<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_07_01_1828254</id>
	<title>Firefox 3.5 Benchmarked, Close To Original Chrome</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1246473540000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://twitter.com/natelanxon" rel="nofollow">CNETNate</a> writes <i>"The tests prove it: It's the <a href="http://crave.cnet.co.uk/software/0,39029471,49302846,00.htm">third-fastest browser in the world</a>, and over twice as fast as Firefox 3. In terms of Javascript performance, Firefox 3.5's new rendering engine places it squarely above Opera 10's beta and Internet Explorers 7 and 8 (based on <a href="http://crave.cnet.co.uk/software/0,39029471,49301219,00.htm">previous benchmarks</a>), plus it's getting on for being almost as quick as the <em>original</em> version of Google Chrome. Also, the new location-awareness feature was testing in central London, and pinpointed yours truly to within a few hundred meters &mdash; easily enough for, say, a Starbucks Web site to tell you where your nearest Starbucks is."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>CNETNate writes " The tests prove it : It 's the third-fastest browser in the world , and over twice as fast as Firefox 3 .
In terms of Javascript performance , Firefox 3.5 's new rendering engine places it squarely above Opera 10 's beta and Internet Explorers 7 and 8 ( based on previous benchmarks ) , plus it 's getting on for being almost as quick as the original version of Google Chrome .
Also , the new location-awareness feature was testing in central London , and pinpointed yours truly to within a few hundred meters    easily enough for , say , a Starbucks Web site to tell you where your nearest Starbucks is .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>CNETNate writes "The tests prove it: It's the third-fastest browser in the world, and over twice as fast as Firefox 3.
In terms of Javascript performance, Firefox 3.5's new rendering engine places it squarely above Opera 10's beta and Internet Explorers 7 and 8 (based on previous benchmarks), plus it's getting on for being almost as quick as the original version of Google Chrome.
Also, the new location-awareness feature was testing in central London, and pinpointed yours truly to within a few hundred meters — easily enough for, say, a Starbucks Web site to tell you where your nearest Starbucks is.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546895</id>
	<title>We're #3</title>
	<author>Nom du Keyboard</author>
	<datestamp>1246477500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>We're #3 - wow that's something to boast about.<br> <br>
According to Nike, this means that your the second loser.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We 're # 3 - wow that 's something to boast about .
According to Nike , this means that your the second loser .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We're #3 - wow that's something to boast about.
According to Nike, this means that your the second loser.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28550789</id>
	<title>Re:This is such great science...</title>
	<author>BikeHelmet</author>
	<datestamp>1246446900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>.. I know 92\% of time statistics are made up, but if you read the article you'll see they have a pretty graph, so I think the data is good.</p></div><p>I am 100\% sure your statistics are baloney.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>.. I know 92 \ % of time statistics are made up , but if you read the article you 'll see they have a pretty graph , so I think the data is good.I am 100 \ % sure your statistics are baloney .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> .. I know 92\% of time statistics are made up, but if you read the article you'll see they have a pretty graph, so I think the data is good.I am 100\% sure your statistics are baloney.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547047</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547795</id>
	<title>Re:pffft</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246480500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know you're trying to be funny, but in the brief highly un-scientific test that I just did...neither lynx nor links are any quicker than Firefox. </p><p>If you really want to big lynx up against Firefox, just point out that it doesn't make a balls-up of rendering slashdot due to the fact that it doesn't do javascript or css....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know you 're trying to be funny , but in the brief highly un-scientific test that I just did...neither lynx nor links are any quicker than Firefox .
If you really want to big lynx up against Firefox , just point out that it does n't make a balls-up of rendering slashdot due to the fact that it does n't do javascript or css... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know you're trying to be funny, but in the brief highly un-scientific test that I just did...neither lynx nor links are any quicker than Firefox.
If you really want to big lynx up against Firefox, just point out that it doesn't make a balls-up of rendering slashdot due to the fact that it doesn't do javascript or css....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546945</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548031</id>
	<title>Re:We're #3</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246481040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>We're #3 - wow that's something to boast about.</p></div><p>Number three <i>always</i> gets the chicks in high school!</p><p>"Hey baby, I'm on the bench!"</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>We 're # 3 - wow that 's something to boast about.Number three always gets the chicks in high school !
" Hey baby , I 'm on the bench !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We're #3 - wow that's something to boast about.Number three always gets the chicks in high school!
"Hey baby, I'm on the bench!
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547033</id>
	<title>Re:Web browsers, bah!</title>
	<author>Tumbleweed</author>
	<datestamp>1246477920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I prefer to read the html code and interpret them myself...</i></p><p>You young punks make me sick. Back in my day, we used Gopher and were grateful for the upgrade over the teletype!</p><p>I still prefer content distributed via mimeograph, though. Get enough enough of that sweet blue text!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I prefer to read the html code and interpret them myself...You young punks make me sick .
Back in my day , we used Gopher and were grateful for the upgrade over the teletype ! I still prefer content distributed via mimeograph , though .
Get enough enough of that sweet blue text !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I prefer to read the html code and interpret them myself...You young punks make me sick.
Back in my day, we used Gopher and were grateful for the upgrade over the teletype!I still prefer content distributed via mimeograph, though.
Get enough enough of that sweet blue text!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546821</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548789</id>
	<title>Re:Web browsers, bah!</title>
	<author>carlmenezes</author>
	<datestamp>1246440180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>And here I am expecting some comments along the opposite lines - like, "I don't use a web browser, I just observe the cloud".</htmltext>
<tokenext>And here I am expecting some comments along the opposite lines - like , " I do n't use a web browser , I just observe the cloud " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And here I am expecting some comments along the opposite lines - like, "I don't use a web browser, I just observe the cloud".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547033</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546875</id>
	<title>Another thread, another flamewar</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246477440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, I guess we're in for a thread about how Firefox is still the (greatest|worst) browser in existence because of its (extensions|javascript performance|standards compliance|support for HTML 5). Looks like I need to go and get some snacks and pull up a recliner.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , I guess we 're in for a thread about how Firefox is still the ( greatest | worst ) browser in existence because of its ( extensions | javascript performance | standards compliance | support for HTML 5 ) .
Looks like I need to go and get some snacks and pull up a recliner .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, I guess we're in for a thread about how Firefox is still the (greatest|worst) browser in existence because of its (extensions|javascript performance|standards compliance|support for HTML 5).
Looks like I need to go and get some snacks and pull up a recliner.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547047</id>
	<title>This is such great science...</title>
	<author>AmigaHeretic</author>
	<datestamp>1246477980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>.. I know 92\% of time statistics are made up, but if you read the article you'll see they have a pretty graph, so I think the data is good.</htmltext>
<tokenext>.. I know 92 \ % of time statistics are made up , but if you read the article you 'll see they have a pretty graph , so I think the data is good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>.. I know 92\% of time statistics are made up, but if you read the article you'll see they have a pretty graph, so I think the data is good.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28551623</id>
	<title>But does linux run it?</title>
	<author>lagomorpha2</author>
	<datestamp>1246450980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But does linux run IT?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But does linux run IT ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But does linux run IT?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548887</id>
	<title>Re:Another thread, another flamewar</title>
	<author>ThePhilips</author>
	<datestamp>1246440480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Looks like I need to go and get some snacks and pull up a recliner.</p> </div><p> Don't bother. Flames will not last long.

</p><p> To me personally the whole thing is senseless: benchmarking feature-full browser versus some puny, prototypical, essentially useless thing? Try again next time.

</p><p> I understand Opera v. FireFox flames. Both are feature-full and useful. Both have their merits. That can be flamed about.

</p><p> But Chrome?? They do not even have usable bookmark!? Who in their right mind would call it a browser? Even Mosaic 10+ years ago was more useful than Chrome is now. It would be forgivable if Google called it "beta" and version number was like "0.2" - but 2.0???? That's hypocritical at best.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Looks like I need to go and get some snacks and pull up a recliner .
Do n't bother .
Flames will not last long .
To me personally the whole thing is senseless : benchmarking feature-full browser versus some puny , prototypical , essentially useless thing ?
Try again next time .
I understand Opera v. FireFox flames .
Both are feature-full and useful .
Both have their merits .
That can be flamed about .
But Chrome ? ?
They do not even have usable bookmark ! ?
Who in their right mind would call it a browser ?
Even Mosaic 10 + years ago was more useful than Chrome is now .
It would be forgivable if Google called it " beta " and version number was like " 0.2 " - but 2.0 ? ? ? ?
That 's hypocritical at best .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Looks like I need to go and get some snacks and pull up a recliner.
Don't bother.
Flames will not last long.
To me personally the whole thing is senseless: benchmarking feature-full browser versus some puny, prototypical, essentially useless thing?
Try again next time.
I understand Opera v. FireFox flames.
Both are feature-full and useful.
Both have their merits.
That can be flamed about.
But Chrome??
They do not even have usable bookmark!?
Who in their right mind would call it a browser?
Even Mosaic 10+ years ago was more useful than Chrome is now.
It would be forgivable if Google called it "beta" and version number was like "0.2" - but 2.0????
That's hypocritical at best.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546875</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28551963</id>
	<title>Re:I don't care...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246452960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Luckily, Chrome is the fastest AND the most secure, so there isn't really a choice you have to make.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Luckily , Chrome is the fastest AND the most secure , so there is n't really a choice you have to make .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Luckily, Chrome is the fastest AND the most secure, so there isn't really a choice you have to make.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547409</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28552675</id>
	<title>Re:One pice of advice for users</title>
	<author>brusk</author>
	<datestamp>1246458120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Poor to fair results with geolocation for me. From a wired connection it put me in Austin TX. I'm in upstate NY. From a wireless connection on campus it gave a neighborhood-level location and from my home AP it shows my city with a circle about 10 miles in radius (I'm within it). Maybe this will get more accurate over time as more data goes into the system...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Poor to fair results with geolocation for me .
From a wired connection it put me in Austin TX .
I 'm in upstate NY .
From a wireless connection on campus it gave a neighborhood-level location and from my home AP it shows my city with a circle about 10 miles in radius ( I 'm within it ) .
Maybe this will get more accurate over time as more data goes into the system.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Poor to fair results with geolocation for me.
From a wired connection it put me in Austin TX.
I'm in upstate NY.
From a wireless connection on campus it gave a neighborhood-level location and from my home AP it shows my city with a circle about 10 miles in radius (I'm within it).
Maybe this will get more accurate over time as more data goes into the system...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28549349</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548093</id>
	<title>Talking javascript</title>
	<author>LSD-OBS</author>
	<datestamp>1246481280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Compared to the current Chrome 2, Firefox 3.5 with JIT enabled gets 1/2 the speed <a href="http://jupiter909.com/mark/jsrt.html" title="jupiter909.com">here</a> [jupiter909.com], 7/8th the speed <a href="http://jupiter909.com/mark/jsrt-bench.html" title="jupiter909.com">here</a> [jupiter909.com], but about 2x the speed <a href="http://jupiter909.com/mark/jsrt-anim.html" title="jupiter909.com">here</a> [jupiter909.com]. That's a much better result than ff3.1!</p><p>Well done, guys.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Compared to the current Chrome 2 , Firefox 3.5 with JIT enabled gets 1/2 the speed here [ jupiter909.com ] , 7/8th the speed here [ jupiter909.com ] , but about 2x the speed here [ jupiter909.com ] .
That 's a much better result than ff3.1 ! Well done , guys .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Compared to the current Chrome 2, Firefox 3.5 with JIT enabled gets 1/2 the speed here [jupiter909.com], 7/8th the speed here [jupiter909.com], but about 2x the speed here [jupiter909.com].
That's a much better result than ff3.1!Well done, guys.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28550745</id>
	<title>Re:We're #3</title>
	<author>BikeHelmet</author>
	<datestamp>1246446780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>We're #3 - wow that's something to boast about.</p></div><p>In Javascript performance. But javascript is only one factor.</p><p>Here, I'll convert it to a car analogy.</p><p>Your Hummer is the second loser because it accelerates slower than my Tercel.</p><p>What? Other features? They don't matter!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>We 're # 3 - wow that 's something to boast about.In Javascript performance .
But javascript is only one factor.Here , I 'll convert it to a car analogy.Your Hummer is the second loser because it accelerates slower than my Tercel.What ?
Other features ?
They do n't matter !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We're #3 - wow that's something to boast about.In Javascript performance.
But javascript is only one factor.Here, I'll convert it to a car analogy.Your Hummer is the second loser because it accelerates slower than my Tercel.What?
Other features?
They don't matter!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547529</id>
	<title>Re:Will it be fast enough to view slashdot?</title>
	<author>gfody</author>
	<datestamp>1246479720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If the javascript performance were anywhere near chrome's you would be able to tell from running some of the examples <a href="http://www.chromeexperiments.com/" title="chromeexperiments.com">here</a> [chromeexperiments.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the javascript performance were anywhere near chrome 's you would be able to tell from running some of the examples here [ chromeexperiments.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the javascript performance were anywhere near chrome's you would be able to tell from running some of the examples here [chromeexperiments.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546923</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547909</id>
	<title>Still my baby</title>
	<author>decrypted08</author>
	<datestamp>1246480740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Opera is still my baby- I'll take any browser that includes precustomized user interfaces that allow me to connect to international irc channells and "chat" bot style.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Opera is still my baby- I 'll take any browser that includes precustomized user interfaces that allow me to connect to international irc channells and " chat " bot style .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Opera is still my baby- I'll take any browser that includes precustomized user interfaces that allow me to connect to international irc channells and "chat" bot style.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28550137</id>
	<title>Re:Firefox 3.5 freezes loading background tabs</title>
	<author>phantomcircuit</author>
	<datestamp>1246444320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>VMware is probably swapping to free memory. You can disable the swapping of memory by VMware which will significantly improve performance (as long as you do not run out of memory).</p><p>Basically it sounds like you're waiting for the hdd to load something while at the same time writing out swap data.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>VMware is probably swapping to free memory .
You can disable the swapping of memory by VMware which will significantly improve performance ( as long as you do not run out of memory ) .Basically it sounds like you 're waiting for the hdd to load something while at the same time writing out swap data .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>VMware is probably swapping to free memory.
You can disable the swapping of memory by VMware which will significantly improve performance (as long as you do not run out of memory).Basically it sounds like you're waiting for the hdd to load something while at the same time writing out swap data.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547137</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547163</id>
	<title>Re:Big Brother...</title>
	<author>Just Some Guy</author>
	<datestamp>1246478400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You have the option of not using the web browser.</p><p>Beyond that, I tried one of the location demos.  A Firefox prompt opened at the top of the window: "${site} wants to know your location: Share Location, Don't Share" with a checkbox to remember the settings for that site.  Go ahead and explain how you could possibly be offended by that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You have the option of not using the web browser.Beyond that , I tried one of the location demos .
A Firefox prompt opened at the top of the window : " $ { site } wants to know your location : Share Location , Do n't Share " with a checkbox to remember the settings for that site .
Go ahead and explain how you could possibly be offended by that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have the option of not using the web browser.Beyond that, I tried one of the location demos.
A Firefox prompt opened at the top of the window: "${site} wants to know your location: Share Location, Don't Share" with a checkbox to remember the settings for that site.
Go ahead and explain how you could possibly be offended by that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546977</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547309</id>
	<title>One pice of advice for users</title>
	<author>bogaboga</author>
	<datestamp>1246478880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you want to install the new Firefox 3.5, you are well advised to remove all traces of previous versions. Otherwise your new install will have bizarre behavior like failing to open up links from websites like <a href="Digg.com" title="slashdot.org"> digg </a> [slashdot.org] and being slow.</p><p>What I did was to uninstall it through the Windows XP control panel and delete all instances of Mozilla and Firefox in the registry. This is one bit of info developers should have informed us about.</p><p>Does anyone know how to use its geo-location feature?</p><p>By the way, it does not score 100\% on the ACID 3 test and some links are returned as invalid but on clicking the "back" button, the sites load! I am also surprised that Yahoo Search is the engine that reports the error. Why, I do not have an idea. Could it be my ISP?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you want to install the new Firefox 3.5 , you are well advised to remove all traces of previous versions .
Otherwise your new install will have bizarre behavior like failing to open up links from websites like digg [ slashdot.org ] and being slow.What I did was to uninstall it through the Windows XP control panel and delete all instances of Mozilla and Firefox in the registry .
This is one bit of info developers should have informed us about.Does anyone know how to use its geo-location feature ? By the way , it does not score 100 \ % on the ACID 3 test and some links are returned as invalid but on clicking the " back " button , the sites load !
I am also surprised that Yahoo Search is the engine that reports the error .
Why , I do not have an idea .
Could it be my ISP ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you want to install the new Firefox 3.5, you are well advised to remove all traces of previous versions.
Otherwise your new install will have bizarre behavior like failing to open up links from websites like  digg  [slashdot.org] and being slow.What I did was to uninstall it through the Windows XP control panel and delete all instances of Mozilla and Firefox in the registry.
This is one bit of info developers should have informed us about.Does anyone know how to use its geo-location feature?By the way, it does not score 100\% on the ACID 3 test and some links are returned as invalid but on clicking the "back" button, the sites load!
I am also surprised that Yahoo Search is the engine that reports the error.
Why, I do not have an idea.
Could it be my ISP?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28549159</id>
	<title>Re:pffft</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246441260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pftt Acid 3... Chrome could take a whole sheet and keep kicking</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pftt Acid 3... Chrome could take a whole sheet and keep kicking</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pftt Acid 3... Chrome could take a whole sheet and keep kicking</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547419</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28658869</id>
	<title>Re:Does it really matter?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247312640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Depending on the importance of the site, you could put "Best viewed in Firefox/Chrome/Opera/etc" and encourage people away from IE.  Of course you can't really do this on commercial sites.</p><p>The more IE's market share drops the more likely MS are to fix its problems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Depending on the importance of the site , you could put " Best viewed in Firefox/Chrome/Opera/etc " and encourage people away from IE .
Of course you ca n't really do this on commercial sites.The more IE 's market share drops the more likely MS are to fix its problems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Depending on the importance of the site, you could put "Best viewed in Firefox/Chrome/Opera/etc" and encourage people away from IE.
Of course you can't really do this on commercial sites.The more IE's market share drops the more likely MS are to fix its problems.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547291</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28550511</id>
	<title>Re:SunSpider says it all...</title>
	<author>BZ</author>
	<datestamp>1246445820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As with any benchmark, important questions to ask:</p><p>1)  Does this measure things that are actually relevant?  (For sunspider the answer is<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; "maybe".)<br>2)  Does it do a good job of measuring them?  (For sunspider the answer is "maybe".)<br>3)  Do the scores on the subtests of the benchmark mean anything?  (For sunspider, as for<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; any benchmark, the answer is "only if you're doing that exact thing that the subtest is<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; doing").</p><p>None of which makes V8 slower than what IE is using, of course, across a broad range of loads.  But it's pretty easy to write script that's 4x slower in V8 than in Firefox... or 10x faster (as the benchmark above).  What really matters to a web page developer is how fast the different browsers run his code, not how fast they run benchmarks.  What matters to a user is how fast the different browsers run the code of the sites he visits, not how fast they run benchmarks.  Benchmarks are a poor proxy for both, especially when dealing with these early-stage JITs.  It's pretty easy to tweak the code just a bit and have it jit a lot worse (or a lot better).  It's also pretty easy to tweak the JIT to make particular tests faster, since so much of the game is various heuristics.</p><p>All of which is to say that better sunspider performance may or may not translate into better performance on \_your\_ code, and in fact improving sunspider performance may regress performance on your code if the JIT is seriously being tuned for sunspider...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As with any benchmark , important questions to ask : 1 ) Does this measure things that are actually relevant ?
( For sunspider the answer is         " maybe " .
) 2 ) Does it do a good job of measuring them ?
( For sunspider the answer is " maybe " .
) 3 ) Do the scores on the subtests of the benchmark mean anything ?
( For sunspider , as for         any benchmark , the answer is " only if you 're doing that exact thing that the subtest is         doing " ) .None of which makes V8 slower than what IE is using , of course , across a broad range of loads .
But it 's pretty easy to write script that 's 4x slower in V8 than in Firefox... or 10x faster ( as the benchmark above ) .
What really matters to a web page developer is how fast the different browsers run his code , not how fast they run benchmarks .
What matters to a user is how fast the different browsers run the code of the sites he visits , not how fast they run benchmarks .
Benchmarks are a poor proxy for both , especially when dealing with these early-stage JITs .
It 's pretty easy to tweak the code just a bit and have it jit a lot worse ( or a lot better ) .
It 's also pretty easy to tweak the JIT to make particular tests faster , since so much of the game is various heuristics.All of which is to say that better sunspider performance may or may not translate into better performance on \ _your \ _ code , and in fact improving sunspider performance may regress performance on your code if the JIT is seriously being tuned for sunspider.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As with any benchmark, important questions to ask:1)  Does this measure things that are actually relevant?
(For sunspider the answer is
        "maybe".
)2)  Does it do a good job of measuring them?
(For sunspider the answer is "maybe".
)3)  Do the scores on the subtests of the benchmark mean anything?
(For sunspider, as for
        any benchmark, the answer is "only if you're doing that exact thing that the subtest is
        doing").None of which makes V8 slower than what IE is using, of course, across a broad range of loads.
But it's pretty easy to write script that's 4x slower in V8 than in Firefox... or 10x faster (as the benchmark above).
What really matters to a web page developer is how fast the different browsers run his code, not how fast they run benchmarks.
What matters to a user is how fast the different browsers run the code of the sites he visits, not how fast they run benchmarks.
Benchmarks are a poor proxy for both, especially when dealing with these early-stage JITs.
It's pretty easy to tweak the code just a bit and have it jit a lot worse (or a lot better).
It's also pretty easy to tweak the JIT to make particular tests faster, since so much of the game is various heuristics.All of which is to say that better sunspider performance may or may not translate into better performance on \_your\_ code, and in fact improving sunspider performance may regress performance on your code if the JIT is seriously being tuned for sunspider...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547143</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548913</id>
	<title>Re:Big Brother...</title>
	<author>Just Some Guy</author>
	<datestamp>1246440600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why would I ever want to share my location?</p></div><p>Seriously?  Imagine you could search Google for something like "sushi restaurant near me", let Google access your location information (once or every time), and get a list of nearby restaurants.  Location services are shaping up to be <em>the</em> killer app for mobile computing.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Why would I want part of my window eaten up by an option I don't like?</p></div><p>It's not.  When you choose "share" or "don't share" the prompt goes away.  It's exactly like the "remember this site's username and password?" prompt.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>What happens when I click the wrong one at 5am cause I'm tired?</p></div><p>Oh, it clears out your checking account, sells your dog, and dumps your girlfriend.  Honestly, what does any other random program do when you make a dumb choice?  Whatever you asked it to do.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would I ever want to share my location ? Seriously ?
Imagine you could search Google for something like " sushi restaurant near me " , let Google access your location information ( once or every time ) , and get a list of nearby restaurants .
Location services are shaping up to be the killer app for mobile computing.Why would I want part of my window eaten up by an option I do n't like ? It 's not .
When you choose " share " or " do n't share " the prompt goes away .
It 's exactly like the " remember this site 's username and password ?
" prompt.What happens when I click the wrong one at 5am cause I 'm tired ? Oh , it clears out your checking account , sells your dog , and dumps your girlfriend .
Honestly , what does any other random program do when you make a dumb choice ?
Whatever you asked it to do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would I ever want to share my location?Seriously?
Imagine you could search Google for something like "sushi restaurant near me", let Google access your location information (once or every time), and get a list of nearby restaurants.
Location services are shaping up to be the killer app for mobile computing.Why would I want part of my window eaten up by an option I don't like?It's not.
When you choose "share" or "don't share" the prompt goes away.
It's exactly like the "remember this site's username and password?
" prompt.What happens when I click the wrong one at 5am cause I'm tired?Oh, it clears out your checking account, sells your dog, and dumps your girlfriend.
Honestly, what does any other random program do when you make a dumb choice?
Whatever you asked it to do.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548519</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28552755</id>
	<title>Re:Using Chrome now, but....</title>
	<author>RedWizzard</author>
	<datestamp>1246458660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If it was FireFox 3's memory utilization that bothered you then I'd recommend trying out 3.5 - it's much less memory hungry.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If it was FireFox 3 's memory utilization that bothered you then I 'd recommend trying out 3.5 - it 's much less memory hungry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it was FireFox 3's memory utilization that bothered you then I'd recommend trying out 3.5 - it's much less memory hungry.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547113</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28550475</id>
	<title>Re:Will it be fast enough to view slashdot?</title>
	<author>anonymousNR</author>
	<datestamp>1246445640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>not a chance.
After teh upgrade to 3.5<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. crashed firefox everytime I open a story with more than 400 comments.</htmltext>
<tokenext>not a chance .
After teh upgrade to 3.5 / .
crashed firefox everytime I open a story with more than 400 comments .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>not a chance.
After teh upgrade to 3.5 /.
crashed firefox everytime I open a story with more than 400 comments.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546923</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546923</id>
	<title>Will it be fast enough to view slashdot?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246477620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The new benchmark in Javascript performance - slashdot.

<br> <br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>...and I wonder if it will be powerful enough to get the line breaks right in "plain text" mode so I don't have to insert "br" tags manually.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The new benchmark in Javascript performance - slashdot .
...and I wonder if it will be powerful enough to get the line breaks right in " plain text " mode so I do n't have to insert " br " tags manually .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The new benchmark in Javascript performance - slashdot.
...and I wonder if it will be powerful enough to get the line breaks right in "plain text" mode so I don't have to insert "br" tags manually.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28562349</id>
	<title>Re:Using Chrome now, but....</title>
	<author>InverseParadox</author>
	<datestamp>1246565700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548179</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548521</id>
	<title>Page Not Found in  1 sec</title>
	<author>djeshelman</author>
	<datestamp>1246439340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course Firefox rocks!</p><p>I got to "Address Not Found" in like... less than a second</p><p>(link slashdotted...)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course Firefox rocks ! I got to " Address Not Found " in like... less than a second ( link slashdotted... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course Firefox rocks!I got to "Address Not Found" in like... less than a second(link slashdotted...)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547143</id>
	<title>SunSpider says it all...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246478340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I ran the <a href="http://www2.webkit.org/perf/sunspider-0.9/sunspider.html" title="webkit.org" rel="nofollow">SunSpider</a> [webkit.org] JavaScript benchmark on Chrome 2.0.172.33, Firefox 3.5, and IE8.  Firefox was almost 7x faster than IE, and Chrome almost 8x faster.  Of particular interest are the contraflow and recursive tests.  Chrome: 4.4ms.  Firefox:  55.4ms.  IE...? <b>218.4ms</b>.  Chrome is <b>fifty times faster</b> than IE in those benchmarks.  Embarassing!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ran the SunSpider [ webkit.org ] JavaScript benchmark on Chrome 2.0.172.33 , Firefox 3.5 , and IE8 .
Firefox was almost 7x faster than IE , and Chrome almost 8x faster .
Of particular interest are the contraflow and recursive tests .
Chrome : 4.4ms .
Firefox : 55.4ms .
IE... ? 218.4ms .
Chrome is fifty times faster than IE in those benchmarks .
Embarassing !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I ran the SunSpider [webkit.org] JavaScript benchmark on Chrome 2.0.172.33, Firefox 3.5, and IE8.
Firefox was almost 7x faster than IE, and Chrome almost 8x faster.
Of particular interest are the contraflow and recursive tests.
Chrome: 4.4ms.
Firefox:  55.4ms.
IE...? 218.4ms.
Chrome is fifty times faster than IE in those benchmarks.
Embarassing!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546903</id>
	<title>Opera</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246477500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>What about opera?

Where does that rank?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What about opera ?
Where does that rank ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What about opera?
Where does that rank?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547079</id>
	<title>I don't even see the code anymore</title>
	<author>slyborg</author>
	<datestamp>1246478160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"All I see is 'blonde...brunette...redhead...'"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" All I see is 'blonde...brunette...redhead... ' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"All I see is 'blonde...brunette...redhead...'"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546821</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28553421</id>
	<title>But as soon as you use it...</title>
	<author>Snaller</author>
	<datestamp>1246464180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...for more than 5 minuttes it will probably slow down. Like 3.x  - gets more and more sluggish. Their new awesome bar (or whatever it was they called it) is a really brilliant idea, but its so slow, it lags and freezes the browser - so firefox.. not so quick.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...for more than 5 minuttes it will probably slow down .
Like 3.x - gets more and more sluggish .
Their new awesome bar ( or whatever it was they called it ) is a really brilliant idea , but its so slow , it lags and freezes the browser - so firefox.. not so quick .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...for more than 5 minuttes it will probably slow down.
Like 3.x  - gets more and more sluggish.
Their new awesome bar (or whatever it was they called it) is a really brilliant idea, but its so slow, it lags and freezes the browser - so firefox.. not so quick.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547191</id>
	<title>Re:Big Brother...</title>
	<author>cbiltcliffe</author>
	<datestamp>1246478460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Probably because:</p><p>1. You can turn the feature off in the browser. (At least, I'd hope so.)<br>2. The browser doesn't have the ability to pass laws that make you a criminal.<br>3. You don't pay taxes to your browser, only to have it track you in return.<br>4. ????<br>5. You get the picture.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Probably because : 1 .
You can turn the feature off in the browser .
( At least , I 'd hope so. ) 2 .
The browser does n't have the ability to pass laws that make you a criminal.3 .
You do n't pay taxes to your browser , only to have it track you in return.4 .
? ? ? ? 5. You get the picture .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Probably because:1.
You can turn the feature off in the browser.
(At least, I'd hope so.)2.
The browser doesn't have the ability to pass laws that make you a criminal.3.
You don't pay taxes to your browser, only to have it track you in return.4.
????5. You get the picture.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546977</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548179</id>
	<title>Re:Using Chrome now, but....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246481580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Am I the only one who read FFX as final fantasy 10?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Am I the only one who read FFX as final fantasy 10 ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Am I the only one who read FFX as final fantasy 10?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547113</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28552085</id>
	<title>Still not the fastest browser...</title>
	<author>TheMightyFuzzball</author>
	<datestamp>1246453620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I really like FF, being a web developer I use many different browsers, but ever since Google Chrome was announced I have been using that.
Within the last few months I have been using the Chromium daily builds as my main web browser (completely stable, I might add)
I like Chromium better than FF because it is clean, simple and fast. It takes the focus away from the browser and puts it on the content, I just wish they'd sort out fulscreen browsing<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D</htmltext>
<tokenext>I really like FF , being a web developer I use many different browsers , but ever since Google Chrome was announced I have been using that .
Within the last few months I have been using the Chromium daily builds as my main web browser ( completely stable , I might add ) I like Chromium better than FF because it is clean , simple and fast .
It takes the focus away from the browser and puts it on the content , I just wish they 'd sort out fulscreen browsing : D</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I really like FF, being a web developer I use many different browsers, but ever since Google Chrome was announced I have been using that.
Within the last few months I have been using the Chromium daily builds as my main web browser (completely stable, I might add)
I like Chromium better than FF because it is clean, simple and fast.
It takes the focus away from the browser and puts it on the content, I just wish they'd sort out fulscreen browsing :D</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28604941</id>
	<title>Re:Firefox 3.5 freezes loading background tabs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247000040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Re tabs freezing: Try "Clear Recent History" on the "Tools" tab.</p><p>I had a tab freezing problem too - worked for me.</p><p>PS</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Re tabs freezing : Try " Clear Recent History " on the " Tools " tab.I had a tab freezing problem too - worked for me.PS</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Re tabs freezing: Try "Clear Recent History" on the "Tools" tab.I had a tab freezing problem too - worked for me.PS</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547137</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547985</id>
	<title>Huh? Safari is faster, and the benchmark proves it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246480980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I benchmarked all the Mac Browsers using Peacemaker as a benchmark.
<br>
<a href="http://www.iheinrich.com/blog/?p=1054" title="iheinrich.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.iheinrich.com/blog/?p=1054</a> [iheinrich.com] <br>
<br>
Safari 4.0 and iCab 4.5 were the fastest. <br>
<br>
I also benchmarked the Windows Browsers using Peacemaker (on PC). <br>
<br>
<a href="http://www.iheinrich.com/blog/?p=1093" title="iheinrich.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.iheinrich.com/blog/?p=1093</a> [iheinrich.com] <br>
<br>
Safari 4.0 was much faster than Firefox.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I benchmarked all the Mac Browsers using Peacemaker as a benchmark .
http : //www.iheinrich.com/blog/ ? p = 1054 [ iheinrich.com ] Safari 4.0 and iCab 4.5 were the fastest .
I also benchmarked the Windows Browsers using Peacemaker ( on PC ) .
http : //www.iheinrich.com/blog/ ? p = 1093 [ iheinrich.com ] Safari 4.0 was much faster than Firefox .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I benchmarked all the Mac Browsers using Peacemaker as a benchmark.
http://www.iheinrich.com/blog/?p=1054 [iheinrich.com] 

Safari 4.0 and iCab 4.5 were the fastest.
I also benchmarked the Windows Browsers using Peacemaker (on PC).
http://www.iheinrich.com/blog/?p=1093 [iheinrich.com] 

Safari 4.0 was much faster than Firefox.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28550977</id>
	<title>Re:Another thread, another flamewar</title>
	<author>selven</author>
	<datestamp>1246447800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The only things Chrome don't have that other browsers do are bookmarks, adblock/noscript and flash. And this is on the linux alpha version. None of these are particularly important to normal web browsing, and I would say having the option of starting up with multiple home pages open beats all of those weaknesses.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The only things Chrome do n't have that other browsers do are bookmarks , adblock/noscript and flash .
And this is on the linux alpha version .
None of these are particularly important to normal web browsing , and I would say having the option of starting up with multiple home pages open beats all of those weaknesses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only things Chrome don't have that other browsers do are bookmarks, adblock/noscript and flash.
And this is on the linux alpha version.
None of these are particularly important to normal web browsing, and I would say having the option of starting up with multiple home pages open beats all of those weaknesses.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548887</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28554137</id>
	<title>Re:Another thread, another flamewar</title>
	<author>Nyvhek</author>
	<datestamp>1246473060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have a simple solution to this. Whenever I reach 389 tabs, I just open another one to make 390.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a simple solution to this .
Whenever I reach 389 tabs , I just open another one to make 390 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a simple solution to this.
Whenever I reach 389 tabs, I just open another one to make 390.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548531</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28554405</id>
	<title>Re:pffft</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246475640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It passes it now! See the screenshot!</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Acid3</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Acid3</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 100/100</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; To pass the test, a browser must use its default settings, the<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; animation has to be smooth, the score has to end on 100/100, and the<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; final page has to look exactly, pixel for pixel, like this reference<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; rendering.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It passes it now !
See the screenshot !
      Acid3       Acid3       100/100       To pass the test , a browser must use its default settings , the       animation has to be smooth , the score has to end on 100/100 , and the       final page has to look exactly , pixel for pixel , like this reference       rendering .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It passes it now!
See the screenshot!
      Acid3
      Acid3
      100/100
      To pass the test, a browser must use its default settings, the
      animation has to be smooth, the score has to end on 100/100, and the
      final page has to look exactly, pixel for pixel, like this reference
      rendering.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547419</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546945</id>
	<title>pffft</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246477680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I just did my own test and lynx is faster than firefox and chrome.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I just did my own test and lynx is faster than firefox and chrome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just did my own test and lynx is faster than firefox and chrome.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28552609</id>
	<title>Re:Big Brother...</title>
	<author>brusk</author>
	<datestamp>1246457580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Remind me again how you can filter the Yellow Pages restaurant section for barbecue places in a five block radius of your current location...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Remind me again how you can filter the Yellow Pages restaurant section for barbecue places in a five block radius of your current location.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Remind me again how you can filter the Yellow Pages restaurant section for barbecue places in a five block radius of your current location...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28551583</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28552065</id>
	<title>Chrome uses more memory</title>
	<author>mdmkolbe</author>
	<datestamp>1246453500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can run 100+ tabs in FF with no problem.  Chrome starts choking after 10-15.  At least in my humble experience.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can run 100 + tabs in FF with no problem .
Chrome starts choking after 10-15 .
At least in my humble experience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can run 100+ tabs in FF with no problem.
Chrome starts choking after 10-15.
At least in my humble experience.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547113</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547789</id>
	<title>Re:Big Brother...</title>
	<author>owlnation</author>
	<datestamp>1246480440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Why is it when the government can keep tabs about where we are it's "draconian" or "orwellian," but when a web browser does it, it's "cool"?</p></div></blockquote><p>

Yep. This "feature" sounds as welcome as the Awesome Bar. Can it be disabled? Cos it's definitely a deal breaker.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is it when the government can keep tabs about where we are it 's " draconian " or " orwellian , " but when a web browser does it , it 's " cool " ?
Yep. This " feature " sounds as welcome as the Awesome Bar .
Can it be disabled ?
Cos it 's definitely a deal breaker .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is it when the government can keep tabs about where we are it's "draconian" or "orwellian," but when a web browser does it, it's "cool"?
Yep. This "feature" sounds as welcome as the Awesome Bar.
Can it be disabled?
Cos it's definitely a deal breaker.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546977</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547419</id>
	<title>Re:pffft</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246479240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sadly, lynx fails <a href="http://acid3.acidtests.org/" title="acidtests.org" rel="nofollow">Acid3</a> [acidtests.org] for some reason.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sadly , lynx fails Acid3 [ acidtests.org ] for some reason .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sadly, lynx fails Acid3 [acidtests.org] for some reason.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546945</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548039</id>
	<title>Re:SunSpider says it all...</title>
	<author>Runaway1956</author>
	<datestamp>1246481100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not embarassing at all - to Microsoft, at least.  They just don't care.  So long as they have the lion's share of the market, they are perfectly happy with any sad performance that people are willing to settle for.</p><p>Spread the word far and wide.  Tell your family, tell your freind, tell your enemies, IE sucks.  When they stop using it, everyone will benefit, including MS.  If MS wants to keep market share, they'll invest time and money into making a better browser.  If they don't want to keep market share, they'll just drop IE into the deep hole they dredged it out of.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not embarassing at all - to Microsoft , at least .
They just do n't care .
So long as they have the lion 's share of the market , they are perfectly happy with any sad performance that people are willing to settle for.Spread the word far and wide .
Tell your family , tell your freind , tell your enemies , IE sucks .
When they stop using it , everyone will benefit , including MS. If MS wants to keep market share , they 'll invest time and money into making a better browser .
If they do n't want to keep market share , they 'll just drop IE into the deep hole they dredged it out of .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not embarassing at all - to Microsoft, at least.
They just don't care.
So long as they have the lion's share of the market, they are perfectly happy with any sad performance that people are willing to settle for.Spread the word far and wide.
Tell your family, tell your freind, tell your enemies, IE sucks.
When they stop using it, everyone will benefit, including MS.  If MS wants to keep market share, they'll invest time and money into making a better browser.
If they don't want to keep market share, they'll just drop IE into the deep hole they dredged it out of.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547143</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28549597</id>
	<title>Re:Huh? Safari is faster, and the benchmark proves</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246442460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Peacemaker is a pretty cool site, you can test the browsers yourself<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Peacemaker is a pretty cool site , you can test the browsers yourself .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Peacemaker is a pretty cool site, you can test the browsers yourself ...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547985</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28550585</id>
	<title>Nearly content free article</title>
	<author>dirtyhippie</author>
	<datestamp>1246446120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1 -  Make a graph of SunSpider scores for 3.5 and 3 other browsers.<br>2 - Hmm, that seems a bit thin.<br>3 - Add some stuff cribbed from the release notes.<br>4 - Still a bit thin, hrmmm...<br>5 - Acid3 results!!!<br>6 - Meh, 798 is almost 1000 words. Publish it!<br>6 - ???<br>7 - Profit!</p><p>Sheesh.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 - Make a graph of SunSpider scores for 3.5 and 3 other browsers.2 - Hmm , that seems a bit thin.3 - Add some stuff cribbed from the release notes.4 - Still a bit thin , hrmmm...5 - Acid3 results ! !
! 6 - Meh , 798 is almost 1000 words .
Publish it ! 6 - ? ?
? 7 - Profit ! Sheesh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1 -  Make a graph of SunSpider scores for 3.5 and 3 other browsers.2 - Hmm, that seems a bit thin.3 - Add some stuff cribbed from the release notes.4 - Still a bit thin, hrmmm...5 - Acid3 results!!
!6 - Meh, 798 is almost 1000 words.
Publish it!6 - ??
?7 - Profit!Sheesh.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28553041</id>
	<title>Re:pffft</title>
	<author>CrkHead</author>
	<datestamp>1246460760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Did you save the graph?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did you save the graph ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did you save the graph?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546945</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547409</id>
	<title>I don't care...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246479240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't care how fast it loads webpages.  What I want to see is a browser that isn't riddled with bugs and easy ways for badware to end up infecting my machine.  I'll gladly surf on the slowest browser in the world if it really is proven to be the most secure.  So what if I save a few seconds surfing web pages.  That is nothing compared to the hours spent trying to get rid of a virus/trojan/keylogger/etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't care how fast it loads webpages .
What I want to see is a browser that is n't riddled with bugs and easy ways for badware to end up infecting my machine .
I 'll gladly surf on the slowest browser in the world if it really is proven to be the most secure .
So what if I save a few seconds surfing web pages .
That is nothing compared to the hours spent trying to get rid of a virus/trojan/keylogger/etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't care how fast it loads webpages.
What I want to see is a browser that isn't riddled with bugs and easy ways for badware to end up infecting my machine.
I'll gladly surf on the slowest browser in the world if it really is proven to be the most secure.
So what if I save a few seconds surfing web pages.
That is nothing compared to the hours spent trying to get rid of a virus/trojan/keylogger/etc.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28552541</id>
	<title>Re:Another thread, another flamewar</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246456860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You forgot the complaints that FireFox is a memory hog when you have 389 tabs open.</p></div><p>... for more than 96 hours.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You forgot the complaints that FireFox is a memory hog when you have 389 tabs open.... for more than 96 hours .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You forgot the complaints that FireFox is a memory hog when you have 389 tabs open.... for more than 96 hours.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548531</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28550377</id>
	<title>You do \_not\_ need to delete 3.0 files</title>
	<author>msobkow</author>
	<datestamp>1246445280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
I just did a "normal" upgrade, overwriting the 3.0.x directory with 3.5.  All of my account settings, passwords, bookmarks, toolbars, etc. are working just fine.  I've had no problems accessing any websites, and even the old cache entries seem to be getting used.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just did a " normal " upgrade , overwriting the 3.0.x directory with 3.5 .
All of my account settings , passwords , bookmarks , toolbars , etc .
are working just fine .
I 've had no problems accessing any websites , and even the old cache entries seem to be getting used .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
I just did a "normal" upgrade, overwriting the 3.0.x directory with 3.5.
All of my account settings, passwords, bookmarks, toolbars, etc.
are working just fine.
I've had no problems accessing any websites, and even the old cache entries seem to be getting used.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547309</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28553141</id>
	<title>Re:No speed improvement for those on x86\_64</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246461420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Crap! How will I manage to use Firefox with only 4GB of RAM available?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Crap !
How will I manage to use Firefox with only 4GB of RAM available ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Crap!
How will I manage to use Firefox with only 4GB of RAM available?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548289</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546977</id>
	<title>Big Brother...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246477740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why is it when the government can keep tabs about where we are it's "draconian" or "orwellian," but when a web browser does it, it's "cool"?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is it when the government can keep tabs about where we are it 's " draconian " or " orwellian , " but when a web browser does it , it 's " cool " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is it when the government can keep tabs about where we are it's "draconian" or "orwellian," but when a web browser does it, it's "cool"?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548981</id>
	<title>Re:Seattle</title>
	<author>Kjella</author>
	<datestamp>1246440720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Downtown that question can usually be answered with "look 360 degrees around you", and the full circle is only required if you want to make sure you go to the closest...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Downtown that question can usually be answered with " look 360 degrees around you " , and the full circle is only required if you want to make sure you go to the closest.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Downtown that question can usually be answered with "look 360 degrees around you", and the full circle is only required if you want to make sure you go to the closest...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547821</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28559003</id>
	<title>Re:Firefox 3.5 freezes loading background tabs</title>
	<author>Quantumstate</author>
	<datestamp>1246555140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't encounter this problem except when I try and open about 5 slashdot tabs at once but I think that is a slightly different issue.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't encounter this problem except when I try and open about 5 slashdot tabs at once but I think that is a slightly different issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't encounter this problem except when I try and open about 5 slashdot tabs at once but I think that is a slightly different issue.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547137</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28551305</id>
	<title>Re:We're #3</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246449300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, you're the loser's loser. Man, that's terrible!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , you 're the loser 's loser .
Man , that 's terrible !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, you're the loser's loser.
Man, that's terrible!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548407</id>
	<title>Re:Firefox 3.5 freezes loading background tabs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246439100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Any modern browers besides Firefox with a "always use this font for text" option?  Neither Opera, Safari, nor Chrome had this option last time I tried those browsers.  (Don't get me started on IE8, which forces me to use anti-aliased text)</p></div><p>Opera has had this feature since at least 1996. Where else do you think the FF developers got the idea?</p><p>Checked my Opera (9.67). Yup, it's still there. Available in the point and click preferences, the "opera:config" page from the adress bar and, of course, in the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.ini-file. You may also edit your opera css-files directly.</p><p><b>Hint:</b> If you open the "opera:config" page, it is under the "Author Display Mode Options", as Opera distinguish between user display mode (where your font is the default, unless you change that) and author display mode  (where the authors font is the default, unless you change that) and let you switch easily between user mode and author mode, or some other style sheet.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Any modern browers besides Firefox with a " always use this font for text " option ?
Neither Opera , Safari , nor Chrome had this option last time I tried those browsers .
( Do n't get me started on IE8 , which forces me to use anti-aliased text ) Opera has had this feature since at least 1996 .
Where else do you think the FF developers got the idea ? Checked my Opera ( 9.67 ) .
Yup , it 's still there .
Available in the point and click preferences , the " opera : config " page from the adress bar and , of course , in the .ini-file .
You may also edit your opera css-files directly.Hint : If you open the " opera : config " page , it is under the " Author Display Mode Options " , as Opera distinguish between user display mode ( where your font is the default , unless you change that ) and author display mode ( where the authors font is the default , unless you change that ) and let you switch easily between user mode and author mode , or some other style sheet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any modern browers besides Firefox with a "always use this font for text" option?
Neither Opera, Safari, nor Chrome had this option last time I tried those browsers.
(Don't get me started on IE8, which forces me to use anti-aliased text)Opera has had this feature since at least 1996.
Where else do you think the FF developers got the idea?Checked my Opera (9.67).
Yup, it's still there.
Available in the point and click preferences, the "opera:config" page from the adress bar and, of course, in the .ini-file.
You may also edit your opera css-files directly.Hint: If you open the "opera:config" page, it is under the "Author Display Mode Options", as Opera distinguish between user display mode (where your font is the default, unless you change that) and author display mode  (where the authors font is the default, unless you change that) and let you switch easily between user mode and author mode, or some other style sheet.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547137</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28555535</id>
	<title>Ever tried "SandBoxie"? It's free, &amp; works...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246533180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><div class="quote"><p><b>"I don't care how fast it loads webpages. What I want to see is a browser that isn't riddled with bugs and easy ways for badware to end up infecting my machine. I'll gladly surf on the slowest browser in the world if it really is proven to be the most secure. So what if I save a few seconds surfing web pages. That is nothing compared to the hours spent trying to get rid of a virus/trojan/keylogger/etc."</b> - by cyberjock1980 (1131059) on Wednesday July 01, @03:14PM (#28547409)</p></div><p>A lot of these folks are stating to try running a webbrowser inside of a virtual machine, which does have some merit, especially considering that it tends to "shield" the rest of your system from anything that MIGHT "come thru the browser window" into your system, via say, a malware scripted page or bad adbanner... but, want to know what does pretty much the SAME thing, &amp; without ALL of the overheads of a Virtual Machine environs? Yes, per my subject-line, you might want to look @ SANDBOXIE:</p><p>----</p><p><b>SANDBOXIE:</b></p><p><a href="http://www.sandboxie.com/index.php?DownloadSandboxie" title="sandboxie.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.sandboxie.com/index.php?DownloadSandboxie</a> [sandboxie.com]</p><p>----</p><p>It's free, &amp; works in the capactity you ask for, on Windows...</p><p>The ONLY thing I have noted that is a "downside" of its usage, is that it is slower on std. mechanical HDDs than it is on my SSD here!</p><p>(That is the way I "offset its slowness" here @ least, &amp; you might also, albeit in YOUR case, possibly via a software emulation (software ramdisks) if you wish, which would be almost like what I use to increase its speed, via a CENATEK "RocketDrive" TRUE SSD (not based on FLASH ram, which is slower on writes))...</p><p>However, since you declared that you didn't care how fast a page loads &amp; what-not, and that you were MORE concerned with security... this fits the bill.</p><p>APK</p><p>P.S.=&gt; <b>What it does is pretty clever:</b>  It literally uses a driver to intercept calls to apps that run under its protection, &amp; creates a "fake/sandboxed" set of subfolders (which you can control the location of, hence, how I get it to operate as if it is on C: drive, albeit here on a SSD, so it is faster) where you tell it to that make the webbrowser (OR, really ANY application, you'll see once you use it) THINK that the area you set it to run SandBoxed apps on IS in fact, your C: drive... &amp;, it works, for exactly what you are looking for, &amp; without all the overheads &amp;/or complications of setting up a TOTAL VM environs too... apk</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" I do n't care how fast it loads webpages .
What I want to see is a browser that is n't riddled with bugs and easy ways for badware to end up infecting my machine .
I 'll gladly surf on the slowest browser in the world if it really is proven to be the most secure .
So what if I save a few seconds surfing web pages .
That is nothing compared to the hours spent trying to get rid of a virus/trojan/keylogger/etc .
" - by cyberjock1980 ( 1131059 ) on Wednesday July 01 , @ 03 : 14PM ( # 28547409 ) A lot of these folks are stating to try running a webbrowser inside of a virtual machine , which does have some merit , especially considering that it tends to " shield " the rest of your system from anything that MIGHT " come thru the browser window " into your system , via say , a malware scripted page or bad adbanner... but , want to know what does pretty much the SAME thing , &amp; without ALL of the overheads of a Virtual Machine environs ?
Yes , per my subject-line , you might want to look @ SANDBOXIE : ----SANDBOXIE : http : //www.sandboxie.com/index.php ? DownloadSandboxie [ sandboxie.com ] ----It 's free , &amp; works in the capactity you ask for , on Windows...The ONLY thing I have noted that is a " downside " of its usage , is that it is slower on std .
mechanical HDDs than it is on my SSD here !
( That is the way I " offset its slowness " here @ least , &amp; you might also , albeit in YOUR case , possibly via a software emulation ( software ramdisks ) if you wish , which would be almost like what I use to increase its speed , via a CENATEK " RocketDrive " TRUE SSD ( not based on FLASH ram , which is slower on writes ) ) ...However , since you declared that you did n't care how fast a page loads &amp; what-not , and that you were MORE concerned with security... this fits the bill.APKP.S. = &gt; What it does is pretty clever : It literally uses a driver to intercept calls to apps that run under its protection , &amp; creates a " fake/sandboxed " set of subfolders ( which you can control the location of , hence , how I get it to operate as if it is on C : drive , albeit here on a SSD , so it is faster ) where you tell it to that make the webbrowser ( OR , really ANY application , you 'll see once you use it ) THINK that the area you set it to run SandBoxed apps on IS in fact , your C : drive... &amp; , it works , for exactly what you are looking for , &amp; without all the overheads &amp;/or complications of setting up a TOTAL VM environs too... apk</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I don't care how fast it loads webpages.
What I want to see is a browser that isn't riddled with bugs and easy ways for badware to end up infecting my machine.
I'll gladly surf on the slowest browser in the world if it really is proven to be the most secure.
So what if I save a few seconds surfing web pages.
That is nothing compared to the hours spent trying to get rid of a virus/trojan/keylogger/etc.
" - by cyberjock1980 (1131059) on Wednesday July 01, @03:14PM (#28547409)A lot of these folks are stating to try running a webbrowser inside of a virtual machine, which does have some merit, especially considering that it tends to "shield" the rest of your system from anything that MIGHT "come thru the browser window" into your system, via say, a malware scripted page or bad adbanner... but, want to know what does pretty much the SAME thing, &amp; without ALL of the overheads of a Virtual Machine environs?
Yes, per my subject-line, you might want to look @ SANDBOXIE:----SANDBOXIE:http://www.sandboxie.com/index.php?DownloadSandboxie [sandboxie.com]----It's free, &amp; works in the capactity you ask for, on Windows...The ONLY thing I have noted that is a "downside" of its usage, is that it is slower on std.
mechanical HDDs than it is on my SSD here!
(That is the way I "offset its slowness" here @ least, &amp; you might also, albeit in YOUR case, possibly via a software emulation (software ramdisks) if you wish, which would be almost like what I use to increase its speed, via a CENATEK "RocketDrive" TRUE SSD (not based on FLASH ram, which is slower on writes))...However, since you declared that you didn't care how fast a page loads &amp; what-not, and that you were MORE concerned with security... this fits the bill.APKP.S.=&gt; What it does is pretty clever:  It literally uses a driver to intercept calls to apps that run under its protection, &amp; creates a "fake/sandboxed" set of subfolders (which you can control the location of, hence, how I get it to operate as if it is on C: drive, albeit here on a SSD, so it is faster) where you tell it to that make the webbrowser (OR, really ANY application, you'll see once you use it) THINK that the area you set it to run SandBoxed apps on IS in fact, your C: drive... &amp;, it works, for exactly what you are looking for, &amp; without all the overheads &amp;/or complications of setting up a TOTAL VM environs too... apk
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547409</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548519</id>
	<title>Re:Big Brother...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246439340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>A Firefox prompt opened at the top of the window: "${site} wants to know your location: Share Location, Don't Share" with a checkbox to remember the settings for that site. Go ahead and explain how you could possibly be offended by that.</p></div></blockquote><p>Why would I ever want to share my location?  Why would I want part of my window eaten up by an option I don't like?  What happens when I click the wrong one at 5am cause I'm tired?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A Firefox prompt opened at the top of the window : " $ { site } wants to know your location : Share Location , Do n't Share " with a checkbox to remember the settings for that site .
Go ahead and explain how you could possibly be offended by that.Why would I ever want to share my location ?
Why would I want part of my window eaten up by an option I do n't like ?
What happens when I click the wrong one at 5am cause I 'm tired ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A Firefox prompt opened at the top of the window: "${site} wants to know your location: Share Location, Don't Share" with a checkbox to remember the settings for that site.
Go ahead and explain how you could possibly be offended by that.Why would I ever want to share my location?
Why would I want part of my window eaten up by an option I don't like?
What happens when I click the wrong one at 5am cause I'm tired?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547163</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547963</id>
	<title>Re:Big Brother...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246480860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because the Mozilla people don't have guns and don't have the legal authority to throw me into a cage. Plus, I can choose to turn this feature off, or use another browser if I so desire.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because the Mozilla people do n't have guns and do n't have the legal authority to throw me into a cage .
Plus , I can choose to turn this feature off , or use another browser if I so desire .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because the Mozilla people don't have guns and don't have the legal authority to throw me into a cage.
Plus, I can choose to turn this feature off, or use another browser if I so desire.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546977</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28549349</id>
	<title>Re:One pice of advice for users</title>
	<author>Ingenium13</author>
	<datestamp>1246441740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://3liz.org/geolocation/" title="3liz.org">http://3liz.org/geolocation/</a> [3liz.org] supposedly works. However, I'm in Pittsburgh and it put me in a LARGE circle with NYC as the center (Pittsburgh is not even in the circle). Using Comcast as my ISP. Plenty of wireless APs around me (upwards of 10). Maybe others have better luck with it?</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //3liz.org/geolocation/ [ 3liz.org ] supposedly works .
However , I 'm in Pittsburgh and it put me in a LARGE circle with NYC as the center ( Pittsburgh is not even in the circle ) .
Using Comcast as my ISP .
Plenty of wireless APs around me ( upwards of 10 ) .
Maybe others have better luck with it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://3liz.org/geolocation/ [3liz.org] supposedly works.
However, I'm in Pittsburgh and it put me in a LARGE circle with NYC as the center (Pittsburgh is not even in the circle).
Using Comcast as my ISP.
Plenty of wireless APs around me (upwards of 10).
Maybe others have better luck with it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547309</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28552199</id>
	<title>Agreed 110\%, Web 2.x &amp; javascript = BAD! apk</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246454340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All this "concentration" on "Web 2.0" riddled with javascript = "bad move", OVERALL, imo @ least! No, it's not "ALL BAD", &amp; is a good thing, but I only say that because IF they would fix up the problems javascript itself has in its DOM, we might NOT see so many "bugs" come through our browsers &amp; into the rest of our systems.</p><p>I mean, hey - <b>Speeding up javascript processing's all "fine &amp; good" but, it's only speeding up how fast you can be infected as well</b> (&amp; lately? Even by bogus adbanners (been this way for years now, only moreso lately)).</p><p>What about this EMCA script, that's supposed to be an improvement on javascript? AND, will it improve the DOM &amp; the security vs. what we see in javascript now?? I think that we need something like that, now.</p><p>(These are the questions that need answering/addressing, imo @ least!)</p><p>APK</p><p>P.S.=&gt; However, on this question from you:</p><div class="quote"><p><b>"What I want to see is a browser that isn't riddled with bugs and easy ways for badware to end up infecting my machine"</b> - by cyberjock1980 (1131059) on Wednesday July 01, @03:14PM (#28547409)</p></div><p>Well, the best I can show you on this account, is these stats from SECUNIA.COM, so you can make your OWN judgements/decisions, on this note!</p><p>----</p><p><b>Opera 9.x</b></p><p><a href="http://secunia.com/advisories/product/10615/" title="secunia.com" rel="nofollow">http://secunia.com/advisories/product/10615/</a> [secunia.com]</p><p>Unpatched = 0\% (0 of 22 Secunia advisories)</p><p>----</p><p><b>FireFox 3.x</b></p><p><a href="http://secunia.com/advisories/product/19089/" title="secunia.com" rel="nofollow">http://secunia.com/advisories/product/19089/</a> [secunia.com]</p><p>Unpatched = 0\% (0 of 15 Secunia advisories)</p><p>----</p><p><b>Internet Explorer</b></p><p><a href="http://secunia.com/advisories/product/21625/" title="secunia.com" rel="nofollow">http://secunia.com/advisories/product/21625/</a> [secunia.com]</p><p>Unpatched = 50\% (1 of 2 Secunia advisories)</p><p>----</p><p>(BIG improvement for FireFox, as I used to post these stats from 2005 - 2008 here, quite frequently, in debates about webbrowsers (on security, other url evidences for speed... &amp; like the article says though, almost @ its outset? We HAVE seen big improvements in webbrowsers, this year especially))</p><p>Problem is though, that the stats above? Those are for KHOWN vulnerabilities... what about those NOT published publicly, &amp; those that javascript creates? No, the problem is, &amp; I AM CONVINCED OF THIS, is javascript - "the harbinger of doom"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... the problem's NOT SO MUCH the webbrowsers, but javascript itself - THIS IS WHAT NEEDS FIXING... apk</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>All this " concentration " on " Web 2.0 " riddled with javascript = " bad move " , OVERALL , imo @ least !
No , it 's not " ALL BAD " , &amp; is a good thing , but I only say that because IF they would fix up the problems javascript itself has in its DOM , we might NOT see so many " bugs " come through our browsers &amp; into the rest of our systems.I mean , hey - Speeding up javascript processing 's all " fine &amp; good " but , it 's only speeding up how fast you can be infected as well ( &amp; lately ?
Even by bogus adbanners ( been this way for years now , only moreso lately ) ) .What about this EMCA script , that 's supposed to be an improvement on javascript ?
AND , will it improve the DOM &amp; the security vs. what we see in javascript now ? ?
I think that we need something like that , now .
( These are the questions that need answering/addressing , imo @ least !
) APKP.S. = &gt; However , on this question from you : " What I want to see is a browser that is n't riddled with bugs and easy ways for badware to end up infecting my machine " - by cyberjock1980 ( 1131059 ) on Wednesday July 01 , @ 03 : 14PM ( # 28547409 ) Well , the best I can show you on this account , is these stats from SECUNIA.COM , so you can make your OWN judgements/decisions , on this note ! ----Opera 9.xhttp : //secunia.com/advisories/product/10615/ [ secunia.com ] Unpatched = 0 \ % ( 0 of 22 Secunia advisories ) ----FireFox 3.xhttp : //secunia.com/advisories/product/19089/ [ secunia.com ] Unpatched = 0 \ % ( 0 of 15 Secunia advisories ) ----Internet Explorerhttp : //secunia.com/advisories/product/21625/ [ secunia.com ] Unpatched = 50 \ % ( 1 of 2 Secunia advisories ) ---- ( BIG improvement for FireFox , as I used to post these stats from 2005 - 2008 here , quite frequently , in debates about webbrowsers ( on security , other url evidences for speed... &amp; like the article says though , almost @ its outset ?
We HAVE seen big improvements in webbrowsers , this year especially ) ) Problem is though , that the stats above ?
Those are for KHOWN vulnerabilities... what about those NOT published publicly , &amp; those that javascript creates ?
No , the problem is , &amp; I AM CONVINCED OF THIS , is javascript - " the harbinger of doom " ... the problem 's NOT SO MUCH the webbrowsers , but javascript itself - THIS IS WHAT NEEDS FIXING... apk</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All this "concentration" on "Web 2.0" riddled with javascript = "bad move", OVERALL, imo @ least!
No, it's not "ALL BAD", &amp; is a good thing, but I only say that because IF they would fix up the problems javascript itself has in its DOM, we might NOT see so many "bugs" come through our browsers &amp; into the rest of our systems.I mean, hey - Speeding up javascript processing's all "fine &amp; good" but, it's only speeding up how fast you can be infected as well (&amp; lately?
Even by bogus adbanners (been this way for years now, only moreso lately)).What about this EMCA script, that's supposed to be an improvement on javascript?
AND, will it improve the DOM &amp; the security vs. what we see in javascript now??
I think that we need something like that, now.
(These are the questions that need answering/addressing, imo @ least!
)APKP.S.=&gt; However, on this question from you:"What I want to see is a browser that isn't riddled with bugs and easy ways for badware to end up infecting my machine" - by cyberjock1980 (1131059) on Wednesday July 01, @03:14PM (#28547409)Well, the best I can show you on this account, is these stats from SECUNIA.COM, so you can make your OWN judgements/decisions, on this note!----Opera 9.xhttp://secunia.com/advisories/product/10615/ [secunia.com]Unpatched = 0\% (0 of 22 Secunia advisories)----FireFox 3.xhttp://secunia.com/advisories/product/19089/ [secunia.com]Unpatched = 0\% (0 of 15 Secunia advisories)----Internet Explorerhttp://secunia.com/advisories/product/21625/ [secunia.com]Unpatched = 50\% (1 of 2 Secunia advisories)----(BIG improvement for FireFox, as I used to post these stats from 2005 - 2008 here, quite frequently, in debates about webbrowsers (on security, other url evidences for speed... &amp; like the article says though, almost @ its outset?
We HAVE seen big improvements in webbrowsers, this year especially))Problem is though, that the stats above?
Those are for KHOWN vulnerabilities... what about those NOT published publicly, &amp; those that javascript creates?
No, the problem is, &amp; I AM CONVINCED OF THIS, is javascript - "the harbinger of doom" ... the problem's NOT SO MUCH the webbrowsers, but javascript itself - THIS IS WHAT NEEDS FIXING... apk
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547409</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28554889</id>
	<title>hmmm</title>
	<author>smash</author>
	<datestamp>1246567680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><ul> <li>fastest browser? no</li><li>most standards compliant? no</li><li>most robust (process per tab)? no..</li><li>prettiest? no</li></ul><p>
Hmm.  Why should we use it again?  Don't get me wrong, i was a firefox user from way back (when it was called phoenix, up until version 2.x or so), but I just don't see much point lately.  Chrome whoops its arse on speed, stability and interface, safari whoops its arse on speed, coverflow bookmarks/history and standards compliance.  Sure, firefox has a million plug ins I don't use, but it just fails the basics as far as I'm concerned...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>fastest browser ?
nomost standards compliant ?
nomost robust ( process per tab ) ?
no..prettiest ? no Hmm .
Why should we use it again ?
Do n't get me wrong , i was a firefox user from way back ( when it was called phoenix , up until version 2.x or so ) , but I just do n't see much point lately .
Chrome whoops its arse on speed , stability and interface , safari whoops its arse on speed , coverflow bookmarks/history and standards compliance .
Sure , firefox has a million plug ins I do n't use , but it just fails the basics as far as I 'm concerned.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> fastest browser?
nomost standards compliant?
nomost robust (process per tab)?
no..prettiest? no
Hmm.
Why should we use it again?
Don't get me wrong, i was a firefox user from way back (when it was called phoenix, up until version 2.x or so), but I just don't see much point lately.
Chrome whoops its arse on speed, stability and interface, safari whoops its arse on speed, coverflow bookmarks/history and standards compliance.
Sure, firefox has a million plug ins I don't use, but it just fails the basics as far as I'm concerned...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547099</id>
	<title>Re:Big Brother...</title>
	<author>Kurusuki</author>
	<datestamp>1246478160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>For one, the government usually doesn't ask for permission first. Not to mention that the information used to determine your geolocation is also derived from something already passed to the web host, your IP, assuming you're not using the WiFi option. Generally speaking web pages can achieve a similar result already with a little effort. As it stands this new feature isn't making new information available to the public, it's just making old information a bit more friendly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>For one , the government usually does n't ask for permission first .
Not to mention that the information used to determine your geolocation is also derived from something already passed to the web host , your IP , assuming you 're not using the WiFi option .
Generally speaking web pages can achieve a similar result already with a little effort .
As it stands this new feature is n't making new information available to the public , it 's just making old information a bit more friendly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For one, the government usually doesn't ask for permission first.
Not to mention that the information used to determine your geolocation is also derived from something already passed to the web host, your IP, assuming you're not using the WiFi option.
Generally speaking web pages can achieve a similar result already with a little effort.
As it stands this new feature isn't making new information available to the public, it's just making old information a bit more friendly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546977</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546821</id>
	<title>Web browsers, bah!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246477200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I prefer to read the html code and interpret them myself...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I prefer to read the html code and interpret them myself.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I prefer to read the html code and interpret them myself...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28550949</id>
	<title>Re:Big Brother...</title>
	<author>mr\_lizard13</author>
	<datestamp>1246447740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>Why would I ever want to share my location?</p></div><p>Seriously?  Imagine you could search Google for something like "sushi restaurant near me", let Google access your location information (once or every time), and get a list of nearby restaurants. </p></div><p>
I don't think he goes out much so he won't see the benefit of that...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would I ever want to share my location ? Seriously ?
Imagine you could search Google for something like " sushi restaurant near me " , let Google access your location information ( once or every time ) , and get a list of nearby restaurants .
I do n't think he goes out much so he wo n't see the benefit of that.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would I ever want to share my location?Seriously?
Imagine you could search Google for something like "sushi restaurant near me", let Google access your location information (once or every time), and get a list of nearby restaurants.
I don't think he goes out much so he won't see the benefit of that...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548913</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28556813</id>
	<title>Re:Oblig. rms</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246545300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>For personal reasons, I do not browse the web from my computer. (I also have not net connection much of the time.) To look at page I send mail to a demon which runs wget and mails the page back to me. It is very efficient use of my time, but it is slow in real time.</p></div><p>http://jeremy.zawodny.com/blog/archives/009889.html</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For personal reasons , I do not browse the web from my computer .
( I also have not net connection much of the time .
) To look at page I send mail to a demon which runs wget and mails the page back to me .
It is very efficient use of my time , but it is slow in real time.http : //jeremy.zawodny.com/blog/archives/009889.html</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For personal reasons, I do not browse the web from my computer.
(I also have not net connection much of the time.
) To look at page I send mail to a demon which runs wget and mails the page back to me.
It is very efficient use of my time, but it is slow in real time.http://jeremy.zawodny.com/blog/archives/009889.html
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546821</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28567949</id>
	<title>Faster at revealing bug(lets)</title>
	<author>lsatenstein</author>
	<datestamp>1246552140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>If I select a set of slashdot entries and click to open them, or request closing, to show the next one. I end up with page not found. Back button is non-operable.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I select a set of slashdot entries and click to open them , or request closing , to show the next one .
I end up with page not found .
Back button is non-operable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I select a set of slashdot entries and click to open them, or request closing, to show the next one.
I end up with page not found.
Back button is non-operable.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547075</id>
	<title>Re:Web browsers, bah!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246478100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bah! I lick the network cable and decode the web page through the electrical pulses!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bah !
I lick the network cable and decode the web page through the electrical pulses !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bah!
I lick the network cable and decode the web page through the electrical pulses!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546821</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547821</id>
	<title>Seattle</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246480560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Presumably in Seattle it could tell you where your nearest 100 Starbucks are...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Presumably in Seattle it could tell you where your nearest 100 Starbucks are.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Presumably in Seattle it could tell you where your nearest 100 Starbucks are...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28550961</id>
	<title>Re:Firefox 3.5 freezes loading background tabs</title>
	<author>thePowerOfGrayskull</author>
	<datestamp>1246447740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have four different 3.5 installations and none of them are doing this.  I'm not usually a "but it's working fine for me" kinda guy, but don't you think something like this would have been reported as a showstopper bug for 3.5?  (Even as I typed this I background loaded your comment, and had no issues...)  What plugins and add-ons are you running?  Could they have an effect? If you're certain that there's no other possible cause, hopefully you've filed a bug report?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have four different 3.5 installations and none of them are doing this .
I 'm not usually a " but it 's working fine for me " kinda guy , but do n't you think something like this would have been reported as a showstopper bug for 3.5 ?
( Even as I typed this I background loaded your comment , and had no issues... ) What plugins and add-ons are you running ?
Could they have an effect ?
If you 're certain that there 's no other possible cause , hopefully you 've filed a bug report ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have four different 3.5 installations and none of them are doing this.
I'm not usually a "but it's working fine for me" kinda guy, but don't you think something like this would have been reported as a showstopper bug for 3.5?
(Even as I typed this I background loaded your comment, and had no issues...)  What plugins and add-ons are you running?
Could they have an effect?
If you're certain that there's no other possible cause, hopefully you've filed a bug report?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547137</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548289</id>
	<title>No speed improvement for those on x86\_64</title>
	<author>zoips</author>
	<datestamp>1246481880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Tracemonkey JIT <a href="http://hacks.mozilla.org/2009/06/tracemonkey-demo/" title="mozilla.org">doesn't work on x86\_64</a> [mozilla.org] in the Firefox 3.5 release. Apparently it works in trunk, but for those on x86\_64 machines, you either have to run the 32 bit version or just deal with no JIT.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Tracemonkey JIT does n't work on x86 \ _64 [ mozilla.org ] in the Firefox 3.5 release .
Apparently it works in trunk , but for those on x86 \ _64 machines , you either have to run the 32 bit version or just deal with no JIT .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Tracemonkey JIT doesn't work on x86\_64 [mozilla.org] in the Firefox 3.5 release.
Apparently it works in trunk, but for those on x86\_64 machines, you either have to run the 32 bit version or just deal with no JIT.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28551583</id>
	<title>Re:Big Brother...</title>
	<author>diablovision</author>
	<datestamp>1246450800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I remember we used to have this things called "phonebooks" or something. It required opening a "book" and binary searching....and remembering street names. Can't be bothered with that now. Oooh silly cats on youtube! Huh? Oh shit, browser went down, can't change my clothes. Better lie on the bed and stare at the ceiling. God I wish this ceiling had better resolution.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember we used to have this things called " phonebooks " or something .
It required opening a " book " and binary searching....and remembering street names .
Ca n't be bothered with that now .
Oooh silly cats on youtube !
Huh ? Oh shit , browser went down , ca n't change my clothes .
Better lie on the bed and stare at the ceiling .
God I wish this ceiling had better resolution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember we used to have this things called "phonebooks" or something.
It required opening a "book" and binary searching....and remembering street names.
Can't be bothered with that now.
Oooh silly cats on youtube!
Huh? Oh shit, browser went down, can't change my clothes.
Better lie on the bed and stare at the ceiling.
God I wish this ceiling had better resolution.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548913</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28551959</id>
	<title>Lies!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246452960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>[...] within a few hundred meters &#226;" easily enough for, say, a Starbucks Web site to tell you where your nearest Starbucks is.</p></div><p>There could easily be several Starbucks within a few-hundred-meter radius...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>[ ... ] within a few hundred meters   " easily enough for , say , a Starbucks Web site to tell you where your nearest Starbucks is.There could easily be several Starbucks within a few-hundred-meter radius.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[...] within a few hundred meters â" easily enough for, say, a Starbucks Web site to tell you where your nearest Starbucks is.There could easily be several Starbucks within a few-hundred-meter radius...
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547091</id>
	<title>Re:Big Brother...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246478160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because it's my choice who I give the information to and it gives me some benefit.</p><p>Me explicitly telling a search service my location right now so that it gives me more useful results: good</p><p>The government tracking me at all times for who knows what reason (of no benefit at all to me): bad</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because it 's my choice who I give the information to and it gives me some benefit.Me explicitly telling a search service my location right now so that it gives me more useful results : goodThe government tracking me at all times for who knows what reason ( of no benefit at all to me ) : bad</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because it's my choice who I give the information to and it gives me some benefit.Me explicitly telling a search service my location right now so that it gives me more useful results: goodThe government tracking me at all times for who knows what reason (of no benefit at all to me): bad</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546977</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547169</id>
	<title>THIRD PLACE!!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246478400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>USA! USA!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>USA !
USA !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>USA!
USA!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547291</id>
	<title>Does it really matter?</title>
	<author>Ark42</author>
	<datestamp>1246478760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I tried to do something pretty seemingly <a href="http://ark42.com/mtg/sets.php" title="ark42.com">simple</a> [ark42.com] with Javascript (1 draggable line to redraw the background colors of the table), and it drags its ass on IE8. It is fast and smooth in FF/Opera/etc, but with so many people using IE still, it hardly matters.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I tried to do something pretty seemingly simple [ ark42.com ] with Javascript ( 1 draggable line to redraw the background colors of the table ) , and it drags its ass on IE8 .
It is fast and smooth in FF/Opera/etc , but with so many people using IE still , it hardly matters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I tried to do something pretty seemingly simple [ark42.com] with Javascript (1 draggable line to redraw the background colors of the table), and it drags its ass on IE8.
It is fast and smooth in FF/Opera/etc, but with so many people using IE still, it hardly matters.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548723</id>
	<title>Re:Web browsers, bah!</title>
	<author>jbeaupre</author>
	<datestamp>1246440000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I still prefer content distributed via mimeograph, though. Get enough enough of that sweet blue text <b>smell</b>!<br>
There, fixed that for you.  Seriously, what was it about the smell of mimeographs that made taking quizzes just a little less painful?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I still prefer content distributed via mimeograph , though .
Get enough enough of that sweet blue text smell !
There , fixed that for you .
Seriously , what was it about the smell of mimeographs that made taking quizzes just a little less painful ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I still prefer content distributed via mimeograph, though.
Get enough enough of that sweet blue text smell!
There, fixed that for you.
Seriously, what was it about the smell of mimeographs that made taking quizzes just a little less painful?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547033</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28555033</id>
	<title>Run *any* browser inside a VM, then</title>
	<author>Mathinker</author>
	<datestamp>1246526040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your demands seem to be mainly met by running the browser of your choice inside a VM (and restoring to a fixed, virus/trojan/keylogger-free configuration either every time or just periodically).</p><p>You just have to figure out what is important to backup from that VM before rolling everything back. For most people, that might only be their bookmarks (easy to backup) and/or saved passwords (which might be tricky to backup, don't know).</p><p>(Of course, this isn't the most memory-efficient solution I can think of. It's actually one of the worst from that point of view.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your demands seem to be mainly met by running the browser of your choice inside a VM ( and restoring to a fixed , virus/trojan/keylogger-free configuration either every time or just periodically ) .You just have to figure out what is important to backup from that VM before rolling everything back .
For most people , that might only be their bookmarks ( easy to backup ) and/or saved passwords ( which might be tricky to backup , do n't know ) .
( Of course , this is n't the most memory-efficient solution I can think of .
It 's actually one of the worst from that point of view .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your demands seem to be mainly met by running the browser of your choice inside a VM (and restoring to a fixed, virus/trojan/keylogger-free configuration either every time or just periodically).You just have to figure out what is important to backup from that VM before rolling everything back.
For most people, that might only be their bookmarks (easy to backup) and/or saved passwords (which might be tricky to backup, don't know).
(Of course, this isn't the most memory-efficient solution I can think of.
It's actually one of the worst from that point of view.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547409</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548559</id>
	<title>Chrome fastest?</title>
	<author>Wingsy</author>
	<datestamp>1246439460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I thought Safari was the fastest.

<a href="http://crave.cnet.co.uk/software/0,39029471,49301219,00.htm" title="cnet.co.uk">http://crave.cnet.co.uk/software/0,39029471,49301219,00.htm</a> [cnet.co.uk]</htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought Safari was the fastest .
http : //crave.cnet.co.uk/software/0,39029471,49301219,00.htm [ cnet.co.uk ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought Safari was the fastest.
http://crave.cnet.co.uk/software/0,39029471,49301219,00.htm [cnet.co.uk]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28550155</id>
	<title>Re:Web browsers, bah!</title>
	<author>theendlessnow</author>
	<datestamp>1246444380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I prefer to read the html code and interpret them myself...</p></div><p>
Do you read and interpret CSS?  What score did you get on Acid3?  Do employers look at that sort of thing on a resume?  Are there any good books out there to help someone interested in taking the test?
</p><p>
Sorry about all the questions...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I prefer to read the html code and interpret them myself.. . Do you read and interpret CSS ?
What score did you get on Acid3 ?
Do employers look at that sort of thing on a resume ?
Are there any good books out there to help someone interested in taking the test ?
Sorry about all the questions.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I prefer to read the html code and interpret them myself...
Do you read and interpret CSS?
What score did you get on Acid3?
Do employers look at that sort of thing on a resume?
Are there any good books out there to help someone interested in taking the test?
Sorry about all the questions...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546821</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28554569</id>
	<title>Re:Web browsers, bah!</title>
	<author>dhall</author>
	<datestamp>1246477500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Damn whipper snappers thinking gopher was old.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>I remember maintaining uucp links.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Damn whipper snappers thinking gopher was old .
: ) I remember maintaining uucp links .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Damn whipper snappers thinking gopher was old.
:)I remember maintaining uucp links.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547033</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547719</id>
	<title>Re:I don't care...</title>
	<author>valinor89</author>
	<datestamp>1246480320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Certainly. I hardly make use of pages that take long to render or else. What I dont' like is to wait 1 minute for the browser to start or to block itsels every time it stumbles on a flawed page that contains some bucle ( multitreading would help). Does the new version fix all this?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Certainly .
I hardly make use of pages that take long to render or else .
What I dont ' like is to wait 1 minute for the browser to start or to block itsels every time it stumbles on a flawed page that contains some bucle ( multitreading would help ) .
Does the new version fix all this ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Certainly.
I hardly make use of pages that take long to render or else.
What I dont' like is to wait 1 minute for the browser to start or to block itsels every time it stumbles on a flawed page that contains some bucle ( multitreading would help).
Does the new version fix all this?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547409</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547591</id>
	<title>Re:Using Chrome now, but....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246479960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You might wanna recheck your preconceptions - a lot has changed in the past few releases for Firefox: http://dotnetperls.com/chrome-memory</p><p>It's too bad a lot of people still think Firefox is such a memory hog when really they've refined it to be one of the most quick and efficient browsers available.</p><p>That said, your mileage may vary depending on the add-ons you choose, but as long as you don't go overboard there's no reason your memory usage should be significantly different than those in the benchmark.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You might wan na recheck your preconceptions - a lot has changed in the past few releases for Firefox : http : //dotnetperls.com/chrome-memoryIt 's too bad a lot of people still think Firefox is such a memory hog when really they 've refined it to be one of the most quick and efficient browsers available.That said , your mileage may vary depending on the add-ons you choose , but as long as you do n't go overboard there 's no reason your memory usage should be significantly different than those in the benchmark .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You might wanna recheck your preconceptions - a lot has changed in the past few releases for Firefox: http://dotnetperls.com/chrome-memoryIt's too bad a lot of people still think Firefox is such a memory hog when really they've refined it to be one of the most quick and efficient browsers available.That said, your mileage may vary depending on the add-ons you choose, but as long as you don't go overboard there's no reason your memory usage should be significantly different than those in the benchmark.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547113</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28549407</id>
	<title>Re:Will it be fast enough to view slashdot?</title>
	<author>KZigurs</author>
	<datestamp>1246441920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>funny enough slashdot has been one of reference sites I test browsers with for quite a while. Incremental rendering in particular.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>funny enough slashdot has been one of reference sites I test browsers with for quite a while .
Incremental rendering in particular .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>funny enough slashdot has been one of reference sites I test browsers with for quite a while.
Incremental rendering in particular.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546923</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547335</id>
	<title>Starbucks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246478940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> within a few hundred meters &#226;" easily enough for, say, a Starbucks Web site to tell you where your nearest Starbucks is</p></div><p>If you live where I live, then there are several Starbucks within a few hundred meters radius.  A little more percision never hurt anyone.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>within a few hundred meters   " easily enough for , say , a Starbucks Web site to tell you where your nearest Starbucks isIf you live where I live , then there are several Starbucks within a few hundred meters radius .
A little more percision never hurt anyone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> within a few hundred meters â" easily enough for, say, a Starbucks Web site to tell you where your nearest Starbucks isIf you live where I live, then there are several Starbucks within a few hundred meters radius.
A little more percision never hurt anyone.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28549567</id>
	<title>Re:Using Chrome now, but....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246442460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The thing that I like about FF with respect to stupid websites that need IE is the IE tab extension. I use this a lot at work for all our stupid IE6 based web-tools.</p><p>The only one it still can't seem to render is iMAP, bu that thing is just such a pile of crap anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The thing that I like about FF with respect to stupid websites that need IE is the IE tab extension .
I use this a lot at work for all our stupid IE6 based web-tools.The only one it still ca n't seem to render is iMAP , bu that thing is just such a pile of crap anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The thing that I like about FF with respect to stupid websites that need IE is the IE tab extension.
I use this a lot at work for all our stupid IE6 based web-tools.The only one it still can't seem to render is iMAP, bu that thing is just such a pile of crap anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547113</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28554581</id>
	<title>Re:that's nice, but</title>
	<author>maglor\_83</author>
	<datestamp>1246477620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would rather an add-on slow down my browsing a bit, than not being able to do what it does at all.<br>That's why I added it on in the first place, after all!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would rather an add-on slow down my browsing a bit , than not being able to do what it does at all.That 's why I added it on in the first place , after all !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would rather an add-on slow down my browsing a bit, than not being able to do what it does at all.That's why I added it on in the first place, after all!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546981</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28551835</id>
	<title>Re:One pice of advice for users</title>
	<author>miro f</author>
	<datestamp>1246452180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Great stuff! It found my location as a 10m radius in Mountain View, California.</p><p>Unfortunately, I live in Melbourne, Australia.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Great stuff !
It found my location as a 10m radius in Mountain View , California.Unfortunately , I live in Melbourne , Australia .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Great stuff!
It found my location as a 10m radius in Mountain View, California.Unfortunately, I live in Melbourne, Australia.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28549349</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548999</id>
	<title>Well, it may be faster, but the quality went down.</title>
	<author>scorp1us</author>
	<datestamp>1246440780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I upgraded yesterday and I've had all kinds of loading problems. Facebook photos don't load. The gmail theme background loads, then goes missing ("whites out") after switching to another tab then back. I've had some some other sites like yahoo finance not load the charts. My 3.0 never had these issues... I hope they get sorted out. I noticed it has a better deferrable loading engine, where it can lay things out and get the page in front of you faster. I'm not describing those types of things. Unless the deferrrer gives up too soon.</p><p>And yes, I did provide the feedback.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I upgraded yesterday and I 've had all kinds of loading problems .
Facebook photos do n't load .
The gmail theme background loads , then goes missing ( " whites out " ) after switching to another tab then back .
I 've had some some other sites like yahoo finance not load the charts .
My 3.0 never had these issues... I hope they get sorted out .
I noticed it has a better deferrable loading engine , where it can lay things out and get the page in front of you faster .
I 'm not describing those types of things .
Unless the deferrrer gives up too soon.And yes , I did provide the feedback .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I upgraded yesterday and I've had all kinds of loading problems.
Facebook photos don't load.
The gmail theme background loads, then goes missing ("whites out") after switching to another tab then back.
I've had some some other sites like yahoo finance not load the charts.
My 3.0 never had these issues... I hope they get sorted out.
I noticed it has a better deferrable loading engine, where it can lay things out and get the page in front of you faster.
I'm not describing those types of things.
Unless the deferrrer gives up too soon.And yes, I did provide the feedback.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548683</id>
	<title>Re:pffft</title>
	<author>Actually, I do RTFA</author>
	<datestamp>1246439820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Okay, lynx may be a little extreme.  But why does every site need to use javascript?  I don't like web pages crashing anymore than movies (see: BluRay).</p><p>In other words, display it once so that it looks right; stop trying to make each website an application.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Okay , lynx may be a little extreme .
But why does every site need to use javascript ?
I do n't like web pages crashing anymore than movies ( see : BluRay ) .In other words , display it once so that it looks right ; stop trying to make each website an application .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Okay, lynx may be a little extreme.
But why does every site need to use javascript?
I don't like web pages crashing anymore than movies (see: BluRay).In other words, display it once so that it looks right; stop trying to make each website an application.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546945</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547101</id>
	<title>Opera 10 not benchmarked in either link</title>
	<author>SteelRealm</author>
	<datestamp>1246478220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Firefox 3.5's new rendering engine places it squarely above Opera 10's beta and Internet Explorers 7 and 8 (based on previous benchmarks)"

Opera 9.6 =! Opera 10 Beta, or am I missing something here?</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Firefox 3.5 's new rendering engine places it squarely above Opera 10 's beta and Internet Explorers 7 and 8 ( based on previous benchmarks ) " Opera 9.6 = !
Opera 10 Beta , or am I missing something here ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Firefox 3.5's new rendering engine places it squarely above Opera 10's beta and Internet Explorers 7 and 8 (based on previous benchmarks)"

Opera 9.6 =!
Opera 10 Beta, or am I missing something here?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28553099</id>
	<title>Re:We're #3</title>
	<author>mqduck</author>
	<datestamp>1246461120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, being #1 in speed is all that matters. That's why everyone who isn't an ignorant fool runs lynx.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , being # 1 in speed is all that matters .
That 's why everyone who is n't an ignorant fool runs lynx .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, being #1 in speed is all that matters.
That's why everyone who isn't an ignorant fool runs lynx.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28553757</id>
	<title>Re:Firefox 3.5 freezes loading background tabs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246467480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ClearType is optional in IE, has been for years. No idea where you got the idea it was forcing you to do anything. Tools -&gt; Internet Options -&gt; Advanced -&gt; First item under Multimedia. It does default to true in IE8, since most people are using flat panels by now and find antialiased text less readable, but it's still optional.</p><p>To set IE8's default fonts, click Fonts at the bottom of the General tab in Internet Options.<br>To override page-specified fonts, open Internet Options, click Accessibility (under the General tab), then click "Ignore font styles specified on webpages" and/or other options there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ClearType is optional in IE , has been for years .
No idea where you got the idea it was forcing you to do anything .
Tools - &gt; Internet Options - &gt; Advanced - &gt; First item under Multimedia .
It does default to true in IE8 , since most people are using flat panels by now and find antialiased text less readable , but it 's still optional.To set IE8 's default fonts , click Fonts at the bottom of the General tab in Internet Options.To override page-specified fonts , open Internet Options , click Accessibility ( under the General tab ) , then click " Ignore font styles specified on webpages " and/or other options there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ClearType is optional in IE, has been for years.
No idea where you got the idea it was forcing you to do anything.
Tools -&gt; Internet Options -&gt; Advanced -&gt; First item under Multimedia.
It does default to true in IE8, since most people are using flat panels by now and find antialiased text less readable, but it's still optional.To set IE8's default fonts, click Fonts at the bottom of the General tab in Internet Options.To override page-specified fonts, open Internet Options, click Accessibility (under the General tab), then click "Ignore font styles specified on webpages" and/or other options there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547137</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28553125</id>
	<title>Re:One pice of advice for users</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246461300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>What I did was to uninstall it through the Windows XP control panel and delete all instances of Mozilla and Firefox in the registry. This is one bit of info developers should have informed us about.</p></div></blockquote><p>How are they supposed to know that your computer is messed up?</p><p>Reading comments such as yours makes me cringe: You automatically assume that the problem is someone else's, when the most likely cause is PEBKAC.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What I did was to uninstall it through the Windows XP control panel and delete all instances of Mozilla and Firefox in the registry .
This is one bit of info developers should have informed us about.How are they supposed to know that your computer is messed up ? Reading comments such as yours makes me cringe : You automatically assume that the problem is someone else 's , when the most likely cause is PEBKAC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What I did was to uninstall it through the Windows XP control panel and delete all instances of Mozilla and Firefox in the registry.
This is one bit of info developers should have informed us about.How are they supposed to know that your computer is messed up?Reading comments such as yours makes me cringe: You automatically assume that the problem is someone else's, when the most likely cause is PEBKAC.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547309</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548867</id>
	<title>Re:Using Chrome now, but....</title>
	<author>Nikker</author>
	<datestamp>1246440420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>After trying Chrome I found one thing that made the difference, extensions.  On my machine 2.5GHz w/ 512MB ram surfing used to be pretty good but now with Slashdot's js and everyone else's for that matter it just slowed everything down again, same freezes as a page loads.  My one out is ScriptBlock and AdBlock, Slashdot js gets banned as well as every other ad server and now my computer loads a 300+ comment in 1 second instead of 10-15.  Just a FYI to the king Taco, it is NOT necessary to show your AJAX prowess by loading each and every comment after the pageLoad() one at a time.  I downloaded the entire content with out JS and looks identical to the JS version in micro seconds.  Hint: Load the content first then play with it via JS, we know your Uber cool trust us just let us load the page with out requiring some quad core w/ multiple GB of ram.</htmltext>
<tokenext>After trying Chrome I found one thing that made the difference , extensions .
On my machine 2.5GHz w/ 512MB ram surfing used to be pretty good but now with Slashdot 's js and everyone else 's for that matter it just slowed everything down again , same freezes as a page loads .
My one out is ScriptBlock and AdBlock , Slashdot js gets banned as well as every other ad server and now my computer loads a 300 + comment in 1 second instead of 10-15 .
Just a FYI to the king Taco , it is NOT necessary to show your AJAX prowess by loading each and every comment after the pageLoad ( ) one at a time .
I downloaded the entire content with out JS and looks identical to the JS version in micro seconds .
Hint : Load the content first then play with it via JS , we know your Uber cool trust us just let us load the page with out requiring some quad core w/ multiple GB of ram .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After trying Chrome I found one thing that made the difference, extensions.
On my machine 2.5GHz w/ 512MB ram surfing used to be pretty good but now with Slashdot's js and everyone else's for that matter it just slowed everything down again, same freezes as a page loads.
My one out is ScriptBlock and AdBlock, Slashdot js gets banned as well as every other ad server and now my computer loads a 300+ comment in 1 second instead of 10-15.
Just a FYI to the king Taco, it is NOT necessary to show your AJAX prowess by loading each and every comment after the pageLoad() one at a time.
I downloaded the entire content with out JS and looks identical to the JS version in micro seconds.
Hint: Load the content first then play with it via JS, we know your Uber cool trust us just let us load the page with out requiring some quad core w/ multiple GB of ram.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547113</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28551143</id>
	<title>Re:Using Chrome now, but....</title>
	<author>Simetrical</author>
	<datestamp>1246448700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You might wanna recheck your preconceptions - a lot has changed in the past few releases for Firefox: <a href="http://dotnetperls.com/chrome-memory" title="dotnetperls.com">http://dotnetperls.com/chrome-memory</a> [dotnetperls.com] </p></div><p>That benchmark is worthless.  Especially for Chrome.  Quote: "When a process with the same name such as 'chrome.exe' is encountered more than once, its total size is accumulated, yielding a total of all the 'chrome.exe' figures together."  Apparently the author has never heard of shared memory!  See <a href="http://blog.chromium.org/2008/09/google-chrome-memory-usage-good-and-bad.html" title="chromium.org">Google Chrome Memory Usage - Good and Bad</a> [chromium.org] on the Chromium blog for some discussion on this.

</p><p>The other browsers might not be using multiple processes, but the same flaws apply to a lesser degree.  Every library they load will count against them, even if another app is using the library and so it would be in memory anyway.  The only reliable way to tell how much memory a process is really using is to check memory usage, use program, check memory usage, kill program, check memory usage.  If the first and third figures are equal, then you can get a correct figure by subtracting the second figure from their common value.  (If they aren't equal, either the app hasn't actually exited fully, or some other program has eaten up more memory in the meantime and the results are no good.)

</p><p>Granted, I doubt Firefox is such a comparative memory hog as people paint it to be, but the benchmark proves nothing either way.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You might wan na recheck your preconceptions - a lot has changed in the past few releases for Firefox : http : //dotnetperls.com/chrome-memory [ dotnetperls.com ] That benchmark is worthless .
Especially for Chrome .
Quote : " When a process with the same name such as 'chrome.exe ' is encountered more than once , its total size is accumulated , yielding a total of all the 'chrome.exe ' figures together .
" Apparently the author has never heard of shared memory !
See Google Chrome Memory Usage - Good and Bad [ chromium.org ] on the Chromium blog for some discussion on this .
The other browsers might not be using multiple processes , but the same flaws apply to a lesser degree .
Every library they load will count against them , even if another app is using the library and so it would be in memory anyway .
The only reliable way to tell how much memory a process is really using is to check memory usage , use program , check memory usage , kill program , check memory usage .
If the first and third figures are equal , then you can get a correct figure by subtracting the second figure from their common value .
( If they are n't equal , either the app has n't actually exited fully , or some other program has eaten up more memory in the meantime and the results are no good .
) Granted , I doubt Firefox is such a comparative memory hog as people paint it to be , but the benchmark proves nothing either way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You might wanna recheck your preconceptions - a lot has changed in the past few releases for Firefox: http://dotnetperls.com/chrome-memory [dotnetperls.com] That benchmark is worthless.
Especially for Chrome.
Quote: "When a process with the same name such as 'chrome.exe' is encountered more than once, its total size is accumulated, yielding a total of all the 'chrome.exe' figures together.
"  Apparently the author has never heard of shared memory!
See Google Chrome Memory Usage - Good and Bad [chromium.org] on the Chromium blog for some discussion on this.
The other browsers might not be using multiple processes, but the same flaws apply to a lesser degree.
Every library they load will count against them, even if another app is using the library and so it would be in memory anyway.
The only reliable way to tell how much memory a process is really using is to check memory usage, use program, check memory usage, kill program, check memory usage.
If the first and third figures are equal, then you can get a correct figure by subtracting the second figure from their common value.
(If they aren't equal, either the app hasn't actually exited fully, or some other program has eaten up more memory in the meantime and the results are no good.
)

Granted, I doubt Firefox is such a comparative memory hog as people paint it to be, but the benchmark proves nothing either way.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547591</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28549513</id>
	<title>Nothing quite as impressive...</title>
	<author>mcgeeb</author>
	<datestamp>1246442280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...as a video with out of sync audio.  It's JUST like youtube!  Awesome!</htmltext>
<tokenext>...as a video with out of sync audio .
It 's JUST like youtube !
Awesome !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...as a video with out of sync audio.
It's JUST like youtube!
Awesome!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547653</id>
	<title>Re:Opera 10 not benchmarked in either link</title>
	<author>hedwards</author>
	<datestamp>1246480140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because it's not good practice to include betas in these sorts of tests. A proper beta is going to have debug code and such activated making the results not necessarily accurate. As a result there's really no guarantee that the final product will behave in a similar fashion.<br> <br>

If it were an article speculating on what Opera 10 is going to be like, that would be fairly reasonable, but otherwise I don't see any reason to include an unfinished browser.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because it 's not good practice to include betas in these sorts of tests .
A proper beta is going to have debug code and such activated making the results not necessarily accurate .
As a result there 's really no guarantee that the final product will behave in a similar fashion .
If it were an article speculating on what Opera 10 is going to be like , that would be fairly reasonable , but otherwise I do n't see any reason to include an unfinished browser .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because it's not good practice to include betas in these sorts of tests.
A proper beta is going to have debug code and such activated making the results not necessarily accurate.
As a result there's really no guarantee that the final product will behave in a similar fashion.
If it were an article speculating on what Opera 10 is going to be like, that would be fairly reasonable, but otherwise I don't see any reason to include an unfinished browser.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547101</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28553009</id>
	<title>Upgrading</title>
	<author>mqduck</author>
	<datestamp>1246460520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The only reason not to upgrade from Firefox 3 immediately is if you myriad extensions aren't compatible</p></div><p>For the record, unmasking the still hard-masked mozilla-firefox-3.5 ebuild broke apart my Gentoo installation. Just saying.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The only reason not to upgrade from Firefox 3 immediately is if you myriad extensions are n't compatibleFor the record , unmasking the still hard-masked mozilla-firefox-3.5 ebuild broke apart my Gentoo installation .
Just saying .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only reason not to upgrade from Firefox 3 immediately is if you myriad extensions aren't compatibleFor the record, unmasking the still hard-masked mozilla-firefox-3.5 ebuild broke apart my Gentoo installation.
Just saying.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28552955</id>
	<title>Re:One pice of advice for users</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246460160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>therwise your new install will have bizarre behavior like failing to open up links from websites like digg</p></div></blockquote><p>That's not bizarre behavior - that's called having good taste.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>therwise your new install will have bizarre behavior like failing to open up links from websites like diggThat 's not bizarre behavior - that 's called having good taste .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>therwise your new install will have bizarre behavior like failing to open up links from websites like diggThat's not bizarre behavior - that's called having good taste.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547309</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28554035</id>
	<title>Re:Big Brother...</title>
	<author>Andyvan</author>
	<datestamp>1246471560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I thought you were making a joke about the tabs support, and couldn't understand why you weren't moderated as funny...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought you were making a joke about the tabs support , and could n't understand why you were n't moderated as funny.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought you were making a joke about the tabs support, and couldn't understand why you weren't moderated as funny...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546977</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28549425</id>
	<title>Re:Huh? Safari is faster, and the benchmark proves</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246441980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>iCab still has a browser?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>iCab still has a browser ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>iCab still has a browser?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547985</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547939</id>
	<title>Re:Firefox 3.5 freezes loading background tabs</title>
	<author>Runaway1956</author>
	<datestamp>1246480800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I suspect some configuration problem on your end, to be honest.  I'm running FF3.5 on XP SP3 inside of VirtualBox.  I do not see that behaviour.  Using snaplinks, I just opened six tabs, and the current tab remained responsive while they loaded in the background.</p><p>Whether the configuration problem is in your VM, within Windows, or in Firefox, I couldn't even begin to guess.  In my case, I have 1 gig of memory allocated to the VM - if you have less memory, that might be something to look at.</p><p>Of course it's possible that my FF is different than yours in some subtle way.  I upgraded from FF 3.5 b4 to FF 3.5 RC1 and then to FF 3.5 final.  I really wouldn't EXPECT there to be any real difference, but crap happens, right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I suspect some configuration problem on your end , to be honest .
I 'm running FF3.5 on XP SP3 inside of VirtualBox .
I do not see that behaviour .
Using snaplinks , I just opened six tabs , and the current tab remained responsive while they loaded in the background.Whether the configuration problem is in your VM , within Windows , or in Firefox , I could n't even begin to guess .
In my case , I have 1 gig of memory allocated to the VM - if you have less memory , that might be something to look at.Of course it 's possible that my FF is different than yours in some subtle way .
I upgraded from FF 3.5 b4 to FF 3.5 RC1 and then to FF 3.5 final .
I really would n't EXPECT there to be any real difference , but crap happens , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I suspect some configuration problem on your end, to be honest.
I'm running FF3.5 on XP SP3 inside of VirtualBox.
I do not see that behaviour.
Using snaplinks, I just opened six tabs, and the current tab remained responsive while they loaded in the background.Whether the configuration problem is in your VM, within Windows, or in Firefox, I couldn't even begin to guess.
In my case, I have 1 gig of memory allocated to the VM - if you have less memory, that might be something to look at.Of course it's possible that my FF is different than yours in some subtle way.
I upgraded from FF 3.5 b4 to FF 3.5 RC1 and then to FF 3.5 final.
I really wouldn't EXPECT there to be any real difference, but crap happens, right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547137</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28549625</id>
	<title>Re:Big Brother...</title>
	<author>Threni</author>
	<datestamp>1246442580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why is it that when the police murder a Brazilian electrician, it's "wrong", but yet when a terminally ill person goes to a Swiss clinic to end their own life it's somehow acceptable?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is it that when the police murder a Brazilian electrician , it 's " wrong " , but yet when a terminally ill person goes to a Swiss clinic to end their own life it 's somehow acceptable ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is it that when the police murder a Brazilian electrician, it's "wrong", but yet when a terminally ill person goes to a Swiss clinic to end their own life it's somehow acceptable?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546977</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28551555</id>
	<title>Re:We're #3</title>
	<author>tyrione</author>
	<datestamp>1246450620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>We're #3 - wow that's something to boast about.</p></div><p>Number three <i>always</i> gets the chicks in high school!</p><p>"Hey baby, I'm on the bench!"</p></div><p>Sloppy thirds just doesn't have that great a ring.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>We 're # 3 - wow that 's something to boast about.Number three always gets the chicks in high school !
" Hey baby , I 'm on the bench !
" Sloppy thirds just does n't have that great a ring .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We're #3 - wow that's something to boast about.Number three always gets the chicks in high school!
"Hey baby, I'm on the bench!
"Sloppy thirds just doesn't have that great a ring.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548031</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547865</id>
	<title>Re:I don't care...</title>
	<author>Locklin</author>
	<datestamp>1246480620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>http://www.vmware.com/appliances/directory/80 is probably your best bet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.vmware.com/appliances/directory/80 is probably your best bet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.vmware.com/appliances/directory/80 is probably your best bet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547409</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547137</id>
	<title>Firefox 3.5 freezes loading background tabs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246478280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
I <a href="http://maradns.blogspot.com/2009/06/firefox-35-sucks.html" title="blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">posted a blog about this</a> [blogspot.com] yesterday.  I tried Firefox 3.5 in a Windows XP VMware Virtual machine yesterday and quickly web back to Firefox 3.0.
</p><p>
The problem is that FF 3.5 freezes while loading a background tab.  In Firefox 3.0, I have no problem clicking on some link that looks interesting, loading the link in a new tab, and continue reading the article I'm reading or what not.
</p><p>
This doesn't work in 3.5.  When I load a page in a background tab, the entire Firefox client freezes up when it's processing Javascript, HTML, or whatever in the background tab.  I can't scroll up or down in the foreground, write a posting or email (typing in text freezes and the letters I'm typing in aren't buffered), or do anything else with Firefox as it parses the page in the other tab.
</p><p>
Because of this issue, I quickly moved back to Firefox 3.0.  I hope the Mozilla developers address this issue in the next six months, because if this issue isn't resolved in Firefox before they EOL security updates with Firefox 3.0, I will probably have to move to another browser.
</p><p>
Any modern browers besides Firefox with a "always use this font for text" option?  Neither Opera, Safari, nor Chrome had this option last time I tried those browsers.  (Don't get me started on IE8, which forces me to use anti-aliased text)
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I posted a blog about this [ blogspot.com ] yesterday .
I tried Firefox 3.5 in a Windows XP VMware Virtual machine yesterday and quickly web back to Firefox 3.0 .
The problem is that FF 3.5 freezes while loading a background tab .
In Firefox 3.0 , I have no problem clicking on some link that looks interesting , loading the link in a new tab , and continue reading the article I 'm reading or what not .
This does n't work in 3.5 .
When I load a page in a background tab , the entire Firefox client freezes up when it 's processing Javascript , HTML , or whatever in the background tab .
I ca n't scroll up or down in the foreground , write a posting or email ( typing in text freezes and the letters I 'm typing in are n't buffered ) , or do anything else with Firefox as it parses the page in the other tab .
Because of this issue , I quickly moved back to Firefox 3.0 .
I hope the Mozilla developers address this issue in the next six months , because if this issue is n't resolved in Firefox before they EOL security updates with Firefox 3.0 , I will probably have to move to another browser .
Any modern browers besides Firefox with a " always use this font for text " option ?
Neither Opera , Safari , nor Chrome had this option last time I tried those browsers .
( Do n't get me started on IE8 , which forces me to use anti-aliased text )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
I posted a blog about this [blogspot.com] yesterday.
I tried Firefox 3.5 in a Windows XP VMware Virtual machine yesterday and quickly web back to Firefox 3.0.
The problem is that FF 3.5 freezes while loading a background tab.
In Firefox 3.0, I have no problem clicking on some link that looks interesting, loading the link in a new tab, and continue reading the article I'm reading or what not.
This doesn't work in 3.5.
When I load a page in a background tab, the entire Firefox client freezes up when it's processing Javascript, HTML, or whatever in the background tab.
I can't scroll up or down in the foreground, write a posting or email (typing in text freezes and the letters I'm typing in aren't buffered), or do anything else with Firefox as it parses the page in the other tab.
Because of this issue, I quickly moved back to Firefox 3.0.
I hope the Mozilla developers address this issue in the next six months, because if this issue isn't resolved in Firefox before they EOL security updates with Firefox 3.0, I will probably have to move to another browser.
Any modern browers besides Firefox with a "always use this font for text" option?
Neither Opera, Safari, nor Chrome had this option last time I tried those browsers.
(Don't get me started on IE8, which forces me to use anti-aliased text)
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28551139</id>
	<title>Re:Big Brother...</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1246448640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mozilla today announced Firefox 3.5, which will be compulsory for all citizens to install on their machines.</p><p>"The public support these plans," claimed the Mozilla spokesperson, "So we have passed legislation that will require Firefox to be installed on all computers, allowing us to keep track of the population, which is essential in the battle against terrorism".</p><p>A copy of Firefox is expected to cost around &pound;100. "Most people keep their computers for about 8 years," claimed the Government, "So it's only actually &pound;12.50 per year."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mozilla today announced Firefox 3.5 , which will be compulsory for all citizens to install on their machines .
" The public support these plans , " claimed the Mozilla spokesperson , " So we have passed legislation that will require Firefox to be installed on all computers , allowing us to keep track of the population , which is essential in the battle against terrorism " .A copy of Firefox is expected to cost around   100 .
" Most people keep their computers for about 8 years , " claimed the Government , " So it 's only actually   12.50 per year .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mozilla today announced Firefox 3.5, which will be compulsory for all citizens to install on their machines.
"The public support these plans," claimed the Mozilla spokesperson, "So we have passed legislation that will require Firefox to be installed on all computers, allowing us to keep track of the population, which is essential in the battle against terrorism".A copy of Firefox is expected to cost around £100.
"Most people keep their computers for about 8 years," claimed the Government, "So it's only actually £12.50 per year.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546977</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547235</id>
	<title>"As good as chrom used to be"</title>
	<author>smallshot</author>
	<datestamp>1246478640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...almost as quick as the original version of Google Chrome</p></div><p>What a comparison.  It's almost as fast, but not quite as fast, as a much earlier and slower version of the fastest browser.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...almost as quick as the original version of Google ChromeWhat a comparison .
It 's almost as fast , but not quite as fast , as a much earlier and slower version of the fastest browser .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...almost as quick as the original version of Google ChromeWhat a comparison.
It's almost as fast, but not quite as fast, as a much earlier and slower version of the fastest browser.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28569277</id>
	<title>Re:No speed improvement for those on x86\_64???</title>
	<author>Nivag064</author>
	<datestamp>1246612020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well I am using Firefox 3.5 on a Linux box with dual 64 bit cores (AMD4200+), and 3.5 is more than twice the speed of 3.0.0.11 when rendering the URL <a href="ftp://fedora.tu-chemnitz.de/pub/linux/fedora/linux/development/x86\_64/os/Packages" title="tu-chemnitz.de" rel="nofollow">ftp://fedora.tu-chemnitz.de/pub/linux/fedora/linux/development/x86\_64/os/Packages</a> [tu-chemnitz.de] - Firefox 3 took about 77 seconds.
<br>
<br>
So if it is not using a JIT, then I'm even more impressed!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well I am using Firefox 3.5 on a Linux box with dual 64 bit cores ( AMD4200 + ) , and 3.5 is more than twice the speed of 3.0.0.11 when rendering the URL ftp : //fedora.tu-chemnitz.de/pub/linux/fedora/linux/development/x86 \ _64/os/Packages [ tu-chemnitz.de ] - Firefox 3 took about 77 seconds .
So if it is not using a JIT , then I 'm even more impressed !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well I am using Firefox 3.5 on a Linux box with dual 64 bit cores (AMD4200+), and 3.5 is more than twice the speed of 3.0.0.11 when rendering the URL ftp://fedora.tu-chemnitz.de/pub/linux/fedora/linux/development/x86\_64/os/Packages [tu-chemnitz.de] - Firefox 3 took about 77 seconds.
So if it is not using a JIT, then I'm even more impressed!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548289</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547113</id>
	<title>Using Chrome now, but....</title>
	<author>tnk1</author>
	<datestamp>1246478220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Having used Chrome now for a little while after becoming irritated with FFX's memory utilization in particular, I'm going to have to admit that while it is quantifiably better than FFX (and Opera) in many ways, I don't find the speed difference compelling.  Indeed, I find myself occasionally wondering if Chrome is actually slower than FFX in some ways.  I am still using it, as the memory utilization is significantly better, but the little inconsistencies in presentation and the weird sensation that it feels slower makes me really want to switch back to Firefox.  If Mozilla can get off their ass and really plug the memory leaks and utilization, I'd probably switch back today.</p><p>That's not to say that Chrome is bad.  It's 100\% usable, and its much more compatible with sites I use than Opera is.  (I tried Opera first after I started looking around).  The problem is that it still breaks some sites that aren't broken in IE or Firefox.  And whether or not you blame the browser or the non-standards compliant webmasters, the reality is that I cannot switch their sites, but I can switch browsers that I am using.  That means I have opened IE 7 windows more while using Chrome, than I have with Firefox.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Having used Chrome now for a little while after becoming irritated with FFX 's memory utilization in particular , I 'm going to have to admit that while it is quantifiably better than FFX ( and Opera ) in many ways , I do n't find the speed difference compelling .
Indeed , I find myself occasionally wondering if Chrome is actually slower than FFX in some ways .
I am still using it , as the memory utilization is significantly better , but the little inconsistencies in presentation and the weird sensation that it feels slower makes me really want to switch back to Firefox .
If Mozilla can get off their ass and really plug the memory leaks and utilization , I 'd probably switch back today.That 's not to say that Chrome is bad .
It 's 100 \ % usable , and its much more compatible with sites I use than Opera is .
( I tried Opera first after I started looking around ) .
The problem is that it still breaks some sites that are n't broken in IE or Firefox .
And whether or not you blame the browser or the non-standards compliant webmasters , the reality is that I can not switch their sites , but I can switch browsers that I am using .
That means I have opened IE 7 windows more while using Chrome , than I have with Firefox .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having used Chrome now for a little while after becoming irritated with FFX's memory utilization in particular, I'm going to have to admit that while it is quantifiably better than FFX (and Opera) in many ways, I don't find the speed difference compelling.
Indeed, I find myself occasionally wondering if Chrome is actually slower than FFX in some ways.
I am still using it, as the memory utilization is significantly better, but the little inconsistencies in presentation and the weird sensation that it feels slower makes me really want to switch back to Firefox.
If Mozilla can get off their ass and really plug the memory leaks and utilization, I'd probably switch back today.That's not to say that Chrome is bad.
It's 100\% usable, and its much more compatible with sites I use than Opera is.
(I tried Opera first after I started looking around).
The problem is that it still breaks some sites that aren't broken in IE or Firefox.
And whether or not you blame the browser or the non-standards compliant webmasters, the reality is that I cannot switch their sites, but I can switch browsers that I am using.
That means I have opened IE 7 windows more while using Chrome, than I have with Firefox.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28553597</id>
	<title>Re:Big Brother...</title>
	<author>cadrell0</author>
	<datestamp>1246465680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/geolocation/" title="mozilla.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/geolocation/</a> [mozilla.com]
<p>
How do I turn off Location-Aware Browsing permanently?
</p><p>
Location-Aware Browsing is always opt-in in Firefox 3.5. No location information is ever sent without your permission. If you wish to disable the feature completely, please follow this set of steps:
</p><ul>
    <li>In the URL bar, type about:config</li>
    <li>Type geo.enabled</li>
    <li>Double click on the geo.enabled preference</li>
    <li>Location-Aware Browsing is now disabled</li>
</ul></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/geolocation/ [ mozilla.com ] How do I turn off Location-Aware Browsing permanently ?
Location-Aware Browsing is always opt-in in Firefox 3.5 .
No location information is ever sent without your permission .
If you wish to disable the feature completely , please follow this set of steps : In the URL bar , type about : config Type geo.enabled Double click on the geo.enabled preference Location-Aware Browsing is now disabled</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/geolocation/ [mozilla.com]

How do I turn off Location-Aware Browsing permanently?
Location-Aware Browsing is always opt-in in Firefox 3.5.
No location information is ever sent without your permission.
If you wish to disable the feature completely, please follow this set of steps:

    In the URL bar, type about:config
    Type geo.enabled
    Double click on the geo.enabled preference
    Location-Aware Browsing is now disabled
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548519</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547307</id>
	<title>Re:Firefox 3.5 freezes loading background tabs</title>
	<author>kaiser423</author>
	<datestamp>1246478880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't see that problem here...neither do about a half dozen of my coworkers.  Are you sure that your install wasn't boinked in some way?
<br> <br>
Because for me at least, it's blazing fast and one tab does not bring the other tabs down like it did sometimes in the past...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't see that problem here...neither do about a half dozen of my coworkers .
Are you sure that your install was n't boinked in some way ?
Because for me at least , it 's blazing fast and one tab does not bring the other tabs down like it did sometimes in the past.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't see that problem here...neither do about a half dozen of my coworkers.
Are you sure that your install wasn't boinked in some way?
Because for me at least, it's blazing fast and one tab does not bring the other tabs down like it did sometimes in the past...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547137</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28553317</id>
	<title>Re:Seattle</title>
	<author>DavidD\_CA</author>
	<datestamp>1246462920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I tried, but I got a Stack Overflow error.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I tried , but I got a Stack Overflow error .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I tried, but I got a Stack Overflow error.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547821</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546981</id>
	<title>that's nice, but</title>
	<author>Sum0</author>
	<datestamp>1246477740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...how fast are all the plug-ins that are inevitably add-on?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...how fast are all the plug-ins that are inevitably add-on ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...how fast are all the plug-ins that are inevitably add-on?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547165</id>
	<title>Re:pffft</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246478400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I concur this.<br>Lynx is way faster, if everything is configured earlier. For eg- Cookie acceptance, etc,<br>Why we not look forward for such a amazing browsers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I concur this.Lynx is way faster , if everything is configured earlier .
For eg- Cookie acceptance , etc,Why we not look forward for such a amazing browsers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I concur this.Lynx is way faster, if everything is configured earlier.
For eg- Cookie acceptance, etc,Why we not look forward for such a amazing browsers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546945</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28551405</id>
	<title>Re:We're #3</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246449840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>this means that your the second loser</p></div></blockquote><p>The Internets... so full of win.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>this means that your the second loserThe Internets... so full of win .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this means that your the second loserThe Internets... so full of win.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547015</id>
	<title>Re:We're #3</title>
	<author>Foofoobar</author>
	<datestamp>1246477860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes because Javascript performance is the only thing that every end user cares about.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes because Javascript performance is the only thing that every end user cares about .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes because Javascript performance is the only thing that every end user cares about.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28551895</id>
	<title>Super Impressive!</title>
	<author>malevolentjelly</author>
	<datestamp>1246452600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do you mean to tell me that Firefox 3.5 succeeded at failing to defeat Safari 4 at the one thing it does well, Javascript performance? Wow!</p><p>It also succeeded at failing to defeat Opera and Safari at the only other thing Firefox does well, standards support! They still fail the Acid 3!</p><p>Does it also succeed in failing to defeat Opera and IE 8 at page-load speed?</p><p>INCREDIBLE!</p><p>I think the only thing Firefox does better than other browsers at this point is attracting frothy-mouthed morons to shout their message from the tree tops and aggressively attack users of other browsers. So technically speaking, its only major strength is its wacky collection of extensions... just like IE 6! Welcome to mediocrity, Mozilla!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you mean to tell me that Firefox 3.5 succeeded at failing to defeat Safari 4 at the one thing it does well , Javascript performance ?
Wow ! It also succeeded at failing to defeat Opera and Safari at the only other thing Firefox does well , standards support !
They still fail the Acid 3 ! Does it also succeed in failing to defeat Opera and IE 8 at page-load speed ? INCREDIBLE ! I think the only thing Firefox does better than other browsers at this point is attracting frothy-mouthed morons to shout their message from the tree tops and aggressively attack users of other browsers .
So technically speaking , its only major strength is its wacky collection of extensions... just like IE 6 !
Welcome to mediocrity , Mozilla !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you mean to tell me that Firefox 3.5 succeeded at failing to defeat Safari 4 at the one thing it does well, Javascript performance?
Wow!It also succeeded at failing to defeat Opera and Safari at the only other thing Firefox does well, standards support!
They still fail the Acid 3!Does it also succeed in failing to defeat Opera and IE 8 at page-load speed?INCREDIBLE!I think the only thing Firefox does better than other browsers at this point is attracting frothy-mouthed morons to shout their message from the tree tops and aggressively attack users of other browsers.
So technically speaking, its only major strength is its wacky collection of extensions... just like IE 6!
Welcome to mediocrity, Mozilla!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548845</id>
	<title>Re:This is such great science...</title>
	<author>Kjella</author>
	<datestamp>1246440360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>(...) but if you read the article you'll see they have a pretty graph, so I think the data is good.</p></div><p>Yes, because a picture lies more than a thousand words or something like that...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>( ... ) but if you read the article you 'll see they have a pretty graph , so I think the data is good.Yes , because a picture lies more than a thousand words or something like that.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(...) but if you read the article you'll see they have a pretty graph, so I think the data is good.Yes, because a picture lies more than a thousand words or something like that...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547047</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548531</id>
	<title>Re:Another thread, another flamewar</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246439340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You forgot the complaints that FireFox is a memory hog when you have 389 tabs open.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You forgot the complaints that FireFox is a memory hog when you have 389 tabs open .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You forgot the complaints that FireFox is a memory hog when you have 389 tabs open.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546875</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28554579</id>
	<title>Re:No speed improvement for those on x86\_64</title>
	<author>BAILOPAN</author>
	<datestamp>1246477620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's not in trunk yet, but we want to get it in as soon as possible.  It's not trivial, but not terribly difficult either - someone just has to take the time to do it.  Unfortunately getting 3.5 out in time was a much higher priority, we just couldn't block on x64.

If you're interested, a tracking bug is here: <a href="https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show\_bug.cgi?id=489146" title="mozilla.org">https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show\_bug.cgi?id=489146</a> [mozilla.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not in trunk yet , but we want to get it in as soon as possible .
It 's not trivial , but not terribly difficult either - someone just has to take the time to do it .
Unfortunately getting 3.5 out in time was a much higher priority , we just could n't block on x64 .
If you 're interested , a tracking bug is here : https : //bugzilla.mozilla.org/show \ _bug.cgi ? id = 489146 [ mozilla.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not in trunk yet, but we want to get it in as soon as possible.
It's not trivial, but not terribly difficult either - someone just has to take the time to do it.
Unfortunately getting 3.5 out in time was a much higher priority, we just couldn't block on x64.
If you're interested, a tracking bug is here: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show\_bug.cgi?id=489146 [mozilla.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548289</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547409
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28555535
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547137
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548407
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547409
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28555033
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546945
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547795
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546977
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548913
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28550949
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546923
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28550475
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546977
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548913
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28551583
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28552609
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546945
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548683
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546923
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28549407
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547143
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548039
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546945
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28553041
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546875
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548531
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28554137
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546977
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547099
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546821
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547079
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546821
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547075
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546977
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547191
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547309
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28553125
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546977
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28554035
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547409
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28552199
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547409
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28551963
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547137
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28553757
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547113
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548867
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547309
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28552955
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547113
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547591
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28551143
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28550745
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547137
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28550137
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547409
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547865
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548031
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28551555
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547821
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28553317
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547309
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28550377
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547137
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28604941
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547309
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28549349
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28552675
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546875
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548887
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28550977
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548289
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28554579
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547143
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28550511
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546977
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28549625
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546875
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548531
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28552541
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546981
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28554581
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546821
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547033
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548723
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28658869
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547137
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28550961
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547985
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28549597
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28553099
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547015
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547821
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548981
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548289
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28569277
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28551405
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547309
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28549349
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28551835
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546821
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28556813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546977
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547091
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546945
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547419
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28549159
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546977
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28553597
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546977
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547963
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547137
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28559003
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546821
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547033
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548789
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547047
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548845
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547113
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28552065
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547113
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28549567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546977
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547789
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547985
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28549425
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546977
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28551139
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28551305
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546923
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547529
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546821
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28550155
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547113
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28552755
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547137
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547939
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546945
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547165
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547409
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547719
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546945
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547419
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28554405
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547113
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548179
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28562349
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547047
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28550789
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547101
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547653
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546821
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547033
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28554569
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547137
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547307
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1828254_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548289
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28553141
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1828254.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546821
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28556813
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547079
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547075
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28550155
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547033
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28554569
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548723
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548789
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1828254.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546977
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28554035
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547191
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547091
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547963
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547789
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547099
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28551139
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547163
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548519
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28553597
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548913
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28550949
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28551583
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28552609
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28549625
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1828254.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548999
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1828254.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547409
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28555535
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547865
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28555033
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28551963
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28552199
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547719
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1828254.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546945
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547795
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548683
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547419
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28549159
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28554405
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28553041
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547165
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1828254.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547291
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28658869
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1828254.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547985
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28549597
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28549425
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1828254.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547335
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1828254.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548559
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1828254.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548093
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1828254.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547047
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28550789
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548845
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1828254.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547143
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28550511
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548039
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1828254.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546981
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28554581
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1828254.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547309
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28552955
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28550377
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28549349
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28552675
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28551835
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28553125
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1828254.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546895
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28550745
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548031
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28551555
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28551305
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547015
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28553099
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28551405
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1828254.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28551895
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1828254.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548289
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28553141
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28569277
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28554579
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1828254.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547137
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28550137
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28553757
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547939
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28550961
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548407
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547307
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28559003
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28604941
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1828254.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546875
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548887
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28550977
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548531
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28554137
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28552541
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1828254.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546903
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1828254.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547101
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547653
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1828254.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28546923
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28549407
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547529
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28550475
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1828254.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28554889
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1828254.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547821
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548981
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28553317
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1828254.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547113
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28552755
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548867
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28552065
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28549567
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28548179
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28562349
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28547591
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1828254.28551143
</commentlist>
</conversation>
