  Were the Romans really so stupid as they are made out to be?</p><p>From Fernando J. Corbat&#243;'s 1991 <a href="http://larch-www.lcs.mit.edu:8001/~corbato/turing91/" title="mit.edu">Turing lecture</a> [mit.edu] concerning one of Muttlix's early teething problems:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The decision to use a compiler to implement the system software was a good one, but what we did not appreciate was that new language PL/I presented us with two big difficulties: First, the language had constructs in it which were intrinsically complicated, and it required a learning period on the part of system programmers to learn to avoid them; second, no one knew how to do a good job of implementing the compiler.</p></div><p>So, perhaps, not the best suited language for systems programming?<br>From Wikipedia:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The goal of PL/I was to develop a single language usable for both business and scientific purposes.</p></div><p>Doesn't that vision give your average PHB a throbbing chum?  If simplicity is hard, let's scale up the mediocre talent and do sameness instead.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>PL/I was designed by a committee drawn from IBM programmers and users drawn from across the United States, working over several months.</p></div><p>No sociology experiment from the 1960s was complete without confederates in white shirts.  The free-love hippies managed to sneak into the language promiscuous data type conversions.</p><p>Dijkstra summed it up in 1975 with his monograph<br><a href="http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~evans/cs655/readings/ewd498.html" title="virginia.edu">How do we tell truths that might hurt?</a> [virginia.edu]</p><p><div class="quote"><p>PL/I --"the fatal disease"-- belongs more to the problem set than to the solution set.</p></div><p>God, I love this guy.  He's the patron saint of annoying the hell out of people by always being right, and putting a fine point on it.  Same monograph includes another famous zinger:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>APL is a mistake, carried through to perfection. It is the language of the future for the programming techniques of the past.</p></div><p>From <a href="http://www.multicians.org/myths.html#fail" title="multicians.org">Myths about Multics</a> [multicians.org] </p><p><div class="quote"><p>We wrote 3000 pages of the Multics System Programmer's Manual first, while waiting for the PL/I compiler.</p></div><p>That should strike a painful nerve in anyone who tried to adopt the C++ STL in 1994.</p><p>Ouch.  Shipwrecked on the beach of half a programming language, fondling your monads.</p><p>Not half surprising that Thompson ended up carving his own canoe with a pen knife to escape.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've encountered bits and pieces of Unix hagiography for the last 15 years , and in all that time , I 've internalized that " Multics sucks " ( somewhere alongside the virgin birth ) , yet I ca n't bring to mind a single reason * why * Multics sucked .
Were the Romans really so stupid as they are made out to be ? From Fernando J. Corbat   's 1991 Turing lecture [ mit.edu ] concerning one of Muttlix 's early teething problems : The decision to use a compiler to implement the system software was a good one , but what we did not appreciate was that new language PL/I presented us with two big difficulties : First , the language had constructs in it which were intrinsically complicated , and it required a learning period on the part of system programmers to learn to avoid them ; second , no one knew how to do a good job of implementing the compiler.So , perhaps , not the best suited language for systems programming ? From Wikipedia : The goal of PL/I was to develop a single language usable for both business and scientific purposes.Does n't that vision give your average PHB a throbbing chum ?
If simplicity is hard , let 's scale up the mediocre talent and do sameness instead.PL/I was designed by a committee drawn from IBM programmers and users drawn from across the United States , working over several months.No sociology experiment from the 1960s was complete without confederates in white shirts .
The free-love hippies managed to sneak into the language promiscuous data type conversions.Dijkstra summed it up in 1975 with his monographHow do we tell truths that might hurt ?
[ virginia.edu ] PL/I -- " the fatal disease " -- belongs more to the problem set than to the solution set.God , I love this guy .
He 's the patron saint of annoying the hell out of people by always being right , and putting a fine point on it .
Same monograph includes another famous zinger : APL is a mistake , carried through to perfection .
It is the language of the future for the programming techniques of the past.From Myths about Multics [ multicians.org ] We wrote 3000 pages of the Multics System Programmer 's Manual first , while waiting for the PL/I compiler.That should strike a painful nerve in anyone who tried to adopt the C + + STL in 1994.Ouch .
Shipwrecked on the beach of half a programming language , fondling your monads.Not half surprising that Thompson ended up carving his own canoe with a pen knife to escape .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've encountered bits and pieces of Unix hagiography for the last 15 years, and in all that time, I've internalized that "Multics sucks" (somewhere alongside the virgin birth), yet I can't bring to mind a single reason *why* Multics sucked.
Were the Romans really so stupid as they are made out to be?From Fernando J. Corbató's 1991 Turing lecture [mit.edu] concerning one of Muttlix's early teething problems:The decision to use a compiler to implement the system software was a good one, but what we did not appreciate was that new language PL/I presented us with two big difficulties: First, the language had constructs in it which were intrinsically complicated, and it required a learning period on the part of system programmers to learn to avoid them; second, no one knew how to do a good job of implementing the compiler.So, perhaps, not the best suited language for systems programming?From Wikipedia:The goal of PL/I was to develop a single language usable for both business and scientific purposes.Doesn't that vision give your average PHB a throbbing chum?
If simplicity is hard, let's scale up the mediocre talent and do sameness instead.PL/I was designed by a committee drawn from IBM programmers and users drawn from across the United States, working over several months.No sociology experiment from the 1960s was complete without confederates in white shirts.
The free-love hippies managed to sneak into the language promiscuous data type conversions.Dijkstra summed it up in 1975 with his monographHow do we tell truths that might hurt?
[virginia.edu]PL/I --"the fatal disease"-- belongs more to the problem set than to the solution set.God, I love this guy.
He's the patron saint of annoying the hell out of people by always being right, and putting a fine point on it.
Same monograph includes another famous zinger:APL is a mistake, carried through to perfection.
It is the language of the future for the programming techniques of the past.From Myths about Multics [multicians.org] We wrote 3000 pages of the Multics System Programmer's Manual first, while waiting for the PL/I compiler.That should strike a painful nerve in anyone who tried to adopt the C++ STL in 1994.Ouch.
Shipwrecked on the beach of half a programming language, fondling your monads.Not half surprising that Thompson ended up carving his own canoe with a pen knife to escape.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242579</id>
	<title>Re:Did they invent C too?</title>
	<author>K. S. Kyosuke</author>
	<datestamp>1244400240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yesss. (Expecting +5 Informative!)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yesss .
( Expecting + 5 Informative !
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yesss.
(Expecting +5 Informative!
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242541</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28248931</id>
	<title>Re:40 and still relevant</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244460720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can we say anything else than http://www.topology.org/human/?a=/linux/lingl.html ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can we say anything else than http : //www.topology.org/human/ ? a = /linux/lingl.html ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can we say anything else than http://www.topology.org/human/?a=/linux/lingl.html ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243309</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28248063</id>
	<title>Re:And to celebrate, it issued the command:</title>
	<author>lanc</author>
	<datestamp>1244494260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>However -exec is slow. Try:</p></div>
</blockquote><p>

rtfm://find <br> <br>

Especially the section explaining the difference between "\;" and "+".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>However -exec is slow .
Try : rtfm : //find Especially the section explaining the difference between " \ ; " and " + " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>However -exec is slow.
Try:


rtfm://find  

Especially the section explaining the difference between "\;" and "+".
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242685</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244607</id>
	<title>Re:Windows has more and more Unix features</title>
	<author>ZorbaTHut</author>
	<datestamp>1244373000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>On the other hand, Linux has been adding Windows-like features for the same period of time . . . like, say, GUIs, and drivers, and hardware acceleration, and programs that end-users want to use.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>On the other hand , Linux has been adding Windows-like features for the same period of time .
. .
like , say , GUIs , and drivers , and hardware acceleration , and programs that end-users want to use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On the other hand, Linux has been adding Windows-like features for the same period of time .
. .
like, say, GUIs, and drivers, and hardware acceleration, and programs that end-users want to use.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243389</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243389</id>
	<title>Windows has more and more Unix features</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244406480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Did you notice that since Windows 3 Microsoft keeps adding Unix-like features? Windows 3 did not have \_real\_ multitasking, it came with WinNT. Windows NT was also a multi-user system, another Unix-like feature. With Windows Vista came the Windows power shell, M$ equivalent of Unix shell. In fact, Unix is an ideal, which Microsoft is approaching in each new Windows release.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did you notice that since Windows 3 Microsoft keeps adding Unix-like features ?
Windows 3 did not have \ _real \ _ multitasking , it came with WinNT .
Windows NT was also a multi-user system , another Unix-like feature .
With Windows Vista came the Windows power shell , M $ equivalent of Unix shell .
In fact , Unix is an ideal , which Microsoft is approaching in each new Windows release .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did you notice that since Windows 3 Microsoft keeps adding Unix-like features?
Windows 3 did not have \_real\_ multitasking, it came with WinNT.
Windows NT was also a multi-user system, another Unix-like feature.
With Windows Vista came the Windows power shell, M$ equivalent of Unix shell.
In fact, Unix is an ideal, which Microsoft is approaching in each new Windows release.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242467</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28253767</id>
	<title>Re:Unix is over the hill</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1244488980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In Unix reality, most everything IS a file, it's just that 'file' grew some rather ad-hoc methods like fcntl and ioctl, unless the file is a socket in which case ass setsockopt, et. el. A directory is a file, but gets special treatment and has a different set of methods<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-(</p><p>Plan 9 tries much harder to stick with everything is a file and to get rid of any special case APIs like ioctl and company. Personally, I suspect that the reason it hasn't caught on is it's insistance on all or nothing. Change your entire world RIGHT NOW, GUI, shell, and ALL or stay in Unix. Guess which one most have chosen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In Unix reality , most everything IS a file , it 's just that 'file ' grew some rather ad-hoc methods like fcntl and ioctl , unless the file is a socket in which case ass setsockopt , et .
el. A directory is a file , but gets special treatment and has a different set of methods : - ( Plan 9 tries much harder to stick with everything is a file and to get rid of any special case APIs like ioctl and company .
Personally , I suspect that the reason it has n't caught on is it 's insistance on all or nothing .
Change your entire world RIGHT NOW , GUI , shell , and ALL or stay in Unix .
Guess which one most have chosen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Unix reality, most everything IS a file, it's just that 'file' grew some rather ad-hoc methods like fcntl and ioctl, unless the file is a socket in which case ass setsockopt, et.
el. A directory is a file, but gets special treatment and has a different set of methods :-(Plan 9 tries much harder to stick with everything is a file and to get rid of any special case APIs like ioctl and company.
Personally, I suspect that the reason it hasn't caught on is it's insistance on all or nothing.
Change your entire world RIGHT NOW, GUI, shell, and ALL or stay in Unix.
Guess which one most have chosen.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244215</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243865</id>
	<title>Re:And to celebrate, it issued the command:</title>
	<author>Vanders</author>
	<datestamp>1244367720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Forget the globing, I'm more impressed you can all remember the syntax &amp; quoting rules for -exec.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Forget the globing , I 'm more impressed you can all remember the syntax &amp; quoting rules for -exec .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Forget the globing, I'm more impressed you can all remember the syntax &amp; quoting rules for -exec.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242421</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28245113</id>
	<title>In those days...</title>
	<author>neonsignal</author>
	<datestamp>1244376840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
hackers were brave, the stakes were high, terminals were real terminals, floppy disks were real floppy disks and big furry beards from Alpha Centauri were real big furry beards from Alpha Centauri.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>hackers were brave , the stakes were high , terminals were real terminals , floppy disks were real floppy disks and big furry beards from Alpha Centauri were real big furry beards from Alpha Centauri .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
hackers were brave, the stakes were high, terminals were real terminals, floppy disks were real floppy disks and big furry beards from Alpha Centauri were real big furry beards from Alpha Centauri.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243179</id>
	<title>Re:Meanwhile, in Redmond</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244404800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In honor of Unix's 40th anniversary, at 10:00 tonight there will be a celebratory Launching of the Chairs.</p></div><p>The ceremony opened with an impromptu speech by Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer during which he declared: "I'll fucking kill UNIX, I've done it before and I'll do it again!".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In honor of Unix 's 40th anniversary , at 10 : 00 tonight there will be a celebratory Launching of the Chairs.The ceremony opened with an impromptu speech by Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer during which he declared : " I 'll fucking kill UNIX , I 've done it before and I 'll do it again !
" .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In honor of Unix's 40th anniversary, at 10:00 tonight there will be a celebratory Launching of the Chairs.The ceremony opened with an impromptu speech by Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer during which he declared: "I'll fucking kill UNIX, I've done it before and I'll do it again!
".
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242645</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244027</id>
	<title>eventually Unix begat OS X</title>
	<author>plopez</author>
	<datestamp>1244369220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>because in the end it was easier to make Unix user friendly than it was to to fix Windows<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>An old joke but it had to be said.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>because in the end it was easier to make Unix user friendly than it was to to fix Windows : ) An old joke but it had to be said .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>because in the end it was easier to make Unix user friendly than it was to to fix Windows :)An old joke but it had to be said.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242597</id>
	<title>Re:And to celebrate, it issued the command:</title>
	<author>MrMr</author>
	<datestamp>1244400420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think you meant "kids*"</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you meant " kids * "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you meant "kids*"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242421</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243169</id>
	<title>The True Legacy of UNIX</title>
	<author>hduff</author>
	<datestamp>1244404740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The true legacy of UNIX and it's derivatives is that it will eventually reduce a significant bit of technology to a fungible good, a universal commodity. Then the real fun begins.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The true legacy of UNIX and it 's derivatives is that it will eventually reduce a significant bit of technology to a fungible good , a universal commodity .
Then the real fun begins .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The true legacy of UNIX and it's derivatives is that it will eventually reduce a significant bit of technology to a fungible good, a universal commodity.
Then the real fun begins.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244143</id>
	<title>Re:And to celebrate, it issued the command:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244370000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just executed "man yes"<br>I learnt something today.</p><p>And people keep saying slashdot is only a waste of time...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just executed " man yes " I learnt something today.And people keep saying slashdot is only a waste of time.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just executed "man yes"I learnt something today.And people keep saying slashdot is only a waste of time...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242907</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28245519</id>
	<title>Re:Worth thinking about</title>
	<author>Darinbob</author>
	<datestamp>1244380440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Source was not easily available in the early days.  You needed a license for it, and it was definately a commercial OS like the competitors were (who often also had source code available under license).  What made Unix take off were the universities who adopted it I think.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Source was not easily available in the early days .
You needed a license for it , and it was definately a commercial OS like the competitors were ( who often also had source code available under license ) .
What made Unix take off were the universities who adopted it I think .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Source was not easily available in the early days.
You needed a license for it, and it was definately a commercial OS like the competitors were (who often also had source code available under license).
What made Unix take off were the universities who adopted it I think.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242471</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243761</id>
	<title>Re:And to celebrate, it issued the command:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244366580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Bah. Your command would fail. You need to escape the splat just like the semicolon:</p></div><p>Not necessarily.  It depends on whether there are files/directories in the current directory that start with the string "kids" (and your shell's globbing rules).  If there aren't, then everything works find.  If there's only one, things might seem to work, but files/directories in subdirectories will not be found (and therefore removed).</p><p><div class="quote"><p> <tt>find my\_lawn -name kids\* | xargs rm -rvf</tt></p> </div><p>Which will break if you have spaces or tabs or newlines etc. in your filenames.  Use this instead (I hope you have a reasonable version of find and xargs):</p><p><tt>find my\_lawn -name kids\* -print0 | xargs -0 -r rm -rvf</tt></p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bah .
Your command would fail .
You need to escape the splat just like the semicolon : Not necessarily .
It depends on whether there are files/directories in the current directory that start with the string " kids " ( and your shell 's globbing rules ) .
If there are n't , then everything works find .
If there 's only one , things might seem to work , but files/directories in subdirectories will not be found ( and therefore removed ) .
find my \ _lawn -name kids \ * | xargs rm -rvf Which will break if you have spaces or tabs or newlines etc .
in your filenames .
Use this instead ( I hope you have a reasonable version of find and xargs ) : find my \ _lawn -name kids \ * -print0 | xargs -0 -r rm -rvf</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bah.
Your command would fail.
You need to escape the splat just like the semicolon:Not necessarily.
It depends on whether there are files/directories in the current directory that start with the string "kids" (and your shell's globbing rules).
If there aren't, then everything works find.
If there's only one, things might seem to work, but files/directories in subdirectories will not be found (and therefore removed).
find my\_lawn -name kids\* | xargs rm -rvf Which will break if you have spaces or tabs or newlines etc.
in your filenames.
Use this instead (I hope you have a reasonable version of find and xargs):find my\_lawn -name kids\* -print0 | xargs -0 -r rm -rvf
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242685</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28250169</id>
	<title>Re:The Gospel of Tux</title>
	<author>Gothmolly</author>
	<datestamp>1244471580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FYI, I didn't write this, I found it online.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FYI , I did n't write this , I found it online .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FYI, I didn't write this, I found it online.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243057</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243515</id>
	<title>Re:This makes Unix 15 years older than Tetris</title>
	<author>darkjedi521</author>
	<datestamp>1244407380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I belive Unix was first developed on a PDP-7 as PDP-11s did not yet exist in 1969.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I belive Unix was first developed on a PDP-7 as PDP-11s did not yet exist in 1969 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I belive Unix was first developed on a PDP-7 as PDP-11s did not yet exist in 1969.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242491</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242577</id>
	<title>The difference between Unix and Eunichs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244400240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Eunichs don't have <a href="http://www.computerworld.com/common/images/site/features/2009/062009/unix\_chart\_775.jpg" title="computerworld.com" rel="nofollow">children</a> [computerworld.com].</p><p>Mod +1 informative -1 everyoneknowsthatalready.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Eunichs do n't have children [ computerworld.com ] .Mod + 1 informative -1 everyoneknowsthatalready .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Eunichs don't have children [computerworld.com].Mod +1 informative -1 everyoneknowsthatalready.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28248953</id>
	<title>Re:The Gospel of Tux</title>
	<author>dzfoo</author>
	<datestamp>1244460960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Fantastic!  Did you really write all that yourself?</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +5 Fucking Amazing<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; -dZ.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Fantastic !
Did you really write all that yourself ?
          + 5 Fucking Amazing           -dZ .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fantastic!
Did you really write all that yourself?
          +5 Fucking Amazing
          -dZ.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243057</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28245495</id>
	<title>Re:What came before?</title>
	<author>ClosedSource</author>
	<datestamp>1244380020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course there were many operating systems before Unix, but in the embedded world OS's were rarely used until the 90's.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course there were many operating systems before Unix , but in the embedded world OS 's were rarely used until the 90 's .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course there were many operating systems before Unix, but in the embedded world OS's were rarely used until the 90's.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243545</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28253301</id>
	<title>Re:let there be pipes</title>
	<author>rbrander</author>
	<datestamp>1244486760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Same here.  One of the largest MULTICS installations in the world for many years was the University of Calgary that bought big into the idea.   It was the technology that "should have been".   The OS ran only one the one piece of hardware that we were ever aware of, the big Honeywell "DPS8" mainframe.</p><p>So all U of C students of the era (end-of-70's, most-of-80's) were taught PL/1 first and foremost; "C" was picked up on-the-fly by students working on Unix on our several VAX computers of the same era, rather than there being any actual C courses at the time.  But PL/1 was considered the smart thing to learn if you wanted a commercial programming career, as it was surely the Coming Thing.  I didn't learn C until my last year there (1984-85), for a computer graphics course on the VAX.  (Yes, computer graphics on a 1 MIPS VAX, over a 9600-baud line to the graphics terminal.  I still remember the scan lines coming in as you watched, building up a 512x512 image over the course of a minute.  Then you would take a Polaroid photograph of the screen, there being only one laser printer in the University.)</p><p>The MULTICS OS, once you had the whole huge mainframe installation up and running, once you had the multiple experts keeping it so, was a flawed but basically great development environment.  Everything but the kitchen sink, fine-grained security protocols out the yin/yang (it was designed for the military, mostly), vast virtual resources.  And while PL/1 took a while to learn, it was also a "all but the kitchen sink" of languages.  Don't tell me programmers don't want that, look at emacs.  They want it, they just usually can't afford it.</p><p>Same with MULTICS; what UNIX brought to the table was that it was small enough and clean/understandable enough for scientists and engineers to run their own departmental minicomputer, and later their personal workstation.  The industry went off in that direction rather than to ever-larger mainframes, as people making straight-line assumptions has imagined.</p><p>And it is STILL headed that way, with Unix running on netbooks, 30 years after that turning point.  In the meantime, the rich, full, all-but-kitchen-sink environment of MULTICS would probably run on a $900 desktop nicely...which brings us to the other problem: totally proprietary and only maintainable if large companies were making tens of millions doing it.</p><p>But the quality of MULTICS was very high: secure, flexible, featureful, crashproof, 7x24.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Same here .
One of the largest MULTICS installations in the world for many years was the University of Calgary that bought big into the idea .
It was the technology that " should have been " .
The OS ran only one the one piece of hardware that we were ever aware of , the big Honeywell " DPS8 " mainframe.So all U of C students of the era ( end-of-70 's , most-of-80 's ) were taught PL/1 first and foremost ; " C " was picked up on-the-fly by students working on Unix on our several VAX computers of the same era , rather than there being any actual C courses at the time .
But PL/1 was considered the smart thing to learn if you wanted a commercial programming career , as it was surely the Coming Thing .
I did n't learn C until my last year there ( 1984-85 ) , for a computer graphics course on the VAX .
( Yes , computer graphics on a 1 MIPS VAX , over a 9600-baud line to the graphics terminal .
I still remember the scan lines coming in as you watched , building up a 512x512 image over the course of a minute .
Then you would take a Polaroid photograph of the screen , there being only one laser printer in the University .
) The MULTICS OS , once you had the whole huge mainframe installation up and running , once you had the multiple experts keeping it so , was a flawed but basically great development environment .
Everything but the kitchen sink , fine-grained security protocols out the yin/yang ( it was designed for the military , mostly ) , vast virtual resources .
And while PL/1 took a while to learn , it was also a " all but the kitchen sink " of languages .
Do n't tell me programmers do n't want that , look at emacs .
They want it , they just usually ca n't afford it.Same with MULTICS ; what UNIX brought to the table was that it was small enough and clean/understandable enough for scientists and engineers to run their own departmental minicomputer , and later their personal workstation .
The industry went off in that direction rather than to ever-larger mainframes , as people making straight-line assumptions has imagined.And it is STILL headed that way , with Unix running on netbooks , 30 years after that turning point .
In the meantime , the rich , full , all-but-kitchen-sink environment of MULTICS would probably run on a $ 900 desktop nicely...which brings us to the other problem : totally proprietary and only maintainable if large companies were making tens of millions doing it.But the quality of MULTICS was very high : secure , flexible , featureful , crashproof , 7x24 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Same here.
One of the largest MULTICS installations in the world for many years was the University of Calgary that bought big into the idea.
It was the technology that "should have been".
The OS ran only one the one piece of hardware that we were ever aware of, the big Honeywell "DPS8" mainframe.So all U of C students of the era (end-of-70's, most-of-80's) were taught PL/1 first and foremost; "C" was picked up on-the-fly by students working on Unix on our several VAX computers of the same era, rather than there being any actual C courses at the time.
But PL/1 was considered the smart thing to learn if you wanted a commercial programming career, as it was surely the Coming Thing.
I didn't learn C until my last year there (1984-85), for a computer graphics course on the VAX.
(Yes, computer graphics on a 1 MIPS VAX, over a 9600-baud line to the graphics terminal.
I still remember the scan lines coming in as you watched, building up a 512x512 image over the course of a minute.
Then you would take a Polaroid photograph of the screen, there being only one laser printer in the University.
)The MULTICS OS, once you had the whole huge mainframe installation up and running, once you had the multiple experts keeping it so, was a flawed but basically great development environment.
Everything but the kitchen sink, fine-grained security protocols out the yin/yang (it was designed for the military, mostly), vast virtual resources.
And while PL/1 took a while to learn, it was also a "all but the kitchen sink" of languages.
Don't tell me programmers don't want that, look at emacs.
They want it, they just usually can't afford it.Same with MULTICS; what UNIX brought to the table was that it was small enough and clean/understandable enough for scientists and engineers to run their own departmental minicomputer, and later their personal workstation.
The industry went off in that direction rather than to ever-larger mainframes, as people making straight-line assumptions has imagined.And it is STILL headed that way, with Unix running on netbooks, 30 years after that turning point.
In the meantime, the rich, full, all-but-kitchen-sink environment of MULTICS would probably run on a $900 desktop nicely...which brings us to the other problem: totally proprietary and only maintainable if large companies were making tens of millions doing it.But the quality of MULTICS was very high: secure, flexible, featureful, crashproof, 7x24.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243517</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243047</id>
	<title>Re:Did they invent C too?</title>
	<author>Holmwood</author>
	<datestamp>1244403960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not exactly. RTFA. Unix was originally written in assembler on a PDP-7 in 1969. Thompson developed B, and some Unix development continued using B on the PDP-7. Ritchie developed a successor, C, finishing in 1972; in 1973 Thompson ported most of the Unix kernel to C on a PDP-11.</p><p>So C wasn't developed to "create" Unix; Unix was a precursor. C was indeed designed for implementing system software though.</p><p>Brian Kernighan -- the K of K&amp;R got involved in C development later, and was indeed one of the two authors of the seminal K&amp;R.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not exactly .
RTFA. Unix was originally written in assembler on a PDP-7 in 1969 .
Thompson developed B , and some Unix development continued using B on the PDP-7 .
Ritchie developed a successor , C , finishing in 1972 ; in 1973 Thompson ported most of the Unix kernel to C on a PDP-11.So C was n't developed to " create " Unix ; Unix was a precursor .
C was indeed designed for implementing system software though.Brian Kernighan -- the K of K&amp;R got involved in C development later , and was indeed one of the two authors of the seminal K&amp;R .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not exactly.
RTFA. Unix was originally written in assembler on a PDP-7 in 1969.
Thompson developed B, and some Unix development continued using B on the PDP-7.
Ritchie developed a successor, C, finishing in 1972; in 1973 Thompson ported most of the Unix kernel to C on a PDP-11.So C wasn't developed to "create" Unix; Unix was a precursor.
C was indeed designed for implementing system software though.Brian Kernighan -- the K of K&amp;R got involved in C development later, and was indeed one of the two authors of the seminal K&amp;R.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242541</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242489</id>
	<title>But life is just getting started...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244399640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>40 is the new 30!</htmltext>
<tokenext>40 is the new 30 !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>40 is the new 30!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243741</id>
	<title>WTF!?</title>
	<author>ThePhilips</author>
	<datestamp>1244366400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Unix. [...] what could arguably be called the most important operating system of them all.</p> </div><p> WinNT is the most important OS of them all: they even had UNIX reinvented dozen of times already.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unix .
[ ... ] what could arguably be called the most important operating system of them all .
WinNT is the most important OS of them all : they even had UNIX reinvented dozen of times already .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Unix.
[...] what could arguably be called the most important operating system of them all.
WinNT is the most important OS of them all: they even had UNIX reinvented dozen of times already.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242937</id>
	<title>Re:Unix is over the hill</title>
	<author>BrokenHalo</author>
	<datestamp>1244403120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Windows could take on board one thing from From Unix and be a much better product as a result: as David Korn (of <tt>ksh</tt> fame) says in TFA: <i>"One of the hallmarks of Unix was that tools could be written, and better tools could replace them... It wasn't some monolith where you had to buy into everything; you could actually develop better versions."</i>. Microsoft has a lot to learn. The progress from 1980's DOS to today's offering is pretty sad.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows could take on board one thing from From Unix and be a much better product as a result : as David Korn ( of ksh fame ) says in TFA : " One of the hallmarks of Unix was that tools could be written , and better tools could replace them... It was n't some monolith where you had to buy into everything ; you could actually develop better versions. " .
Microsoft has a lot to learn .
The progress from 1980 's DOS to today 's offering is pretty sad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows could take on board one thing from From Unix and be a much better product as a result: as David Korn (of ksh fame) says in TFA: "One of the hallmarks of Unix was that tools could be written, and better tools could replace them... It wasn't some monolith where you had to buy into everything; you could actually develop better versions.".
Microsoft has a lot to learn.
The progress from 1980's DOS to today's offering is pretty sad.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242467</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243677</id>
	<title>Any documentaries?</title>
	<author>antdude</author>
	<datestamp>1244365500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I watched two Tetris documentaries (can find the links to watch them on <a href="http://www.aqfl.net/?q=node/4263" title="aqfl.net">http://www.aqfl.net/?q=node/4263</a> [aqfl.net] ).</p><p>Are there any good ones on UNIX too?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I watched two Tetris documentaries ( can find the links to watch them on http : //www.aqfl.net/ ? q = node/4263 [ aqfl.net ] ) .Are there any good ones on UNIX too ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I watched two Tetris documentaries (can find the links to watch them on http://www.aqfl.net/?q=node/4263 [aqfl.net] ).Are there any good ones on UNIX too?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242491</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243363</id>
	<title>Eunuchs</title>
	<author>Brandybuck</author>
	<datestamp>1244406240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Eunuchs&reg; is a trademark of Ball Labs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Eunuchs   is a trademark of Ball Labs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Eunuchs® is a trademark of Ball Labs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243309</id>
	<title>Re:40 and still relevant</title>
	<author>Brandybuck</author>
	<datestamp>1244405880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...and Hurd is still "coming soon".</p><p>p.s. The term "GNU/Linux" wouldn't be so repulsive if there actually were a GNU system that Torvalds bastardized by swapping out a kernel. But there is no such beast because Hurd remains unfinished. RMS publicly called the kernel the simplest part of an operating system, yet they still have not finished it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...and Hurd is still " coming soon " .p.s .
The term " GNU/Linux " would n't be so repulsive if there actually were a GNU system that Torvalds bastardized by swapping out a kernel .
But there is no such beast because Hurd remains unfinished .
RMS publicly called the kernel the simplest part of an operating system , yet they still have not finished it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...and Hurd is still "coming soon".p.s.
The term "GNU/Linux" wouldn't be so repulsive if there actually were a GNU system that Torvalds bastardized by swapping out a kernel.
But there is no such beast because Hurd remains unfinished.
RMS publicly called the kernel the simplest part of an operating system, yet they still have not finished it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242797</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242631</id>
	<title>Happy 1.26227704e9</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244400780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Happy 1.26227704e9</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Happy 1.26227704e9</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Happy 1.26227704e9</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242781</id>
	<title>Correction</title>
	<author>BrokenHalo</author>
	<datestamp>1244401860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>A small correction to the submission:<br> <br>Multics was believed to have stood for "Many Unnecessarily Large Tables In Core Simultaneously".<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</htmltext>
<tokenext>A small correction to the submission : Multics was believed to have stood for " Many Unnecessarily Large Tables In Core Simultaneously " .
; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A small correction to the submission: Multics was believed to have stood for "Many Unnecessarily Large Tables In Core Simultaneously".
;-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242411</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28250397</id>
	<title>What's the uptime on that?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244472720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's the uptime on that?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's the uptime on that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's the uptime on that?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242645</id>
	<title>Meanwhile, in Redmond</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244400900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In honor of Unix's 40th anniversary, at 10:00 tonight there will be a celebratory Launching of the Chairs. It's open to the public, but seats are expected to go fast so you should plan to come early!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In honor of Unix 's 40th anniversary , at 10 : 00 tonight there will be a celebratory Launching of the Chairs .
It 's open to the public , but seats are expected to go fast so you should plan to come early !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In honor of Unix's 40th anniversary, at 10:00 tonight there will be a celebratory Launching of the Chairs.
It's open to the public, but seats are expected to go fast so you should plan to come early!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28255283</id>
	<title>Re:And to celebrate, it issued the command:</title>
	<author>againjj</author>
	<datestamp>1244494740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I think you meant "kids*"</p></div><p>In bash, if there are no files in the current directory that match kids*, then the glob is unexpanded.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you meant " kids * " In bash , if there are no files in the current directory that match kids * , then the glob is unexpanded .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you meant "kids*"In bash, if there are no files in the current directory that match kids*, then the glob is unexpanded.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242597</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244141</id>
	<title>Re:And to celebrate, it issued the command:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244370000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; mv lawn/kids<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/null</p><p>you realize this doesn't work, since<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/null is not a directory?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; mv lawn/kids /dev/nullyou realize this does n't work , since /dev/null is not a directory ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; mv lawn/kids /dev/nullyou realize this doesn't work, since /dev/null is not a directory?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242907</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242411</id>
	<title>Happy Birthday!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244399100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Happy Birthday!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Happy Birthday !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Happy Birthday!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243115</id>
	<title>Where the Name Came From</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244404440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Brian Kernighan, a long-time Bell Labs stalwart (and the guy who taught me C), coined "Unix" as a pun on Multics. He's also the man responsible for "Hello, world".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Brian Kernighan , a long-time Bell Labs stalwart ( and the guy who taught me C ) , coined " Unix " as a pun on Multics .
He 's also the man responsible for " Hello , world " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Brian Kernighan, a long-time Bell Labs stalwart (and the guy who taught me C), coined "Unix" as a pun on Multics.
He's also the man responsible for "Hello, world".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28263681</id>
	<title>Re:And to celebrate, it issued the command:</title>
	<author>ma11achy</author>
	<datestamp>1244550900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or to make it a little more posix...<br>cd my\_lawn; find . -depth -print -name kids\* -exec rm -rf {} \;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or to make it a little more posix...cd my \ _lawn ; find .
-depth -print -name kids \ * -exec rm -rf { } \ ;</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or to make it a little more posix...cd my\_lawn; find .
-depth -print -name kids\* -exec rm -rf {} \;</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242597</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242775</id>
	<title>fuck 4 dick</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244401800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not anymOre. It's</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not anymOre .
It 's</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not anymOre.
It's</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243695</id>
	<title>UNIX and FORTRAN will still be there in 2100</title>
	<author>peter303</author>
	<datestamp>1244365680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Old computer languages/systems seem to never die.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Old computer languages/systems seem to never die .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Old computer languages/systems seem to never die.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28249809</id>
	<title>Re:And to celebrate, it issued the command:</title>
	<author>akanouras</author>
	<datestamp>1244469360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Or even better:<br>
<br>
<tt>
find my\_lawn -name kids\* -delete -print
</tt> <br>
<br>
And kiss the fork-fest goodbye...
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or even better : find my \ _lawn -name kids \ * -delete -print And kiss the fork-fest goodbye.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Or even better:


find my\_lawn -name kids\* -delete -print
 

And kiss the fork-fest goodbye...
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242685</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244267</id>
	<title>Re:Question for Mac OS X Users</title>
	<author>argent</author>
	<datestamp>1244370780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>What is the major difference between Linux and Mac OS X?</i></p><p>OS X's graphical user interface is not open source. That's really the biggest difference. Boot while holding down COMMAND-S and you'll end up in the same single-user mode as in Linux. Enter the user name "&gt;console" and you'll get a command line login with no GUI.</p><p><i>Which one is better?</i></p><p>For what?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p><i>Will it be hard for me to learn OS X?</i></p><p>Open up Terminal.app and you're running<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/bin/bash, with a mix of GNU and other command line programs. It's totally familiar to anyone used to pretty much any conventional UNIX platform.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What is the major difference between Linux and Mac OS X ? OS X 's graphical user interface is not open source .
That 's really the biggest difference .
Boot while holding down COMMAND-S and you 'll end up in the same single-user mode as in Linux .
Enter the user name " &gt; console " and you 'll get a command line login with no GUI.Which one is better ? For what ?
: ) Will it be hard for me to learn OS X ? Open up Terminal.app and you 're running /bin/bash , with a mix of GNU and other command line programs .
It 's totally familiar to anyone used to pretty much any conventional UNIX platform .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is the major difference between Linux and Mac OS X?OS X's graphical user interface is not open source.
That's really the biggest difference.
Boot while holding down COMMAND-S and you'll end up in the same single-user mode as in Linux.
Enter the user name "&gt;console" and you'll get a command line login with no GUI.Which one is better?For what?
:)Will it be hard for me to learn OS X?Open up Terminal.app and you're running /bin/bash, with a mix of GNU and other command line programs.
It's totally familiar to anyone used to pretty much any conventional UNIX platform.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243809</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28245597</id>
	<title>Re:Worth thinking about</title>
	<author>ClosedSource</author>
	<datestamp>1244381040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, I agree that Unix is a culture, but No, it wasn't based on sweetness and light.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , I agree that Unix is a culture , but No , it was n't based on sweetness and light .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, I agree that Unix is a culture, but No, it wasn't based on sweetness and light.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242921</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244449</id>
	<title>Re:And to celebrate, it issued the command:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244371980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>wonderful, cryptic commands like 'ls, cp, rm, mv, etc.</p></div></blockquote><p>I know you're just going for a +5, Funny, but:</p><p>ls = list<br>cp = copy<br>rm = remove<br>mv = move</p><p>Not so cryptic? They were deliberately intended to be short so that they were easy to remember and easy to type. Rather important details to an administrator like myself who might use them dozens or even hundreds of times each day.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>wonderful , cryptic commands like 'ls , cp , rm , mv , etc.I know you 're just going for a + 5 , Funny , but : ls = listcp = copyrm = removemv = moveNot so cryptic ?
They were deliberately intended to be short so that they were easy to remember and easy to type .
Rather important details to an administrator like myself who might use them dozens or even hundreds of times each day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>wonderful, cryptic commands like 'ls, cp, rm, mv, etc.I know you're just going for a +5, Funny, but:ls = listcp = copyrm = removemv = moveNot so cryptic?
They were deliberately intended to be short so that they were easy to remember and easy to type.
Rather important details to an administrator like myself who might use them dozens or even hundreds of times each day.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242907</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244215</id>
	<title>Re:Unix is over the hill</title>
	<author>rolfwind</author>
	<datestamp>1244370360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Windows could take on board one thing from From Unix and be a much better product as a result: as David Korn (of ksh fame) says in TFA: "One of the hallmarks of Unix was that tools could be written, and better tools could replace them... It wasn't some monolith where you had to buy into everything; you could actually develop better versions.". Microsoft has a lot to learn. The progress from 1980's DOS to today's offering is pretty sad.</p></div></blockquote><p>Does Unix philosophy actually mesh with Unix reality?  A reason I ask is because in unix everything is supposedly a file, but there were enough exceptions, such as in networking, that in the seperate Plan9 OS, they sought to really make everything a file.  And that by the original makers of unix.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows could take on board one thing from From Unix and be a much better product as a result : as David Korn ( of ksh fame ) says in TFA : " One of the hallmarks of Unix was that tools could be written , and better tools could replace them... It was n't some monolith where you had to buy into everything ; you could actually develop better versions. " .
Microsoft has a lot to learn .
The progress from 1980 's DOS to today 's offering is pretty sad.Does Unix philosophy actually mesh with Unix reality ?
A reason I ask is because in unix everything is supposedly a file , but there were enough exceptions , such as in networking , that in the seperate Plan9 OS , they sought to really make everything a file .
And that by the original makers of unix .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows could take on board one thing from From Unix and be a much better product as a result: as David Korn (of ksh fame) says in TFA: "One of the hallmarks of Unix was that tools could be written, and better tools could replace them... It wasn't some monolith where you had to buy into everything; you could actually develop better versions.".
Microsoft has a lot to learn.
The progress from 1980's DOS to today's offering is pretty sad.Does Unix philosophy actually mesh with Unix reality?
A reason I ask is because in unix everything is supposedly a file, but there were enough exceptions, such as in networking, that in the seperate Plan9 OS, they sought to really make everything a file.
And that by the original makers of unix.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242937</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242541</id>
	<title>Did they invent C too?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244400000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I really, really want to say that Ken and Dennis invented C to make unix but I'm not completely sure. I could look it up, but I'm interested to hear what people have to say here. I mean, they're the K&amp;R of the original C book, right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I really , really want to say that Ken and Dennis invented C to make unix but I 'm not completely sure .
I could look it up , but I 'm interested to hear what people have to say here .
I mean , they 're the K&amp;R of the original C book , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I really, really want to say that Ken and Dennis invented C to make unix but I'm not completely sure.
I could look it up, but I'm interested to hear what people have to say here.
I mean, they're the K&amp;R of the original C book, right?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242921</id>
	<title>Re:Worth thinking about</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244403060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Not a bad retrospective, and interesting in that it illustrates some of the reasons for Unix's success: availability of source, and the ability for the user to create and replace tools easily.</p></div></blockquote><p>Exactly. Unix has survived for as long as it has because it was built from, encouraged and profited from a culture of free innovation. Indeed, moreso that its actual code, I would argue that it is this culture that constitutes exactly what is meant by Unix.</p><p>Unix is not just an OS. It is a culture. Indeed, there is really no one "Unix" operating system. Or at least, no one widely used one called "Unix". Linux, BSD, OSX, BeOS, all can be called *nix systems. But what unifies them is not their internal mechanisms or algorithms or standards. What links them is the culture of the people who use them, and who build them. The idea of freely sharing tools, building on the work of others, understanding the whole of the machine, making magic happen with code; that is what Unix really is. You just don't see this kind of thinking in groups using other operating systems.</p><p>It's no surprise that the GPL and open source in general were born from the minds of Unix hackers. In many ways, the GPL only formalises the culture of academic openness, innovation and free sharing of ideas that existed throughout the Unix timeline. It's true that Unix was regarded by Big Corps as a money making excercise, but that's not how hackers saw it. They saw Unix and the programs that ran on it as part of their culture, and more importantly, heritage.</p><p>Unix has become more than source code or a framework. Is a significant part of our society. The norms and customs of Unix hackers have become their own tradition and even law in places. Unix and the hacker culture are a way our society has found to cope with the recent addition of computers, a way that has served well as the they and the internet become more and more pervasive. Like the old traditions and customs that founded our legal and civil systems, the Unix culture has formed the foundation of how we deal with the integration of computers into our lives.</p><p>The culture, traditions and ethics of Unix will probably outlast the lines of source that make up the programs, or the architectures they ran on. I expect Unix and hacker culture, or their descendants, will still be around in another 40 or 400 years, forming the philosophical foundation of a digital age.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not a bad retrospective , and interesting in that it illustrates some of the reasons for Unix 's success : availability of source , and the ability for the user to create and replace tools easily.Exactly .
Unix has survived for as long as it has because it was built from , encouraged and profited from a culture of free innovation .
Indeed , moreso that its actual code , I would argue that it is this culture that constitutes exactly what is meant by Unix.Unix is not just an OS .
It is a culture .
Indeed , there is really no one " Unix " operating system .
Or at least , no one widely used one called " Unix " .
Linux , BSD , OSX , BeOS , all can be called * nix systems .
But what unifies them is not their internal mechanisms or algorithms or standards .
What links them is the culture of the people who use them , and who build them .
The idea of freely sharing tools , building on the work of others , understanding the whole of the machine , making magic happen with code ; that is what Unix really is .
You just do n't see this kind of thinking in groups using other operating systems.It 's no surprise that the GPL and open source in general were born from the minds of Unix hackers .
In many ways , the GPL only formalises the culture of academic openness , innovation and free sharing of ideas that existed throughout the Unix timeline .
It 's true that Unix was regarded by Big Corps as a money making excercise , but that 's not how hackers saw it .
They saw Unix and the programs that ran on it as part of their culture , and more importantly , heritage.Unix has become more than source code or a framework .
Is a significant part of our society .
The norms and customs of Unix hackers have become their own tradition and even law in places .
Unix and the hacker culture are a way our society has found to cope with the recent addition of computers , a way that has served well as the they and the internet become more and more pervasive .
Like the old traditions and customs that founded our legal and civil systems , the Unix culture has formed the foundation of how we deal with the integration of computers into our lives.The culture , traditions and ethics of Unix will probably outlast the lines of source that make up the programs , or the architectures they ran on .
I expect Unix and hacker culture , or their descendants , will still be around in another 40 or 400 years , forming the philosophical foundation of a digital age .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not a bad retrospective, and interesting in that it illustrates some of the reasons for Unix's success: availability of source, and the ability for the user to create and replace tools easily.Exactly.
Unix has survived for as long as it has because it was built from, encouraged and profited from a culture of free innovation.
Indeed, moreso that its actual code, I would argue that it is this culture that constitutes exactly what is meant by Unix.Unix is not just an OS.
It is a culture.
Indeed, there is really no one "Unix" operating system.
Or at least, no one widely used one called "Unix".
Linux, BSD, OSX, BeOS, all can be called *nix systems.
But what unifies them is not their internal mechanisms or algorithms or standards.
What links them is the culture of the people who use them, and who build them.
The idea of freely sharing tools, building on the work of others, understanding the whole of the machine, making magic happen with code; that is what Unix really is.
You just don't see this kind of thinking in groups using other operating systems.It's no surprise that the GPL and open source in general were born from the minds of Unix hackers.
In many ways, the GPL only formalises the culture of academic openness, innovation and free sharing of ideas that existed throughout the Unix timeline.
It's true that Unix was regarded by Big Corps as a money making excercise, but that's not how hackers saw it.
They saw Unix and the programs that ran on it as part of their culture, and more importantly, heritage.Unix has become more than source code or a framework.
Is a significant part of our society.
The norms and customs of Unix hackers have become their own tradition and even law in places.
Unix and the hacker culture are a way our society has found to cope with the recent addition of computers, a way that has served well as the they and the internet become more and more pervasive.
Like the old traditions and customs that founded our legal and civil systems, the Unix culture has formed the foundation of how we deal with the integration of computers into our lives.The culture, traditions and ethics of Unix will probably outlast the lines of source that make up the programs, or the architectures they ran on.
I expect Unix and hacker culture, or their descendants, will still be around in another 40 or 400 years, forming the philosophical foundation of a digital age.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242471</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242609</id>
	<title>Re:Did they invent C too?</title>
	<author>iggymanz</author>
	<datestamp>1244400540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ritchie invented C, it's funny that Ken worked on B with some help from Ritchie, C was the successor to B</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ritchie invented C , it 's funny that Ken worked on B with some help from Ritchie , C was the successor to B</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ritchie invented C, it's funny that Ken worked on B with some help from Ritchie, C was the successor to B</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242541</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242907</id>
	<title>Re:And to celebrate, it issued the command:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244402880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Without UNIX we wouldn't have:</p><ul> <li>wonderful, cryptic commands like 'ls, cp, rm, mv, etc.</li><li>awk, sed and Perl ('nuff said)</li><li>C ('nuff said)</li><li>silly recursive acronyms like GNU == GNU's Not Unix</li><li>mv lawn/kids<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/null</li><li>old stupid jokes like "unzip; strip; touch; finger; fsck; while do; more; yes; more; yes; more; done; zip"</li><li>known the answer to the existential question "who am i"?</li></ul></htmltext>
<tokenext>Without UNIX we would n't have : wonderful , cryptic commands like 'ls , cp , rm , mv , etc.awk , sed and Perl ( 'nuff said ) C ( 'nuff said ) silly recursive acronyms like GNU = = GNU 's Not Unixmv lawn/kids /dev/nullold stupid jokes like " unzip ; strip ; touch ; finger ; fsck ; while do ; more ; yes ; more ; yes ; more ; done ; zip " known the answer to the existential question " who am i " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Without UNIX we wouldn't have: wonderful, cryptic commands like 'ls, cp, rm, mv, etc.awk, sed and Perl ('nuff said)C ('nuff said)silly recursive acronyms like GNU == GNU's Not Unixmv lawn/kids /dev/nullold stupid jokes like "unzip; strip; touch; finger; fsck; while do; more; yes; more; yes; more; done; zip"known the answer to the existential question "who am i"?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242685</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242935</id>
	<title>Re:Did they invent C too?</title>
	<author>RDW</author>
	<datestamp>1244403120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>'I really, really want to say that Ken and Dennis invented C to make unix but I'm not completely sure. I could look it up, but I'm interested to hear what people have to say here'</p><p>For the definitive account, see:</p><p><a href="http://www.galactic-guide.com/articles/2U20.html" title="galactic-guide.com">http://www.galactic-guide.com/articles/2U20.html</a> [galactic-guide.com]</p><p>'Dennis and I [Thompson] were responsible for the operating environment. We looked at Multics and designed the new system to be as complex and cryptic as possible to maximize casual users' frustration levels, calling it Unix as a parody of Multics, as well as other more risque allusions. Then Dennis and Brian worked on a truly warped version of Pascal, called 'A'.  When we found others were actually trying to create real programs with A, we quickly added additional cryptic features and evolved into B, BCPL and finally C.'</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>'I really , really want to say that Ken and Dennis invented C to make unix but I 'm not completely sure .
I could look it up , but I 'm interested to hear what people have to say here'For the definitive account , see : http : //www.galactic-guide.com/articles/2U20.html [ galactic-guide.com ] 'Dennis and I [ Thompson ] were responsible for the operating environment .
We looked at Multics and designed the new system to be as complex and cryptic as possible to maximize casual users ' frustration levels , calling it Unix as a parody of Multics , as well as other more risque allusions .
Then Dennis and Brian worked on a truly warped version of Pascal , called 'A' .
When we found others were actually trying to create real programs with A , we quickly added additional cryptic features and evolved into B , BCPL and finally C.'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'I really, really want to say that Ken and Dennis invented C to make unix but I'm not completely sure.
I could look it up, but I'm interested to hear what people have to say here'For the definitive account, see:http://www.galactic-guide.com/articles/2U20.html [galactic-guide.com]'Dennis and I [Thompson] were responsible for the operating environment.
We looked at Multics and designed the new system to be as complex and cryptic as possible to maximize casual users' frustration levels, calling it Unix as a parody of Multics, as well as other more risque allusions.
Then Dennis and Brian worked on a truly warped version of Pascal, called 'A'.
When we found others were actually trying to create real programs with A, we quickly added additional cryptic features and evolved into B, BCPL and finally C.'</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242541</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244841</id>
	<title>Re:Windows has more and more Unix features</title>
	<author>SilverHatHacker</author>
	<datestamp>1244374860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And the best part is, Microsoft somehow manages to get patents on them too!</htmltext>
<tokenext>And the best part is , Microsoft somehow manages to get patents on them too !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And the best part is, Microsoft somehow manages to get patents on them too!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243389</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242467</id>
	<title>Unix is over the hill</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244399460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We need a fresh new operating system like Windows 7.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We need a fresh new operating system like Windows 7 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We need a fresh new operating system like Windows 7.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243875</id>
	<title>Re:This makes Unix 15 years older than Tetris</title>
	<author>Wodin</author>
	<datestamp>1244367840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Unix just turned 40, and <a href="http://games.slashdot.org/story/09/06/02/1514256/emTetrisem-Turns-25?art\_pos=2" title="slashdot.org">Tetris just turned 25</a> [slashdot.org]. What do they have in common other than closely spaced birthdays? They were both first developed on PDP-11 hardware (Unix on a PDP-11, Tetris on a Russian clone). And they've both been cloned, early and often.</p></div><p>And Lisp is 50 years old.  It wasn't developed on a PDP-11, since PDP-11s weren't around then<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)  It was developed on an IBM 704, but there was a version for <a href="http://www.softwarepreservation.org/projects/LISP/index.html#Basic\_PDP-1\_LISP\_" title="softwarepreservation.org">PDP-1</a> [softwarepreservation.org] developed a little later.</p><p>I think you can say the same about cloning, since there are many different dialects of Lisp and many languages have adopted aspects of Lisp.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unix just turned 40 , and Tetris just turned 25 [ slashdot.org ] .
What do they have in common other than closely spaced birthdays ?
They were both first developed on PDP-11 hardware ( Unix on a PDP-11 , Tetris on a Russian clone ) .
And they 've both been cloned , early and often.And Lisp is 50 years old .
It was n't developed on a PDP-11 , since PDP-11s were n't around then : ) It was developed on an IBM 704 , but there was a version for PDP-1 [ softwarepreservation.org ] developed a little later.I think you can say the same about cloning , since there are many different dialects of Lisp and many languages have adopted aspects of Lisp .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unix just turned 40, and Tetris just turned 25 [slashdot.org].
What do they have in common other than closely spaced birthdays?
They were both first developed on PDP-11 hardware (Unix on a PDP-11, Tetris on a Russian clone).
And they've both been cloned, early and often.And Lisp is 50 years old.
It wasn't developed on a PDP-11, since PDP-11s weren't around then :)  It was developed on an IBM 704, but there was a version for PDP-1 [softwarepreservation.org] developed a little later.I think you can say the same about cloning, since there are many different dialects of Lisp and many languages have adopted aspects of Lisp.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242491</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28246911</id>
	<title>Re:Unix, a blackhole of incompetence and conservat</title>
	<author>Ereth</author>
	<datestamp>1244393700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Microsoft told the Court that removing Explorer was impossible. They lied, but that's not the point. There's an attitude difference.</p><p>Microsoft doesn't want you changing their OS. It's theirs, they are the only ones who get to decide what is good and what is bad.</p><p>In Unix the choice is given to the user. Change shells by simply typing the name of any of the half-dozen provided to you. If you don't like the ones that are there, write your own and distribute it.</p><p>Forking is GOOD. When someone has a better idea in Unix, they release their better idea and people get to see it, to use it, to decide if it really is a better idea, and if it is, it will win out, and the old idea will be replaced. To do that in the Windows world, you have to hope Microsoft decides its a better idea and incorporates it for you. The eco-system is completely different.</p><p>And if you think Unix prevents software from advancing, I'd like you to take a look at the World Wide Web, almost all of which was developed by that same open model you denounce. Not just TCP/IP and the web browser itself, but PHP, Ruby, all the new tools doing things that were never done before, come from those places you claim will never advance software.</p><p>Sounds to me like you have your own reality distortion field.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft told the Court that removing Explorer was impossible .
They lied , but that 's not the point .
There 's an attitude difference.Microsoft does n't want you changing their OS .
It 's theirs , they are the only ones who get to decide what is good and what is bad.In Unix the choice is given to the user .
Change shells by simply typing the name of any of the half-dozen provided to you .
If you do n't like the ones that are there , write your own and distribute it.Forking is GOOD .
When someone has a better idea in Unix , they release their better idea and people get to see it , to use it , to decide if it really is a better idea , and if it is , it will win out , and the old idea will be replaced .
To do that in the Windows world , you have to hope Microsoft decides its a better idea and incorporates it for you .
The eco-system is completely different.And if you think Unix prevents software from advancing , I 'd like you to take a look at the World Wide Web , almost all of which was developed by that same open model you denounce .
Not just TCP/IP and the web browser itself , but PHP , Ruby , all the new tools doing things that were never done before , come from those places you claim will never advance software.Sounds to me like you have your own reality distortion field .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft told the Court that removing Explorer was impossible.
They lied, but that's not the point.
There's an attitude difference.Microsoft doesn't want you changing their OS.
It's theirs, they are the only ones who get to decide what is good and what is bad.In Unix the choice is given to the user.
Change shells by simply typing the name of any of the half-dozen provided to you.
If you don't like the ones that are there, write your own and distribute it.Forking is GOOD.
When someone has a better idea in Unix, they release their better idea and people get to see it, to use it, to decide if it really is a better idea, and if it is, it will win out, and the old idea will be replaced.
To do that in the Windows world, you have to hope Microsoft decides its a better idea and incorporates it for you.
The eco-system is completely different.And if you think Unix prevents software from advancing, I'd like you to take a look at the World Wide Web, almost all of which was developed by that same open model you denounce.
Not just TCP/IP and the web browser itself, but PHP, Ruby, all the new tools doing things that were never done before, come from those places you claim will never advance software.Sounds to me like you have your own reality distortion field.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244635</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28249719</id>
	<title>Re:Worth thinking about</title>
	<author>FordPrefect276709</author>
	<datestamp>1244468940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>speaking about culture: don't forget SCOUnix<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</htmltext>
<tokenext>speaking about culture : do n't forget SCOUnix ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>speaking about culture: don't forget SCOUnix ;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242921</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28248923</id>
	<title>Re:And to celebrate, it issued the command:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244460600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>find my\_lawn -name kids\* -print -exec rm -f {} +</p><p>does the same</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>find my \ _lawn -name kids \ * -print -exec rm -f { } + does the same</tokentext>
<sentencetext>find my\_lawn -name kids\* -print -exec rm -f {} +does the same</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242685</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28245199</id>
	<title>Re:Windows has more and more Unix features</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244377560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do you mean that Windows(tm) 8 will drop the GUI and then several groups will code several windowing systems from zero and then fight for fourty years over whose is best? That looks interesting!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you mean that Windows ( tm ) 8 will drop the GUI and then several groups will code several windowing systems from zero and then fight for fourty years over whose is best ?
That looks interesting !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you mean that Windows(tm) 8 will drop the GUI and then several groups will code several windowing systems from zero and then fight for fourty years over whose is best?
That looks interesting!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243389</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242797</id>
	<title>40 and still relevant</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244401920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wow... 40 already.
<p>
When I started doing Unix Admin professionally Unix was just turning 30, Linux was poised to take over the Desktop, Mac OS X was just a glimmer of hope, and Sun was the king of commercial Unix.
</p><p>
When I started using Minix, Unix was only 20, but RMS was kvetching about source code (and Hurd was Coming Soon), BSD had just won it's freedom, and Steve Jobs was doing cool things over at NeXT.  Unix was just leaving it's  First "Golden Age"...
</p><p>
Now, at 40, Mac OS X is the most used Unix system, Sun was just bought cheap, most other commercial Unix systems are defunct...  But with Android, Pre, and iPhone all putting *nix systems in the palms of millions, Macs selling more than ever, and many companies offering Linux pre-installed in the box, Unix is as relevant as ever.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow... 40 already .
When I started doing Unix Admin professionally Unix was just turning 30 , Linux was poised to take over the Desktop , Mac OS X was just a glimmer of hope , and Sun was the king of commercial Unix .
When I started using Minix , Unix was only 20 , but RMS was kvetching about source code ( and Hurd was Coming Soon ) , BSD had just won it 's freedom , and Steve Jobs was doing cool things over at NeXT .
Unix was just leaving it 's First " Golden Age " .. . Now , at 40 , Mac OS X is the most used Unix system , Sun was just bought cheap , most other commercial Unix systems are defunct... But with Android , Pre , and iPhone all putting * nix systems in the palms of millions , Macs selling more than ever , and many companies offering Linux pre-installed in the box , Unix is as relevant as ever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow... 40 already.
When I started doing Unix Admin professionally Unix was just turning 30, Linux was poised to take over the Desktop, Mac OS X was just a glimmer of hope, and Sun was the king of commercial Unix.
When I started using Minix, Unix was only 20, but RMS was kvetching about source code (and Hurd was Coming Soon), BSD had just won it's freedom, and Steve Jobs was doing cool things over at NeXT.
Unix was just leaving it's  First "Golden Age"...

Now, at 40, Mac OS X is the most used Unix system, Sun was just bought cheap, most other commercial Unix systems are defunct...  But with Android, Pre, and iPhone all putting *nix systems in the palms of millions, Macs selling more than ever, and many companies offering Linux pre-installed in the box, Unix is as relevant as ever.
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28252423</id>
	<title>Re:let there be pipes</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244483040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've used PL/1 and Multics. They aren't as unweildy as you have been lead to believe.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've used PL/1 and Multics .
They are n't as unweildy as you have been lead to believe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've used PL/1 and Multics.
They aren't as unweildy as you have been lead to believe.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243517</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244635</id>
	<title>Unix, a blackhole of incompetence and conservatism</title>
	<author>malevolentjelly</author>
	<datestamp>1244373180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's wonderful to see everyone parading around and celebrating the mastery of UNIX. I've seen mention of the fact that UNIX is better because its components can be replaced... and yet this isn't any different than Windows, which can have its explorer ripped out... and yet the morons chime on.</p><p>And for all this amazing progressive openness (which will solve everything someday), the Unix Hater's Handbook is still almost as completely applicable today as it was over a decade ago when it was written.</p><p>What does that say about progress? Basically, Linux is now doing the same thing UNIX has done historically, leverage enthusiasm from conservative admins to block all progress in system development. It is the ultimate curse of the "good enough" solution, demonstrating that the most important factor in the computing world is elitism. It's the cult of the inaccessible and unusable system. It is a blackhole of useless knowledge. It's a gaping wound in security, stability, and the progress of usability.</p><p>Indeed, UNIX is as bad as it ever has been... it's 2009 and people are pushing this hellish mess onto home users, now offering desktops like Ubuntu, swallowing resources, breaking at every turn, and all at once offering less lucidity and ease of use than 20 year old commercial solutions.</p><p>UNIX is the cancer that keeps computers "geeky" and keeps the power of computing out of the hands of regular users. UNIX is like the Church which dragged society out of the enlightenment of Rome and into the dark ages, filling peoples' heads with superstition and making progress a dark taboo. Now, thanks to the new popularity of linux, CS students are raised in unix-like environments, where dogmatic and archaic beliefs will prevent them from ever advancing software. They are trapped in streams of text and monoliths, doomed to repeat outdated principles of system design.</p><p>Here's to the new dark ages.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's wonderful to see everyone parading around and celebrating the mastery of UNIX .
I 've seen mention of the fact that UNIX is better because its components can be replaced... and yet this is n't any different than Windows , which can have its explorer ripped out... and yet the morons chime on.And for all this amazing progressive openness ( which will solve everything someday ) , the Unix Hater 's Handbook is still almost as completely applicable today as it was over a decade ago when it was written.What does that say about progress ?
Basically , Linux is now doing the same thing UNIX has done historically , leverage enthusiasm from conservative admins to block all progress in system development .
It is the ultimate curse of the " good enough " solution , demonstrating that the most important factor in the computing world is elitism .
It 's the cult of the inaccessible and unusable system .
It is a blackhole of useless knowledge .
It 's a gaping wound in security , stability , and the progress of usability.Indeed , UNIX is as bad as it ever has been... it 's 2009 and people are pushing this hellish mess onto home users , now offering desktops like Ubuntu , swallowing resources , breaking at every turn , and all at once offering less lucidity and ease of use than 20 year old commercial solutions.UNIX is the cancer that keeps computers " geeky " and keeps the power of computing out of the hands of regular users .
UNIX is like the Church which dragged society out of the enlightenment of Rome and into the dark ages , filling peoples ' heads with superstition and making progress a dark taboo .
Now , thanks to the new popularity of linux , CS students are raised in unix-like environments , where dogmatic and archaic beliefs will prevent them from ever advancing software .
They are trapped in streams of text and monoliths , doomed to repeat outdated principles of system design.Here 's to the new dark ages .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's wonderful to see everyone parading around and celebrating the mastery of UNIX.
I've seen mention of the fact that UNIX is better because its components can be replaced... and yet this isn't any different than Windows, which can have its explorer ripped out... and yet the morons chime on.And for all this amazing progressive openness (which will solve everything someday), the Unix Hater's Handbook is still almost as completely applicable today as it was over a decade ago when it was written.What does that say about progress?
Basically, Linux is now doing the same thing UNIX has done historically, leverage enthusiasm from conservative admins to block all progress in system development.
It is the ultimate curse of the "good enough" solution, demonstrating that the most important factor in the computing world is elitism.
It's the cult of the inaccessible and unusable system.
It is a blackhole of useless knowledge.
It's a gaping wound in security, stability, and the progress of usability.Indeed, UNIX is as bad as it ever has been... it's 2009 and people are pushing this hellish mess onto home users, now offering desktops like Ubuntu, swallowing resources, breaking at every turn, and all at once offering less lucidity and ease of use than 20 year old commercial solutions.UNIX is the cancer that keeps computers "geeky" and keeps the power of computing out of the hands of regular users.
UNIX is like the Church which dragged society out of the enlightenment of Rome and into the dark ages, filling peoples' heads with superstition and making progress a dark taboo.
Now, thanks to the new popularity of linux, CS students are raised in unix-like environments, where dogmatic and archaic beliefs will prevent them from ever advancing software.
They are trapped in streams of text and monoliths, doomed to repeat outdated principles of system design.Here's to the new dark ages.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244153</id>
	<title>Re:This makes Unix 15 years older than Tetris</title>
	<author>harlows\_monkeys</author>
	<datestamp>1244370060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Unix just turned 40, and Tetris just turned 25 [slashdot.org]. What do they have in common other than closely spaced birthdays? They were both first developed on PDP-11 hardware (Unix on a PDP-11, Tetris on a Russian clone)</p></div></blockquote><p>Unix was first developed on the PDP-7. The PDP-11 wasn't even available when Unix development started--the 11 came out a year later.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unix just turned 40 , and Tetris just turned 25 [ slashdot.org ] .
What do they have in common other than closely spaced birthdays ?
They were both first developed on PDP-11 hardware ( Unix on a PDP-11 , Tetris on a Russian clone ) Unix was first developed on the PDP-7 .
The PDP-11 was n't even available when Unix development started--the 11 came out a year later .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unix just turned 40, and Tetris just turned 25 [slashdot.org].
What do they have in common other than closely spaced birthdays?
They were both first developed on PDP-11 hardware (Unix on a PDP-11, Tetris on a Russian clone)Unix was first developed on the PDP-7.
The PDP-11 wasn't even available when Unix development started--the 11 came out a year later.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242491</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28248981</id>
	<title>Re:Did they invent C too?</title>
	<author>W33B</author>
	<datestamp>1244461200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm still waiting for D</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm still waiting for D</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm still waiting for D</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242609</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242773</id>
	<title>glad GNU/Linux &amp; BSD have stolen Unix(tm) thun</title>
	<author>iggymanz</author>
	<datestamp>1244401800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unix is grand, I consider the open source BSD and GNU/Linux flavors of Unix.  But Unix(tm), I could tell that was starting to go downhill when they stopped including full C compiler with system, all of a sudden it wasn't a system one could extend as needed without paying serious coin.  Most Unix(tm) meant  being locked into one hardware vendor</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unix is grand , I consider the open source BSD and GNU/Linux flavors of Unix .
But Unix ( tm ) , I could tell that was starting to go downhill when they stopped including full C compiler with system , all of a sudden it was n't a system one could extend as needed without paying serious coin .
Most Unix ( tm ) meant being locked into one hardware vendor</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unix is grand, I consider the open source BSD and GNU/Linux flavors of Unix.
But Unix(tm), I could tell that was starting to go downhill when they stopped including full C compiler with system, all of a sudden it wasn't a system one could extend as needed without paying serious coin.
Most Unix(tm) meant  being locked into one hardware vendor</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244335</id>
	<title>Re:What came before?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244371260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>So could an old salt fill us young-un's in? What was it like before Unix?</i></p><p>Here's a typical computer job from before UNIX... IBM JCL. The following is roughly the equivalent of "lpr -Pxerox</p><blockquote><div><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr><tt>//CHECKS JOB (),'BARR',MSGCLASS=A<br>//*<br>//* TESTING ASA CARRIAGE CONTROL<br>//*<br>// EXEC PGM=IEBGENER<br>//SYSPRINT DD SYSOUT=D<br>//SYSIN DD DUMMY<br>//SYSUT2 DD SYSOUT=(S,,CHKS),DCB=(RECFM=FBA),COPIES=1,<br>//     DEST=(BAR1TN06,XEROX)<br>//SYSUT1 DD *</tt></p></div> </blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So could an old salt fill us young-un 's in ?
What was it like before Unix ? Here 's a typical computer job from before UNIX... IBM JCL .
The following is roughly the equivalent of " lpr -Pxerox //CHECKS JOB ( ) ,'BARR',MSGCLASS = A// * // * TESTING ASA CARRIAGE CONTROL// * // EXEC PGM = IEBGENER//SYSPRINT DD SYSOUT = D//SYSIN DD DUMMY//SYSUT2 DD SYSOUT = ( S,,CHKS ) ,DCB = ( RECFM = FBA ) ,COPIES = 1,// DEST = ( BAR1TN06,XEROX ) //SYSUT1 DD *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So could an old salt fill us young-un's in?
What was it like before Unix?Here's a typical computer job from before UNIX... IBM JCL.
The following is roughly the equivalent of "lpr -Pxerox //CHECKS JOB (),'BARR',MSGCLASS=A//*//* TESTING ASA CARRIAGE CONTROL//*// EXEC PGM=IEBGENER//SYSPRINT DD SYSOUT=D//SYSIN DD DUMMY//SYSUT2 DD SYSOUT=(S,,CHKS),DCB=(RECFM=FBA),COPIES=1,//     DEST=(BAR1TN06,XEROX)//SYSUT1 DD * 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243545</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242471</id>
	<title>Worth thinking about</title>
	<author>Mannerism</author>
	<datestamp>1244399460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not a bad retrospective, and interesting in that it illustrates some of the reasons for Unix's success: availability of source, and the ability for the user to create and replace tools easily. One wonders how those lessons might be applied not necessarily to operating systems or even computing, but to other industries and technical endeavours.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not a bad retrospective , and interesting in that it illustrates some of the reasons for Unix 's success : availability of source , and the ability for the user to create and replace tools easily .
One wonders how those lessons might be applied not necessarily to operating systems or even computing , but to other industries and technical endeavours .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not a bad retrospective, and interesting in that it illustrates some of the reasons for Unix's success: availability of source, and the ability for the user to create and replace tools easily.
One wonders how those lessons might be applied not necessarily to operating systems or even computing, but to other industries and technical endeavours.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242685
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28248923
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242491
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244153
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243517
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28253301
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242921
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244447
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242685
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242907
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28247581
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243057
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28248953
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243545
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244335
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242651
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243545
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28245495
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242467
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242779
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243057
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28250169
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242685
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28249809
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242541
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242609
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28248981
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242541
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242965
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242467
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243389
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244841
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242541
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242857
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242645
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243179
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244803
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243865
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243517
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28252423
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242685
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243017
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242685
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28247367
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242685
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242907
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244449
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28249735
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242685
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242907
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28247295
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242467
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242937
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244215
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28253767
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242491
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243875
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243057
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28247979
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242541
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243005
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243333
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28245547
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243809
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244267
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243057
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28245899
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242467
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243389
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28245199
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242685
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243761
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243215
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242537
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28247031
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242597
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28263681
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242491
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243515
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242541
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242579
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242467
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243389
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28254313
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242411
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242781
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242685
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28245591
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242797
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243309
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28248931
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242685
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242907
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28250475
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242921
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28249719
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242691
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28259567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242467
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243389
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244021
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242541
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242935
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243563
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242921
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28246103
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243003
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242685
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28248063
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242685
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242907
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244143
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242685
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243271
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244635
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28246911
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242541
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243047
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242685
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242907
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244141
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242491
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243677
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28245519
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242597
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28255283
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242921
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243725
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244699
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242467
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243389
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244607
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242921
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243883
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244145
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28245719
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244635
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28250759
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242921
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28245145
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_07_1619231_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242921
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28245597
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_07_1619231.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242743
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243215
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243003
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28245719
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_07_1619231.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242491
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243515
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243875
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243677
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244153
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_07_1619231.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243741
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_07_1619231.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242797
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243309
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28248931
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_07_1619231.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243809
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244267
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_07_1619231.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242489
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_07_1619231.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243363
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_07_1619231.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244635
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28246911
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28250759
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_07_1619231.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242773
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_07_1619231.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242411
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242781
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_07_1619231.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242599
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_07_1619231.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243517
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28252423
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28253301
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_07_1619231.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242645
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243179
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244803
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_07_1619231.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242771
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_07_1619231.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242537
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28247031
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_07_1619231.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242541
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242609
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28248981
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242965
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243047
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242935
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243563
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243005
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242579
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242857
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_07_1619231.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242421
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242597
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28255283
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28263681
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242691
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242685
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28248063
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243271
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28249809
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28248923
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28245591
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243761
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242907
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244141
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28250475
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28247581
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244449
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28249735
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28247295
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244143
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28247367
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243017
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243865
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242651
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_07_1619231.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242467
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243389
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244607
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28245199
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244021
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244841
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28254313
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242779
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242937
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244215
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28253767
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_07_1619231.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243057
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28248953
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28245899
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28247979
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28250169
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_07_1619231.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243545
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244335
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28245495
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_07_1619231.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242471
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28259567
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244145
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28245519
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28242921
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28245597
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243725
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244699
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28244447
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28245145
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243883
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28246103
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28249719
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_07_1619231.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28243333
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_07_1619231.28245547
</commentlist>
</conversation>
