<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_20_1828253</id>
	<title>Ray Bradbury Loves Libraries, Hates the Internet</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1245489060000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://hughpickens.com/" rel="nofollow">Hugh Pickens</a> was one of several readers to let us know that, according to a NY Times story, the 89-year-old <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/20/us/20ventura.html">Ray Bradbury hates the Internet</a>. But he loves libraries, and is <a href="http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2009/jun/14/bradbury-community-join-forces-to-save-library/">helping raise $280,000 to keep libraries in Ventura County open</a>. <i>"Among Mr. Bradbury's passions, none burn quite as hot as his lifelong enthusiasm for halls of books. ... 'Libraries raised me,' Mr. Bradbury said. 'I don't believe in colleges and universities. I believe in libraries because most students don't have any money. When I graduated from high school, it was during the Depression and we had no money. I couldn't go to college, so I went to the library three days a week for 10 years.' ... The Internet? Don't get him started. 'The Internet is a big distraction,' Mr. Bradbury barked... 'Yahoo called me eight weeks ago,' he said, voice rising. 'They wanted to put a book of mine on Yahoo! You know what I told them? "To hell with you. To hell with you and to hell with the Internet." It's distracting. It's meaningless; it's not real. It's in the air somewhere.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hugh Pickens was one of several readers to let us know that , according to a NY Times story , the 89-year-old Ray Bradbury hates the Internet .
But he loves libraries , and is helping raise $ 280,000 to keep libraries in Ventura County open .
" Among Mr. Bradbury 's passions , none burn quite as hot as his lifelong enthusiasm for halls of books .
... 'Libraries raised me, ' Mr. Bradbury said .
'I do n't believe in colleges and universities .
I believe in libraries because most students do n't have any money .
When I graduated from high school , it was during the Depression and we had no money .
I could n't go to college , so I went to the library three days a week for 10 years .
' ... The Internet ?
Do n't get him started .
'The Internet is a big distraction, ' Mr. Bradbury barked... 'Yahoo called me eight weeks ago, ' he said , voice rising .
'They wanted to put a book of mine on Yahoo !
You know what I told them ?
" To hell with you .
To hell with you and to hell with the Internet .
" It 's distracting .
It 's meaningless ; it 's not real .
It 's in the air somewhere .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hugh Pickens was one of several readers to let us know that, according to a NY Times story, the 89-year-old Ray Bradbury hates the Internet.
But he loves libraries, and is helping raise $280,000 to keep libraries in Ventura County open.
"Among Mr. Bradbury's passions, none burn quite as hot as his lifelong enthusiasm for halls of books.
... 'Libraries raised me,' Mr. Bradbury said.
'I don't believe in colleges and universities.
I believe in libraries because most students don't have any money.
When I graduated from high school, it was during the Depression and we had no money.
I couldn't go to college, so I went to the library three days a week for 10 years.
' ... The Internet?
Don't get him started.
'The Internet is a big distraction,' Mr. Bradbury barked... 'Yahoo called me eight weeks ago,' he said, voice rising.
'They wanted to put a book of mine on Yahoo!
You know what I told them?
"To hell with you.
To hell with you and to hell with the Internet.
" It's distracting.
It's meaningless; it's not real.
It's in the air somewhere.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28414717</id>
	<title>Re:LEARN WITH B.O.O.K.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245588720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>wake me up when the text in one of your B.O.O.K. units is searchable.</p><p>also, cut and paste would be nice for discussions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>wake me up when the text in one of your B.O.O.K .
units is searchable.also , cut and paste would be nice for discussions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>wake me up when the text in one of your B.O.O.K.
units is searchable.also, cut and paste would be nice for discussions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404853</id>
	<title>wtf?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245496920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't give a shit what this dude likes or doesn't.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't give a shit what this dude likes or does n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't give a shit what this dude likes or doesn't.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404793</id>
	<title>The internet is the biggest library ever.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245496380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Put your book on it, and the whole world can see it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Put your book on it , and the whole world can see it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Put your book on it, and the whole world can see it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404633</id>
	<title>Libraries are public, websites are (usually) not</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245495180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>anyone can go to a library, and assuming the locality is solvent and can pay the paycheques for librarians, acquisitions, and cleaning staff, the library can stay open indefinitely. This is not to say that libraries never close down. What I am saying is: given adequate support, libraries can stay open indefinitely. Two examples: NY Public Library. Library of Congress.
<p>
The same cannot be said for a given website. Google (or any other commercial website) might be big today, but once the ad revenue (business model) collapses, they're toast and their huge volume of books, videos, etc. will go offline. If their board of directors can demonstrate that Google (or whatever corporation that sells shares) would make serious bank in another industry (say, breakfast cereal  or carpeting or  concrete or maid services - whatever) the shareholders would vote for that product to get a better return on investment, and those jillions of books and videos would be reduced to essentially what they are: unwanted webservers that would be zeroed out and sold.
</p><p>
Bradbury's a bit of a cranky right wing dipshit, but even a stopped clock is right once a day.
</p><p>
RS</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>anyone can go to a library , and assuming the locality is solvent and can pay the paycheques for librarians , acquisitions , and cleaning staff , the library can stay open indefinitely .
This is not to say that libraries never close down .
What I am saying is : given adequate support , libraries can stay open indefinitely .
Two examples : NY Public Library .
Library of Congress .
The same can not be said for a given website .
Google ( or any other commercial website ) might be big today , but once the ad revenue ( business model ) collapses , they 're toast and their huge volume of books , videos , etc .
will go offline .
If their board of directors can demonstrate that Google ( or whatever corporation that sells shares ) would make serious bank in another industry ( say , breakfast cereal or carpeting or concrete or maid services - whatever ) the shareholders would vote for that product to get a better return on investment , and those jillions of books and videos would be reduced to essentially what they are : unwanted webservers that would be zeroed out and sold .
Bradbury 's a bit of a cranky right wing dipshit , but even a stopped clock is right once a day .
RS</tokentext>
<sentencetext>anyone can go to a library, and assuming the locality is solvent and can pay the paycheques for librarians, acquisitions, and cleaning staff, the library can stay open indefinitely.
This is not to say that libraries never close down.
What I am saying is: given adequate support, libraries can stay open indefinitely.
Two examples: NY Public Library.
Library of Congress.
The same cannot be said for a given website.
Google (or any other commercial website) might be big today, but once the ad revenue (business model) collapses, they're toast and their huge volume of books, videos, etc.
will go offline.
If their board of directors can demonstrate that Google (or whatever corporation that sells shares) would make serious bank in another industry (say, breakfast cereal  or carpeting or  concrete or maid services - whatever) the shareholders would vote for that product to get a better return on investment, and those jillions of books and videos would be reduced to essentially what they are: unwanted webservers that would be zeroed out and sold.
Bradbury's a bit of a cranky right wing dipshit, but even a stopped clock is right once a day.
RS</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404537</id>
	<title>What if...</title>
	<author>Drone69</author>
	<datestamp>1245494340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Someone explained to Mr. Bradbury that the internets is operated by a conclave of androids?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Someone explained to Mr. Bradbury that the internets is operated by a conclave of androids ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Someone explained to Mr. Bradbury that the internets is operated by a conclave of androids?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405323</id>
	<title>"none burn quite as hot"</title>
	<author>Arancaytar</author>
	<datestamp>1245499980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can't tell me that wasn't on purpose.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You ca n't tell me that was n't on purpose .
: P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can't tell me that wasn't on purpose.
:P</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405991</id>
	<title>Re:Books are not real!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245504000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I like libraries, but you hit the nail on the head there. Bradbury is a man out of his time.  It will be us one day.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I like libraries , but you hit the nail on the head there .
Bradbury is a man out of his time .
It will be us one day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like libraries, but you hit the nail on the head there.
Bradbury is a man out of his time.
It will be us one day.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404517</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28408967</id>
	<title>Fuck Bradbury</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245577800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>An old fashioned science fiction writer? The dude needs to fucking die and be be buried already. What a sorry piece of shit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>An old fashioned science fiction writer ?
The dude needs to fucking die and be be buried already .
What a sorry piece of shit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An old fashioned science fiction writer?
The dude needs to fucking die and be be buried already.
What a sorry piece of shit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28406549</id>
	<title>Ray Bradbury is one of the most inspiring people</title>
	<author>quixote9</author>
	<datestamp>1245508200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>on the whole planet.  I heard him speak at the LA WorldCon a few years ago, and I was blown away.  There was an immediacy, a direct contact he made with what felt like every single one of us in that huge audience.  Somebody who can have that effect in -- and probably from -- realspace might well feel that the internet is lacking something.</htmltext>
<tokenext>on the whole planet .
I heard him speak at the LA WorldCon a few years ago , and I was blown away .
There was an immediacy , a direct contact he made with what felt like every single one of us in that huge audience .
Somebody who can have that effect in -- and probably from -- realspace might well feel that the internet is lacking something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>on the whole planet.
I heard him speak at the LA WorldCon a few years ago, and I was blown away.
There was an immediacy, a direct contact he made with what felt like every single one of us in that huge audience.
Somebody who can have that effect in -- and probably from -- realspace might well feel that the internet is lacking something.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28407603</id>
	<title>Iran</title>
	<author>Yaos</author>
	<datestamp>1245518460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>He can tell the Iranian's the Internet is meaningless, anybody want to pay for his plane ticket?</htmltext>
<tokenext>He can tell the Iranian 's the Internet is meaningless , anybody want to pay for his plane ticket ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He can tell the Iranian's the Internet is meaningless, anybody want to pay for his plane ticket?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404527</id>
	<title>"In the air?" Come on!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245494160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>&#226;oeIt&#226;(TM)s distracting,&#226; he continued. &#226;oeIt&#226;(TM)s meaningless; it&#226;(TM)s not real. It&#226;(TM)s in the air somewhere.&#226;</p> </div><p>Many critics of digital media complain that the information is not tangible, like a book or a record is. That you can't hold it in your hands. But last time I checked, how a book physically felt in your hands wasn't important to enjoying and understanding a book. You read with your eyes, not with your fingers (braille notwithstanding).</p><p>So really Mr. Bradbury, what's your obsession with being able to hold things? Sounds more like materialism and hoarding instincts or misguided nostalgia than a genuine concern for the Internet.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>  oeIt   ( TM ) s distracting ,   he continued .
  oeIt   ( TM ) s meaningless ; it   ( TM ) s not real .
It   ( TM ) s in the air somewhere.   Many critics of digital media complain that the information is not tangible , like a book or a record is .
That you ca n't hold it in your hands .
But last time I checked , how a book physically felt in your hands was n't important to enjoying and understanding a book .
You read with your eyes , not with your fingers ( braille notwithstanding ) .So really Mr. Bradbury , what 's your obsession with being able to hold things ?
Sounds more like materialism and hoarding instincts or misguided nostalgia than a genuine concern for the Internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>âoeItâ(TM)s distracting,â he continued.
âoeItâ(TM)s meaningless; itâ(TM)s not real.
Itâ(TM)s in the air somewhere.â Many critics of digital media complain that the information is not tangible, like a book or a record is.
That you can't hold it in your hands.
But last time I checked, how a book physically felt in your hands wasn't important to enjoying and understanding a book.
You read with your eyes, not with your fingers (braille notwithstanding).So really Mr. Bradbury, what's your obsession with being able to hold things?
Sounds more like materialism and hoarding instincts or misguided nostalgia than a genuine concern for the Internet.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28406661</id>
	<title>Sorry, but I don't have a problem with either one.</title>
	<author>bXTr</author>
	<datestamp>1245509340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sure books are good, but I'm not willing to stop using the Internet. Sure the Internet is OK, but I'm not willing to burn all my books just yet. There are legitimate uses for each, and each have their problems. The Internet has the advantage of immediacy of information delivery, but even with Google's help you often have to dig through a lot of dirt to get to a nugget of useful info. Signal-to-noise is lower with books, but by the time you buy the book the information it contains is obsolete. Turning the Internet off is unlikely, but still possible. Books don't require electricity for their use, but you do have to cut down some trees.</p><p>My point is, I wonder how Ray feels about people buying his books through Amazon.com.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure books are good , but I 'm not willing to stop using the Internet .
Sure the Internet is OK , but I 'm not willing to burn all my books just yet .
There are legitimate uses for each , and each have their problems .
The Internet has the advantage of immediacy of information delivery , but even with Google 's help you often have to dig through a lot of dirt to get to a nugget of useful info .
Signal-to-noise is lower with books , but by the time you buy the book the information it contains is obsolete .
Turning the Internet off is unlikely , but still possible .
Books do n't require electricity for their use , but you do have to cut down some trees.My point is , I wonder how Ray feels about people buying his books through Amazon.com .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure books are good, but I'm not willing to stop using the Internet.
Sure the Internet is OK, but I'm not willing to burn all my books just yet.
There are legitimate uses for each, and each have their problems.
The Internet has the advantage of immediacy of information delivery, but even with Google's help you often have to dig through a lot of dirt to get to a nugget of useful info.
Signal-to-noise is lower with books, but by the time you buy the book the information it contains is obsolete.
Turning the Internet off is unlikely, but still possible.
Books don't require electricity for their use, but you do have to cut down some trees.My point is, I wonder how Ray feels about people buying his books through Amazon.com.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404667</id>
	<title>So what's the problem?</title>
	<author>93 Escort Wagon</author>
	<datestamp>1245495360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ray Bradbury hates the internet - or, I'm guessing, "hates the world wide web" would be the more accurate statement. And, apparently, he's also a Republican according to some posts here.</p><p>So what? Isn't he entitled to his opinions? Why do some people here think they can only enjoy the work of someone with whom they're in agreement on everything? Take this to the logical extreme: A lot of people really liked ReiserFS - does that mean they must think it's okay to murder someone?</p><p>Bradbury is even helping raise a bunch of money for a library. How much of your time and money do you put into causes you believe in?</p><p>C'mon, give the guy a break. Reading his comments, I'll admit I was half-expecting "and you kids get off my lawn!" included in there somewhere. But man, it never even occurred to me that I should change my mind about his stories because some of his opinions are different than mine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ray Bradbury hates the internet - or , I 'm guessing , " hates the world wide web " would be the more accurate statement .
And , apparently , he 's also a Republican according to some posts here.So what ?
Is n't he entitled to his opinions ?
Why do some people here think they can only enjoy the work of someone with whom they 're in agreement on everything ?
Take this to the logical extreme : A lot of people really liked ReiserFS - does that mean they must think it 's okay to murder someone ? Bradbury is even helping raise a bunch of money for a library .
How much of your time and money do you put into causes you believe in ? C'mon , give the guy a break .
Reading his comments , I 'll admit I was half-expecting " and you kids get off my lawn !
" included in there somewhere .
But man , it never even occurred to me that I should change my mind about his stories because some of his opinions are different than mine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ray Bradbury hates the internet - or, I'm guessing, "hates the world wide web" would be the more accurate statement.
And, apparently, he's also a Republican according to some posts here.So what?
Isn't he entitled to his opinions?
Why do some people here think they can only enjoy the work of someone with whom they're in agreement on everything?
Take this to the logical extreme: A lot of people really liked ReiserFS - does that mean they must think it's okay to murder someone?Bradbury is even helping raise a bunch of money for a library.
How much of your time and money do you put into causes you believe in?C'mon, give the guy a break.
Reading his comments, I'll admit I was half-expecting "and you kids get off my lawn!
" included in there somewhere.
But man, it never even occurred to me that I should change my mind about his stories because some of his opinions are different than mine.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404709</id>
	<title>I like the internet</title>
	<author>HalAtWork</author>
	<datestamp>1245495720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I like the idea that anyone can publish something, anyone can remark on something, and anyone can seek out your comments.  People can communicate in a neutral medium without worrying about immediate personal repercussions because then they don't fear to speak their minds.<br> <br>You don't learn a lot when you can only see one shade in the spectrum, but on the internet you have everything, and this feels like a more realistic representation of what people think.  You can see peoples' arguments instead of a finished product that can never be changed.  You see the etymology of peoples' thoughts.<br> <br>We haven't really had much structure in society, in terms of interpersonal relationships.  They are wildly different.  Personalities are wildly different.  We all have different goals and different reasons and different opinions.  Everyone has to learn about being on this planet together, but you aren't really privy to everyone's personal process.  You just hear whatever comes out of their mouth at one given time, even though what they think, and what think they know, is constantly evolving.<br> <br>The fact that you can observe all perspectives can help people learn about all of the different ways of thinking about something, and different ways of dealing with ways of thinking that are different than yours, but the internet is like a social equalizer.  You may have search rankings, and ad priorities, and certain computers will ship with a general default configuration, and you may have favorite bookmarks that you load up every day that may put a bias on what a given individual will be exposed to.  Invariably, however, people will find their way into many different areas of interest, which will present them with many different groups of people who will speak about things that they have picked up from many other places, and points of view are dispersed widely and vary widely, yet they are all available.<br> <br>On web sites, you can have discussion forums with different topics that have different posts and within them, different threads, and different arguments.  On Wikipedia, you can move through any topic by clicking on the area of interest, and you can see how the article changed and why.  On Slashdot, you have people writing stories and comments and voting each other up.  On 2chan you have unmoderated discussions on a wide variety of interests.  Anyone can step in and drop some heavy knowledge, or they can blurt out an off-the-cuff remark, but we get way more variety than our every day communications, and we can seek out any topic we can come up with to get such perspectives.<br> <br>I think it makes us healthier that we can see all that and take it in in a more unbiased manner.  It drives home the point that the truth is the truth no matter where it comes from, because bullshit is less tolerated and picked apart.  Conclusions may be drawn, but topics are forever evolving and nothing really ever stays the same on the internet.  Even though there's a lot of stupid shit on the internet, I feel like I'm learning a lot of important stuff that I couldn't in school or a library, and even a lot that I can.  But it's all easy and accessible.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I like the idea that anyone can publish something , anyone can remark on something , and anyone can seek out your comments .
People can communicate in a neutral medium without worrying about immediate personal repercussions because then they do n't fear to speak their minds .
You do n't learn a lot when you can only see one shade in the spectrum , but on the internet you have everything , and this feels like a more realistic representation of what people think .
You can see peoples ' arguments instead of a finished product that can never be changed .
You see the etymology of peoples ' thoughts .
We have n't really had much structure in society , in terms of interpersonal relationships .
They are wildly different .
Personalities are wildly different .
We all have different goals and different reasons and different opinions .
Everyone has to learn about being on this planet together , but you are n't really privy to everyone 's personal process .
You just hear whatever comes out of their mouth at one given time , even though what they think , and what think they know , is constantly evolving .
The fact that you can observe all perspectives can help people learn about all of the different ways of thinking about something , and different ways of dealing with ways of thinking that are different than yours , but the internet is like a social equalizer .
You may have search rankings , and ad priorities , and certain computers will ship with a general default configuration , and you may have favorite bookmarks that you load up every day that may put a bias on what a given individual will be exposed to .
Invariably , however , people will find their way into many different areas of interest , which will present them with many different groups of people who will speak about things that they have picked up from many other places , and points of view are dispersed widely and vary widely , yet they are all available .
On web sites , you can have discussion forums with different topics that have different posts and within them , different threads , and different arguments .
On Wikipedia , you can move through any topic by clicking on the area of interest , and you can see how the article changed and why .
On Slashdot , you have people writing stories and comments and voting each other up .
On 2chan you have unmoderated discussions on a wide variety of interests .
Anyone can step in and drop some heavy knowledge , or they can blurt out an off-the-cuff remark , but we get way more variety than our every day communications , and we can seek out any topic we can come up with to get such perspectives .
I think it makes us healthier that we can see all that and take it in in a more unbiased manner .
It drives home the point that the truth is the truth no matter where it comes from , because bullshit is less tolerated and picked apart .
Conclusions may be drawn , but topics are forever evolving and nothing really ever stays the same on the internet .
Even though there 's a lot of stupid shit on the internet , I feel like I 'm learning a lot of important stuff that I could n't in school or a library , and even a lot that I can .
But it 's all easy and accessible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like the idea that anyone can publish something, anyone can remark on something, and anyone can seek out your comments.
People can communicate in a neutral medium without worrying about immediate personal repercussions because then they don't fear to speak their minds.
You don't learn a lot when you can only see one shade in the spectrum, but on the internet you have everything, and this feels like a more realistic representation of what people think.
You can see peoples' arguments instead of a finished product that can never be changed.
You see the etymology of peoples' thoughts.
We haven't really had much structure in society, in terms of interpersonal relationships.
They are wildly different.
Personalities are wildly different.
We all have different goals and different reasons and different opinions.
Everyone has to learn about being on this planet together, but you aren't really privy to everyone's personal process.
You just hear whatever comes out of their mouth at one given time, even though what they think, and what think they know, is constantly evolving.
The fact that you can observe all perspectives can help people learn about all of the different ways of thinking about something, and different ways of dealing with ways of thinking that are different than yours, but the internet is like a social equalizer.
You may have search rankings, and ad priorities, and certain computers will ship with a general default configuration, and you may have favorite bookmarks that you load up every day that may put a bias on what a given individual will be exposed to.
Invariably, however, people will find their way into many different areas of interest, which will present them with many different groups of people who will speak about things that they have picked up from many other places, and points of view are dispersed widely and vary widely, yet they are all available.
On web sites, you can have discussion forums with different topics that have different posts and within them, different threads, and different arguments.
On Wikipedia, you can move through any topic by clicking on the area of interest, and you can see how the article changed and why.
On Slashdot, you have people writing stories and comments and voting each other up.
On 2chan you have unmoderated discussions on a wide variety of interests.
Anyone can step in and drop some heavy knowledge, or they can blurt out an off-the-cuff remark, but we get way more variety than our every day communications, and we can seek out any topic we can come up with to get such perspectives.
I think it makes us healthier that we can see all that and take it in in a more unbiased manner.
It drives home the point that the truth is the truth no matter where it comes from, because bullshit is less tolerated and picked apart.
Conclusions may be drawn, but topics are forever evolving and nothing really ever stays the same on the internet.
Even though there's a lot of stupid shit on the internet, I feel like I'm learning a lot of important stuff that I couldn't in school or a library, and even a lot that I can.
But it's all easy and accessible.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28409333</id>
	<title>Re:How real is the knowledge in your head?</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1245582480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Ray Bradbury wrote some good books. One book in particular was truly great, providing a social commentary on the value of information and what it means to have open and free access. This makes him a man who was forward thinking for his time and perhaps means future societies will remember him.</p></div><p>Unfortunately, when he was writing that book, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit\_451#Censorship\_and\_the\_effects\_of\_mass\_media" title="wikipedia.org">it wasn't what he intended it to be about</a> [wikipedia.org]. So it makes him a not-so-forward-thinking man who happened to write a book that a lot of people interpreted to mean something much more important than it actually meant.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ray Bradbury wrote some good books .
One book in particular was truly great , providing a social commentary on the value of information and what it means to have open and free access .
This makes him a man who was forward thinking for his time and perhaps means future societies will remember him.Unfortunately , when he was writing that book , it was n't what he intended it to be about [ wikipedia.org ] .
So it makes him a not-so-forward-thinking man who happened to write a book that a lot of people interpreted to mean something much more important than it actually meant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ray Bradbury wrote some good books.
One book in particular was truly great, providing a social commentary on the value of information and what it means to have open and free access.
This makes him a man who was forward thinking for his time and perhaps means future societies will remember him.Unfortunately, when he was writing that book, it wasn't what he intended it to be about [wikipedia.org].
So it makes him a not-so-forward-thinking man who happened to write a book that a lot of people interpreted to mean something much more important than it actually meant.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404787</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28414781</id>
	<title>An 88-year-old man who hates the internet...</title>
	<author>incognito84</author>
	<datestamp>1245589200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why is everyone surprised?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is everyone surprised ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is everyone surprised?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28406573</id>
	<title>Re:To hell with Ray Bradbury.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245508440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bad idea.  The carbon load would contribute to global warming.</p><p>It is notable, nonetheless, that essentially all of us learned of Bradbury's remarks only via the internet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bad idea .
The carbon load would contribute to global warming.It is notable , nonetheless , that essentially all of us learned of Bradbury 's remarks only via the internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bad idea.
The carbon load would contribute to global warming.It is notable, nonetheless, that essentially all of us learned of Bradbury's remarks only via the internet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404485</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28408873</id>
	<title>The thing that libraries provide</title>
	<author>caywen</author>
	<datestamp>1245576720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Having a huge amount of physical books is great, but like everyone else has pointed out, it can't hope to match the raw amount of material on the Internet. But, amazingly, it does provide a lot of arcane stuff that you just won't find.</p><p>Try finding the January 1974 issue of Popular Mechanics online. Try finding the archived reports of the State Department for the last 50 years. Libraries are a veritable eBay of finding lost treasures of information.</p><p>I think it's the feeling of being surrounded by lost information that makes libraries such an interesting, satisfying place to study. Far more satisfying that in front of my plasma TV with my wifi laptop, getting distracted by So You Think You Can Dance.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Having a huge amount of physical books is great , but like everyone else has pointed out , it ca n't hope to match the raw amount of material on the Internet .
But , amazingly , it does provide a lot of arcane stuff that you just wo n't find.Try finding the January 1974 issue of Popular Mechanics online .
Try finding the archived reports of the State Department for the last 50 years .
Libraries are a veritable eBay of finding lost treasures of information.I think it 's the feeling of being surrounded by lost information that makes libraries such an interesting , satisfying place to study .
Far more satisfying that in front of my plasma TV with my wifi laptop , getting distracted by So You Think You Can Dance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having a huge amount of physical books is great, but like everyone else has pointed out, it can't hope to match the raw amount of material on the Internet.
But, amazingly, it does provide a lot of arcane stuff that you just won't find.Try finding the January 1974 issue of Popular Mechanics online.
Try finding the archived reports of the State Department for the last 50 years.
Libraries are a veritable eBay of finding lost treasures of information.I think it's the feeling of being surrounded by lost information that makes libraries such an interesting, satisfying place to study.
Far more satisfying that in front of my plasma TV with my wifi laptop, getting distracted by So You Think You Can Dance.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28409771</id>
	<title>the internet is a spy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245589020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Once you own a book, it's yours and nobody can take it away from you. But if you only read on the internet, then you are dependent on your ISP or other providers for access; you are effectively controlled by corporations and the government. Even if you read on the internet from internet cafes, there is a camera somewhere recording your face and your screen contents. Worse still, even when you are at the privacy of your own home with your own ISP connection, there is a government-mandated server somewhere recording every page you visit. So, they know what you read. They know what you think of them. And if they do not like it, you will become part of the national suicide or car accident statistics pretty quickly. The internet is a big spy that tips off the police every time you read a webpage.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Once you own a book , it 's yours and nobody can take it away from you .
But if you only read on the internet , then you are dependent on your ISP or other providers for access ; you are effectively controlled by corporations and the government .
Even if you read on the internet from internet cafes , there is a camera somewhere recording your face and your screen contents .
Worse still , even when you are at the privacy of your own home with your own ISP connection , there is a government-mandated server somewhere recording every page you visit .
So , they know what you read .
They know what you think of them .
And if they do not like it , you will become part of the national suicide or car accident statistics pretty quickly .
The internet is a big spy that tips off the police every time you read a webpage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Once you own a book, it's yours and nobody can take it away from you.
But if you only read on the internet, then you are dependent on your ISP or other providers for access; you are effectively controlled by corporations and the government.
Even if you read on the internet from internet cafes, there is a camera somewhere recording your face and your screen contents.
Worse still, even when you are at the privacy of your own home with your own ISP connection, there is a government-mandated server somewhere recording every page you visit.
So, they know what you read.
They know what you think of them.
And if they do not like it, you will become part of the national suicide or car accident statistics pretty quickly.
The internet is a big spy that tips off the police every time you read a webpage.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28406147</id>
	<title>Contrarian ~= reactionary</title>
	<author>rlseaman</author>
	<datestamp>1245505140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you normalize out the usual "tax" of Slashdot bullshit, this article has generated a better discussion than most.  That said, it is remarkable how many of the contributers appear to be far more reactionary than Bradbury himself is accused of being.  A couple of points:</p><p>1) Wouldn't it make more sense to read his anti-internet rant as provocative rhetoric in pursuit of a pro-library agenda?  After all, he also denigrates a college education in the same breath.  In nine decades of dealing with the media he likely has learned some tricks for gathering attention and staying on message.</p><p>2) And what about his stated distaste for universities?  Other than one or two home school proponents, nobody has even commented on that.</p><p>What does it say about Slashdotters that they jump to the defense of the role the internet plays as a static archive and ignore the dynamic role networked technologies (like Slashdot on a good day) can play in developing and extending online communities analogous to universities?  There are also far too many here who seem ready to accept unsubstantiated assertions about Bradbury's politics, while investing no weight to this widely regarded author's body of work.  Do yourself a favor and read a few of his books.</p><p>The remarkable thing here is not that an author would support libraries - in particular, that the author of Fahrenheit 451 would - but rather that members of this technology-aware community would have such an inert view of the internet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you normalize out the usual " tax " of Slashdot bullshit , this article has generated a better discussion than most .
That said , it is remarkable how many of the contributers appear to be far more reactionary than Bradbury himself is accused of being .
A couple of points : 1 ) Would n't it make more sense to read his anti-internet rant as provocative rhetoric in pursuit of a pro-library agenda ?
After all , he also denigrates a college education in the same breath .
In nine decades of dealing with the media he likely has learned some tricks for gathering attention and staying on message.2 ) And what about his stated distaste for universities ?
Other than one or two home school proponents , nobody has even commented on that.What does it say about Slashdotters that they jump to the defense of the role the internet plays as a static archive and ignore the dynamic role networked technologies ( like Slashdot on a good day ) can play in developing and extending online communities analogous to universities ?
There are also far too many here who seem ready to accept unsubstantiated assertions about Bradbury 's politics , while investing no weight to this widely regarded author 's body of work .
Do yourself a favor and read a few of his books.The remarkable thing here is not that an author would support libraries - in particular , that the author of Fahrenheit 451 would - but rather that members of this technology-aware community would have such an inert view of the internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you normalize out the usual "tax" of Slashdot bullshit, this article has generated a better discussion than most.
That said, it is remarkable how many of the contributers appear to be far more reactionary than Bradbury himself is accused of being.
A couple of points:1) Wouldn't it make more sense to read his anti-internet rant as provocative rhetoric in pursuit of a pro-library agenda?
After all, he also denigrates a college education in the same breath.
In nine decades of dealing with the media he likely has learned some tricks for gathering attention and staying on message.2) And what about his stated distaste for universities?
Other than one or two home school proponents, nobody has even commented on that.What does it say about Slashdotters that they jump to the defense of the role the internet plays as a static archive and ignore the dynamic role networked technologies (like Slashdot on a good day) can play in developing and extending online communities analogous to universities?
There are also far too many here who seem ready to accept unsubstantiated assertions about Bradbury's politics, while investing no weight to this widely regarded author's body of work.
Do yourself a favor and read a few of his books.The remarkable thing here is not that an author would support libraries - in particular, that the author of Fahrenheit 451 would - but rather that members of this technology-aware community would have such an inert view of the internet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404951</id>
	<title>Mr. Bradbury then spoke feelingly about...</title>
	<author>Chris Tucker</author>
	<datestamp>1245497640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... young people today, with their loud hair and long music, and their propensity for lounging in a most insouciant manner upon his lawn.</p><p>At this point in the diatribe, well known sci-fi writer and self-proclaimed "Master Storyteller" Mr. Harlan "I don't take a piss without getting paid" Ellison mounted his soapbox, two milk crates and a folding chair, thus barely getting his eyes above the seated audience. "You tell 'em, Ray! Fuck the Internet!" Mr. Ellison sputtered in a cracked and whiney voice.</p><p>Mr. Bradbury inquired after the publishing date of "The Last Dangerous Visions", whereupon Mr. Ellison threw his false teeth at Mr. Bradbury, whereupon the two aged scifi writers began to box each other about the head and shoulders.  The assembled crowd wagered upon who would be the first to fling the contents of their Depends at the other, while several witnesses used their iPhones to upload video of the struggle to YouTube. Others in the crowd were content to chant, "Codger Fight! Codger Fight!" at the geriatric combatants.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... young people today , with their loud hair and long music , and their propensity for lounging in a most insouciant manner upon his lawn.At this point in the diatribe , well known sci-fi writer and self-proclaimed " Master Storyteller " Mr. Harlan " I do n't take a piss without getting paid " Ellison mounted his soapbox , two milk crates and a folding chair , thus barely getting his eyes above the seated audience .
" You tell 'em , Ray !
Fuck the Internet !
" Mr. Ellison sputtered in a cracked and whiney voice.Mr .
Bradbury inquired after the publishing date of " The Last Dangerous Visions " , whereupon Mr. Ellison threw his false teeth at Mr. Bradbury , whereupon the two aged scifi writers began to box each other about the head and shoulders .
The assembled crowd wagered upon who would be the first to fling the contents of their Depends at the other , while several witnesses used their iPhones to upload video of the struggle to YouTube .
Others in the crowd were content to chant , " Codger Fight !
Codger Fight !
" at the geriatric combatants .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... young people today, with their loud hair and long music, and their propensity for lounging in a most insouciant manner upon his lawn.At this point in the diatribe, well known sci-fi writer and self-proclaimed "Master Storyteller" Mr. Harlan "I don't take a piss without getting paid" Ellison mounted his soapbox, two milk crates and a folding chair, thus barely getting his eyes above the seated audience.
"You tell 'em, Ray!
Fuck the Internet!
" Mr. Ellison sputtered in a cracked and whiney voice.Mr.
Bradbury inquired after the publishing date of "The Last Dangerous Visions", whereupon Mr. Ellison threw his false teeth at Mr. Bradbury, whereupon the two aged scifi writers began to box each other about the head and shoulders.
The assembled crowd wagered upon who would be the first to fling the contents of their Depends at the other, while several witnesses used their iPhones to upload video of the struggle to YouTube.
Others in the crowd were content to chant, "Codger Fight!
Codger Fight!
" at the geriatric combatants.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404423</id>
	<title>And in other news, old man shouts at cloud</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245493260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Old Man Ray is also a flaming Republican. Sad to think of it since his work is so enjoyable but that's the long and the short of it. He went apeshit over Fahrenheit 9-11.<br><i><br>"No. 1, he didn't ask (permission), and, No. 2, he took it - period," Bradbury tells PEOPLE. "Even if he did ask, what he has done is a crime."</i></p><p><i>Speaking from his Los Angeles home Wednesday, the 83-year-old author says he never would have allowed Moore to use the name, "because it doesn't belong to him. It belongs to me. I have several new editions of the book coming out this summer. I have a new film version of Fahrenheit 451 with Mel Gibson starring, and it is going into production sometime in the next six months."</i></p><p><i>Bradbury says that Moore, 50, contacted him only last Saturday - months after the controversial movie started making headlines.</i></p><p><i>"He was embarrassed because he didn't want to call me," says Bradbury, adding that he felt Moore was "forced into" making the call and that the filmmaker hasn't offered to screen the film for him.</i></p><p><i>"He didn't want to face me," says Bradbury. "He is supposedly a big fan of mine and read my work years ago. Now suddenly he has to call someone he has been reading for most of his life and apologize for what he did." </i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Old Man Ray is also a flaming Republican .
Sad to think of it since his work is so enjoyable but that 's the long and the short of it .
He went apeshit over Fahrenheit 9-11. " No .
1 , he did n't ask ( permission ) , and , No .
2 , he took it - period , " Bradbury tells PEOPLE .
" Even if he did ask , what he has done is a crime .
" Speaking from his Los Angeles home Wednesday , the 83-year-old author says he never would have allowed Moore to use the name , " because it does n't belong to him .
It belongs to me .
I have several new editions of the book coming out this summer .
I have a new film version of Fahrenheit 451 with Mel Gibson starring , and it is going into production sometime in the next six months .
" Bradbury says that Moore , 50 , contacted him only last Saturday - months after the controversial movie started making headlines .
" He was embarrassed because he did n't want to call me , " says Bradbury , adding that he felt Moore was " forced into " making the call and that the filmmaker has n't offered to screen the film for him .
" He did n't want to face me , " says Bradbury .
" He is supposedly a big fan of mine and read my work years ago .
Now suddenly he has to call someone he has been reading for most of his life and apologize for what he did .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Old Man Ray is also a flaming Republican.
Sad to think of it since his work is so enjoyable but that's the long and the short of it.
He went apeshit over Fahrenheit 9-11."No.
1, he didn't ask (permission), and, No.
2, he took it - period," Bradbury tells PEOPLE.
"Even if he did ask, what he has done is a crime.
"Speaking from his Los Angeles home Wednesday, the 83-year-old author says he never would have allowed Moore to use the name, "because it doesn't belong to him.
It belongs to me.
I have several new editions of the book coming out this summer.
I have a new film version of Fahrenheit 451 with Mel Gibson starring, and it is going into production sometime in the next six months.
"Bradbury says that Moore, 50, contacted him only last Saturday - months after the controversial movie started making headlines.
"He was embarrassed because he didn't want to call me," says Bradbury, adding that he felt Moore was "forced into" making the call and that the filmmaker hasn't offered to screen the film for him.
"He didn't want to face me," says Bradbury.
"He is supposedly a big fan of mine and read my work years ago.
Now suddenly he has to call someone he has been reading for most of his life and apologize for what he did.
" </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405121</id>
	<title>Ray Bradbury is a great writer... here's an idea</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245498720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Among Mr. Bradbury's passions, none <i>burn quite as hot</i> as his lifelong enthusiasm for halls of books..."</p><p>Whoever wrote that article has a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit\_451" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">great taste for irony</a> [wikipedia.org].</p><p>Anyway, if Ray Bradbury wants to hate the internet, that's fine, but I think he's missing the good parts that are in between the bad parts.  For example, it's a much more interactive and creative medium than the passive one he derides all the time (i.e. TV).  For that matter, it's much more interactive than the "author writes books, everyone else reads" mode of communication he prefers.  I can also <a href="http://catalog.vencolibrary.org/ipac20/ipac.jsp?profile=dial" title="vencolibrary.org" rel="nofollow">search the collections of most libraries online</a> [vencolibrary.org], and then request the books -- at far less cost and trouble than the traditional paper ways allowed.  It is great for people who can't physically get to a library easily.  The internet is great for doing research -- not comprehensive, but useful as a start.  Finally, it is the way to find and buy the most obscure used books from anywhere in the world, and a great means for making books available FOR FREE once their copyright expires to the public domain.  Even for his favorite thing in the world -- books -- the internet is really useful.</p><p>He's an elderly gentleman and apparently set in his ways.  Maybe he just hasn't thought enough about it.</p><p>Heck, I'm living in a different country and across the continent.  Without the internet, there was nearly a zero chance I'd ever have read the article about him in the New York Times or in the Ventura County Star, and thus learned about financial situation at the <a href="http://www.vencolibrary.org/libraries/wright.html" title="vencolibrary.org" rel="nofollow">H.P. Wright Ventura County Library</a> [vencolibrary.org].  And, look, I can find all the details about what goes on at that library.</p><p>The Internet by itself doesn't matter so much.  It's the people that are connected to it that matter and what they can do en masse.  I'm tempted to make <a href="http://savewrightlibrary.org/?cat=26" title="savewrightlibrary.org" rel="nofollow">donation to his beloved library</a> [savewrightlibrary.org], and send them a note saying "Please let Ray Bradbury know the Internet does matter!"  (They accept donations by credit card and paypal there).  Maybe if he saw a demonstration of why the internet mattered, it might sink in?</p><p>From a <a href="http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2009/jun/19/ray-bradbury-to-feature-in-wright-library/" title="venturacountystar.com" rel="nofollow">different article</a> [venturacountystar.com], also in the internet: "Donations also can be sent to Save Wright Library, P.O. Box 403, Ventura, CA 93002. Checks should be made out to Save Wright Library."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Among Mr. Bradbury 's passions , none burn quite as hot as his lifelong enthusiasm for halls of books... " Whoever wrote that article has a great taste for irony [ wikipedia.org ] .Anyway , if Ray Bradbury wants to hate the internet , that 's fine , but I think he 's missing the good parts that are in between the bad parts .
For example , it 's a much more interactive and creative medium than the passive one he derides all the time ( i.e .
TV ) . For that matter , it 's much more interactive than the " author writes books , everyone else reads " mode of communication he prefers .
I can also search the collections of most libraries online [ vencolibrary.org ] , and then request the books -- at far less cost and trouble than the traditional paper ways allowed .
It is great for people who ca n't physically get to a library easily .
The internet is great for doing research -- not comprehensive , but useful as a start .
Finally , it is the way to find and buy the most obscure used books from anywhere in the world , and a great means for making books available FOR FREE once their copyright expires to the public domain .
Even for his favorite thing in the world -- books -- the internet is really useful.He 's an elderly gentleman and apparently set in his ways .
Maybe he just has n't thought enough about it.Heck , I 'm living in a different country and across the continent .
Without the internet , there was nearly a zero chance I 'd ever have read the article about him in the New York Times or in the Ventura County Star , and thus learned about financial situation at the H.P .
Wright Ventura County Library [ vencolibrary.org ] .
And , look , I can find all the details about what goes on at that library.The Internet by itself does n't matter so much .
It 's the people that are connected to it that matter and what they can do en masse .
I 'm tempted to make donation to his beloved library [ savewrightlibrary.org ] , and send them a note saying " Please let Ray Bradbury know the Internet does matter !
" ( They accept donations by credit card and paypal there ) .
Maybe if he saw a demonstration of why the internet mattered , it might sink in ? From a different article [ venturacountystar.com ] , also in the internet : " Donations also can be sent to Save Wright Library , P.O .
Box 403 , Ventura , CA 93002 .
Checks should be made out to Save Wright Library .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Among Mr. Bradbury's passions, none burn quite as hot as his lifelong enthusiasm for halls of books..."Whoever wrote that article has a great taste for irony [wikipedia.org].Anyway, if Ray Bradbury wants to hate the internet, that's fine, but I think he's missing the good parts that are in between the bad parts.
For example, it's a much more interactive and creative medium than the passive one he derides all the time (i.e.
TV).  For that matter, it's much more interactive than the "author writes books, everyone else reads" mode of communication he prefers.
I can also search the collections of most libraries online [vencolibrary.org], and then request the books -- at far less cost and trouble than the traditional paper ways allowed.
It is great for people who can't physically get to a library easily.
The internet is great for doing research -- not comprehensive, but useful as a start.
Finally, it is the way to find and buy the most obscure used books from anywhere in the world, and a great means for making books available FOR FREE once their copyright expires to the public domain.
Even for his favorite thing in the world -- books -- the internet is really useful.He's an elderly gentleman and apparently set in his ways.
Maybe he just hasn't thought enough about it.Heck, I'm living in a different country and across the continent.
Without the internet, there was nearly a zero chance I'd ever have read the article about him in the New York Times or in the Ventura County Star, and thus learned about financial situation at the H.P.
Wright Ventura County Library [vencolibrary.org].
And, look, I can find all the details about what goes on at that library.The Internet by itself doesn't matter so much.
It's the people that are connected to it that matter and what they can do en masse.
I'm tempted to make donation to his beloved library [savewrightlibrary.org], and send them a note saying "Please let Ray Bradbury know the Internet does matter!
"  (They accept donations by credit card and paypal there).
Maybe if he saw a demonstration of why the internet mattered, it might sink in?From a different article [venturacountystar.com], also in the internet: "Donations also can be sent to Save Wright Library, P.O.
Box 403, Ventura, CA 93002.
Checks should be made out to Save Wright Library.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405447</id>
	<title>Re:LEARN WITH B.O.O.K.</title>
	<author>selven</author>
	<datestamp>1245500640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nice and clever, but it completely ignores:<br>
<br>
1) Storage considerations (an average paperback is about 1 MB, so you can either fit 100,000 of them in a storage room or digitize them and keep them on a pocket hard drive.<br>
<br>
2) Backups - paperbacks are notoriously difficult to backup. Good for the publisher, bad for everyone else.<br>
<br>
3) No search function (this would be EXTREMELY useful, especially in a school environment, and dictionaries. I don't know how people can stand shuffling through paper dictionaries when computer ones take 2-5 seconds per word)<br>
<br>
3.1) Poor random access - with an e-book, you can skip straight to chapter 17, or page 325. In a book, you need to flip through all those pages, overshoot your target, flip back one page at a time, try to get 2 sheets of paper to stop sticking from each other, and only then do you get where you want. Somewhat fixable with bookmarks, but that doesn't cover all the reasons why you might need random access.<br>
<br>
4) Choice of how to read it. A book must be accepted as given, with an e-book you can shrink the text for faster reading, expand the text for the visibility-impaired, make it green on black because hacker literature is supposed to be read that way, you can even with the right hardware convert the entire thing into braille.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nice and clever , but it completely ignores : 1 ) Storage considerations ( an average paperback is about 1 MB , so you can either fit 100,000 of them in a storage room or digitize them and keep them on a pocket hard drive .
2 ) Backups - paperbacks are notoriously difficult to backup .
Good for the publisher , bad for everyone else .
3 ) No search function ( this would be EXTREMELY useful , especially in a school environment , and dictionaries .
I do n't know how people can stand shuffling through paper dictionaries when computer ones take 2-5 seconds per word ) 3.1 ) Poor random access - with an e-book , you can skip straight to chapter 17 , or page 325 .
In a book , you need to flip through all those pages , overshoot your target , flip back one page at a time , try to get 2 sheets of paper to stop sticking from each other , and only then do you get where you want .
Somewhat fixable with bookmarks , but that does n't cover all the reasons why you might need random access .
4 ) Choice of how to read it .
A book must be accepted as given , with an e-book you can shrink the text for faster reading , expand the text for the visibility-impaired , make it green on black because hacker literature is supposed to be read that way , you can even with the right hardware convert the entire thing into braille .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nice and clever, but it completely ignores:

1) Storage considerations (an average paperback is about 1 MB, so you can either fit 100,000 of them in a storage room or digitize them and keep them on a pocket hard drive.
2) Backups - paperbacks are notoriously difficult to backup.
Good for the publisher, bad for everyone else.
3) No search function (this would be EXTREMELY useful, especially in a school environment, and dictionaries.
I don't know how people can stand shuffling through paper dictionaries when computer ones take 2-5 seconds per word)

3.1) Poor random access - with an e-book, you can skip straight to chapter 17, or page 325.
In a book, you need to flip through all those pages, overshoot your target, flip back one page at a time, try to get 2 sheets of paper to stop sticking from each other, and only then do you get where you want.
Somewhat fixable with bookmarks, but that doesn't cover all the reasons why you might need random access.
4) Choice of how to read it.
A book must be accepted as given, with an e-book you can shrink the text for faster reading, expand the text for the visibility-impaired, make it green on black because hacker literature is supposed to be read that way, you can even with the right hardware convert the entire thing into braille.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404851</id>
	<title>Grandpa Simpson has new friend</title>
	<author>geofgibson</author>
	<datestamp>1245496920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Gal darn kids and their newfangled information technology<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... where's my newspaper?  Hey you!  Get off the grass!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Gal darn kids and their newfangled information technology ... where 's my newspaper ?
Hey you !
Get off the grass !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gal darn kids and their newfangled information technology ... where's my newspaper?
Hey you!
Get off the grass!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404581</id>
	<title>Sure it's a distraction but</title>
	<author>stuntpope</author>
	<datestamp>1245494640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, the Internet can be a distraction, and it can be a wealth of information. It's up to the person using it. Just as I could walk into a library intending to learn something valuable, but be waylaid by the periodicals section - ooh, look, the New Yorker! Bicycling Magazine! Road &amp; Track! and suddenly my hours have wasted away on trivia.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , the Internet can be a distraction , and it can be a wealth of information .
It 's up to the person using it .
Just as I could walk into a library intending to learn something valuable , but be waylaid by the periodicals section - ooh , look , the New Yorker !
Bicycling Magazine !
Road &amp; Track !
and suddenly my hours have wasted away on trivia .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, the Internet can be a distraction, and it can be a wealth of information.
It's up to the person using it.
Just as I could walk into a library intending to learn something valuable, but be waylaid by the periodicals section - ooh, look, the New Yorker!
Bicycling Magazine!
Road &amp; Track!
and suddenly my hours have wasted away on trivia.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405359</id>
	<title>That's the problem with people getting old</title>
	<author>thetoadwarrior</author>
	<datestamp>1245500100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I like libraries and the internet as do most people, I think.
<br> <br>
I'm not surprised he thinks that way. There is definitely something about most people when they get old. They start getting grumpy, hating everything that's different from their youth and generally losing the ability to adapt which generally turns them into hypocrites as well.
<br> <br>
I can only hope this doesn't happen to me and I don't think it will but if I do turn into an old miserable shit, I hope I realise it soon enough and snap out of it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I like libraries and the internet as do most people , I think .
I 'm not surprised he thinks that way .
There is definitely something about most people when they get old .
They start getting grumpy , hating everything that 's different from their youth and generally losing the ability to adapt which generally turns them into hypocrites as well .
I can only hope this does n't happen to me and I do n't think it will but if I do turn into an old miserable shit , I hope I realise it soon enough and snap out of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like libraries and the internet as do most people, I think.
I'm not surprised he thinks that way.
There is definitely something about most people when they get old.
They start getting grumpy, hating everything that's different from their youth and generally losing the ability to adapt which generally turns them into hypocrites as well.
I can only hope this doesn't happen to me and I don't think it will but if I do turn into an old miserable shit, I hope I realise it soon enough and snap out of it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404987</id>
	<title>Sci-fi writer's curse</title>
	<author>gmuslera</author>
	<datestamp>1245497820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>... is to not accept the future when it finally reaches us.<br><br>What internet gives us today would have been called 40-50 years ago "sci-fi". Is not an utopia, nor almost pure abstraction that could be painted fully black or white as treated by most of the genre, but is the future or at least an important part of it, something that you can point and say that is a game changer from whatever you had in old times.</htmltext>
<tokenext>... is to not accept the future when it finally reaches us.What internet gives us today would have been called 40-50 years ago " sci-fi " .
Is not an utopia , nor almost pure abstraction that could be painted fully black or white as treated by most of the genre , but is the future or at least an important part of it , something that you can point and say that is a game changer from whatever you had in old times .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... is to not accept the future when it finally reaches us.What internet gives us today would have been called 40-50 years ago "sci-fi".
Is not an utopia, nor almost pure abstraction that could be painted fully black or white as treated by most of the genre, but is the future or at least an important part of it, something that you can point and say that is a game changer from whatever you had in old times.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404631</id>
	<title>I Respect Mr. Bradbury but...</title>
	<author>Nom du Keyboard</author>
	<datestamp>1245495120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I respect Mr. Bradbury and his contributions to the literature of SF a lot, but...<br> <br>
His comments here are like JRR Tolkein famously proclaiming that his Lord of the Rings was "too good" to appear in paperback books.  Fortunately Donald A. Wollheim proved him wrong, while making him rich and famous at the same time. I was introduced to LotR in paperback, and might not have found it otherwise.<br> <br>
The Internet isn't going away, and the future of eBooks is as assured as the future of music as individual tracks on iPod players.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I respect Mr. Bradbury and his contributions to the literature of SF a lot , but.. . His comments here are like JRR Tolkein famously proclaiming that his Lord of the Rings was " too good " to appear in paperback books .
Fortunately Donald A. Wollheim proved him wrong , while making him rich and famous at the same time .
I was introduced to LotR in paperback , and might not have found it otherwise .
The Internet is n't going away , and the future of eBooks is as assured as the future of music as individual tracks on iPod players .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I respect Mr. Bradbury and his contributions to the literature of SF a lot, but... 
His comments here are like JRR Tolkein famously proclaiming that his Lord of the Rings was "too good" to appear in paperback books.
Fortunately Donald A. Wollheim proved him wrong, while making him rich and famous at the same time.
I was introduced to LotR in paperback, and might not have found it otherwise.
The Internet isn't going away, and the future of eBooks is as assured as the future of music as individual tracks on iPod players.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28408129</id>
	<title>Maybe so...</title>
	<author>Malibee</author>
	<datestamp>1245523740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Internet is no less distracting and ephemeral than your works of fiction, Mr. Bradbury, although chances are good your comments were misinterpreted and taken out of context.</p><p>I find the comments about the longevity of paper to be very interesting. The Internet is a wonderfully fascinating and useful tool, but it is inherently fragile in numerous ways. Most fundamentally, it relies on \_electricity\_, produced in large quantity. This is a non-trivial task. Then comes the process of manufacturing the hardware, the silicon wafers and circuit boards, and so on...</p><p>I believe the global communication network will be our gift to humanity, perhaps as important as Renaissance, but its essential fragility is sad and disturbing to me. I would like our gift to have the durability and solidity of the Pyramids. A server farm or a fiber bundle is a shabby monument indeed for our culture and civilization. Perhaps our monument will be the landfill...</p><p>Still, I think there is hope: the structure is not without beauty, and has the potential to become a true artform, in the same vein as architecture. The space is virtual, not physical, but the concepts are the same: useful space that is also beautiful, even monumental.</p><p>I hope to see great things develop in the realm of information art and architecture. It's an exciting time to be alive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Internet is no less distracting and ephemeral than your works of fiction , Mr. Bradbury , although chances are good your comments were misinterpreted and taken out of context.I find the comments about the longevity of paper to be very interesting .
The Internet is a wonderfully fascinating and useful tool , but it is inherently fragile in numerous ways .
Most fundamentally , it relies on \ _electricity \ _ , produced in large quantity .
This is a non-trivial task .
Then comes the process of manufacturing the hardware , the silicon wafers and circuit boards , and so on...I believe the global communication network will be our gift to humanity , perhaps as important as Renaissance , but its essential fragility is sad and disturbing to me .
I would like our gift to have the durability and solidity of the Pyramids .
A server farm or a fiber bundle is a shabby monument indeed for our culture and civilization .
Perhaps our monument will be the landfill...Still , I think there is hope : the structure is not without beauty , and has the potential to become a true artform , in the same vein as architecture .
The space is virtual , not physical , but the concepts are the same : useful space that is also beautiful , even monumental.I hope to see great things develop in the realm of information art and architecture .
It 's an exciting time to be alive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Internet is no less distracting and ephemeral than your works of fiction, Mr. Bradbury, although chances are good your comments were misinterpreted and taken out of context.I find the comments about the longevity of paper to be very interesting.
The Internet is a wonderfully fascinating and useful tool, but it is inherently fragile in numerous ways.
Most fundamentally, it relies on \_electricity\_, produced in large quantity.
This is a non-trivial task.
Then comes the process of manufacturing the hardware, the silicon wafers and circuit boards, and so on...I believe the global communication network will be our gift to humanity, perhaps as important as Renaissance, but its essential fragility is sad and disturbing to me.
I would like our gift to have the durability and solidity of the Pyramids.
A server farm or a fiber bundle is a shabby monument indeed for our culture and civilization.
Perhaps our monument will be the landfill...Still, I think there is hope: the structure is not without beauty, and has the potential to become a true artform, in the same vein as architecture.
The space is virtual, not physical, but the concepts are the same: useful space that is also beautiful, even monumental.I hope to see great things develop in the realm of information art and architecture.
It's an exciting time to be alive.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28406095</id>
	<title>In a related story...</title>
	<author>jcr</author>
	<datestamp>1245504720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mr. Bradbury shook his cane at the reporter, and demanded that he remove himself from Mr. Bradbury's lawn.</p><p>-jcr</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mr. Bradbury shook his cane at the reporter , and demanded that he remove himself from Mr. Bradbury 's lawn.-jcr</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mr. Bradbury shook his cane at the reporter, and demanded that he remove himself from Mr. Bradbury's lawn.-jcr</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404717</id>
	<title>Re:The truth</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245495780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hate the internet and libraries.</p><p>Why am I here?<br>I hate myself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hate the internet and libraries.Why am I here ? I hate myself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hate the internet and libraries.Why am I here?I hate myself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404487</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404549</id>
	<title>Re:And in other news, old man shouts at cloud</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245494520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Moore is kind of an ass, and will be forgotten long before Bradbury is, but I thought that film title was fair use.  Nobody would confuse "Fahrenheit 911" with one of Bradbury's works, even before seeing the movie.  It was a rather clever allusion to a classic work of fiction, whose author happens to be alive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Moore is kind of an ass , and will be forgotten long before Bradbury is , but I thought that film title was fair use .
Nobody would confuse " Fahrenheit 911 " with one of Bradbury 's works , even before seeing the movie .
It was a rather clever allusion to a classic work of fiction , whose author happens to be alive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Moore is kind of an ass, and will be forgotten long before Bradbury is, but I thought that film title was fair use.
Nobody would confuse "Fahrenheit 911" with one of Bradbury's works, even before seeing the movie.
It was a rather clever allusion to a classic work of fiction, whose author happens to be alive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404423</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405335</id>
	<title>So he hates the internet and loves books, hmm...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245500040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Put books on the internet. That'll confuse him.</p><p>Oh, wait...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Put books on the internet .
That 'll confuse him.Oh , wait.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Put books on the internet.
That'll confuse him.Oh, wait...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405685</id>
	<title>Re:Libraries are public, websites are (usually) no</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245502020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>That is a problem with the web, not with the internet. I agree that it desperately needs to be fixed, but I am unaware of any good solutions. Freenet distributes content but at a great cost of speed and usability.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That is a problem with the web , not with the internet .
I agree that it desperately needs to be fixed , but I am unaware of any good solutions .
Freenet distributes content but at a great cost of speed and usability .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is a problem with the web, not with the internet.
I agree that it desperately needs to be fixed, but I am unaware of any good solutions.
Freenet distributes content but at a great cost of speed and usability.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404633</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404525</id>
	<title>A series of tubes in the air?</title>
	<author>Nakor BlueRider</author>
	<datestamp>1245494160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So the Internet is a series of tubes in the air somewhere...?</p><p>OMG... the Internet is in the Mushroom Kingdom!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So the Internet is a series of tubes in the air somewhere... ? OMG... the Internet is in the Mushroom Kingdom !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So the Internet is a series of tubes in the air somewhere...?OMG... the Internet is in the Mushroom Kingdom!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28413267</id>
	<title>Re:And in other news, old man shouts at cloud</title>
	<author>KingAlanI</author>
	<datestamp>1245576480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>True.<br>I recall a MAD article entitled "What Democrats Believe / What Republicans Believe"; one of the lines was something lie "Only Democrats believe that our big fat partisan gasbag [Moore] is better than their big fat partisan gasbag [Limbaugh]"</p><p>I'm closer to Moore than Limbaugh, but I can still recognize the (snarky) truth of such a statement.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>True.I recall a MAD article entitled " What Democrats Believe / What Republicans Believe " ; one of the lines was something lie " Only Democrats believe that our big fat partisan gasbag [ Moore ] is better than their big fat partisan gasbag [ Limbaugh ] " I 'm closer to Moore than Limbaugh , but I can still recognize the ( snarky ) truth of such a statement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>True.I recall a MAD article entitled "What Democrats Believe / What Republicans Believe"; one of the lines was something lie "Only Democrats believe that our big fat partisan gasbag [Moore] is better than their big fat partisan gasbag [Limbaugh]"I'm closer to Moore than Limbaugh, but I can still recognize the (snarky) truth of such a statement.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404585</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28408709</id>
	<title>hello?!?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245617520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe cold calling 89 year olds isn't the most effective way to do this thing?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe cold calling 89 year olds is n't the most effective way to do this thing ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe cold calling 89 year olds isn't the most effective way to do this thing?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404665</id>
	<title>Re:"In the air?" Come on!</title>
	<author>Quantos</author>
	<datestamp>1245495360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can curl up in my easy chair with my dog(thank god he's a small dog) and a good book.  It's incredibly awkward to do the same with a laptop.  I do realize that smaller and probably far less awkward technology exists for reading e-books, but why would I purchase some piece of tech to do what the books I already own do.  True, I could always just use it for new books, but I wouldn't.   To be honest I prefer the way that an actual book feels in my hands.<br> <br>People talk about reading books online or on a computer and I just don't get it, probably a lot like Mr. Bradbury.  I'm not slamming the alternatives and most people would know that just from reading what I have taken the time to write here, but on Slashdot there are some really dim people, so I'm stating this for them<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)<br> <br>I am curious as to why Mr. Bradbury is being ridiculed for his opinion though.  Some of the opinions that I see on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. are far more ridiculous....</htmltext>
<tokenext>I can curl up in my easy chair with my dog ( thank god he 's a small dog ) and a good book .
It 's incredibly awkward to do the same with a laptop .
I do realize that smaller and probably far less awkward technology exists for reading e-books , but why would I purchase some piece of tech to do what the books I already own do .
True , I could always just use it for new books , but I would n't .
To be honest I prefer the way that an actual book feels in my hands .
People talk about reading books online or on a computer and I just do n't get it , probably a lot like Mr. Bradbury. I 'm not slamming the alternatives and most people would know that just from reading what I have taken the time to write here , but on Slashdot there are some really dim people , so I 'm stating this for them : ) I am curious as to why Mr. Bradbury is being ridiculed for his opinion though .
Some of the opinions that I see on / .
are far more ridiculous... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can curl up in my easy chair with my dog(thank god he's a small dog) and a good book.
It's incredibly awkward to do the same with a laptop.
I do realize that smaller and probably far less awkward technology exists for reading e-books, but why would I purchase some piece of tech to do what the books I already own do.
True, I could always just use it for new books, but I wouldn't.
To be honest I prefer the way that an actual book feels in my hands.
People talk about reading books online or on a computer and I just don't get it, probably a lot like Mr. Bradbury.  I'm not slamming the alternatives and most people would know that just from reading what I have taken the time to write here, but on Slashdot there are some really dim people, so I'm stating this for them :) I am curious as to why Mr. Bradbury is being ridiculed for his opinion though.
Some of the opinions that I see on /.
are far more ridiculous....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404527</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28407313</id>
	<title>The Internet is not the Web</title>
	<author>improfane</author>
	<datestamp>1245515760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The internet is not the web. I agree with him: the web has a massive noise to signal ratio. There are massive problems with spam, quality and advertising that reduce its effectiveness.</p><p>I would rather read a text book on a subject than use the web. What about you?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The internet is not the web .
I agree with him : the web has a massive noise to signal ratio .
There are massive problems with spam , quality and advertising that reduce its effectiveness.I would rather read a text book on a subject than use the web .
What about you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The internet is not the web.
I agree with him: the web has a massive noise to signal ratio.
There are massive problems with spam, quality and advertising that reduce its effectiveness.I would rather read a text book on a subject than use the web.
What about you?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28406155</id>
	<title>This really isn't surprising</title>
	<author>fooslacker</author>
	<datestamp>1245505200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It isn't really all that surprising that an author who was educated in and made his life writing has nostalgic feelings about a place that was instrumental in his life.  The fact that he hates the internet is no more surprising and is likely just part of a generational gap.  People/Companies who master one system will always resist the next one, especially when the next one does not improve on the old one for the niche part they have mastered.  This is just an old master shaking his cane at the young upstarts and being upset that they don't respect what he accomplished and more to the point how he accomplished it and one day the large majority of us will being doing the same thing.  Just because you're visionary one day doesn't mean that most don't become the inertial force against the new visionaries the next.  It is the rare person that can adapt and shift and remain visionary through more than a few changes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is n't really all that surprising that an author who was educated in and made his life writing has nostalgic feelings about a place that was instrumental in his life .
The fact that he hates the internet is no more surprising and is likely just part of a generational gap .
People/Companies who master one system will always resist the next one , especially when the next one does not improve on the old one for the niche part they have mastered .
This is just an old master shaking his cane at the young upstarts and being upset that they do n't respect what he accomplished and more to the point how he accomplished it and one day the large majority of us will being doing the same thing .
Just because you 're visionary one day does n't mean that most do n't become the inertial force against the new visionaries the next .
It is the rare person that can adapt and shift and remain visionary through more than a few changes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It isn't really all that surprising that an author who was educated in and made his life writing has nostalgic feelings about a place that was instrumental in his life.
The fact that he hates the internet is no more surprising and is likely just part of a generational gap.
People/Companies who master one system will always resist the next one, especially when the next one does not improve on the old one for the niche part they have mastered.
This is just an old master shaking his cane at the young upstarts and being upset that they don't respect what he accomplished and more to the point how he accomplished it and one day the large majority of us will being doing the same thing.
Just because you're visionary one day doesn't mean that most don't become the inertial force against the new visionaries the next.
It is the rare person that can adapt and shift and remain visionary through more than a few changes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28425163</id>
	<title>Re:And in other news, old man shouts at cloud</title>
	<author>aceofspades1217</author>
	<datestamp>1245695760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Honestly Micheal Moore is a pretty massive douche. As a liberal I despise Moore almost as much (if not just as much) as I despire O'Reiley. They are both closed minded idiots that only see one side of the issues.</p><p>I am a staunch liberal but I am not afraid of criticizing liberal officials. I also think fiscal conservatism is much better than fiscal liberalism.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Honestly Micheal Moore is a pretty massive douche .
As a liberal I despise Moore almost as much ( if not just as much ) as I despire O'Reiley .
They are both closed minded idiots that only see one side of the issues.I am a staunch liberal but I am not afraid of criticizing liberal officials .
I also think fiscal conservatism is much better than fiscal liberalism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Honestly Micheal Moore is a pretty massive douche.
As a liberal I despise Moore almost as much (if not just as much) as I despire O'Reiley.
They are both closed minded idiots that only see one side of the issues.I am a staunch liberal but I am not afraid of criticizing liberal officials.
I also think fiscal conservatism is much better than fiscal liberalism.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404423</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405873</id>
	<title>This is fantastic news!</title>
	<author>CuteSteveJobs</author>
	<datestamp>1245503160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I didn't even realize Mr. Bradbury was still alive!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I did n't even realize Mr. Bradbury was still alive !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I didn't even realize Mr. Bradbury was still alive!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404487</id>
	<title>The truth</title>
	<author>zazenation</author>
	<datestamp>1245493800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ray loves libraries but hates the internet...<br>I love libraries and the internet...<br>All we need now are someone who loves the internet and hates libraries and another who hates both libraries and the internet and we can have ourselves a fully populated 2x2 truth table.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ray loves libraries but hates the internet...I love libraries and the internet...All we need now are someone who loves the internet and hates libraries and another who hates both libraries and the internet and we can have ourselves a fully populated 2x2 truth table .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ray loves libraries but hates the internet...I love libraries and the internet...All we need now are someone who loves the internet and hates libraries and another who hates both libraries and the internet and we can have ourselves a fully populated 2x2 truth table.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404679</id>
	<title>Say What You Really Think</title>
	<author>Nom du Keyboard</author>
	<datestamp>1245495420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Bradbury a Luddite - who woulda thunk?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bradbury a Luddite - who woulda thunk ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bradbury a Luddite - who woulda thunk?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28406203</id>
	<title>Who needs college?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245505500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>'I don't believe in colleges and universities. I believe in the internet because most students don't have any money. When I graduated from high school, it was during the Depression and we had no money. I couldn't go to college, so I went to on the internet seven days a week for 10 years.'</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>'I do n't believe in colleges and universities .
I believe in the internet because most students do n't have any money .
When I graduated from high school , it was during the Depression and we had no money .
I could n't go to college , so I went to on the internet seven days a week for 10 years .
'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'I don't believe in colleges and universities.
I believe in the internet because most students don't have any money.
When I graduated from high school, it was during the Depression and we had no money.
I couldn't go to college, so I went to on the internet seven days a week for 10 years.
'</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28407765</id>
	<title>lincoln was a republican</title>
	<author>circletimessquare</author>
	<datestamp>1245520020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>things can change a lot in a few decades</p><p>just ask the people in tehran revolting against a regime that was established 30 years ago in a revolution of the people</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>things can change a lot in a few decadesjust ask the people in tehran revolting against a regime that was established 30 years ago in a revolution of the people</tokentext>
<sentencetext>things can change a lot in a few decadesjust ask the people in tehran revolting against a regime that was established 30 years ago in a revolution of the people</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404423</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404815</id>
	<title>Farhenheit 451</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245496620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Did anyone actually read this book?<br>Do you know what he foresaw with the loss of the printed word?<br>Please at least check out the cliffs notes, for heaven's sake.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did anyone actually read this book ? Do you know what he foresaw with the loss of the printed word ? Please at least check out the cliffs notes , for heaven 's sake .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did anyone actually read this book?Do you know what he foresaw with the loss of the printed word?Please at least check out the cliffs notes, for heaven's sake.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405985</id>
	<title>What Distraction?</title>
	<author>drwhite</author>
	<datestamp>1245504000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"The Internet is a big distraction"</p></div><p>

Thats why I look at internet porn!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" The Internet is a big distraction " Thats why I look at internet porn !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The Internet is a big distraction"

Thats why I look at internet porn!
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404913</id>
	<title>newsflash: old man hates new things!</title>
	<author>bigbigbison</author>
	<datestamp>1245497400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Bradbury wrote some really good stories but that doesn't prevent him from exhibiting old man syndrome. He probably wants the kids off his yard too...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bradbury wrote some really good stories but that does n't prevent him from exhibiting old man syndrome .
He probably wants the kids off his yard too.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bradbury wrote some really good stories but that doesn't prevent him from exhibiting old man syndrome.
He probably wants the kids off his yard too...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404603</id>
	<title>Libraries</title>
	<author>girlintraining</author>
	<datestamp>1245494940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I still go to the library-- Because I'm poor, and need to get my e-mail and stay in touch with friends online, search for jobs, and more. To the man who calls the internet less worthwhile than the internet: Sir, how does it feel being a dinosaur? Our generation is the first to realize that we will never be able to reach a point in our lives where we can afford to be out of date and set in our ways. The internet is largely responsible for that, because it ensures that we can share our collective insights and experiences with each other and the world almost instantly. Now get off <i>my</i> lawn--I mean, LCD.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I still go to the library-- Because I 'm poor , and need to get my e-mail and stay in touch with friends online , search for jobs , and more .
To the man who calls the internet less worthwhile than the internet : Sir , how does it feel being a dinosaur ?
Our generation is the first to realize that we will never be able to reach a point in our lives where we can afford to be out of date and set in our ways .
The internet is largely responsible for that , because it ensures that we can share our collective insights and experiences with each other and the world almost instantly .
Now get off my lawn--I mean , LCD .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I still go to the library-- Because I'm poor, and need to get my e-mail and stay in touch with friends online, search for jobs, and more.
To the man who calls the internet less worthwhile than the internet: Sir, how does it feel being a dinosaur?
Our generation is the first to realize that we will never be able to reach a point in our lives where we can afford to be out of date and set in our ways.
The internet is largely responsible for that, because it ensures that we can share our collective insights and experiences with each other and the world almost instantly.
Now get off my lawn--I mean, LCD.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405521</id>
	<title>At least the Internet exists.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245501060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><b>"It's distracting. It's meaningless; it's not real. It's in the air somewhere."</b></p><p>Sounds like he's describing that fictional heaven that crazy old kooks seem to believe in.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" It 's distracting .
It 's meaningless ; it 's not real .
It 's in the air somewhere .
" Sounds like he 's describing that fictional heaven that crazy old kooks seem to believe in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"It's distracting.
It's meaningless; it's not real.
It's in the air somewhere.
"Sounds like he's describing that fictional heaven that crazy old kooks seem to believe in.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405157</id>
	<title>Obligatory Max Headroom</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245498900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Blank Reg: "It's a book. It's a non-volatile storage medium. It's very rare. You should 'ave one."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Blank Reg : " It 's a book .
It 's a non-volatile storage medium .
It 's very rare .
You should 'ave one .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Blank Reg: "It's a book.
It's a non-volatile storage medium.
It's very rare.
You should 'ave one.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28407541</id>
	<title>How quaint</title>
	<author>PNutts</author>
	<datestamp>1245517860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I often lament that electric lights cannot replace a good whale oil lantern as I take my buggy down to the barber for some blood letting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I often lament that electric lights can not replace a good whale oil lantern as I take my buggy down to the barber for some blood letting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I often lament that electric lights cannot replace a good whale oil lantern as I take my buggy down to the barber for some blood letting.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28409229</id>
	<title>Not mutually exclusive</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245580680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know about the states, but in the UK, city libraries were among the first places to offer free access to a computer and the internet - all you need is a library card (basically they want your name and address and that's it).</p><p>I practically live on the internet, but I love libraries for what they meant to me as a kid (or someone without the cash to purchase his own books) and for what they continue to represent - free access to information and culture. These forgotten little buildings embody the very spirit we are fighting to keep alive on the wires - they should be revered for that reason alone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know about the states , but in the UK , city libraries were among the first places to offer free access to a computer and the internet - all you need is a library card ( basically they want your name and address and that 's it ) .I practically live on the internet , but I love libraries for what they meant to me as a kid ( or someone without the cash to purchase his own books ) and for what they continue to represent - free access to information and culture .
These forgotten little buildings embody the very spirit we are fighting to keep alive on the wires - they should be revered for that reason alone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know about the states, but in the UK, city libraries were among the first places to offer free access to a computer and the internet - all you need is a library card (basically they want your name and address and that's it).I practically live on the internet, but I love libraries for what they meant to me as a kid (or someone without the cash to purchase his own books) and for what they continue to represent - free access to information and culture.
These forgotten little buildings embody the very spirit we are fighting to keep alive on the wires - they should be revered for that reason alone.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404557</id>
	<title>Sort of related</title>
	<author>Rorschach1</author>
	<datestamp>1245494520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My girlfriend's mother is a school librarian, has been for decades.  One day she was sorting through a stack of old books and came across a Bradbury book in which someone had scribbled across the title page in pen.  I think it was actually as she was in the process of slamming her DISCARD stamp down on the book that she belatedly recognized the scribble as the author's signature.</p><p>She's normally got a good sense of humor, but she does NOT like it when you remind her about that dang Bradbury kid scribbling in her books.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My girlfriend 's mother is a school librarian , has been for decades .
One day she was sorting through a stack of old books and came across a Bradbury book in which someone had scribbled across the title page in pen .
I think it was actually as she was in the process of slamming her DISCARD stamp down on the book that she belatedly recognized the scribble as the author 's signature.She 's normally got a good sense of humor , but she does NOT like it when you remind her about that dang Bradbury kid scribbling in her books .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My girlfriend's mother is a school librarian, has been for decades.
One day she was sorting through a stack of old books and came across a Bradbury book in which someone had scribbled across the title page in pen.
I think it was actually as she was in the process of slamming her DISCARD stamp down on the book that she belatedly recognized the scribble as the author's signature.She's normally got a good sense of humor, but she does NOT like it when you remind her about that dang Bradbury kid scribbling in her books.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405543</id>
	<title>Distraction? Tell that to the people in Iran</title>
	<author>Durandal64</author>
	<datestamp>1245501180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That "distraction" is being used to loosely coordinate a revolution. Not to mention that, in the first days after Iran's election, the Giant Distraction was the only way we could get information about what was happening in Iran, since the mainstream media either didn't care enough to cover it, or the reporters there were under lockdown and not allowed to report on anything.
<br> <br>
Great author, but sorry, he's being an idiot.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That " distraction " is being used to loosely coordinate a revolution .
Not to mention that , in the first days after Iran 's election , the Giant Distraction was the only way we could get information about what was happening in Iran , since the mainstream media either did n't care enough to cover it , or the reporters there were under lockdown and not allowed to report on anything .
Great author , but sorry , he 's being an idiot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That "distraction" is being used to loosely coordinate a revolution.
Not to mention that, in the first days after Iran's election, the Giant Distraction was the only way we could get information about what was happening in Iran, since the mainstream media either didn't care enough to cover it, or the reporters there were under lockdown and not allowed to report on anything.
Great author, but sorry, he's being an idiot.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28412359</id>
	<title>whiners never win</title>
	<author>loxosceles</author>
	<datestamp>1245612300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Evidently, whatever imagination and insight led him to write his great stories has since abandoned him.</p><p>From <a href="http://www.laweekly.com/2007-05-31/news/ray-bradbury-fahrenheit-451-misinterpreted/" title="laweekly.com">http://www.laweekly.com/2007-05-31/news/ray-bradbury-fahrenheit-451-misinterpreted/</a> [laweekly.com]<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:</p><blockquote><div><p>Now, Bradbury has decided to make news about the writing of his iconographic work and what he really meant. Fahrenheit 451 is not, he says firmly, a story about government censorship. Nor was it a response to Senator Joseph McCarthy, whose investigations had already instilled fear and stifled the creativity of thousands.</p><p>Bradbury, a man living in the creative and industrial center of reality TV and one-hour dramas, says it is, in fact, a story about how television destroys interest in reading literature.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>I have no objection to <i>some</i> level of concern about television culture, and I have no objection to his advocacy in support of libraries.  However, if he were really concerned about those things, he would support technological efforts to bring literary and educational content to people surfing the net or TV, rather than just whining and moaning that there are young whippersnappers on his lawn who have no respect for books.</p><p>He also seems to be engaging in a bit of historical revisionism.  He couldn't possibly have been too concerned with the television culture when he wrote <i>F-451</i> in 1953.  Maybe he ought to reread his own story, and then chase it down with <i>1984</i>.  No matter how legitimate his current complaints are, he shouldn't rewrite history.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Evidently , whatever imagination and insight led him to write his great stories has since abandoned him.From http : //www.laweekly.com/2007-05-31/news/ray-bradbury-fahrenheit-451-misinterpreted/ [ laweekly.com ] : Now , Bradbury has decided to make news about the writing of his iconographic work and what he really meant .
Fahrenheit 451 is not , he says firmly , a story about government censorship .
Nor was it a response to Senator Joseph McCarthy , whose investigations had already instilled fear and stifled the creativity of thousands.Bradbury , a man living in the creative and industrial center of reality TV and one-hour dramas , says it is , in fact , a story about how television destroys interest in reading literature .
I have no objection to some level of concern about television culture , and I have no objection to his advocacy in support of libraries .
However , if he were really concerned about those things , he would support technological efforts to bring literary and educational content to people surfing the net or TV , rather than just whining and moaning that there are young whippersnappers on his lawn who have no respect for books.He also seems to be engaging in a bit of historical revisionism .
He could n't possibly have been too concerned with the television culture when he wrote F-451 in 1953 .
Maybe he ought to reread his own story , and then chase it down with 1984 .
No matter how legitimate his current complaints are , he should n't rewrite history .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Evidently, whatever imagination and insight led him to write his great stories has since abandoned him.From http://www.laweekly.com/2007-05-31/news/ray-bradbury-fahrenheit-451-misinterpreted/ [laweekly.com] :Now, Bradbury has decided to make news about the writing of his iconographic work and what he really meant.
Fahrenheit 451 is not, he says firmly, a story about government censorship.
Nor was it a response to Senator Joseph McCarthy, whose investigations had already instilled fear and stifled the creativity of thousands.Bradbury, a man living in the creative and industrial center of reality TV and one-hour dramas, says it is, in fact, a story about how television destroys interest in reading literature.
I have no objection to some level of concern about television culture, and I have no objection to his advocacy in support of libraries.
However, if he were really concerned about those things, he would support technological efforts to bring literary and educational content to people surfing the net or TV, rather than just whining and moaning that there are young whippersnappers on his lawn who have no respect for books.He also seems to be engaging in a bit of historical revisionism.
He couldn't possibly have been too concerned with the television culture when he wrote F-451 in 1953.
Maybe he ought to reread his own story, and then chase it down with 1984.
No matter how legitimate his current complaints are, he shouldn't rewrite history.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404355</id>
	<title>anonymous coward loves first posts</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245492780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>and rimjobs, hates slashfags.</htmltext>
<tokenext>and rimjobs , hates slashfags .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and rimjobs, hates slashfags.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404869</id>
	<title>Oh, Ray Bradbury?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245497100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I read that as Ron Burgundy...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I read that as Ron Burgundy.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I read that as Ron Burgundy...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404663</id>
	<title>Is there ONLY one thing to be said about books?</title>
	<author>gilgongo</author>
	<datestamp>1245495360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"To hell with you. To hell with you and to hell with the Internet.' It's distracting. It's meaningless; it's not real. It's in the air somewhere."</i>
<p>
He doesn't explain why he doesn't like the Internet, but I think I can make a good guess based on the "it's in the air somewhere" remark.
</p><p>
Whenever anyone discusses the merits of books over digital literature, somebody always saying something like "Nothing can beat the feeling of a nice book: the paper, the ink, the smell of it, the weight of it, the warm, friendly..." blah blah blah. Indeed, that usually seems to be the ONLY argument presented in favour. This is basically just re-hashing the same idea: that books and paper are emotionally better because they're tactile and look nicer than [insert technology under discussion]. Bradbury's attitude seems to be no exception.
</p><p>
While I don't dismiss emotional attachment as being insignificant, it would be useful to list something else about books or paper that give them an advantage over digital media. Here are a few I can think of:
</p><p>
1. Paper (and to a lesser extent books) fit a particular mode of use that digital media cannot yet fulfil: I can jot something down on paper, hand it to somebody who can then adjust that jotting if need be, and we can use it for high-level, fast communication. The recipient can then carry it around for a short while until its purpose is served, and then dispose of it. Similar use cases can be played out on walls with chalk or charred sticks, on sand, or on steamy windows.
</p><p>
2. Books and paper are robust within specific common parameters and don't need a power source. Properly stored, a book can last thousands of years. I can also abuse a book in a variety of ways and it will still be fit for purpose. Burn it, however, or tear it into tiny pieces, and I better have another copy or all the information in it is lost forever.
</p><p>
3. Properly produced, books and paper can be far more environmentally friendly than digital media, or at least the hardware that delivers that media.
</p><p>
4. Er, that's it. Every other property of books or paper I can think of are either disadvantages, or are matched by current digital media.
</p><p>
Any other suggestions for the objective advantages of books over digital media?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" To hell with you .
To hell with you and to hell with the Internet .
' It 's distracting .
It 's meaningless ; it 's not real .
It 's in the air somewhere .
" He does n't explain why he does n't like the Internet , but I think I can make a good guess based on the " it 's in the air somewhere " remark .
Whenever anyone discusses the merits of books over digital literature , somebody always saying something like " Nothing can beat the feeling of a nice book : the paper , the ink , the smell of it , the weight of it , the warm , friendly... " blah blah blah .
Indeed , that usually seems to be the ONLY argument presented in favour .
This is basically just re-hashing the same idea : that books and paper are emotionally better because they 're tactile and look nicer than [ insert technology under discussion ] .
Bradbury 's attitude seems to be no exception .
While I do n't dismiss emotional attachment as being insignificant , it would be useful to list something else about books or paper that give them an advantage over digital media .
Here are a few I can think of : 1 .
Paper ( and to a lesser extent books ) fit a particular mode of use that digital media can not yet fulfil : I can jot something down on paper , hand it to somebody who can then adjust that jotting if need be , and we can use it for high-level , fast communication .
The recipient can then carry it around for a short while until its purpose is served , and then dispose of it .
Similar use cases can be played out on walls with chalk or charred sticks , on sand , or on steamy windows .
2. Books and paper are robust within specific common parameters and do n't need a power source .
Properly stored , a book can last thousands of years .
I can also abuse a book in a variety of ways and it will still be fit for purpose .
Burn it , however , or tear it into tiny pieces , and I better have another copy or all the information in it is lost forever .
3. Properly produced , books and paper can be far more environmentally friendly than digital media , or at least the hardware that delivers that media .
4. Er , that 's it .
Every other property of books or paper I can think of are either disadvantages , or are matched by current digital media .
Any other suggestions for the objective advantages of books over digital media ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"To hell with you.
To hell with you and to hell with the Internet.
' It's distracting.
It's meaningless; it's not real.
It's in the air somewhere.
"

He doesn't explain why he doesn't like the Internet, but I think I can make a good guess based on the "it's in the air somewhere" remark.
Whenever anyone discusses the merits of books over digital literature, somebody always saying something like "Nothing can beat the feeling of a nice book: the paper, the ink, the smell of it, the weight of it, the warm, friendly..." blah blah blah.
Indeed, that usually seems to be the ONLY argument presented in favour.
This is basically just re-hashing the same idea: that books and paper are emotionally better because they're tactile and look nicer than [insert technology under discussion].
Bradbury's attitude seems to be no exception.
While I don't dismiss emotional attachment as being insignificant, it would be useful to list something else about books or paper that give them an advantage over digital media.
Here are a few I can think of:

1.
Paper (and to a lesser extent books) fit a particular mode of use that digital media cannot yet fulfil: I can jot something down on paper, hand it to somebody who can then adjust that jotting if need be, and we can use it for high-level, fast communication.
The recipient can then carry it around for a short while until its purpose is served, and then dispose of it.
Similar use cases can be played out on walls with chalk or charred sticks, on sand, or on steamy windows.
2. Books and paper are robust within specific common parameters and don't need a power source.
Properly stored, a book can last thousands of years.
I can also abuse a book in a variety of ways and it will still be fit for purpose.
Burn it, however, or tear it into tiny pieces, and I better have another copy or all the information in it is lost forever.
3. Properly produced, books and paper can be far more environmentally friendly than digital media, or at least the hardware that delivers that media.
4. Er, that's it.
Every other property of books or paper I can think of are either disadvantages, or are matched by current digital media.
Any other suggestions for the objective advantages of books over digital media?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404485</id>
	<title>To hell with Ray Bradbury.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245493800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We don't need libraries anymore. Let's just burn them all down.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We do n't need libraries anymore .
Let 's just burn them all down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We don't need libraries anymore.
Let's just burn them all down.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28440939</id>
	<title>Re:LEARN WITH B.O.O.K.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245779820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can it be searched with Ctrl-F?</p><p>Sorry, not interested</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can it be searched with Ctrl-F ? Sorry , not interested</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can it be searched with Ctrl-F?Sorry, not interested</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28406739</id>
	<title>Could be a troll you know</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245510060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He might not be serious, this could just have been a troll.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He might not be serious , this could just have been a troll .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He might not be serious, this could just have been a troll.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404499</id>
	<title>give him a break</title>
	<author>Goldsmith</author>
	<datestamp>1245493920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The ideas he presented in his books have obviously stayed relevant across generations.  So he's fallen behind part of the culture he helped to create, so what?  I suppose Yahoo loses out, but he's really the one missing out here.  Maybe the people close to him can change his mind, but it doesn't do any good to go bashing one of our philosophical heroes here just because he became an old man.  Libraries are not bad, maybe they're even good, it's not like he's giving money to a controversial cause!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The ideas he presented in his books have obviously stayed relevant across generations .
So he 's fallen behind part of the culture he helped to create , so what ?
I suppose Yahoo loses out , but he 's really the one missing out here .
Maybe the people close to him can change his mind , but it does n't do any good to go bashing one of our philosophical heroes here just because he became an old man .
Libraries are not bad , maybe they 're even good , it 's not like he 's giving money to a controversial cause !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The ideas he presented in his books have obviously stayed relevant across generations.
So he's fallen behind part of the culture he helped to create, so what?
I suppose Yahoo loses out, but he's really the one missing out here.
Maybe the people close to him can change his mind, but it doesn't do any good to go bashing one of our philosophical heroes here just because he became an old man.
Libraries are not bad, maybe they're even good, it's not like he's giving money to a controversial cause!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404911</id>
	<title>Re:Libraries are public, websites are (usually) no</title>
	<author>PTFD5023</author>
	<datestamp>1245497400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>&gt; </p><p>Bradbury's a bit of a cranky right wing dipshit, but even a stopped clock is right once a day.</p></div><p>Actually, a stopped clock is right TWICE a day....</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Bradbury 's a bit of a cranky right wing dipshit , but even a stopped clock is right once a day.Actually , a stopped clock is right TWICE a day... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Bradbury's a bit of a cranky right wing dipshit, but even a stopped clock is right once a day.Actually, a stopped clock is right TWICE a day....
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404633</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28413967</id>
	<title>Mr. Bradbury keep growing</title>
	<author>Raven\_Stark</author>
	<datestamp>1245582000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree that libraries are wonderful places, temples of knowledge, one of the very few things I hold sacred. I love printed books. They are sensuous right down to their spicy scent between their leathery leaves.  I have not yet been able to imagine the Internet providing the full sensory experience I get from books. Maybe in time...</p><p>However, it pains me that Mr. Bradbury, one of my all time favorite authors, has allowed himself to stop growing. I think it is very likely that some people reading this will never die unless they choose to. Imagine living to be 20,000 years old and hating whatever newfangled things replace the Internet, hating pretty much everything about the world because it has changed and you have not. Human history is tiny, the future potentially vast; why confine yourself to some small region of the past and let history race by you into the future?</p><p>I was just listening to something a little old, Alexander Scriabin's 2nd symphony. A month ago, I never even heard of Scriabin. I found him on the Internet and now have his music. I doubt I would have found him at the local library. Now I'm listening to Shpongle which is kind of new (2005) and goes shockingly well with mushroom soup and strolls through mossy eldritch forests as well as with computer programming. I wouldn't have found Shpongle at the library either. This Fall I hope to share my home with an 18 year old college student for the simple reason that she will bring novelty--both modern youth culture and her tribal culture which is completely and wonderfully alien to me. That's how I try to live, always throwing something new into the old brain pan so it never goes empty. </p><p>Now if you'll excuse me, my head feels like a Frisbee...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree that libraries are wonderful places , temples of knowledge , one of the very few things I hold sacred .
I love printed books .
They are sensuous right down to their spicy scent between their leathery leaves .
I have not yet been able to imagine the Internet providing the full sensory experience I get from books .
Maybe in time...However , it pains me that Mr. Bradbury , one of my all time favorite authors , has allowed himself to stop growing .
I think it is very likely that some people reading this will never die unless they choose to .
Imagine living to be 20,000 years old and hating whatever newfangled things replace the Internet , hating pretty much everything about the world because it has changed and you have not .
Human history is tiny , the future potentially vast ; why confine yourself to some small region of the past and let history race by you into the future ? I was just listening to something a little old , Alexander Scriabin 's 2nd symphony .
A month ago , I never even heard of Scriabin .
I found him on the Internet and now have his music .
I doubt I would have found him at the local library .
Now I 'm listening to Shpongle which is kind of new ( 2005 ) and goes shockingly well with mushroom soup and strolls through mossy eldritch forests as well as with computer programming .
I would n't have found Shpongle at the library either .
This Fall I hope to share my home with an 18 year old college student for the simple reason that she will bring novelty--both modern youth culture and her tribal culture which is completely and wonderfully alien to me .
That 's how I try to live , always throwing something new into the old brain pan so it never goes empty .
Now if you 'll excuse me , my head feels like a Frisbee.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree that libraries are wonderful places, temples of knowledge, one of the very few things I hold sacred.
I love printed books.
They are sensuous right down to their spicy scent between their leathery leaves.
I have not yet been able to imagine the Internet providing the full sensory experience I get from books.
Maybe in time...However, it pains me that Mr. Bradbury, one of my all time favorite authors, has allowed himself to stop growing.
I think it is very likely that some people reading this will never die unless they choose to.
Imagine living to be 20,000 years old and hating whatever newfangled things replace the Internet, hating pretty much everything about the world because it has changed and you have not.
Human history is tiny, the future potentially vast; why confine yourself to some small region of the past and let history race by you into the future?I was just listening to something a little old, Alexander Scriabin's 2nd symphony.
A month ago, I never even heard of Scriabin.
I found him on the Internet and now have his music.
I doubt I would have found him at the local library.
Now I'm listening to Shpongle which is kind of new (2005) and goes shockingly well with mushroom soup and strolls through mossy eldritch forests as well as with computer programming.
I wouldn't have found Shpongle at the library either.
This Fall I hope to share my home with an 18 year old college student for the simple reason that she will bring novelty--both modern youth culture and her tribal culture which is completely and wonderfully alien to me.
That's how I try to live, always throwing something new into the old brain pan so it never goes empty.
Now if you'll excuse me, my head feels like a Frisbee...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28407405</id>
	<title>Jorge Luis Borges on Libraries</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245516840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library.</i> -Borge</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library .
-Borge</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library.
-Borge</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404993</id>
	<title>Bradbury is a poet.</title>
	<author>EWAdams</author>
	<datestamp>1245497880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For him it's about words on paper. And why shouldn't it be? He's one of the best writers of the 20th century, and words on paper have been his life. I love his work.</p><p>He hasn't yet seen the value in the Internet, but then much of its value is hidden behind mountains of dross, so it's not surprising. I'm willing to overlook that ignorance; it doesn't devalue anything he has done.</p><p>Nobody does creepy with words like Ray Bradbury. He is Edgar Allen Poe's Edgar Allen Poe.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For him it 's about words on paper .
And why should n't it be ?
He 's one of the best writers of the 20th century , and words on paper have been his life .
I love his work.He has n't yet seen the value in the Internet , but then much of its value is hidden behind mountains of dross , so it 's not surprising .
I 'm willing to overlook that ignorance ; it does n't devalue anything he has done.Nobody does creepy with words like Ray Bradbury .
He is Edgar Allen Poe 's Edgar Allen Poe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For him it's about words on paper.
And why shouldn't it be?
He's one of the best writers of the 20th century, and words on paper have been his life.
I love his work.He hasn't yet seen the value in the Internet, but then much of its value is hidden behind mountains of dross, so it's not surprising.
I'm willing to overlook that ignorance; it doesn't devalue anything he has done.Nobody does creepy with words like Ray Bradbury.
He is Edgar Allen Poe's Edgar Allen Poe.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404579</id>
	<title>The summary missed a bit.</title>
	<author>asdf7890</author>
	<datestamp>1245494640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The summary missed a bit:</p><p><div class="quote"><p> <i>"and get off my lawn!"</i> he continued in a raised voice, waving a stick in what was presumably intended as a threatening manner</p></div><p>He is entitled to his opinion, of course. But I think he is missing the point by a few lightyears on this matter. And wrong as he may be on this matter, that doesn't invalidate anything he said/wrote previously.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The summary missed a bit : " and get off my lawn !
" he continued in a raised voice , waving a stick in what was presumably intended as a threatening mannerHe is entitled to his opinion , of course .
But I think he is missing the point by a few lightyears on this matter .
And wrong as he may be on this matter , that does n't invalidate anything he said/wrote previously .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The summary missed a bit: "and get off my lawn!
" he continued in a raised voice, waving a stick in what was presumably intended as a threatening mannerHe is entitled to his opinion, of course.
But I think he is missing the point by a few lightyears on this matter.
And wrong as he may be on this matter, that doesn't invalidate anything he said/wrote previously.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405847</id>
	<title>Re:Books are not real!</title>
	<author>thrawn\_aj</author>
	<datestamp>1245503040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>LMFAO. <br>

You sir, owe me a new keyboard! That's satire of a calibre ol' man Ray would be happy to be stung by<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>LMFAO .
You sir , owe me a new keyboard !
That 's satire of a calibre ol ' man Ray would be happy to be stung by : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>LMFAO.
You sir, owe me a new keyboard!
That's satire of a calibre ol' man Ray would be happy to be stung by :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404517</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404555</id>
	<title>Bradbury is out of touch with reality</title>
	<author>ring-eldest</author>
	<datestamp>1245494520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>It is truly a shame that he feels that way and that he believes in such a false dichotomy.  If he was a little less antagonistic about the subject he'd see the massive influx of new people into the libraries that the internet has helped spur.  The poor especially benefit from free access to computers and their children are put in touch with a wealth of learning (books AND electronic information) that is truly unprecedented.  Library usage is up across the board, from what I can see.<br>
<br>
The man is almost 90 years old, but he's younger than my grandmother who regularly uses email and praises it as a wonderful way of keeping in touch with her mobility-impaired friends.  Age and stubbornness are not excuses for a man of his intelligence to hold such a myopic view of the world which HE HELPED CREATE.  It makes me wonder if he has been to a library recently during business hours to see the throngs of people using the internet there to find jobs and better themselves.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is truly a shame that he feels that way and that he believes in such a false dichotomy .
If he was a little less antagonistic about the subject he 'd see the massive influx of new people into the libraries that the internet has helped spur .
The poor especially benefit from free access to computers and their children are put in touch with a wealth of learning ( books AND electronic information ) that is truly unprecedented .
Library usage is up across the board , from what I can see .
The man is almost 90 years old , but he 's younger than my grandmother who regularly uses email and praises it as a wonderful way of keeping in touch with her mobility-impaired friends .
Age and stubbornness are not excuses for a man of his intelligence to hold such a myopic view of the world which HE HELPED CREATE .
It makes me wonder if he has been to a library recently during business hours to see the throngs of people using the internet there to find jobs and better themselves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is truly a shame that he feels that way and that he believes in such a false dichotomy.
If he was a little less antagonistic about the subject he'd see the massive influx of new people into the libraries that the internet has helped spur.
The poor especially benefit from free access to computers and their children are put in touch with a wealth of learning (books AND electronic information) that is truly unprecedented.
Library usage is up across the board, from what I can see.
The man is almost 90 years old, but he's younger than my grandmother who regularly uses email and praises it as a wonderful way of keeping in touch with her mobility-impaired friends.
Age and stubbornness are not excuses for a man of his intelligence to hold such a myopic view of the world which HE HELPED CREATE.
It makes me wonder if he has been to a library recently during business hours to see the throngs of people using the internet there to find jobs and better themselves.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28413041</id>
	<title>Re:LEARN WITH B.O.O.K.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245617700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's a "paper"?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's a " paper " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's a "paper"?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404569</id>
	<title>It's all "in the air"</title>
	<author>ChaoticCoyote</author>
	<datestamp>1245494640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
All knowledge is "in the air", whether printed on paper or stored magnetically or transmitted across the universe. Knowledge exists whther or not it has physical form; if all the math books in the universe disappeared tomorrow, 2 + 2 would *still* equal 4 and force would still equal mass times exceleration.
</p><p>
My daughters have educated themselves though physical and digital media; they are home-schooled, something that seemes near and dear to Bradbury's heart. The Internet gives them access to knowledge, ideas, and people they would *never* have encountered in a real library. The Internet EXPANDS our knowledge; it does not replace books, it COMPLEMENTS THEM.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All knowledge is " in the air " , whether printed on paper or stored magnetically or transmitted across the universe .
Knowledge exists whther or not it has physical form ; if all the math books in the universe disappeared tomorrow , 2 + 2 would * still * equal 4 and force would still equal mass times exceleration .
My daughters have educated themselves though physical and digital media ; they are home-schooled , something that seemes near and dear to Bradbury 's heart .
The Internet gives them access to knowledge , ideas , and people they would * never * have encountered in a real library .
The Internet EXPANDS our knowledge ; it does not replace books , it COMPLEMENTS THEM .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
All knowledge is "in the air", whether printed on paper or stored magnetically or transmitted across the universe.
Knowledge exists whther or not it has physical form; if all the math books in the universe disappeared tomorrow, 2 + 2 would *still* equal 4 and force would still equal mass times exceleration.
My daughters have educated themselves though physical and digital media; they are home-schooled, something that seemes near and dear to Bradbury's heart.
The Internet gives them access to knowledge, ideas, and people they would *never* have encountered in a real library.
The Internet EXPANDS our knowledge; it does not replace books, it COMPLEMENTS THEM.
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404531</id>
	<title>Re:And in other news, old man shouts at cloud</title>
	<author>oneirophrenos</author>
	<datestamp>1245494220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nowhere in that quote does it say he's a Republican. He was just upset that Moore didn't talk with him about appropriating the title of his book.</p><p>Not that I much care what the demented old geezer thinks.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nowhere in that quote does it say he 's a Republican .
He was just upset that Moore did n't talk with him about appropriating the title of his book.Not that I much care what the demented old geezer thinks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nowhere in that quote does it say he's a Republican.
He was just upset that Moore didn't talk with him about appropriating the title of his book.Not that I much care what the demented old geezer thinks.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404423</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404517</id>
	<title>Books are not real!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245494100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><em>I don't believe in libraries. I believe in cave paintings because most students don't have any animal hides to cover their genitals. When I graduated from climbing in trees, it was during the first great ice age and we had no fire or language. I couldn't go to the library, so I went to the cave three days a week for 10 seasons. The library? Don't get him started. The library is a big distraction, Gieco Cavemen growled... The library called me eight moons ago, he said, voice rising. They wanted to put a calfskin of mine in the Library! You know what I told them? To hell with you. To hell with you and to hell with the library. It's distracting. It's meaningless; it's not real. It's in the dead trees somewhere with that soulless invention called language.</em></p><p>- Gieco Cavemen</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't believe in libraries .
I believe in cave paintings because most students do n't have any animal hides to cover their genitals .
When I graduated from climbing in trees , it was during the first great ice age and we had no fire or language .
I could n't go to the library , so I went to the cave three days a week for 10 seasons .
The library ?
Do n't get him started .
The library is a big distraction , Gieco Cavemen growled... The library called me eight moons ago , he said , voice rising .
They wanted to put a calfskin of mine in the Library !
You know what I told them ?
To hell with you .
To hell with you and to hell with the library .
It 's distracting .
It 's meaningless ; it 's not real .
It 's in the dead trees somewhere with that soulless invention called language.- Gieco Cavemen</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't believe in libraries.
I believe in cave paintings because most students don't have any animal hides to cover their genitals.
When I graduated from climbing in trees, it was during the first great ice age and we had no fire or language.
I couldn't go to the library, so I went to the cave three days a week for 10 seasons.
The library?
Don't get him started.
The library is a big distraction, Gieco Cavemen growled... The library called me eight moons ago, he said, voice rising.
They wanted to put a calfskin of mine in the Library!
You know what I told them?
To hell with you.
To hell with you and to hell with the library.
It's distracting.
It's meaningless; it's not real.
It's in the dead trees somewhere with that soulless invention called language.- Gieco Cavemen</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404809</id>
	<title>Re:Libraries are public, websites are (usually) no</title>
	<author>dcollins</author>
	<datestamp>1245496500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"What I am saying is: given adequate support, libraries can stay open indefinitely."</p><p>Given adequate support, websites can also stay open indefinitely.</p><p>What I am saying is: That's a pretty big "given".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" What I am saying is : given adequate support , libraries can stay open indefinitely .
" Given adequate support , websites can also stay open indefinitely.What I am saying is : That 's a pretty big " given " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"What I am saying is: given adequate support, libraries can stay open indefinitely.
"Given adequate support, websites can also stay open indefinitely.What I am saying is: That's a pretty big "given".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404633</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28406307</id>
	<title>Sad</title>
	<author>pubwvj</author>
	<datestamp>1245506220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sad. He is confusing the medium with the message. Libraries don't matter. They are elitist collections that restrict access. Putting his books on the Internet would make it so that more people could access them. People who like himself couldn't afford to go to college. I live in a rural area. We farm. I can't waste time going to the city to the library for books. College is a waste of time. I can get the info online. Libraries are old tech and just a tool, not content. Bradbury is lost in the past. Too bad. So sad.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sad .
He is confusing the medium with the message .
Libraries do n't matter .
They are elitist collections that restrict access .
Putting his books on the Internet would make it so that more people could access them .
People who like himself could n't afford to go to college .
I live in a rural area .
We farm .
I ca n't waste time going to the city to the library for books .
College is a waste of time .
I can get the info online .
Libraries are old tech and just a tool , not content .
Bradbury is lost in the past .
Too bad .
So sad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sad.
He is confusing the medium with the message.
Libraries don't matter.
They are elitist collections that restrict access.
Putting his books on the Internet would make it so that more people could access them.
People who like himself couldn't afford to go to college.
I live in a rural area.
We farm.
I can't waste time going to the city to the library for books.
College is a waste of time.
I can get the info online.
Libraries are old tech and just a tool, not content.
Bradbury is lost in the past.
Too bad.
So sad.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404671</id>
	<title>Re:And in other news, old man shouts at cloud</title>
	<author>fermion</author>
	<datestamp>1245495420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Let's be fair.  Writers of that that generation did not wait for someone to create a job.  They created an industry.  They used their talents and created work that had a positive impact on society.  At the same time they supported a family.  Like so many others they could have blamed the government for their ills, saying that some group of people took their jobs, with marches on Washington demanding legislation to insure the entitlement of work and wages that are given to you rather than earned.
<p>
One also has to consider that a science fiction writer is not necessarily pro technology at any costs.  Fahrenheit 451 certainly shows a world destroyed by technology, the heros being bums who recite books to each other.
</p><p>
That said, Bradbury made his living in a world of relative opulence.  There was a time when the library is what educates the educated, perhaps even more than formal education.  However, one had to have a library near you.  And the library had to be funded.  The problem is that one well funded library might serve the few (hundred) thousand people that can get to it.  A network of well funded libraries also support the thousands of authors that supply the books.  As an author, Bradbury knows on which side his bread is buttered.
</p><p>
I think the current reality is both good and bad.  The internet provides a order of magnitude greater learning opportunities than the average public library.  Just being able to access something PLOS One is something that only those that had access to University libraries could dream of.  OTOH, the ability of authors like Bradbury to make a living is going to become increasingly difficult.
</p><p>
Some might say an honest conservative would admit that everyone should have the opportunity to succeed, and the Internet might provide an better opportunity than the library.  Certainly most kids have access for at least an hour or two a day, and some use it to learn.  Most school libraries barely has books to last more than the freshman year, so the Internet provides a good supplement.  The downside, that authors do not get paid as much, well, there is no entitlement to profit, only the pursuit of it.
</p><p>
All this is of no surprise.   To get rid of the old ideas, such as woman's work is so simple that it will be computerized first, while men's work, like astronavigation, will still be done at hand, young people have to , sometimes forcibly, take control away from the old.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's be fair .
Writers of that that generation did not wait for someone to create a job .
They created an industry .
They used their talents and created work that had a positive impact on society .
At the same time they supported a family .
Like so many others they could have blamed the government for their ills , saying that some group of people took their jobs , with marches on Washington demanding legislation to insure the entitlement of work and wages that are given to you rather than earned .
One also has to consider that a science fiction writer is not necessarily pro technology at any costs .
Fahrenheit 451 certainly shows a world destroyed by technology , the heros being bums who recite books to each other .
That said , Bradbury made his living in a world of relative opulence .
There was a time when the library is what educates the educated , perhaps even more than formal education .
However , one had to have a library near you .
And the library had to be funded .
The problem is that one well funded library might serve the few ( hundred ) thousand people that can get to it .
A network of well funded libraries also support the thousands of authors that supply the books .
As an author , Bradbury knows on which side his bread is buttered .
I think the current reality is both good and bad .
The internet provides a order of magnitude greater learning opportunities than the average public library .
Just being able to access something PLOS One is something that only those that had access to University libraries could dream of .
OTOH , the ability of authors like Bradbury to make a living is going to become increasingly difficult .
Some might say an honest conservative would admit that everyone should have the opportunity to succeed , and the Internet might provide an better opportunity than the library .
Certainly most kids have access for at least an hour or two a day , and some use it to learn .
Most school libraries barely has books to last more than the freshman year , so the Internet provides a good supplement .
The downside , that authors do not get paid as much , well , there is no entitlement to profit , only the pursuit of it .
All this is of no surprise .
To get rid of the old ideas , such as woman 's work is so simple that it will be computerized first , while men 's work , like astronavigation , will still be done at hand , young people have to , sometimes forcibly , take control away from the old .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's be fair.
Writers of that that generation did not wait for someone to create a job.
They created an industry.
They used their talents and created work that had a positive impact on society.
At the same time they supported a family.
Like so many others they could have blamed the government for their ills, saying that some group of people took their jobs, with marches on Washington demanding legislation to insure the entitlement of work and wages that are given to you rather than earned.
One also has to consider that a science fiction writer is not necessarily pro technology at any costs.
Fahrenheit 451 certainly shows a world destroyed by technology, the heros being bums who recite books to each other.
That said, Bradbury made his living in a world of relative opulence.
There was a time when the library is what educates the educated, perhaps even more than formal education.
However, one had to have a library near you.
And the library had to be funded.
The problem is that one well funded library might serve the few (hundred) thousand people that can get to it.
A network of well funded libraries also support the thousands of authors that supply the books.
As an author, Bradbury knows on which side his bread is buttered.
I think the current reality is both good and bad.
The internet provides a order of magnitude greater learning opportunities than the average public library.
Just being able to access something PLOS One is something that only those that had access to University libraries could dream of.
OTOH, the ability of authors like Bradbury to make a living is going to become increasingly difficult.
Some might say an honest conservative would admit that everyone should have the opportunity to succeed, and the Internet might provide an better opportunity than the library.
Certainly most kids have access for at least an hour or two a day, and some use it to learn.
Most school libraries barely has books to last more than the freshman year, so the Internet provides a good supplement.
The downside, that authors do not get paid as much, well, there is no entitlement to profit, only the pursuit of it.
All this is of no surprise.
To get rid of the old ideas, such as woman's work is so simple that it will be computerized first, while men's work, like astronavigation, will still be done at hand, young people have to , sometimes forcibly, take control away from the old.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404423</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28415593</id>
	<title>Re:And in other news, old man shouts at cloud</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245597300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Republicans weren't so bad way back when they believed in small gov't and fiscal responsibility.</p></div></blockquote><p>When was that, exactly?</p><p>The current Republicans have created a myth that such a time existed.  I have never seen it.</p><p>Now, it's true that many old-time Republicans have been alienated in recent decades.  For example, in 1989 Barry Goldwater described the Republican party as "a bunch of kooks".  More recently the Eisenhower family has spoken out against Bush.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Republicans were n't so bad way back when they believed in small gov't and fiscal responsibility.When was that , exactly ? The current Republicans have created a myth that such a time existed .
I have never seen it.Now , it 's true that many old-time Republicans have been alienated in recent decades .
For example , in 1989 Barry Goldwater described the Republican party as " a bunch of kooks " .
More recently the Eisenhower family has spoken out against Bush .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Republicans weren't so bad way back when they believed in small gov't and fiscal responsibility.When was that, exactly?The current Republicans have created a myth that such a time existed.
I have never seen it.Now, it's true that many old-time Republicans have been alienated in recent decades.
For example, in 1989 Barry Goldwater described the Republican party as "a bunch of kooks".
More recently the Eisenhower family has spoken out against Bush.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404593</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404703</id>
	<title>Give him a Kindle!</title>
	<author>yanguang</author>
	<datestamp>1245495660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Give the man a Kindle preloaded with more books than his library. All that, in the palm of your hand.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Give the man a Kindle preloaded with more books than his library .
All that , in the palm of your hand .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Give the man a Kindle preloaded with more books than his library.
All that, in the palm of your hand.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28411125</id>
	<title>News at 11, cranky old man hates new technology.</title>
	<author>Eskarel</author>
	<datestamp>1245602700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is anyone surprised that an old man who generally wrote dystopian science fiction doesn't like new technology.</p><p>Not that I don't like libraries, good libraries are a fantastic place with all sorts of wonderful things. The problem is, for every library with an extensive book catalog, comfortable reading areas, and good enthusiastic qualified libraries, you'll find a few that have almost no books, unqualified or bitter staff, and poor facilities.</p><p>With the internet, and a few more iterations on the e-reader technology, and you might be able to deliver the library of congress to nearly everyone in the world, all for almost nothing. It wouldn't be as good as the best of current libraries, but it would be one hell of a lot better than most of the libraries that are actually out there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is anyone surprised that an old man who generally wrote dystopian science fiction does n't like new technology.Not that I do n't like libraries , good libraries are a fantastic place with all sorts of wonderful things .
The problem is , for every library with an extensive book catalog , comfortable reading areas , and good enthusiastic qualified libraries , you 'll find a few that have almost no books , unqualified or bitter staff , and poor facilities.With the internet , and a few more iterations on the e-reader technology , and you might be able to deliver the library of congress to nearly everyone in the world , all for almost nothing .
It would n't be as good as the best of current libraries , but it would be one hell of a lot better than most of the libraries that are actually out there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is anyone surprised that an old man who generally wrote dystopian science fiction doesn't like new technology.Not that I don't like libraries, good libraries are a fantastic place with all sorts of wonderful things.
The problem is, for every library with an extensive book catalog, comfortable reading areas, and good enthusiastic qualified libraries, you'll find a few that have almost no books, unqualified or bitter staff, and poor facilities.With the internet, and a few more iterations on the e-reader technology, and you might be able to deliver the library of congress to nearly everyone in the world, all for almost nothing.
It wouldn't be as good as the best of current libraries, but it would be one hell of a lot better than most of the libraries that are actually out there.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404699</id>
	<title>Re:"In the air?" Come on!</title>
	<author>Bieeanda</author>
	<datestamp>1245495660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Enjoyment" is highly subjective.  I enjoy the weight of a book.  I enjoy opening a textbook to a random page and reading a quarter of a chapter.  I enjoy the way a book smells.  I enjoy being able to jot a note in the margin, or stick a receipt in to mark my place.  I enjoy opening an old, cherished book to the front and reading a sentimental, handwritten dedication.  I enjoy not having to spend several hundred dollars on an e-book reader in order to read a book wherever and whenever.
<p>Mr. Bradbury's 'obsession' may have something to do with growing up during the Depression.  He doesn't give a shit about the Internet-- there is no 'concern' evident anywhere in the article.  His formative years were spent in the wake of the evaporation of a whole ton of ephemeral monetary value, which left people with little more than (wait for it) their material possessions.  There may just be the slightest correlation there.
</p><p>Above and beyond all that though, Bradbury is one of the most reactionary people on the face of the Earth.  He's old and he's set in his ways.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Enjoyment " is highly subjective .
I enjoy the weight of a book .
I enjoy opening a textbook to a random page and reading a quarter of a chapter .
I enjoy the way a book smells .
I enjoy being able to jot a note in the margin , or stick a receipt in to mark my place .
I enjoy opening an old , cherished book to the front and reading a sentimental , handwritten dedication .
I enjoy not having to spend several hundred dollars on an e-book reader in order to read a book wherever and whenever .
Mr. Bradbury 's 'obsession ' may have something to do with growing up during the Depression .
He does n't give a shit about the Internet-- there is no 'concern ' evident anywhere in the article .
His formative years were spent in the wake of the evaporation of a whole ton of ephemeral monetary value , which left people with little more than ( wait for it ) their material possessions .
There may just be the slightest correlation there .
Above and beyond all that though , Bradbury is one of the most reactionary people on the face of the Earth .
He 's old and he 's set in his ways .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Enjoyment" is highly subjective.
I enjoy the weight of a book.
I enjoy opening a textbook to a random page and reading a quarter of a chapter.
I enjoy the way a book smells.
I enjoy being able to jot a note in the margin, or stick a receipt in to mark my place.
I enjoy opening an old, cherished book to the front and reading a sentimental, handwritten dedication.
I enjoy not having to spend several hundred dollars on an e-book reader in order to read a book wherever and whenever.
Mr. Bradbury's 'obsession' may have something to do with growing up during the Depression.
He doesn't give a shit about the Internet-- there is no 'concern' evident anywhere in the article.
His formative years were spent in the wake of the evaporation of a whole ton of ephemeral monetary value, which left people with little more than (wait for it) their material possessions.
There may just be the slightest correlation there.
Above and beyond all that though, Bradbury is one of the most reactionary people on the face of the Earth.
He's old and he's set in his ways.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404527</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405285</id>
	<title>Aggregate Knowledge</title>
	<author>jasongates</author>
	<datestamp>1245499740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hi Ray,

Sorry to be so critical.

I grew up reading your works and they have greatly influenced my attitudes.

That being said, at a bare minimum, the Internet is the worlds largest and most accessible library.
As with every new communications medium, it comes with a learning curve and a maturity necessity.

I grew up in a lower income family and took large advantage of the public library system.

Denouncing the Internet as a "distraction" is either a sign of ignorance or stubbornness.

By creating the ability of everyone with access (yes, that is a whole other debate) to have access to all information best promotes the dissemination of information, which (correct me if I'm wrong) is the essence the library system.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hi Ray , Sorry to be so critical .
I grew up reading your works and they have greatly influenced my attitudes .
That being said , at a bare minimum , the Internet is the worlds largest and most accessible library .
As with every new communications medium , it comes with a learning curve and a maturity necessity .
I grew up in a lower income family and took large advantage of the public library system .
Denouncing the Internet as a " distraction " is either a sign of ignorance or stubbornness .
By creating the ability of everyone with access ( yes , that is a whole other debate ) to have access to all information best promotes the dissemination of information , which ( correct me if I 'm wrong ) is the essence the library system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hi Ray,

Sorry to be so critical.
I grew up reading your works and they have greatly influenced my attitudes.
That being said, at a bare minimum, the Internet is the worlds largest and most accessible library.
As with every new communications medium, it comes with a learning curve and a maturity necessity.
I grew up in a lower income family and took large advantage of the public library system.
Denouncing the Internet as a "distraction" is either a sign of ignorance or stubbornness.
By creating the ability of everyone with access (yes, that is a whole other debate) to have access to all information best promotes the dissemination of information, which (correct me if I'm wrong) is the essence the library system.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28408645</id>
	<title>Internet != libraries, different purposes</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245616560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Internet is a COMMUNICATION tool. An exchange tool.</p><p>As such, it can be used for great things and stupid things. Will you condemn the telephone because most people use it for senseless chatting?</p><p>It does not make sense to compare it to a library since only a part of internet is used for books and information.</p><p>As for libraries (described as the greatest thing), what a joke!!<br>Does he really believe that libraries are not biased? That they contain all the existing knowledge?<br>- Look at the controversial books, including sex-ed, adult topics, etc, do you find them easily on the shelves? I don't.<br>- What about obscure authors or older books? You'll probably find the latest "Harry Potter", what about this 18th century classbook that my parents have at home?<br>- They can't be a distraction? I don't believe that all the books are educative/highly intellectual (see "Harry Potter": a lot of books are about entertainment)</p><p>Truth is :<br>- libraries have finitive shelf space<br>- they can't buy everything<br>- they can't display just anything (adult books)<br>- librarians are biaised (or have to obey their community rules with the same result)<br>- they won't store foreign books (not a lot anyway, see problem #1)<br>- many books are written for entertainment</p><p>Librairies are great. That's for sure. But they are also very limited. Internet has plenty of problems and stupidities, but it's also an invaluable tool. Both have their role to play. They are more complementary than opposed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Internet is a COMMUNICATION tool .
An exchange tool.As such , it can be used for great things and stupid things .
Will you condemn the telephone because most people use it for senseless chatting ? It does not make sense to compare it to a library since only a part of internet is used for books and information.As for libraries ( described as the greatest thing ) , what a joke !
! Does he really believe that libraries are not biased ?
That they contain all the existing knowledge ? - Look at the controversial books , including sex-ed , adult topics , etc , do you find them easily on the shelves ?
I do n't.- What about obscure authors or older books ?
You 'll probably find the latest " Harry Potter " , what about this 18th century classbook that my parents have at home ? - They ca n't be a distraction ?
I do n't believe that all the books are educative/highly intellectual ( see " Harry Potter " : a lot of books are about entertainment ) Truth is : - libraries have finitive shelf space- they ca n't buy everything- they ca n't display just anything ( adult books ) - librarians are biaised ( or have to obey their community rules with the same result ) - they wo n't store foreign books ( not a lot anyway , see problem # 1 ) - many books are written for entertainmentLibrairies are great .
That 's for sure .
But they are also very limited .
Internet has plenty of problems and stupidities , but it 's also an invaluable tool .
Both have their role to play .
They are more complementary than opposed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Internet is a COMMUNICATION tool.
An exchange tool.As such, it can be used for great things and stupid things.
Will you condemn the telephone because most people use it for senseless chatting?It does not make sense to compare it to a library since only a part of internet is used for books and information.As for libraries (described as the greatest thing), what a joke!
!Does he really believe that libraries are not biased?
That they contain all the existing knowledge?- Look at the controversial books, including sex-ed, adult topics, etc, do you find them easily on the shelves?
I don't.- What about obscure authors or older books?
You'll probably find the latest "Harry Potter", what about this 18th century classbook that my parents have at home?- They can't be a distraction?
I don't believe that all the books are educative/highly intellectual (see "Harry Potter": a lot of books are about entertainment)Truth is :- libraries have finitive shelf space- they can't buy everything- they can't display just anything (adult books)- librarians are biaised (or have to obey their community rules with the same result)- they won't store foreign books (not a lot anyway, see problem #1)- many books are written for entertainmentLibrairies are great.
That's for sure.
But they are also very limited.
Internet has plenty of problems and stupidities, but it's also an invaluable tool.
Both have their role to play.
They are more complementary than opposed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404933</id>
	<title>So Mr. Bradbury...</title>
	<author>VinB</author>
	<datestamp>1245497580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>other than that, no strong feelings on the subject?</htmltext>
<tokenext>other than that , no strong feelings on the subject ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>other than that, no strong feelings on the subject?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28406923</id>
	<title>Re:How real is the knowledge in your head?</title>
	<author>nEoN nOoDlE</author>
	<datestamp>1245511860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Particularly ironic considering the events of the past week in Iran and the internet's enabling role in that continuing saga.</p></div><p>It's not ironic at all. The Iranian government would have been completely overthrown by now if half the population wasn't too busy wasting time "twittering" on the internet.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Particularly ironic considering the events of the past week in Iran and the internet 's enabling role in that continuing saga.It 's not ironic at all .
The Iranian government would have been completely overthrown by now if half the population was n't too busy wasting time " twittering " on the internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Particularly ironic considering the events of the past week in Iran and the internet's enabling role in that continuing saga.It's not ironic at all.
The Iranian government would have been completely overthrown by now if half the population wasn't too busy wasting time "twittering" on the internet.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404787</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404637</id>
	<title>LEARN WITH B.O.O.K.</title>
	<author>Solitonic</author>
	<datestamp>1245495180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>LEARN WITH B.O.O.K.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; - R. J. Heathorn</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; A new aid to rapid - almost magical - learning has made its appearance.<br>Indications are that if it catches on all the electronic gadgets will be<br>so much junk.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; The new device is known as Built-in Orderly Organized Knowledge. The<br>makers generally call it by its initials, BOOK.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Many advantages are claimed over the old-style learning and teaching<br>aids on which most people are brought up nowadays. It has no wires, no<br>electric circuit to break down, No connection is needed to an<br>electricity power point. It is made entirely without mechanical parts to<br>go wrong or need replacement.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Anyone can use BOOK, even children, and it fits comfortably into the<br>hands. It can be conveniently used sitting in an armchair by the fire.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; How does this revolutionary, unbelievably easy invention work? Basically<br>BOOK consists only of a large number of paper sheets. These may run to<br>hundreds where BOOK covers a lengthy programme of information. Each<br>sheet bears a number in sequence so that the sheets cannot be used in<br>the wrong order.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; To make it even easier for the user to keep the sheets in the proper<br>order they are held firmly in place by a special locking device called a<br>'binding'.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Each sheet of paper presents the user with an information sequence in<br>the form of symbols, which he absorbs optically for automatic<br>registration on the brain. When one sheet has been assimilated a flick<br>of the finger turns it over and further information is found on the<br>other side.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; By using both sides of each sheet in this way a great economy is<br>effected, thus reducing both the size and cost of BOOK. No buttons need<br>to be pressed to move from one sheet to another, to open or close BOOK,<br>or to start it working.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; BOOK may be taken up at any time and used by merely opening it.<br>Instantly it it ready for use. Nothing has to be connected or switched<br>on. The user may turn at will to any sheet, going backwards or forwards<br>as he pleases. A sheet is provided near the beginning as a location<br>finder for any required information sequence.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; A small accessory, available at trifling extra cost, is the BOOKmark.<br>This enables the user to pick up his programme where he left off on the<br>previous learning session. BOOKmark is versatile and may be used in any<br>BOOK.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; The initial cost varies with the size and subject matter. Already a vast<br>range of BOOKs is available, covering every conceivable subject and<br>adjusted to different levels of aptitude. One BOOK, small enough to be<br>held in the hands, may contain an entire learning schedule.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Once purchased, BOOK requires no further upkeep cost; no batteries or<br>wires are needed, since the motive power, thanks to an ingenious device<br>patented by the makers, is supplied by the brain of the user.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; BOOKs may be stored on handy shelves and for ease of reference the<br>programme schedule is normally indicated on the back of the binding.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Altogether the Built-in Orderly Organized Knowledge seems to have great<br>advantages with no drawbacks. We predict a big future for it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>LEARN WITH B.O.O.K .
          - R. J. Heathorn           A new aid to rapid - almost magical - learning has made its appearance.Indications are that if it catches on all the electronic gadgets will beso much junk .
          The new device is known as Built-in Orderly Organized Knowledge .
Themakers generally call it by its initials , BOOK .
          Many advantages are claimed over the old-style learning and teachingaids on which most people are brought up nowadays .
It has no wires , noelectric circuit to break down , No connection is needed to anelectricity power point .
It is made entirely without mechanical parts togo wrong or need replacement .
          Anyone can use BOOK , even children , and it fits comfortably into thehands .
It can be conveniently used sitting in an armchair by the fire .
          How does this revolutionary , unbelievably easy invention work ?
BasicallyBOOK consists only of a large number of paper sheets .
These may run tohundreds where BOOK covers a lengthy programme of information .
Eachsheet bears a number in sequence so that the sheets can not be used inthe wrong order .
          To make it even easier for the user to keep the sheets in the properorder they are held firmly in place by a special locking device called a'binding' .
          Each sheet of paper presents the user with an information sequence inthe form of symbols , which he absorbs optically for automaticregistration on the brain .
When one sheet has been assimilated a flickof the finger turns it over and further information is found on theother side .
          By using both sides of each sheet in this way a great economy iseffected , thus reducing both the size and cost of BOOK .
No buttons needto be pressed to move from one sheet to another , to open or close BOOK,or to start it working .
          BOOK may be taken up at any time and used by merely opening it.Instantly it it ready for use .
Nothing has to be connected or switchedon .
The user may turn at will to any sheet , going backwards or forwardsas he pleases .
A sheet is provided near the beginning as a locationfinder for any required information sequence .
          A small accessory , available at trifling extra cost , is the BOOKmark.This enables the user to pick up his programme where he left off on theprevious learning session .
BOOKmark is versatile and may be used in anyBOOK .
          The initial cost varies with the size and subject matter .
Already a vastrange of BOOKs is available , covering every conceivable subject andadjusted to different levels of aptitude .
One BOOK , small enough to beheld in the hands , may contain an entire learning schedule .
          Once purchased , BOOK requires no further upkeep cost ; no batteries orwires are needed , since the motive power , thanks to an ingenious devicepatented by the makers , is supplied by the brain of the user .
          BOOKs may be stored on handy shelves and for ease of reference theprogramme schedule is normally indicated on the back of the binding .
          Altogether the Built-in Orderly Organized Knowledge seems to have greatadvantages with no drawbacks .
We predict a big future for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>LEARN WITH B.O.O.K.
          - R. J. Heathorn
          A new aid to rapid - almost magical - learning has made its appearance.Indications are that if it catches on all the electronic gadgets will beso much junk.
          The new device is known as Built-in Orderly Organized Knowledge.
Themakers generally call it by its initials, BOOK.
          Many advantages are claimed over the old-style learning and teachingaids on which most people are brought up nowadays.
It has no wires, noelectric circuit to break down, No connection is needed to anelectricity power point.
It is made entirely without mechanical parts togo wrong or need replacement.
          Anyone can use BOOK, even children, and it fits comfortably into thehands.
It can be conveniently used sitting in an armchair by the fire.
          How does this revolutionary, unbelievably easy invention work?
BasicallyBOOK consists only of a large number of paper sheets.
These may run tohundreds where BOOK covers a lengthy programme of information.
Eachsheet bears a number in sequence so that the sheets cannot be used inthe wrong order.
          To make it even easier for the user to keep the sheets in the properorder they are held firmly in place by a special locking device called a'binding'.
          Each sheet of paper presents the user with an information sequence inthe form of symbols, which he absorbs optically for automaticregistration on the brain.
When one sheet has been assimilated a flickof the finger turns it over and further information is found on theother side.
          By using both sides of each sheet in this way a great economy iseffected, thus reducing both the size and cost of BOOK.
No buttons needto be pressed to move from one sheet to another, to open or close BOOK,or to start it working.
          BOOK may be taken up at any time and used by merely opening it.Instantly it it ready for use.
Nothing has to be connected or switchedon.
The user may turn at will to any sheet, going backwards or forwardsas he pleases.
A sheet is provided near the beginning as a locationfinder for any required information sequence.
          A small accessory, available at trifling extra cost, is the BOOKmark.This enables the user to pick up his programme where he left off on theprevious learning session.
BOOKmark is versatile and may be used in anyBOOK.
          The initial cost varies with the size and subject matter.
Already a vastrange of BOOKs is available, covering every conceivable subject andadjusted to different levels of aptitude.
One BOOK, small enough to beheld in the hands, may contain an entire learning schedule.
          Once purchased, BOOK requires no further upkeep cost; no batteries orwires are needed, since the motive power, thanks to an ingenious devicepatented by the makers, is supplied by the brain of the user.
          BOOKs may be stored on handy shelves and for ease of reference theprogramme schedule is normally indicated on the back of the binding.
          Altogether the Built-in Orderly Organized Knowledge seems to have greatadvantages with no drawbacks.
We predict a big future for it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405373</id>
	<title>Re:And in other news, old man shouts at cloud</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1245500160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wonder if Ray asked <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel\_Gabriel\_Fahrenheit" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Mr Fahrenheit's</a> [wikipedia.org] permission to use his name...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder if Ray asked Mr Fahrenheit 's [ wikipedia.org ] permission to use his name.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder if Ray asked Mr Fahrenheit's [wikipedia.org] permission to use his name...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404423</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404787</id>
	<title>How real is the knowledge in your head?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245496380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or is that in the air as well?</p><p>Ray Bradbury wrote some good books.  One book in particular was truly great, providing a social commentary on the value of information and what it means to have open and free access.  This makes him a man who was forward thinking for his time and perhaps means future societies will remember him.</p><p>Unfortunately, he's become a bit of a cranky old man.  That's okay.  I suppose he's earned the right to be one.</p><p>The value of his works shouldn't be diminished but certainly, time has passed him by.</p><p>Particularly ironic considering the events of the past week in Iran and the internet's enabling role in that continuing saga.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or is that in the air as well ? Ray Bradbury wrote some good books .
One book in particular was truly great , providing a social commentary on the value of information and what it means to have open and free access .
This makes him a man who was forward thinking for his time and perhaps means future societies will remember him.Unfortunately , he 's become a bit of a cranky old man .
That 's okay .
I suppose he 's earned the right to be one.The value of his works should n't be diminished but certainly , time has passed him by.Particularly ironic considering the events of the past week in Iran and the internet 's enabling role in that continuing saga .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or is that in the air as well?Ray Bradbury wrote some good books.
One book in particular was truly great, providing a social commentary on the value of information and what it means to have open and free access.
This makes him a man who was forward thinking for his time and perhaps means future societies will remember him.Unfortunately, he's become a bit of a cranky old man.
That's okay.
I suppose he's earned the right to be one.The value of his works shouldn't be diminished but certainly, time has passed him by.Particularly ironic considering the events of the past week in Iran and the internet's enabling role in that continuing saga.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28409225</id>
	<title>Fun and pain to see</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245580620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Buying a R.Bradbury book - 4$.<br>Seening a sci-fi writer in a future shock - priceless.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Buying a R.Bradbury book - 4 $ .Seening a sci-fi writer in a future shock - priceless .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Buying a R.Bradbury book - 4$.Seening a sci-fi writer in a future shock - priceless.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404553</id>
	<title>Geezer Award</title>
	<author>icebike</author>
	<datestamp>1245494520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;" To hell with you and to hell with the Internet.<br>&gt;It's distracting. It's meaningless; it's not real.<br>&gt;It's in the air somewhere.'"</p><p>Its amazing given the amount of sifi he's written that he takes this approach to the single most futuristic invention of mankind.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; " To hell with you and to hell with the Internet. &gt; It 's distracting .
It 's meaningless ; it 's not real. &gt; It 's in the air somewhere .
' " Its amazing given the amount of sifi he 's written that he takes this approach to the single most futuristic invention of mankind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;" To hell with you and to hell with the Internet.&gt;It's distracting.
It's meaningless; it's not real.&gt;It's in the air somewhere.
'"Its amazing given the amount of sifi he's written that he takes this approach to the single most futuristic invention of mankind.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28408353</id>
	<title>Re:Books are not real!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245526140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's "Geico", dumbass.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's " Geico " , dumbass .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's "Geico", dumbass.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404517</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28407519</id>
	<title>Re:And in other news, old man shouts at cloud</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245517740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You don't have to be a Republican to think that Michael Moore is a bullshit machine.</p></div><p>Your comment degrades bovine dung.  Dung promotes crop growth, improve the economy, and helps feed people worldwide.  Michael Moore on the other hand...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't have to be a Republican to think that Michael Moore is a bullshit machine.Your comment degrades bovine dung .
Dung promotes crop growth , improve the economy , and helps feed people worldwide .
Michael Moore on the other hand.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't have to be a Republican to think that Michael Moore is a bullshit machine.Your comment degrades bovine dung.
Dung promotes crop growth, improve the economy, and helps feed people worldwide.
Michael Moore on the other hand...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404585</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28409531</id>
	<title>Buying</title>
	<author>Carra</author>
	<datestamp>1245585180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, without the internet I wouldn't have bought Fahrenheit 451 from a webshop and read it. Books and the internet are both good tools.

But the man does have a point. Just think how much of your time online you actually spend learning and how much time you use for entertainment. Sure, people now spend a part of their television time browsing the nets. But it's for the same reason: entertainment.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , without the internet I would n't have bought Fahrenheit 451 from a webshop and read it .
Books and the internet are both good tools .
But the man does have a point .
Just think how much of your time online you actually spend learning and how much time you use for entertainment .
Sure , people now spend a part of their television time browsing the nets .
But it 's for the same reason : entertainment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, without the internet I wouldn't have bought Fahrenheit 451 from a webshop and read it.
Books and the internet are both good tools.
But the man does have a point.
Just think how much of your time online you actually spend learning and how much time you use for entertainment.
Sure, people now spend a part of their television time browsing the nets.
But it's for the same reason: entertainment.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28408217</id>
	<title>Re:And in other news, old man shouts at cloud</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245524640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds like Old Man Ray needs to learn what the hell copyright is about.  "Fahrenheit 451" is almost 60 years old, and by rights should be in the public domain now.  I can't stand Michael Moore, but he's perfectly within his rights to use a play on the book's name for his own work, and Ray can take a flying leap if he doesn't like it.</p><p>Copyright exists for the enrichment of society.  Enrichment of one Ray Bradbury is the means of accomplishing that, and doesn't last forever.  Ray needs to lose the entitlement mentality and elitist attitude, and understand that "Fahrenheit 451" does NOT belong to him.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like Old Man Ray needs to learn what the hell copyright is about .
" Fahrenheit 451 " is almost 60 years old , and by rights should be in the public domain now .
I ca n't stand Michael Moore , but he 's perfectly within his rights to use a play on the book 's name for his own work , and Ray can take a flying leap if he does n't like it.Copyright exists for the enrichment of society .
Enrichment of one Ray Bradbury is the means of accomplishing that , and does n't last forever .
Ray needs to lose the entitlement mentality and elitist attitude , and understand that " Fahrenheit 451 " does NOT belong to him .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like Old Man Ray needs to learn what the hell copyright is about.
"Fahrenheit 451" is almost 60 years old, and by rights should be in the public domain now.
I can't stand Michael Moore, but he's perfectly within his rights to use a play on the book's name for his own work, and Ray can take a flying leap if he doesn't like it.Copyright exists for the enrichment of society.
Enrichment of one Ray Bradbury is the means of accomplishing that, and doesn't last forever.
Ray needs to lose the entitlement mentality and elitist attitude, and understand that "Fahrenheit 451" does NOT belong to him.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404423</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404365</id>
	<title>God Bless Him</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245492840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's a lot to be said for libraries.  The other day, my wife came home with a new library card.  Big internet a holic, but there's always something about halls of books.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a lot to be said for libraries .
The other day , my wife came home with a new library card .
Big internet a holic , but there 's always something about halls of books .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a lot to be said for libraries.
The other day, my wife came home with a new library card.
Big internet a holic, but there's always something about halls of books.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28406645</id>
	<title>S.O.B.</title>
	<author>PopeRatzo</author>
	<datestamp>1245509160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Has anyone else noticed that for the last 3 or 4 decades, Ray Bradbury has been consistently a tool?</p><p>I'm inclined to give scifi writers a lot of leeway when it comes to personal stridency and being fuckheads, because the best ones are visionary and creative and therefore get a little bit of license.</p><p>Certain ones, however, have crossed a line where their body of work has to be re-evaluated because of their non-literary activities.  Orson Scott Card is one such prick-with-ears.  George Orwell is practically the <i>template</i>.  Ray Bradbury is arguably on the steering committee of scifi writers who need to STFU.</p><p>Fortunately, death sort of wipes the slate clean for this archetype.  Because Orwell's no longer around to embarrass himself, and his contemporaries who were virtually unanimous in hating him have all passed on, his work can be seen on its own merits.  I think, in the case of O S Card, that the quality of his work has followed his own personal path to wankdom and triviality, and the few worthwhile books he's written probably won't last the time it takes to forget what a jerk he was (after his demise, I mean).</p><p>Bradbury's got a little more goodwill built up because he's written some important things, so despite his best efforts to destroy his personal "brand" his work will endure.  However, there will be footnotes in his bibliography mentioning what a nasty old cocksucker (and victim of abominable taste in facial hair)  he was.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Has anyone else noticed that for the last 3 or 4 decades , Ray Bradbury has been consistently a tool ? I 'm inclined to give scifi writers a lot of leeway when it comes to personal stridency and being fuckheads , because the best ones are visionary and creative and therefore get a little bit of license.Certain ones , however , have crossed a line where their body of work has to be re-evaluated because of their non-literary activities .
Orson Scott Card is one such prick-with-ears .
George Orwell is practically the template .
Ray Bradbury is arguably on the steering committee of scifi writers who need to STFU.Fortunately , death sort of wipes the slate clean for this archetype .
Because Orwell 's no longer around to embarrass himself , and his contemporaries who were virtually unanimous in hating him have all passed on , his work can be seen on its own merits .
I think , in the case of O S Card , that the quality of his work has followed his own personal path to wankdom and triviality , and the few worthwhile books he 's written probably wo n't last the time it takes to forget what a jerk he was ( after his demise , I mean ) .Bradbury 's got a little more goodwill built up because he 's written some important things , so despite his best efforts to destroy his personal " brand " his work will endure .
However , there will be footnotes in his bibliography mentioning what a nasty old cocksucker ( and victim of abominable taste in facial hair ) he was .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Has anyone else noticed that for the last 3 or 4 decades, Ray Bradbury has been consistently a tool?I'm inclined to give scifi writers a lot of leeway when it comes to personal stridency and being fuckheads, because the best ones are visionary and creative and therefore get a little bit of license.Certain ones, however, have crossed a line where their body of work has to be re-evaluated because of their non-literary activities.
Orson Scott Card is one such prick-with-ears.
George Orwell is practically the template.
Ray Bradbury is arguably on the steering committee of scifi writers who need to STFU.Fortunately, death sort of wipes the slate clean for this archetype.
Because Orwell's no longer around to embarrass himself, and his contemporaries who were virtually unanimous in hating him have all passed on, his work can be seen on its own merits.
I think, in the case of O S Card, that the quality of his work has followed his own personal path to wankdom and triviality, and the few worthwhile books he's written probably won't last the time it takes to forget what a jerk he was (after his demise, I mean).Bradbury's got a little more goodwill built up because he's written some important things, so despite his best efforts to destroy his personal "brand" his work will endure.
However, there will be footnotes in his bibliography mentioning what a nasty old cocksucker (and victim of abominable taste in facial hair)  he was.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404791</id>
	<title>Need a termometer</title>
	<author>gmuslera</author>
	<datestamp>1245496380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>At how much Farenheit degrees a Kindle burns?</htmltext>
<tokenext>At how much Farenheit degrees a Kindle burns ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At how much Farenheit degrees a Kindle burns?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28406659</id>
	<title>Re:And in other news, old man shouts at cloud</title>
	<author>HiThere</author>
	<datestamp>1245509280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The interesting thing about that is...titles are not copyrightable.  I suppose he could have made it a trademark, but he didn't.  And he sure didn't patent his title.</p><p>So... Michael Moore was embarrassed for social reasons, not for legal ones.  And if Bradbury is a legitimate Republican, he shouldn't find anything wrong with it.  The name, after all, was legally available for use.</p><p>Instead he's like most people, and an ideologue only when it's personally convenient.  OK.  That's the same way most people are.  But he should be aware that he's just twisting the Republican doctrines to fit what's personally convenient.</p><p>Personally, I think they both acted as unpleasant people, but, from description, at least Michael Moore had the grace to be embarrassed about it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The interesting thing about that is...titles are not copyrightable .
I suppose he could have made it a trademark , but he did n't .
And he sure did n't patent his title.So... Michael Moore was embarrassed for social reasons , not for legal ones .
And if Bradbury is a legitimate Republican , he should n't find anything wrong with it .
The name , after all , was legally available for use.Instead he 's like most people , and an ideologue only when it 's personally convenient .
OK. That 's the same way most people are .
But he should be aware that he 's just twisting the Republican doctrines to fit what 's personally convenient.Personally , I think they both acted as unpleasant people , but , from description , at least Michael Moore had the grace to be embarrassed about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The interesting thing about that is...titles are not copyrightable.
I suppose he could have made it a trademark, but he didn't.
And he sure didn't patent his title.So... Michael Moore was embarrassed for social reasons, not for legal ones.
And if Bradbury is a legitimate Republican, he shouldn't find anything wrong with it.
The name, after all, was legally available for use.Instead he's like most people, and an ideologue only when it's personally convenient.
OK.  That's the same way most people are.
But he should be aware that he's just twisting the Republican doctrines to fit what's personally convenient.Personally, I think they both acted as unpleasant people, but, from description, at least Michael Moore had the grace to be embarrassed about it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404423</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404595</id>
	<title>Trying not to sound condescending...</title>
	<author>hedgemage</author>
	<datestamp>1245494820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I work with elderly folks and when people ask me about my job, I joke that the biggest thing old folks fear is change.<br>
As we age, our ability to absorb new information and get it to gel with existing preconceptions degrades.  Elderly people aren't incapable of learning, but it takes much more effort to absorb and internalize new concepts that don't already fit into their world view or realm of experience.<br> Its really un-PC to say, but the older we get, the more inflexible our thinking becomes.  We have problems adapting to new situations, information, and the end result is often fear, confusion, or the dismissal of new ideas as irrelevant.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I work with elderly folks and when people ask me about my job , I joke that the biggest thing old folks fear is change .
As we age , our ability to absorb new information and get it to gel with existing preconceptions degrades .
Elderly people are n't incapable of learning , but it takes much more effort to absorb and internalize new concepts that do n't already fit into their world view or realm of experience .
Its really un-PC to say , but the older we get , the more inflexible our thinking becomes .
We have problems adapting to new situations , information , and the end result is often fear , confusion , or the dismissal of new ideas as irrelevant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work with elderly folks and when people ask me about my job, I joke that the biggest thing old folks fear is change.
As we age, our ability to absorb new information and get it to gel with existing preconceptions degrades.
Elderly people aren't incapable of learning, but it takes much more effort to absorb and internalize new concepts that don't already fit into their world view or realm of experience.
Its really un-PC to say, but the older we get, the more inflexible our thinking becomes.
We have problems adapting to new situations, information, and the end result is often fear, confusion, or the dismissal of new ideas as irrelevant.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28406931</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245511860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am 30, and I have been using the internet since the years of the BBS and I probably don't read as many books as I should.  That being said I personally think books and the internet are two forms of media both with their own limitations and benefits.  I always seems to turn to a well researched book if I want to learn anything in depth.  Books are more densely packed with "useful" information on a subject than most websites.  Cumulatively it takes accessing many web pages to find that kind of depth and even then I think a good book will more often go beyond my expectations whereas I find that web research will more often fall short.  Maybe e-books are the solution to this, but I doubt that an entire library of information will be accessible anytime soon and of course there is the longevity issue.  The internet on the other hand can publish/disseminate ideas faster and at little cost to the author.  User applications that collect and process data are also a big plus.  But I really don't think this discussion is about tooting our horns at the internet and how many wonderful things that Mr. Bradbury is missing out on.  For frig sake the man is 89 cut him some slack.  Most kids give me crap for not being on facebook, which I truly think is a useless waste of time.  Probably he means that for him the internet is a waste of time.  I once tried to teach my 65 year old mother how to use a mouse, it was not pretty.  Relatively books are much easier to interface with than a PC, and I'm sure I'll be cursing the IO device that controls the future of computing.  Oh god please don't make me sixty when the first brain controlled computers roll out.</p><p>In the end maybe we need an old curmudgeon like Mr. Bradbury to remind us of how cool books are so we tear our eyes away from the monitor and focus on a library book every once in a while.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am 30 , and I have been using the internet since the years of the BBS and I probably do n't read as many books as I should .
That being said I personally think books and the internet are two forms of media both with their own limitations and benefits .
I always seems to turn to a well researched book if I want to learn anything in depth .
Books are more densely packed with " useful " information on a subject than most websites .
Cumulatively it takes accessing many web pages to find that kind of depth and even then I think a good book will more often go beyond my expectations whereas I find that web research will more often fall short .
Maybe e-books are the solution to this , but I doubt that an entire library of information will be accessible anytime soon and of course there is the longevity issue .
The internet on the other hand can publish/disseminate ideas faster and at little cost to the author .
User applications that collect and process data are also a big plus .
But I really do n't think this discussion is about tooting our horns at the internet and how many wonderful things that Mr. Bradbury is missing out on .
For frig sake the man is 89 cut him some slack .
Most kids give me crap for not being on facebook , which I truly think is a useless waste of time .
Probably he means that for him the internet is a waste of time .
I once tried to teach my 65 year old mother how to use a mouse , it was not pretty .
Relatively books are much easier to interface with than a PC , and I 'm sure I 'll be cursing the IO device that controls the future of computing .
Oh god please do n't make me sixty when the first brain controlled computers roll out.In the end maybe we need an old curmudgeon like Mr. Bradbury to remind us of how cool books are so we tear our eyes away from the monitor and focus on a library book every once in a while .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am 30, and I have been using the internet since the years of the BBS and I probably don't read as many books as I should.
That being said I personally think books and the internet are two forms of media both with their own limitations and benefits.
I always seems to turn to a well researched book if I want to learn anything in depth.
Books are more densely packed with "useful" information on a subject than most websites.
Cumulatively it takes accessing many web pages to find that kind of depth and even then I think a good book will more often go beyond my expectations whereas I find that web research will more often fall short.
Maybe e-books are the solution to this, but I doubt that an entire library of information will be accessible anytime soon and of course there is the longevity issue.
The internet on the other hand can publish/disseminate ideas faster and at little cost to the author.
User applications that collect and process data are also a big plus.
But I really don't think this discussion is about tooting our horns at the internet and how many wonderful things that Mr. Bradbury is missing out on.
For frig sake the man is 89 cut him some slack.
Most kids give me crap for not being on facebook, which I truly think is a useless waste of time.
Probably he means that for him the internet is a waste of time.
I once tried to teach my 65 year old mother how to use a mouse, it was not pretty.
Relatively books are much easier to interface with than a PC, and I'm sure I'll be cursing the IO device that controls the future of computing.
Oh god please don't make me sixty when the first brain controlled computers roll out.In the end maybe we need an old curmudgeon like Mr. Bradbury to remind us of how cool books are so we tear our eyes away from the monitor and focus on a library book every once in a while.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405713</id>
	<title>2^n</title>
	<author>Fmuctohekerr</author>
	<datestamp>1245502140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Find the invisible man and you'll have a power set...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Find the invisible man and you 'll have a power set.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Find the invisible man and you'll have a power set...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404487</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28407947</id>
	<title>Re:And in other news, old man shouts at cloud</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245521640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>Yeah except&nbsp; you're kidding yourself--there never was any such thing as those old Republicans.&nbsp; They've been using that kind of philosophy as a cover for corruption ever since U.S. Grant.<br><br>Look it up.</tt></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah except   you 're kidding yourself--there never was any such thing as those old Republicans.   They 've been using that kind of philosophy as a cover for corruption ever since U.S. Grant.Look it up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah except  you're kidding yourself--there never was any such thing as those old Republicans.  They've been using that kind of philosophy as a cover for corruption ever since U.S. Grant.Look it up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404593</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404977</id>
	<title>Ray Bradbury just loves moderated forums</title>
	<author>hwyhobo</author>
	<datestamp>1245497820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The only difference between the Internet and a library is that the library is moderated.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The only difference between the Internet and a library is that the library is moderated .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only difference between the Internet and a library is that the library is moderated.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405185</id>
	<title>He kinda sucks</title>
	<author>Dalroth</author>
	<datestamp>1245499140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He came to my university my freshman year where he was supposed to give an hour long speech about censorship.  Instead, he gave an hour long speech about how awesome he was and all these cool awards he earned throughout his life.</p><p>Honestly, I don't care how great his books are, he's an idiot.</p><p>Bryan</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He came to my university my freshman year where he was supposed to give an hour long speech about censorship .
Instead , he gave an hour long speech about how awesome he was and all these cool awards he earned throughout his life.Honestly , I do n't care how great his books are , he 's an idiot.Bryan</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He came to my university my freshman year where he was supposed to give an hour long speech about censorship.
Instead, he gave an hour long speech about how awesome he was and all these cool awards he earned throughout his life.Honestly, I don't care how great his books are, he's an idiot.Bryan</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404879</id>
	<title>Re:Libraries are public, websites are (usually) no</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245497160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>given adequate support, libraries can stay open indefinitely</p></div><p><div class="quote"><p>Google (or any other commercial website) might be big today, but once the ad revenue (business model) collapses, they're toast and their huge volume of books, videos, etc. will go offline.</p></div><p>So on the one hand, if you assume an infinite amount of funding, libraries can stay open forever. On the other hand, if you do not assume an infinite amount of funding, an online library may close.</p><p>What happens if we assume an infinite amount of funding for an online library? Oh look, it stays open too. And libraries without an infinite amount of funding? Apparently those might eventually close.</p><p>This logic thing is certainly weird.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>given adequate support , libraries can stay open indefinitelyGoogle ( or any other commercial website ) might be big today , but once the ad revenue ( business model ) collapses , they 're toast and their huge volume of books , videos , etc .
will go offline.So on the one hand , if you assume an infinite amount of funding , libraries can stay open forever .
On the other hand , if you do not assume an infinite amount of funding , an online library may close.What happens if we assume an infinite amount of funding for an online library ?
Oh look , it stays open too .
And libraries without an infinite amount of funding ?
Apparently those might eventually close.This logic thing is certainly weird .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>given adequate support, libraries can stay open indefinitelyGoogle (or any other commercial website) might be big today, but once the ad revenue (business model) collapses, they're toast and their huge volume of books, videos, etc.
will go offline.So on the one hand, if you assume an infinite amount of funding, libraries can stay open forever.
On the other hand, if you do not assume an infinite amount of funding, an online library may close.What happens if we assume an infinite amount of funding for an online library?
Oh look, it stays open too.
And libraries without an infinite amount of funding?
Apparently those might eventually close.This logic thing is certainly weird.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404633</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404427</id>
	<title>Wow</title>
	<author>dcollins</author>
	<datestamp>1245493260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"I believe in libraries because most students don't have any money... 'To hell with you. To hell with you and to hell with the Internet.' It's distracting. It's meaningless; it's not real. It's in the air somewhere.'"</p><p>Wow, someone's got a bad case of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future\_shock" title="wikipedia.org">future shock</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>I grew up on newspapers &amp; magazines, but I'm coming to grips with the fact that someday those will be effectively gone, too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" I believe in libraries because most students do n't have any money... 'To hell with you .
To hell with you and to hell with the Internet .
' It 's distracting .
It 's meaningless ; it 's not real .
It 's in the air somewhere .
' " Wow , someone 's got a bad case of future shock [ wikipedia.org ] I grew up on newspapers &amp; magazines , but I 'm coming to grips with the fact that someday those will be effectively gone , too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I believe in libraries because most students don't have any money... 'To hell with you.
To hell with you and to hell with the Internet.
' It's distracting.
It's meaningless; it's not real.
It's in the air somewhere.
'"Wow, someone's got a bad case of future shock [wikipedia.org]I grew up on newspapers &amp; magazines, but I'm coming to grips with the fact that someday those will be effectively gone, too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404585</id>
	<title>Re:And in other news, old man shouts at cloud</title>
	<author>pankkake</author>
	<datestamp>1245494700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>You don't have to be a Republican to think that Michael Moore is a bullshit machine.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't have to be a Republican to think that Michael Moore is a bullshit machine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't have to be a Republican to think that Michael Moore is a bullshit machine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404423</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404571</id>
	<title>Re:"In the air?" Come on!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245494640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>&#226;oeIt&#226;(TM)s distracting,&#226; he continued. &#226;oeIt&#226;(TM)s meaningless; it&#226;(TM)s not real. It&#226;(TM)s in the air somewhere.&#226;</p></div><p>Many critics of digital media complain that the information is not tangible, like a book or a record is. That you can't hold it in your hands. But last time I checked, how a book physically felt in your hands wasn't important to enjoying and understanding a book. You read with your eyes, not with your fingers (braille notwithstanding).</p><p>So really Mr. Bradbury, what's your obsession with being able to hold things? Sounds more like materialism and hoarding instincts or misguided nostalgia than a genuine concern for the Internet.</p></div><p>I disagree with that. The tactile feeling I get from reading a paper book adds much to my enjoyment, at least for me. I've never tried a kindle, but I can't stand reading text from sites like project gutenberg.</p><p>I can read a real book for 10 hours. I can only stand about 20 minutes of text on a computer screen.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>  oeIt   ( TM ) s distracting ,   he continued .
  oeIt   ( TM ) s meaningless ; it   ( TM ) s not real .
It   ( TM ) s in the air somewhere.   Many critics of digital media complain that the information is not tangible , like a book or a record is .
That you ca n't hold it in your hands .
But last time I checked , how a book physically felt in your hands was n't important to enjoying and understanding a book .
You read with your eyes , not with your fingers ( braille notwithstanding ) .So really Mr. Bradbury , what 's your obsession with being able to hold things ?
Sounds more like materialism and hoarding instincts or misguided nostalgia than a genuine concern for the Internet.I disagree with that .
The tactile feeling I get from reading a paper book adds much to my enjoyment , at least for me .
I 've never tried a kindle , but I ca n't stand reading text from sites like project gutenberg.I can read a real book for 10 hours .
I can only stand about 20 minutes of text on a computer screen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>âoeItâ(TM)s distracting,â he continued.
âoeItâ(TM)s meaningless; itâ(TM)s not real.
Itâ(TM)s in the air somewhere.âMany critics of digital media complain that the information is not tangible, like a book or a record is.
That you can't hold it in your hands.
But last time I checked, how a book physically felt in your hands wasn't important to enjoying and understanding a book.
You read with your eyes, not with your fingers (braille notwithstanding).So really Mr. Bradbury, what's your obsession with being able to hold things?
Sounds more like materialism and hoarding instincts or misguided nostalgia than a genuine concern for the Internet.I disagree with that.
The tactile feeling I get from reading a paper book adds much to my enjoyment, at least for me.
I've never tried a kindle, but I can't stand reading text from sites like project gutenberg.I can read a real book for 10 hours.
I can only stand about 20 minutes of text on a computer screen.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404527</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28414887</id>
	<title>Re:A series of tubes in the air?</title>
	<author>lennier</author>
	<datestamp>1245590100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"So the Internet is a series of tubes in the air somewhere...?"</p><p>Pneumatic tubes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" So the Internet is a series of tubes in the air somewhere... ?
" Pneumatic tubes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"So the Internet is a series of tubes in the air somewhere...?
"Pneumatic tubes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404525</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28406533</id>
	<title>Old guy hates new things, news at 11</title>
	<author>spooje</author>
	<datestamp>1245507960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Old guy hates new things, news at 11.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Old guy hates new things , news at 11 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Old guy hates new things, news at 11.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28406411</id>
	<title>Re:Is there ONLY one thing to be said about books?</title>
	<author>AdamHaun</author>
	<datestamp>1245507000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are some important tradeoffs between paper and digital media. I'm assuming we're talking about original works here and that e.g. transcribing a newpaper article doesn't count.</p><p>* Books aren't just rugged, they're also non-ephemeral in a way that web sites aren't. Much of the efficiency of the internet comes from cheap communication with centralized storage. But this means that whoever controls the storage has the power to change history. You can't change a million books in people's houses but old web pages can be lost or altered much more easily. When I go through my old del.icio.us bookmarks I often find 404s, which never happens on my bookshelf.</p><p>* The time and money needed for paper publishing creates an incentive for basic quality control. There are precious few copy-editors working on the net. Spelling, grammar, and basic comprehensibility all suffer as a result.</p><p>* Many popular formats on the internet (such as blogs) are inherently chronological. The focus is always on the latest information, and there's little incentive to improve or correct old content. Longer content is released a chapter (or section!) at a time. This is most visible (although less important) in webcomics, where the early art and storytelling can be orders of magnitude worse than the latest material.</p><p>* Books have total control over layout and formatting. Web content, which has to be viewed on everything from PCs to cell phones, doesn't. Formats such as PDF are much clumsier to use than HTML. Read Edward Tufte to find out why this is important.</p><p>* There is very little long-format content on the internet. A page or two of text is considered "long" for most purposes (in the context of Slashdot, how long is this comment? how long would it be on a printed page?). Several pages is huge, and a couple dozen pages is gargantuan. Meanwhile, even small books for children and short works of nonfiction are usually at least a couple hundred pages long. Short content is convenient (and thus popular), but there are ideas and levels of detail you simply can't reach in a few pages.</p><p>There are some exceptions to all of this, but the general trends still drive the way we communicate. And in general, books are longer, more expensive, better edited, and more thought out in advance, while web content is shorter, faster, cheaper, more accessible, more diverse, and lower quality. The net's advantages work better in shorter formats -- it's telling that the first (and most successful) things to be digitized were the letter/memo and the casual conversation, followed later by the want ad and article.</p><p>Will web content ever equal books? I don't know. Collections of related blog essays have been pulled from blogs, cleaned up, and published as books (Joel Spolsky's, for instance), which is a start. The Wiki might be a viable format, although I suspect open-content sites will never quite make it. Taking an idea from Fred Brooks, it may be that conceptual integrity is the most important factor in the quality of a written document, and it's hard to achieve that when you have a thousand editors. Good luck talking about it, though, since the net has a giant persecution complex vis-a-vis top-down control of publishing.</p><p>Here's an example of where I'm coming from: Recently I decided I don't know enough about biology. I took a class in high school when I was 15 and that's it (I'm 27 now). So I bought what appears to be the standard intro level college textbook (<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Biology-MasteringBiology-8th-Neil-Campbell/dp/0321543254/ref=sr\_1\_4?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1245544562&amp;sr=8-4" title="amazon.com">Campbell and Reece</a> [amazon.com]) and was blown away. Despite being full of detail, the explanations are clear, and nearly every page has one or more full-color pictures or diagrams. There are many asides that link the topics to everyday life. Each subsection has about as much content as an average blog post. The book is 1,400 pages long. It cost $140 and I consider it worth every penny.</p><p>There is nothing like this on the internet. But</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are some important tradeoffs between paper and digital media .
I 'm assuming we 're talking about original works here and that e.g .
transcribing a newpaper article does n't count .
* Books are n't just rugged , they 're also non-ephemeral in a way that web sites are n't .
Much of the efficiency of the internet comes from cheap communication with centralized storage .
But this means that whoever controls the storage has the power to change history .
You ca n't change a million books in people 's houses but old web pages can be lost or altered much more easily .
When I go through my old del.icio.us bookmarks I often find 404s , which never happens on my bookshelf .
* The time and money needed for paper publishing creates an incentive for basic quality control .
There are precious few copy-editors working on the net .
Spelling , grammar , and basic comprehensibility all suffer as a result .
* Many popular formats on the internet ( such as blogs ) are inherently chronological .
The focus is always on the latest information , and there 's little incentive to improve or correct old content .
Longer content is released a chapter ( or section !
) at a time .
This is most visible ( although less important ) in webcomics , where the early art and storytelling can be orders of magnitude worse than the latest material .
* Books have total control over layout and formatting .
Web content , which has to be viewed on everything from PCs to cell phones , does n't .
Formats such as PDF are much clumsier to use than HTML .
Read Edward Tufte to find out why this is important .
* There is very little long-format content on the internet .
A page or two of text is considered " long " for most purposes ( in the context of Slashdot , how long is this comment ?
how long would it be on a printed page ? ) .
Several pages is huge , and a couple dozen pages is gargantuan .
Meanwhile , even small books for children and short works of nonfiction are usually at least a couple hundred pages long .
Short content is convenient ( and thus popular ) , but there are ideas and levels of detail you simply ca n't reach in a few pages.There are some exceptions to all of this , but the general trends still drive the way we communicate .
And in general , books are longer , more expensive , better edited , and more thought out in advance , while web content is shorter , faster , cheaper , more accessible , more diverse , and lower quality .
The net 's advantages work better in shorter formats -- it 's telling that the first ( and most successful ) things to be digitized were the letter/memo and the casual conversation , followed later by the want ad and article.Will web content ever equal books ?
I do n't know .
Collections of related blog essays have been pulled from blogs , cleaned up , and published as books ( Joel Spolsky 's , for instance ) , which is a start .
The Wiki might be a viable format , although I suspect open-content sites will never quite make it .
Taking an idea from Fred Brooks , it may be that conceptual integrity is the most important factor in the quality of a written document , and it 's hard to achieve that when you have a thousand editors .
Good luck talking about it , though , since the net has a giant persecution complex vis-a-vis top-down control of publishing.Here 's an example of where I 'm coming from : Recently I decided I do n't know enough about biology .
I took a class in high school when I was 15 and that 's it ( I 'm 27 now ) .
So I bought what appears to be the standard intro level college textbook ( Campbell and Reece [ amazon.com ] ) and was blown away .
Despite being full of detail , the explanations are clear , and nearly every page has one or more full-color pictures or diagrams .
There are many asides that link the topics to everyday life .
Each subsection has about as much content as an average blog post .
The book is 1,400 pages long .
It cost $ 140 and I consider it worth every penny.There is nothing like this on the internet .
But</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are some important tradeoffs between paper and digital media.
I'm assuming we're talking about original works here and that e.g.
transcribing a newpaper article doesn't count.
* Books aren't just rugged, they're also non-ephemeral in a way that web sites aren't.
Much of the efficiency of the internet comes from cheap communication with centralized storage.
But this means that whoever controls the storage has the power to change history.
You can't change a million books in people's houses but old web pages can be lost or altered much more easily.
When I go through my old del.icio.us bookmarks I often find 404s, which never happens on my bookshelf.
* The time and money needed for paper publishing creates an incentive for basic quality control.
There are precious few copy-editors working on the net.
Spelling, grammar, and basic comprehensibility all suffer as a result.
* Many popular formats on the internet (such as blogs) are inherently chronological.
The focus is always on the latest information, and there's little incentive to improve or correct old content.
Longer content is released a chapter (or section!
) at a time.
This is most visible (although less important) in webcomics, where the early art and storytelling can be orders of magnitude worse than the latest material.
* Books have total control over layout and formatting.
Web content, which has to be viewed on everything from PCs to cell phones, doesn't.
Formats such as PDF are much clumsier to use than HTML.
Read Edward Tufte to find out why this is important.
* There is very little long-format content on the internet.
A page or two of text is considered "long" for most purposes (in the context of Slashdot, how long is this comment?
how long would it be on a printed page?).
Several pages is huge, and a couple dozen pages is gargantuan.
Meanwhile, even small books for children and short works of nonfiction are usually at least a couple hundred pages long.
Short content is convenient (and thus popular), but there are ideas and levels of detail you simply can't reach in a few pages.There are some exceptions to all of this, but the general trends still drive the way we communicate.
And in general, books are longer, more expensive, better edited, and more thought out in advance, while web content is shorter, faster, cheaper, more accessible, more diverse, and lower quality.
The net's advantages work better in shorter formats -- it's telling that the first (and most successful) things to be digitized were the letter/memo and the casual conversation, followed later by the want ad and article.Will web content ever equal books?
I don't know.
Collections of related blog essays have been pulled from blogs, cleaned up, and published as books (Joel Spolsky's, for instance), which is a start.
The Wiki might be a viable format, although I suspect open-content sites will never quite make it.
Taking an idea from Fred Brooks, it may be that conceptual integrity is the most important factor in the quality of a written document, and it's hard to achieve that when you have a thousand editors.
Good luck talking about it, though, since the net has a giant persecution complex vis-a-vis top-down control of publishing.Here's an example of where I'm coming from: Recently I decided I don't know enough about biology.
I took a class in high school when I was 15 and that's it (I'm 27 now).
So I bought what appears to be the standard intro level college textbook (Campbell and Reece [amazon.com]) and was blown away.
Despite being full of detail, the explanations are clear, and nearly every page has one or more full-color pictures or diagrams.
There are many asides that link the topics to everyday life.
Each subsection has about as much content as an average blog post.
The book is 1,400 pages long.
It cost $140 and I consider it worth every penny.There is nothing like this on the internet.
But</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404663</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404599</id>
	<title>Well...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245494880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If he's so intelligent and hates the Internet so much, maybe someone should tell him to take down the website that bears his name (http://www.raybradbury.com/)  and lists all his books for purchase (http://www.raybradbury.com/books/books.html). After all, it's just a waste of time!</p><p>ANOVWL.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If he 's so intelligent and hates the Internet so much , maybe someone should tell him to take down the website that bears his name ( http : //www.raybradbury.com/ ) and lists all his books for purchase ( http : //www.raybradbury.com/books/books.html ) .
After all , it 's just a waste of time ! ANOVWL .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If he's so intelligent and hates the Internet so much, maybe someone should tell him to take down the website that bears his name (http://www.raybradbury.com/)  and lists all his books for purchase (http://www.raybradbury.com/books/books.html).
After all, it's just a waste of time!ANOVWL.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405139</id>
	<title>He was tortured by the bushes</title>
	<author>nanospook</author>
	<datestamp>1245498840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Forgive the man, he has never been the same since he was invited over by the Bushes.. oh the torturing he endured.. *shaking head*
<br>
<a href="http://bp0.blogger.com/\_PG3ew\_iFi3A/SEshn-ZMVII/AAAAAAAABSo/NJzApusv3ak/s1600-h/photo1.jpg" title="blogger.com" rel="nofollow">I was tortured by the Bushes</a> [blogger.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Forgive the man , he has never been the same since he was invited over by the Bushes.. oh the torturing he endured.. * shaking head * I was tortured by the Bushes [ blogger.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Forgive the man, he has never been the same since he was invited over by the Bushes.. oh the torturing he endured.. *shaking head*

I was tortured by the Bushes [blogger.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404945</id>
	<title>who?</title>
	<author>foxx1337</author>
	<datestamp>1245497640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>haven't heard of this dude till now</p><p>*goes wiki...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>have n't heard of this dude till now * goes wiki.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>haven't heard of this dude till now*goes wiki...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28411729</id>
	<title>Re:Books are not real!</title>
	<author>sootman</author>
	<datestamp>1245608040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Among Leet Slashdotter's passions, none burn quite as hot as his lifelong enthusiasm for the Internet.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... "The Internet raised me," Mr. Slashdotter said. "I don't believe in colleges and universities and brain implants. I believe in the Internet because most students don't have any implants. When I graduated from high school, it was during the Depression (2009-2018) and we had no money. I couldn't go to college, so I went online three days a week for 10 years."<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... Implants? Don't get him started. "Implants are a big distraction," Mr. Slashdotter barked... "Yahooglesoft called me eight weeks ago," he said, voice rising. "They wanted to put a book of mine in an implant! You know what I told them? 'To hell with you. To hell with you and to hell with implants. It's distracting. It's meaningless; it's not real. It's in your blood somewhere.' "</i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Among Leet Slashdotter 's passions , none burn quite as hot as his lifelong enthusiasm for the Internet .
... " The Internet raised me , " Mr. Slashdotter said .
" I do n't believe in colleges and universities and brain implants .
I believe in the Internet because most students do n't have any implants .
When I graduated from high school , it was during the Depression ( 2009-2018 ) and we had no money .
I could n't go to college , so I went online three days a week for 10 years .
" ... Implants ? Do n't get him started .
" Implants are a big distraction , " Mr. Slashdotter barked... " Yahooglesoft called me eight weeks ago , " he said , voice rising .
" They wanted to put a book of mine in an implant !
You know what I told them ?
'To hell with you .
To hell with you and to hell with implants .
It 's distracting .
It 's meaningless ; it 's not real .
It 's in your blood somewhere .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Among Leet Slashdotter's passions, none burn quite as hot as his lifelong enthusiasm for the Internet.
... "The Internet raised me," Mr. Slashdotter said.
"I don't believe in colleges and universities and brain implants.
I believe in the Internet because most students don't have any implants.
When I graduated from high school, it was during the Depression (2009-2018) and we had no money.
I couldn't go to college, so I went online three days a week for 10 years.
" ... Implants? Don't get him started.
"Implants are a big distraction," Mr. Slashdotter barked... "Yahooglesoft called me eight weeks ago," he said, voice rising.
"They wanted to put a book of mine in an implant!
You know what I told them?
'To hell with you.
To hell with you and to hell with implants.
It's distracting.
It's meaningless; it's not real.
It's in your blood somewhere.
' "</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404517</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28414125</id>
	<title>Google Books has already sold me a book</title>
	<author>lennier</author>
	<datestamp>1245583260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I read online obsessively, but I also buy print books.</p><p>Increasingly, I'm finding Google Books a big temptation. Through a random search somewhere I discovered <a href="http://books.google.co.nz/books?id=eD4taFgeTUYC&amp;printsec=frontcover&amp;source=gbs\_v2\_summary\_r&amp;cad=0" title="google.co.nz">Strategic Computing</a> [google.co.nz], and after reading the first couple of chapters online decided heck with it and placed an order at my local bookstore for the real thing.</p><p>Without Google Books and the ability to read text I would never have done this.</p><p>One data point maybe, but for me it's pretty obvious: digitising books in the way that Google is doing doesn't replace print books, it promotes them.</p><p>Ray Bradbury's welcome to miss out on this if he wants. He's always been anti-technology, but I didn't think he was anti *reading*. Guess I was wrong.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I read online obsessively , but I also buy print books.Increasingly , I 'm finding Google Books a big temptation .
Through a random search somewhere I discovered Strategic Computing [ google.co.nz ] , and after reading the first couple of chapters online decided heck with it and placed an order at my local bookstore for the real thing.Without Google Books and the ability to read text I would never have done this.One data point maybe , but for me it 's pretty obvious : digitising books in the way that Google is doing does n't replace print books , it promotes them.Ray Bradbury 's welcome to miss out on this if he wants .
He 's always been anti-technology , but I did n't think he was anti * reading * .
Guess I was wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I read online obsessively, but I also buy print books.Increasingly, I'm finding Google Books a big temptation.
Through a random search somewhere I discovered Strategic Computing [google.co.nz], and after reading the first couple of chapters online decided heck with it and placed an order at my local bookstore for the real thing.Without Google Books and the ability to read text I would never have done this.One data point maybe, but for me it's pretty obvious: digitising books in the way that Google is doing doesn't replace print books, it promotes them.Ray Bradbury's welcome to miss out on this if he wants.
He's always been anti-technology, but I didn't think he was anti *reading*.
Guess I was wrong.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405279</id>
	<title>a library...</title>
	<author>hitmark</author>
	<datestamp>1245499740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>it is indeed, and one with infinite lending time of its content, and endless copies to lend out...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it is indeed , and one with infinite lending time of its content , and endless copies to lend out.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it is indeed, and one with infinite lending time of its content, and endless copies to lend out...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405455</id>
	<title>Re:And in other news, old man shouts at cloud</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245500700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not wanting his book title used for a Michael Moore film doesn't make him a "flaming Republican."</p><p>I also find it amusing how being a flaming Democrat isn't a problem to Slashdotters.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not wanting his book title used for a Michael Moore film does n't make him a " flaming Republican .
" I also find it amusing how being a flaming Democrat is n't a problem to Slashdotters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not wanting his book title used for a Michael Moore film doesn't make him a "flaming Republican.
"I also find it amusing how being a flaming Democrat isn't a problem to Slashdotters.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404423</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28406977</id>
	<title>By Neruos</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245512340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not the information it's the experience. The internet offers no experience except the keyboard, mouse, monitor and a speaker if you so choose. The library offers an entire experience, which the internet will never have. If you dismiss the physical world for that of the virtual on the sole merits of information, then you might as well stay living in your moms basement.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not the information it 's the experience .
The internet offers no experience except the keyboard , mouse , monitor and a speaker if you so choose .
The library offers an entire experience , which the internet will never have .
If you dismiss the physical world for that of the virtual on the sole merits of information , then you might as well stay living in your moms basement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not the information it's the experience.
The internet offers no experience except the keyboard, mouse, monitor and a speaker if you so choose.
The library offers an entire experience, which the internet will never have.
If you dismiss the physical world for that of the virtual on the sole merits of information, then you might as well stay living in your moms basement.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28408215</id>
	<title>For Ray Bradbury</title>
	<author>FLoWCTRL</author>
	<datestamp>1245524640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>respect--;</htmltext>
<tokenext>respect-- ;</tokentext>
<sentencetext>respect--;</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28407457</id>
	<title>And he writes sci-fi...</title>
	<author>GroovyChk</author>
	<datestamp>1245517200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And this guy writes science fiction?  Geez - how short sighted of him.  Libraries are neat.  I have fond memories of them from my youth. But the Internet is awesome.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And this guy writes science fiction ?
Geez - how short sighted of him .
Libraries are neat .
I have fond memories of them from my youth .
But the Internet is awesome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And this guy writes science fiction?
Geez - how short sighted of him.
Libraries are neat.
I have fond memories of them from my youth.
But the Internet is awesome.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28407923</id>
	<title>Been to college?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245521340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think its funny when people talk about books being outdated. Yet they will spend 40 grand or more to go to college and what do they do there? Read books.</p><p>If its all on the internet, just go to wikipedia and save yourself 40 grand. Its all just information, right?</p><p>I think not.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think its funny when people talk about books being outdated .
Yet they will spend 40 grand or more to go to college and what do they do there ?
Read books.If its all on the internet , just go to wikipedia and save yourself 40 grand .
Its all just information , right ? I think not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think its funny when people talk about books being outdated.
Yet they will spend 40 grand or more to go to college and what do they do there?
Read books.If its all on the internet, just go to wikipedia and save yourself 40 grand.
Its all just information, right?I think not.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404917</id>
	<title>(shrug) Some people are incapable of change...</title>
	<author>sherifffruitfly</author>
	<datestamp>1245497400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No biggie. He's still a great author, and libraries are definitely ftw. As far as the internet is concerned, however, it is what the user makes of it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No biggie .
He 's still a great author , and libraries are definitely ftw .
As far as the internet is concerned , however , it is what the user makes of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No biggie.
He's still a great author, and libraries are definitely ftw.
As far as the internet is concerned, however, it is what the user makes of it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405211</id>
	<title>"I don't believe in colleges and universities."</title>
	<author>blind biker</author>
	<datestamp>1245499320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What does he think, who and what is responsible for most of the scientific books in libraries? I like libraries, too, but I also like institutions of higher education, as well as the Internet.</p><p>I only dislike pompous second-rate sci-fi writers whose only reason for fame is striking a populist cord in his overrated novels. And I don't like Fahrenheit 451 - what an overrated piece of crap.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What does he think , who and what is responsible for most of the scientific books in libraries ?
I like libraries , too , but I also like institutions of higher education , as well as the Internet.I only dislike pompous second-rate sci-fi writers whose only reason for fame is striking a populist cord in his overrated novels .
And I do n't like Fahrenheit 451 - what an overrated piece of crap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What does he think, who and what is responsible for most of the scientific books in libraries?
I like libraries, too, but I also like institutions of higher education, as well as the Internet.I only dislike pompous second-rate sci-fi writers whose only reason for fame is striking a populist cord in his overrated novels.
And I don't like Fahrenheit 451 - what an overrated piece of crap.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405245</id>
	<title>Grumpy</title>
	<author>Jaro</author>
	<datestamp>1245499440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I love libraries, I love the internet. Both have their uses. I find it quite comfortable to search my local library catalog. This is grumpy old man who is sticking to what he knows and is comfortable with. Just ignore it. I know other grumpy old people who hate technology because they don't know it and thus are afraid of it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I love libraries , I love the internet .
Both have their uses .
I find it quite comfortable to search my local library catalog .
This is grumpy old man who is sticking to what he knows and is comfortable with .
Just ignore it .
I know other grumpy old people who hate technology because they do n't know it and thus are afraid of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love libraries, I love the internet.
Both have their uses.
I find it quite comfortable to search my local library catalog.
This is grumpy old man who is sticking to what he knows and is comfortable with.
Just ignore it.
I know other grumpy old people who hate technology because they don't know it and thus are afraid of it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404449</id>
	<title>Root of all Evil: Ignorance</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245493500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Internet has taught me far more than my college education ever could, and more than any one book for that matter.</p><p>It's amazing how people will so stereotypically judge an entire artifact without fully understanding its purpose or potential.</p><p>The Internet is distracting? I bet he uses Windows...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Internet has taught me far more than my college education ever could , and more than any one book for that matter.It 's amazing how people will so stereotypically judge an entire artifact without fully understanding its purpose or potential.The Internet is distracting ?
I bet he uses Windows.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Internet has taught me far more than my college education ever could, and more than any one book for that matter.It's amazing how people will so stereotypically judge an entire artifact without fully understanding its purpose or potential.The Internet is distracting?
I bet he uses Windows...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28418369</id>
	<title>Re:"In the air?" Come on!</title>
	<author>FatLittleMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1245662880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I can curl up in my easy chair with my dog(...) and a good book.  It's incredibly awkward to do the same with a laptop.  I do realize that smaller and probably far less awkward technology exists for reading e-books, but why would I purchase some piece of tech to do what the books I already own do.</p></div><p>When was the last time you moved?  Two boxes, marked kitchen, two boxes marked bedroom, two boxes marked computer-stuff *, 15 boxes marked books. 15 Heavy Boxes Marked Books. And I don't own that many books. Bring on the digital revolution, I would be more than happy to have every book I've ever owned on a tablet-style device. (DRM notwithstanding)

</p><p>(And another 15 two-foot tight-packed bundles of magazines on the curb. How the hell did I get a periodicals section?)

</p><p>(*) Actually, "computer-stuff-fragile-fragile-do-not-drop-no-i'm-serious-i-will-fucking-kill-you". Okay, maybe the digi-book tablet-thing still has a flaw or two.</p><p><div class="quote"><p> but on Slashdot there are some really dim people, so I'm stating this for them<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div><p>And we appreciate your small words, and big fonts.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I can curl up in my easy chair with my dog ( ... ) and a good book .
It 's incredibly awkward to do the same with a laptop .
I do realize that smaller and probably far less awkward technology exists for reading e-books , but why would I purchase some piece of tech to do what the books I already own do.When was the last time you moved ?
Two boxes , marked kitchen , two boxes marked bedroom , two boxes marked computer-stuff * , 15 boxes marked books .
15 Heavy Boxes Marked Books .
And I do n't own that many books .
Bring on the digital revolution , I would be more than happy to have every book I 've ever owned on a tablet-style device .
( DRM notwithstanding ) ( And another 15 two-foot tight-packed bundles of magazines on the curb .
How the hell did I get a periodicals section ?
) ( * ) Actually , " computer-stuff-fragile-fragile-do-not-drop-no-i 'm-serious-i-will-fucking-kill-you " .
Okay , maybe the digi-book tablet-thing still has a flaw or two .
but on Slashdot there are some really dim people , so I 'm stating this for them : ) And we appreciate your small words , and big fonts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can curl up in my easy chair with my dog(...) and a good book.
It's incredibly awkward to do the same with a laptop.
I do realize that smaller and probably far less awkward technology exists for reading e-books, but why would I purchase some piece of tech to do what the books I already own do.When was the last time you moved?
Two boxes, marked kitchen, two boxes marked bedroom, two boxes marked computer-stuff *, 15 boxes marked books.
15 Heavy Boxes Marked Books.
And I don't own that many books.
Bring on the digital revolution, I would be more than happy to have every book I've ever owned on a tablet-style device.
(DRM notwithstanding)

(And another 15 two-foot tight-packed bundles of magazines on the curb.
How the hell did I get a periodicals section?
)

(*) Actually, "computer-stuff-fragile-fragile-do-not-drop-no-i'm-serious-i-will-fucking-kill-you".
Okay, maybe the digi-book tablet-thing still has a flaw or two.
but on Slashdot there are some really dim people, so I'm stating this for them :)And we appreciate your small words, and big fonts.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404665</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405281</id>
	<title>Ray Bradbury is a tool</title>
	<author>yidele</author>
	<datestamp>1245499740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...and a willfully blind  one, too. You'd have to be a tool to refuse to see the single greatest technological change vector since at least Berthold Shwartz or Gutenberg. Sure it's up in the air. So is all of literature. So is his renown, fame, reputation, etc.  These are all virtual, ephemeric phenomena.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...and a willfully blind one , too .
You 'd have to be a tool to refuse to see the single greatest technological change vector since at least Berthold Shwartz or Gutenberg .
Sure it 's up in the air .
So is all of literature .
So is his renown , fame , reputation , etc .
These are all virtual , ephemeric phenomena .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...and a willfully blind  one, too.
You'd have to be a tool to refuse to see the single greatest technological change vector since at least Berthold Shwartz or Gutenberg.
Sure it's up in the air.
So is all of literature.
So is his renown, fame, reputation, etc.
These are all virtual, ephemeric phenomena.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404593</id>
	<title>Re:And in other news, old man shouts at cloud</title>
	<author>fyoder</author>
	<datestamp>1245494820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Republicans weren't so bad way back when they believed in small gov't and fiscal responsibility.  Even if one believed that gov't had a role to play in society beyond simply maintaining the courts and providing for defense, one could still get along with, and even appreciate the perspective of, the old Republicans.  A lot of old folk who call themselves Republicans may not be whatever the fuck today's Republicans are.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Republicans were n't so bad way back when they believed in small gov't and fiscal responsibility .
Even if one believed that gov't had a role to play in society beyond simply maintaining the courts and providing for defense , one could still get along with , and even appreciate the perspective of , the old Republicans .
A lot of old folk who call themselves Republicans may not be whatever the fuck today 's Republicans are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Republicans weren't so bad way back when they believed in small gov't and fiscal responsibility.
Even if one believed that gov't had a role to play in society beyond simply maintaining the courts and providing for defense, one could still get along with, and even appreciate the perspective of, the old Republicans.
A lot of old folk who call themselves Republicans may not be whatever the fuck today's Republicans are.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404423</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404425</id>
	<title>Re:God Bless Him</title>
	<author>spire3661</author>
	<datestamp>1245493260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Technically, the internet is the largest library of information ever known to man. To dismiss it only shows his inability to truly grasp it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Technically , the internet is the largest library of information ever known to man .
To dismiss it only shows his inability to truly grasp it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Technically, the internet is the largest library of information ever known to man.
To dismiss it only shows his inability to truly grasp it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404365</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405001</id>
	<title>Internet as a library</title>
	<author>SharpFang</author>
	<datestamp>1245497940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At school I would read 10-20 books a year. When I started work, I found I have a hard time finding time to read one or two books. I don't have time to go to the library, the bookstores are expensive, and I find hauling a book with me to work and back a hassle. For some 6 years I read maybe 4 books total.</p><p>Over the last 3 years I read maybe 100 books. All thanks to getting an ebook reader (Palm Vx actually), and books in electronic form. I can spend 15 minutes downloading and converting them, then have enough reading for another 3 months, and enough storage memory to keep several various books to pick something matching my current mood.</p><p>I can read in bed with the light off, when the roommate is asleep already. I can read in public communication. Sometimes I buy a beer at a pub and read. And so on.</p><p>Paper is overrated. It is limiting as a medium, expensive and unwieldy. Sure it has better contrast and doesn't require recharging, but if I was to carry the paper kind of library I carry with me now, my back would break.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At school I would read 10-20 books a year .
When I started work , I found I have a hard time finding time to read one or two books .
I do n't have time to go to the library , the bookstores are expensive , and I find hauling a book with me to work and back a hassle .
For some 6 years I read maybe 4 books total.Over the last 3 years I read maybe 100 books .
All thanks to getting an ebook reader ( Palm Vx actually ) , and books in electronic form .
I can spend 15 minutes downloading and converting them , then have enough reading for another 3 months , and enough storage memory to keep several various books to pick something matching my current mood.I can read in bed with the light off , when the roommate is asleep already .
I can read in public communication .
Sometimes I buy a beer at a pub and read .
And so on.Paper is overrated .
It is limiting as a medium , expensive and unwieldy .
Sure it has better contrast and does n't require recharging , but if I was to carry the paper kind of library I carry with me now , my back would break .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At school I would read 10-20 books a year.
When I started work, I found I have a hard time finding time to read one or two books.
I don't have time to go to the library, the bookstores are expensive, and I find hauling a book with me to work and back a hassle.
For some 6 years I read maybe 4 books total.Over the last 3 years I read maybe 100 books.
All thanks to getting an ebook reader (Palm Vx actually), and books in electronic form.
I can spend 15 minutes downloading and converting them, then have enough reading for another 3 months, and enough storage memory to keep several various books to pick something matching my current mood.I can read in bed with the light off, when the roommate is asleep already.
I can read in public communication.
Sometimes I buy a beer at a pub and read.
And so on.Paper is overrated.
It is limiting as a medium, expensive and unwieldy.
Sure it has better contrast and doesn't require recharging, but if I was to carry the paper kind of library I carry with me now, my back would break.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404663
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28406411
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404633
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404911
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404525
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28414887
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404487
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404717
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404633
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404879
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28440939
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404423
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404585
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28413267
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404423
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405455
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404365
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404425
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404517
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28411729
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404423
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405373
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404423
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28407765
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404423
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404593
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28407947
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404633
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405685
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404423
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28406659
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404487
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405713
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404633
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404809
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404527
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404665
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28418369
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404423
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404423
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404531
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404787
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28406923
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404787
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28409333
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28414717
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404527
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404571
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404423
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28425163
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404423
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404585
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28407519
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404527
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404699
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404423
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404671
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404517
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405447
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404423
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404593
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28415593
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404485
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28406573
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404423
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28408217
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404517
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405991
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28413041
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_1828253_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404517
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28408353
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_1828253.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404427
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_1828253.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28407923
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_1828253.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404525
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28414887
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_1828253.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404787
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28406923
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28409333
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_1828253.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28406977
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_1828253.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28409771
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_1828253.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28407313
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_1828253.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404637
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28413041
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28440939
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405447
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28414717
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_1828253.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404355
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_1828253.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404365
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404425
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_1828253.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404485
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28406573
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_1828253.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404595
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_1828253.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404527
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404665
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28418369
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404699
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404571
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_1828253.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28407405
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_1828253.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404557
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_1828253.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404663
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28406411
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_1828253.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404553
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_1828253.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28407457
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_1828253.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404791
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_1828253.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404487
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404717
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405713
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_1828253.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404633
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404911
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404809
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405685
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404879
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_1828253.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404603
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_1828253.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404423
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405373
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28408217
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405455
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28407765
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28425163
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404671
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404593
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28415593
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28407947
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404549
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404585
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28407519
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28413267
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28406659
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404531
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_1828253.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404517
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28408353
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405847
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28405991
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28411729
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_1828253.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_1828253.28404667
</commentlist>
</conversation>
