<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_07_12_2324216</id>
	<title>Windows 7 Hits Build 7600 (Possible RTM)</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1247397960000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"One Microsoft Way is reporting that Microsoft has <a href="http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2009/07/first-screenshots-of-windows-7-build-7600-leak.ars">significantly incremented the build number of both Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2</a>: 'Reports across the Web are pointing to a build 7600 for both Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2. This is significant because the bump in the build number would suggest that Microsoft has christened this build as the Release to Manufacturing (RTM) build. The RTM is expected to be given out to Microsoft partners sometime later this month and launched on October 22, 2009, the day of General Availability (GA). The build string is "7600.16384.090710-1945," which indicates that it was compiled just a few days ago: July 10, 2009, at 7:45pm. Microsoft only increments the build number when it reaches a significant goal, and the only one left is the RTM milestone. The last builds that were leaking were all 72xx builds, so such a large bump is suspicious but at the same time it is something Microsoft would do to signify that this is the final build.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " One Microsoft Way is reporting that Microsoft has significantly incremented the build number of both Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2 : 'Reports across the Web are pointing to a build 7600 for both Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2 .
This is significant because the bump in the build number would suggest that Microsoft has christened this build as the Release to Manufacturing ( RTM ) build .
The RTM is expected to be given out to Microsoft partners sometime later this month and launched on October 22 , 2009 , the day of General Availability ( GA ) .
The build string is " 7600.16384.090710-1945 , " which indicates that it was compiled just a few days ago : July 10 , 2009 , at 7 : 45pm .
Microsoft only increments the build number when it reaches a significant goal , and the only one left is the RTM milestone .
The last builds that were leaking were all 72xx builds , so such a large bump is suspicious but at the same time it is something Microsoft would do to signify that this is the final build .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "One Microsoft Way is reporting that Microsoft has significantly incremented the build number of both Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2: 'Reports across the Web are pointing to a build 7600 for both Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2.
This is significant because the bump in the build number would suggest that Microsoft has christened this build as the Release to Manufacturing (RTM) build.
The RTM is expected to be given out to Microsoft partners sometime later this month and launched on October 22, 2009, the day of General Availability (GA).
The build string is "7600.16384.090710-1945," which indicates that it was compiled just a few days ago: July 10, 2009, at 7:45pm.
Microsoft only increments the build number when it reaches a significant goal, and the only one left is the RTM milestone.
The last builds that were leaking were all 72xx builds, so such a large bump is suspicious but at the same time it is something Microsoft would do to signify that this is the final build.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672103</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1247414280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>* You might be able to burn ISOs, but you still can't mount them. Loopback device anyone? Do I really need to pay $XX, or install some spyware-infested freeware crap, just to mount ISOs?</p></div></blockquote><p>Just for reference, Microsoft offers the Virtual CD Control Panel which will let you mount ISOs.  I started using it sometime in late 2k5, not sure when it actually came out, and appearently it can be made to work in Vista at least.</p><p><a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/charles\_sterling/archive/2007/05/14/virtual-cd-rom-control-panel-on-vista.aspx" title="msdn.com">http://blogs.msdn.com/charles\_sterling/archive/2007/05/14/virtual-cd-rom-control-panel-on-vista.aspx</a> [msdn.com]</p><p>I did some quick Googling and could find the main link to the MS product page for it.  Prolly should have used bing, but I refuse to use a search engine that has changed names to get market share.</p><p>Anyway, if you actually use the MS Virtual CD control panel you'll quickly understand why they didn't include it.  The management interface is some basic windows app that would have been accepted during the win95 internal builds, before the betas, not any time after that.  But it does indeed work, after you figure out the sequence of button clicks required to get you going since it doesn't do anything other than what the button says, such as loading the driver automatically rather than requiring you to go to a different dialog first to enable the drive than come back and add a drive.  Its just not end-user friendly.  Geeks will figure it out quick enough though.</p><p>Interestingly enough, my Ubuntu install doesn't just let me double click on an ISO to mount it out of the box.  Do any distros work this way?  I'll fully accept it may be due to my futzing.  I'm a FreeBSD user mostly, just play with Ubuntu so I have a general idea whats going on in the Linux desktop arena, and I've done some weird crap to it so it wouldn't surprise me if I pissed off some automounter gods or something.</p><p>I seem to recall it being more than a single mount command to do it in FBSD although I know it can be done with just a couple.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>* You might be able to burn ISOs , but you still ca n't mount them .
Loopback device anyone ?
Do I really need to pay $ XX , or install some spyware-infested freeware crap , just to mount ISOs ? Just for reference , Microsoft offers the Virtual CD Control Panel which will let you mount ISOs .
I started using it sometime in late 2k5 , not sure when it actually came out , and appearently it can be made to work in Vista at least.http : //blogs.msdn.com/charles \ _sterling/archive/2007/05/14/virtual-cd-rom-control-panel-on-vista.aspx [ msdn.com ] I did some quick Googling and could find the main link to the MS product page for it .
Prolly should have used bing , but I refuse to use a search engine that has changed names to get market share.Anyway , if you actually use the MS Virtual CD control panel you 'll quickly understand why they did n't include it .
The management interface is some basic windows app that would have been accepted during the win95 internal builds , before the betas , not any time after that .
But it does indeed work , after you figure out the sequence of button clicks required to get you going since it does n't do anything other than what the button says , such as loading the driver automatically rather than requiring you to go to a different dialog first to enable the drive than come back and add a drive .
Its just not end-user friendly .
Geeks will figure it out quick enough though.Interestingly enough , my Ubuntu install does n't just let me double click on an ISO to mount it out of the box .
Do any distros work this way ?
I 'll fully accept it may be due to my futzing .
I 'm a FreeBSD user mostly , just play with Ubuntu so I have a general idea whats going on in the Linux desktop arena , and I 've done some weird crap to it so it would n't surprise me if I pissed off some automounter gods or something.I seem to recall it being more than a single mount command to do it in FBSD although I know it can be done with just a couple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>* You might be able to burn ISOs, but you still can't mount them.
Loopback device anyone?
Do I really need to pay $XX, or install some spyware-infested freeware crap, just to mount ISOs?Just for reference, Microsoft offers the Virtual CD Control Panel which will let you mount ISOs.
I started using it sometime in late 2k5, not sure when it actually came out, and appearently it can be made to work in Vista at least.http://blogs.msdn.com/charles\_sterling/archive/2007/05/14/virtual-cd-rom-control-panel-on-vista.aspx [msdn.com]I did some quick Googling and could find the main link to the MS product page for it.
Prolly should have used bing, but I refuse to use a search engine that has changed names to get market share.Anyway, if you actually use the MS Virtual CD control panel you'll quickly understand why they didn't include it.
The management interface is some basic windows app that would have been accepted during the win95 internal builds, before the betas, not any time after that.
But it does indeed work, after you figure out the sequence of button clicks required to get you going since it doesn't do anything other than what the button says, such as loading the driver automatically rather than requiring you to go to a different dialog first to enable the drive than come back and add a drive.
Its just not end-user friendly.
Geeks will figure it out quick enough though.Interestingly enough, my Ubuntu install doesn't just let me double click on an ISO to mount it out of the box.
Do any distros work this way?
I'll fully accept it may be due to my futzing.
I'm a FreeBSD user mostly, just play with Ubuntu so I have a general idea whats going on in the Linux desktop arena, and I've done some weird crap to it so it wouldn't surprise me if I pissed off some automounter gods or something.I seem to recall it being more than a single mount command to do it in FBSD although I know it can be done with just a couple.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672047</id>
	<title>Re:Windows 7 makes me excited</title>
	<author>sandoval88419</author>
	<datestamp>1247413680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I second you on that dude. Not statistically but I feel the same trend here : MS zealots invade every MS related story with the same crap<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:<p><div class="quote"><p>ah I like windows xx and I'm very happy</p></div><p>and someone feed the troll...
<br>
If we don't pay attention sooner or later slashdot will lose its independency</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I second you on that dude .
Not statistically but I feel the same trend here : MS zealots invade every MS related story with the same crap : ah I like windows xx and I 'm very happyand someone feed the troll.. . If we do n't pay attention sooner or later slashdot will lose its independency</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I second you on that dude.
Not statistically but I feel the same trend here : MS zealots invade every MS related story with the same crap :ah I like windows xx and I'm very happyand someone feed the troll...

If we don't pay attention sooner or later slashdot will lose its independency
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671085</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671397</id>
	<title>Re:OK, Since this is a non-event...</title>
	<author>Tony Stark</author>
	<datestamp>1247407740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Windows 7 is going to be the "reassuring" Windows.  I believe this is Microsoft's business plan: release something good, hook the people.  Release something crappy, the hooked people will buy it, then pay for the tons of tech support they will need.  Release something good to remind the people why they got hooked in the first place.  Release something crappy to make money off tech support, etc, etc, etc.  I just don't think Windows users will ever catch the dragon.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows 7 is going to be the " reassuring " Windows .
I believe this is Microsoft 's business plan : release something good , hook the people .
Release something crappy , the hooked people will buy it , then pay for the tons of tech support they will need .
Release something good to remind the people why they got hooked in the first place .
Release something crappy to make money off tech support , etc , etc , etc .
I just do n't think Windows users will ever catch the dragon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows 7 is going to be the "reassuring" Windows.
I believe this is Microsoft's business plan: release something good, hook the people.
Release something crappy, the hooked people will buy it, then pay for the tons of tech support they will need.
Release something good to remind the people why they got hooked in the first place.
Release something crappy to make money off tech support, etc, etc, etc.
I just don't think Windows users will ever catch the dragon.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670827</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672113</id>
	<title>Don't speak like Mojo Jojo, just don't.</title>
	<author>thunderclap</author>
	<datestamp>1247414400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"First shalt thou take out the Holy Pin, then shalt thou count to three, no more, no less. Three shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, neither count thou two, excepting that thou then proceedest on to three. Five is right out. Once the number three, being the third number, be reached, then lobbest thou thy Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch towards thy foe, who being naughty in my sight, shall snuff it." Amen.</p></div><p>Honestly describing to someone how to throw an hand grenade in Mojo Jojo style prayer is annoying at best.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" First shalt thou take out the Holy Pin , then shalt thou count to three , no more , no less .
Three shall be the number thou shalt count , and the number of the counting shall be three .
Four shalt thou not count , neither count thou two , excepting that thou then proceedest on to three .
Five is right out .
Once the number three , being the third number , be reached , then lobbest thou thy Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch towards thy foe , who being naughty in my sight , shall snuff it .
" Amen.Honestly describing to someone how to throw an hand grenade in Mojo Jojo style prayer is annoying at best .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"First shalt thou take out the Holy Pin, then shalt thou count to three, no more, no less.
Three shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three.
Four shalt thou not count, neither count thou two, excepting that thou then proceedest on to three.
Five is right out.
Once the number three, being the third number, be reached, then lobbest thou thy Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch towards thy foe, who being naughty in my sight, shall snuff it.
" Amen.Honestly describing to someone how to throw an hand grenade in Mojo Jojo style prayer is annoying at best.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670771</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672203</id>
	<title>Re:Windows 7 makes me excited</title>
	<author>thePowerOfGrayskull</author>
	<datestamp>1247415420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't entirely disagree with you - it's clear just by doing a google search for "Windows 7" that MS has the propoganda going out overtime.  If you search my history, you'll find I posted a similar sentiment -- when I tried looking for help with Windows 7 issues, I could only find blog, news (real newspapers!), and forum articles telling me how great Windows 7 was. It was a very frustrating experience -- all the more so because whenI posted it here, I was basically accused of being an<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/anti/-MS shill.

<p>Now - that being said.  Eventually I found answers for those issues, and I'm pretty pleased with Win 7.  There are a couple of quirks, but I'm fairly hopeful that the final build will have them fixed.   However... discrediting every pro-Win7 poster as "shill" sounds a bit ridiculous.   So with that in mind, where's your evidence that this is the case? You say it's "clearly visible" -- where is your "clear proof" that GP was a shill?   Am I a "shill" now because after my initial issues I have had a relatively good experience (and holy shit, a TON better than Vista - even under SP1/SP2). How do you tell the difference between real people who like Win7 and shills?
</p><p>
Amusingly, your post - a copy-paste of someone other AC's unsubstantiated rant actually got modded "interesting", while mine will likely get modded down.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't entirely disagree with you - it 's clear just by doing a google search for " Windows 7 " that MS has the propoganda going out overtime .
If you search my history , you 'll find I posted a similar sentiment -- when I tried looking for help with Windows 7 issues , I could only find blog , news ( real newspapers !
) , and forum articles telling me how great Windows 7 was .
It was a very frustrating experience -- all the more so because whenI posted it here , I was basically accused of being an /anti/-MS shill .
Now - that being said .
Eventually I found answers for those issues , and I 'm pretty pleased with Win 7 .
There are a couple of quirks , but I 'm fairly hopeful that the final build will have them fixed .
However... discrediting every pro-Win7 poster as " shill " sounds a bit ridiculous .
So with that in mind , where 's your evidence that this is the case ?
You say it 's " clearly visible " -- where is your " clear proof " that GP was a shill ?
Am I a " shill " now because after my initial issues I have had a relatively good experience ( and holy shit , a TON better than Vista - even under SP1/SP2 ) .
How do you tell the difference between real people who like Win7 and shills ?
Amusingly , your post - a copy-paste of someone other AC 's unsubstantiated rant actually got modded " interesting " , while mine will likely get modded down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't entirely disagree with you - it's clear just by doing a google search for "Windows 7" that MS has the propoganda going out overtime.
If you search my history, you'll find I posted a similar sentiment -- when I tried looking for help with Windows 7 issues, I could only find blog, news (real newspapers!
), and forum articles telling me how great Windows 7 was.
It was a very frustrating experience -- all the more so because whenI posted it here, I was basically accused of being an /anti/-MS shill.
Now - that being said.
Eventually I found answers for those issues, and I'm pretty pleased with Win 7.
There are a couple of quirks, but I'm fairly hopeful that the final build will have them fixed.
However... discrediting every pro-Win7 poster as "shill" sounds a bit ridiculous.
So with that in mind, where's your evidence that this is the case?
You say it's "clearly visible" -- where is your "clear proof" that GP was a shill?
Am I a "shill" now because after my initial issues I have had a relatively good experience (and holy shit, a TON better than Vista - even under SP1/SP2).
How do you tell the difference between real people who like Win7 and shills?
Amusingly, your post - a copy-paste of someone other AC's unsubstantiated rant actually got modded "interesting", while mine will likely get modded down.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671085</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28686201</id>
	<title>Re:Efficiency</title>
	<author>toddestan</author>
	<datestamp>1247503320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>A $400 Windows laptop is cheap only if your time has no value.</p></div></blockquote><p>Agreed.  The extra $100-300 for something like a Thinkpad is well spent.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A $ 400 Windows laptop is cheap only if your time has no value.Agreed .
The extra $ 100-300 for something like a Thinkpad is well spent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A $400 Windows laptop is cheap only if your time has no value.Agreed.
The extra $100-300 for something like a Thinkpad is well spent.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671519</id>
	<title>Re:OK, Since this is a non-event...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247408640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Windows 7 might help lift the economy out of the recession.  Don't laugh, but some economists are already forecasting a bump when it rolls out.  Just as people driving around clunkers eventually will need to shell out for a new (or at least newer) automobile, consumers (and perhaps businesses) are out there waiting to upgrade their 2003 PC's for a version of Windows other than XP (end-of-lifed) and Vista.</p><p>And I'm one of them.  It'll have a 1-1.5T hard drive, 8-10G RAM, and a DirectX-10 video card.  And it won't be from Dell, who stiffed me on my $150 rebate claim the last time around.  Of course, I'll set it up for a multiway boot so I can install a couple Linux distros.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows 7 might help lift the economy out of the recession .
Do n't laugh , but some economists are already forecasting a bump when it rolls out .
Just as people driving around clunkers eventually will need to shell out for a new ( or at least newer ) automobile , consumers ( and perhaps businesses ) are out there waiting to upgrade their 2003 PC 's for a version of Windows other than XP ( end-of-lifed ) and Vista.And I 'm one of them .
It 'll have a 1-1.5T hard drive , 8-10G RAM , and a DirectX-10 video card .
And it wo n't be from Dell , who stiffed me on my $ 150 rebate claim the last time around .
Of course , I 'll set it up for a multiway boot so I can install a couple Linux distros .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows 7 might help lift the economy out of the recession.
Don't laugh, but some economists are already forecasting a bump when it rolls out.
Just as people driving around clunkers eventually will need to shell out for a new (or at least newer) automobile, consumers (and perhaps businesses) are out there waiting to upgrade their 2003 PC's for a version of Windows other than XP (end-of-lifed) and Vista.And I'm one of them.
It'll have a 1-1.5T hard drive, 8-10G RAM, and a DirectX-10 video card.
And it won't be from Dell, who stiffed me on my $150 rebate claim the last time around.
Of course, I'll set it up for a multiway boot so I can install a couple Linux distros.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670827</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674049</id>
	<title>The problem is  people</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247484300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem facing us is that people are idiots(end users)<br>While we as I.T. experts know that linux and unix are both freeish<br>and more stable than the Solar cycle, while osx and such are more<br>for a specific kind of user - you might be a graphix designer or<br>someone of such nature using all the apple processor capabilities.</p><p>End users dont care - if it is easy to use and understand the os, why not?<br>Unfortunatly we end up spending the money to purchuse MS products because<br>idiots(end users) end up not wanting to learn a new application(for instance : open office)<br>even though we know it's very easy to use, even more so than MS, the dont care,<br>They know the ms stuff and doesn't give a crap about anything else.</p><p>Think about it - a user who calls the I.T. guys to help them find "any key" on the keybord<br>are not the type of people that i would like to play around on a linux system, infact,<br>i'm not sure i want them using a calculator, or for that matter an abbacus.<br>i reasonably good in linux, but i'm not that good.</p><p>The point i'm trying to make is that while we can use and support more advanced<br>operating systems - we cannot expect the general public to abide by those rules,<br>if it's easy- they will use and request it, more that that, i guess that is why Vista didn't<br>take off that well, and i'm guessing it will be the same with windows 7.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem facing us is that people are idiots ( end users ) While we as I.T .
experts know that linux and unix are both freeishand more stable than the Solar cycle , while osx and such are morefor a specific kind of user - you might be a graphix designer orsomeone of such nature using all the apple processor capabilities.End users dont care - if it is easy to use and understand the os , why not ? Unfortunatly we end up spending the money to purchuse MS products becauseidiots ( end users ) end up not wanting to learn a new application ( for instance : open office ) even though we know it 's very easy to use , even more so than MS , the dont care,They know the ms stuff and does n't give a crap about anything else.Think about it - a user who calls the I.T .
guys to help them find " any key " on the keybordare not the type of people that i would like to play around on a linux system , infact,i 'm not sure i want them using a calculator , or for that matter an abbacus.i reasonably good in linux , but i 'm not that good.The point i 'm trying to make is that while we can use and support more advancedoperating systems - we can not expect the general public to abide by those rules,if it 's easy- they will use and request it , more that that , i guess that is why Vista didn'ttake off that well , and i 'm guessing it will be the same with windows 7 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem facing us is that people are idiots(end users)While we as I.T.
experts know that linux and unix are both freeishand more stable than the Solar cycle, while osx and such are morefor a specific kind of user - you might be a graphix designer orsomeone of such nature using all the apple processor capabilities.End users dont care - if it is easy to use and understand the os, why not?Unfortunatly we end up spending the money to purchuse MS products becauseidiots(end users) end up not wanting to learn a new application(for instance : open office)even though we know it's very easy to use, even more so than MS, the dont care,They know the ms stuff and doesn't give a crap about anything else.Think about it - a user who calls the I.T.
guys to help them find "any key" on the keybordare not the type of people that i would like to play around on a linux system, infact,i'm not sure i want them using a calculator, or for that matter an abbacus.i reasonably good in linux, but i'm not that good.The point i'm trying to make is that while we can use and support more advancedoperating systems - we cannot expect the general public to abide by those rules,if it's easy- they will use and request it, more that that, i guess that is why Vista didn'ttake off that well, and i'm guessing it will be the same with windows 7.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671049</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671253</id>
	<title>Windows Backup is actually quite good now</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247406240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Windows back up can also be used to store entire disk and system images to external storage.  Very, very useful for system restores for testing, dev, etc.  Works very well and is very quick.  200GB+ of backup was stored in under half an hour on my system.  Restore took about 20 minutes from start to boot of restored system.</p><p>For example, the following in a batch file run via Task Scheduler creates a full image of my system on an external drive every week.  Couple that with nightly xcopy of documents to a server fileshare (with the server also getting backups to external drives) and you have a pretty robust, cheap and efficient backup system for your home network.</p><p>wbadmin start backup -backupTarget:f: -include:c:,d: -quiet</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Windows back up can also be used to store entire disk and system images to external storage .
Very , very useful for system restores for testing , dev , etc .
Works very well and is very quick .
200GB + of backup was stored in under half an hour on my system .
Restore took about 20 minutes from start to boot of restored system.For example , the following in a batch file run via Task Scheduler creates a full image of my system on an external drive every week .
Couple that with nightly xcopy of documents to a server fileshare ( with the server also getting backups to external drives ) and you have a pretty robust , cheap and efficient backup system for your home network.wbadmin start backup -backupTarget : f : -include : c : ,d : -quiet</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Windows back up can also be used to store entire disk and system images to external storage.
Very, very useful for system restores for testing, dev, etc.
Works very well and is very quick.
200GB+ of backup was stored in under half an hour on my system.
Restore took about 20 minutes from start to boot of restored system.For example, the following in a batch file run via Task Scheduler creates a full image of my system on an external drive every week.
Couple that with nightly xcopy of documents to a server fileshare (with the server also getting backups to external drives) and you have a pretty robust, cheap and efficient backup system for your home network.wbadmin start backup -backupTarget:f: -include:c:,d: -quiet</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28690179</id>
	<title>HOSTS files speed you up online, period</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247582460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><div class="quote"><p><b>"Your complaint is about the performance of using the hosts file for something it's never meant to be used for and the resultant performance drops of reading such a large file."</b> - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13, @05:00AM (#28673669)</p></div><p>WoW... you are REALLY clueless, aren't you - are you trying to say that downloading adbanner data speeds up my system? It slows you down, and?? Adbanners have been shown to harbor malicious script in them (was "big news" here on this very website in fact, here):</p><p>----</p><p><b>THE NEXT ADBANNER YOU CLICK ON MAY BE A VIRUS:</b></p><p><a href="http://it.slashdot.org/story/09/06/15/2056219/The-Next-Ad-You-Click-May-Be-a-Virus" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://it.slashdot.org/story/09/06/15/2056219/The-Next-Ad-You-Click-May-Be-a-Virus</a> [slashdot.org]</p><p>----</p><p>Care to dispute the findings that even slashdot posted about? Good luck...</p><p>AND, I am NOT the only person noting you go faster online by using a custom HOSTS file (for blocking adbanners &amp;/or hardcoding your favs into it for their URL-to-IP resolution, which also stops you from using possibly compromised DNS Servers (Dan Kaminsky did GREAT work last year &amp; this year on that latter note by the by proving it happens via DNS poisonings etc. et al):</p><p>----</p><p><a href="http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491" title="securityfocus.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491</a> [securityfocus.com]</p><p><b>PERTINENT QUOTE:</b></p><p>"The host file on my day-to-day laptop is now over 16,000 lines long. Accessing the Internet  particularly browsing the Web  is actually faster now." <b>Mr. Oliver Day, SECURITYFOCUS.COM</b></p><p>----</p><p>So much for your blatant b.s. (try to either learn to tell the truth, or learn how HOSTS files, really work (&amp; for the benefits of users))</p><p>APK</p><p>P.S.=&gt; The "resultant performance drops" you said I noted, are about using 127.0.0.1, or even 0.0.0.0, vs. the smaller &amp; F A S T E R  0 hosts file blocking IP address ONLY...</p><p>That is because when coming up from disk into memory (diskcache or DNS local cache)? You slow down using the larger/longer blocking IP addresses &amp; you can prove that to yourself with this test -&gt;  <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1300193&amp;cid=28672971" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1300193&amp;cid=28672971</a> [slashdot.org]</p><p>(&amp; you can try that test, if you code you can try it yourself &amp; see (I wish you would))<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>NOW - with a tinier HOSTS file (such as the one sootman uses &amp; stated so here (from mvps.org))?</p><p>Then, you don't have to stall the DNS Client Service in Windows IF you use a smaller HOSTS file...</p><p>It only happens when you use a larger (&amp; more comprehensive one for coverage vs. KNOWN BAD SITES from sources like this one -&gt; <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosts\_file" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosts\_file</a> [wikipedia.org] &amp; reputable sources such as Spybot S&amp;D, SRI, stopbadware.org &amp; others of that ilk )</p><p>HOWEVER - The fact that using a larger HOSTS file like mine that covers a lot more because it is composed of data from all those sources clearly indicates that MS needs to revise the local DNS Client Cache also... it should NOT 'break down' &amp; slow you up on larger HOSTS period. Easy to get around though, just stop the local DNS client cache is all!</p><p>Please - get a clue, but more importantly, a life... apk</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Your complaint is about the performance of using the hosts file for something it 's never meant to be used for and the resultant performance drops of reading such a large file .
" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 , @ 05 : 00AM ( # 28673669 ) WoW... you are REALLY clueless , are n't you - are you trying to say that downloading adbanner data speeds up my system ?
It slows you down , and ? ?
Adbanners have been shown to harbor malicious script in them ( was " big news " here on this very website in fact , here ) : ----THE NEXT ADBANNER YOU CLICK ON MAY BE A VIRUS : http : //it.slashdot.org/story/09/06/15/2056219/The-Next-Ad-You-Click-May-Be-a-Virus [ slashdot.org ] ----Care to dispute the findings that even slashdot posted about ?
Good luck...AND , I am NOT the only person noting you go faster online by using a custom HOSTS file ( for blocking adbanners &amp;/or hardcoding your favs into it for their URL-to-IP resolution , which also stops you from using possibly compromised DNS Servers ( Dan Kaminsky did GREAT work last year &amp; this year on that latter note by the by proving it happens via DNS poisonings etc .
et al ) : ----http : //www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491 [ securityfocus.com ] PERTINENT QUOTE : " The host file on my day-to-day laptop is now over 16,000 lines long .
Accessing the Internet particularly browsing the Web is actually faster now .
" Mr. Oliver Day , SECURITYFOCUS.COM----So much for your blatant b.s .
( try to either learn to tell the truth , or learn how HOSTS files , really work ( &amp; for the benefits of users ) ) APKP.S. = &gt; The " resultant performance drops " you said I noted , are about using 127.0.0.1 , or even 0.0.0.0 , vs. the smaller &amp; F A S T E R 0 hosts file blocking IP address ONLY...That is because when coming up from disk into memory ( diskcache or DNS local cache ) ?
You slow down using the larger/longer blocking IP addresses &amp; you can prove that to yourself with this test - &gt; http : //tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 1300193&amp;cid = 28672971 [ slashdot.org ] ( &amp; you can try that test , if you code you can try it yourself &amp; see ( I wish you would ) ) ...NOW - with a tinier HOSTS file ( such as the one sootman uses &amp; stated so here ( from mvps.org ) ) ? Then , you do n't have to stall the DNS Client Service in Windows IF you use a smaller HOSTS file...It only happens when you use a larger ( &amp; more comprehensive one for coverage vs. KNOWN BAD SITES from sources like this one - &gt; http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosts \ _file [ wikipedia.org ] &amp; reputable sources such as Spybot S&amp;D , SRI , stopbadware.org &amp; others of that ilk ) HOWEVER - The fact that using a larger HOSTS file like mine that covers a lot more because it is composed of data from all those sources clearly indicates that MS needs to revise the local DNS Client Cache also... it should NOT 'break down ' &amp; slow you up on larger HOSTS period .
Easy to get around though , just stop the local DNS client cache is all ! Please - get a clue , but more importantly , a life... apk</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Your complaint is about the performance of using the hosts file for something it's never meant to be used for and the resultant performance drops of reading such a large file.
" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13, @05:00AM (#28673669)WoW... you are REALLY clueless, aren't you - are you trying to say that downloading adbanner data speeds up my system?
It slows you down, and??
Adbanners have been shown to harbor malicious script in them (was "big news" here on this very website in fact, here):----THE NEXT ADBANNER YOU CLICK ON MAY BE A VIRUS:http://it.slashdot.org/story/09/06/15/2056219/The-Next-Ad-You-Click-May-Be-a-Virus [slashdot.org]----Care to dispute the findings that even slashdot posted about?
Good luck...AND, I am NOT the only person noting you go faster online by using a custom HOSTS file (for blocking adbanners &amp;/or hardcoding your favs into it for their URL-to-IP resolution, which also stops you from using possibly compromised DNS Servers (Dan Kaminsky did GREAT work last year &amp; this year on that latter note by the by proving it happens via DNS poisonings etc.
et al):----http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491 [securityfocus.com]PERTINENT QUOTE:"The host file on my day-to-day laptop is now over 16,000 lines long.
Accessing the Internet  particularly browsing the Web  is actually faster now.
" Mr. Oliver Day, SECURITYFOCUS.COM----So much for your blatant b.s.
(try to either learn to tell the truth, or learn how HOSTS files, really work (&amp; for the benefits of users))APKP.S.=&gt; The "resultant performance drops" you said I noted, are about using 127.0.0.1, or even 0.0.0.0, vs. the smaller &amp; F A S T E R  0 hosts file blocking IP address ONLY...That is because when coming up from disk into memory (diskcache or DNS local cache)?
You slow down using the larger/longer blocking IP addresses &amp; you can prove that to yourself with this test -&gt;  http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1300193&amp;cid=28672971 [slashdot.org](&amp; you can try that test, if you code you can try it yourself &amp; see (I wish you would)) ...NOW - with a tinier HOSTS file (such as the one sootman uses &amp; stated so here (from mvps.org))?Then, you don't have to stall the DNS Client Service in Windows IF you use a smaller HOSTS file...It only happens when you use a larger (&amp; more comprehensive one for coverage vs. KNOWN BAD SITES from sources like this one -&gt; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosts\_file [wikipedia.org] &amp; reputable sources such as Spybot S&amp;D, SRI, stopbadware.org &amp; others of that ilk )HOWEVER - The fact that using a larger HOSTS file like mine that covers a lot more because it is composed of data from all those sources clearly indicates that MS needs to revise the local DNS Client Cache also... it should NOT 'break down' &amp; slow you up on larger HOSTS period.
Easy to get around though, just stop the local DNS client cache is all!Please - get a clue, but more importantly, a life... apk
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673669</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671117</id>
	<title>Re:And the Lord spake, saying,</title>
	<author>DevConcepts</author>
	<datestamp>1247404680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>WHERE ARE MY MOD POINTS!!!!!<br> <br>

Kinda like microsoft, never have there when I need them.<br> <br>

Three.</htmltext>
<tokenext>WHERE ARE MY MOD POINTS ! ! ! ! !
Kinda like microsoft , never have there when I need them .
Three .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WHERE ARE MY MOD POINTS!!!!!
Kinda like microsoft, never have there when I need them.
Three.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670771</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672157</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>darkmeridian</author>
	<datestamp>1247414880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Vista got that market share on virtue of Microsoft's monopoly. All the same, Vista was a good operating system after SP1 once the drivers matured. I kept on telling my Linux-zealot friends that Vista x64 SP1 was the best Windows ever, and easier to use than Ubuntu. Well, one of my friends tried it. He concluded that, "Well, it doesn't suck as much as I thought it did."</p><p>Run Vista SP1 yourself on supported hardware. Don't knock it until you tried it. I am running Ubuntu, Vista x64, and Windows 7 x64 on the desktop. Vista is a surprisingly good operating system. FreeBSD on FreeNAS is solid as heck.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Vista got that market share on virtue of Microsoft 's monopoly .
All the same , Vista was a good operating system after SP1 once the drivers matured .
I kept on telling my Linux-zealot friends that Vista x64 SP1 was the best Windows ever , and easier to use than Ubuntu .
Well , one of my friends tried it .
He concluded that , " Well , it does n't suck as much as I thought it did .
" Run Vista SP1 yourself on supported hardware .
Do n't knock it until you tried it .
I am running Ubuntu , Vista x64 , and Windows 7 x64 on the desktop .
Vista is a surprisingly good operating system .
FreeBSD on FreeNAS is solid as heck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Vista got that market share on virtue of Microsoft's monopoly.
All the same, Vista was a good operating system after SP1 once the drivers matured.
I kept on telling my Linux-zealot friends that Vista x64 SP1 was the best Windows ever, and easier to use than Ubuntu.
Well, one of my friends tried it.
He concluded that, "Well, it doesn't suck as much as I thought it did.
"Run Vista SP1 yourself on supported hardware.
Don't knock it until you tried it.
I am running Ubuntu, Vista x64, and Windows 7 x64 on the desktop.
Vista is a surprisingly good operating system.
FreeBSD on FreeNAS is solid as heck.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671415</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673527</id>
	<title>Re:Bless their hearts</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247476680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I guess there's always a market for retro stuff.</p></div><p>Like Unix?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess there 's always a market for retro stuff.Like Unix ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess there's always a market for retro stuff.Like Unix?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671583</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673763</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>gbjbaanb</author>
	<datestamp>1247480220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>of course that's until they get it and realise the UI isn't quite as good as promised. I installed the RC build recently on a PC I was reinstalling anyway and gave it a couple of days running.</p><p>The new task bar is appalling.</p><p>I like the ability to move the iconised windows around, but - I hate the grouping so I turned it off. Guess what, all the windows still appeared grouped when you hovered over them, and they didn't helpfully show the titles - I had 3 firefox windows open, it was difficult to tell them apart. This was a big downgrade to Vista's 'quite nice' preview-on-hover. Also MSN Messenger (we use it at work) refused to minimise to the tray, so it stayed on the taskbar all the time.</p><p>I can see little things like this giving W7 a much poorer reception than Vista if they're still in the final build. After all, no-one really cares that it is a bit faster if they've bought it on a new PC - they'll think the speed increase is due to the better hardware. But good UI is really important.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>of course that 's until they get it and realise the UI is n't quite as good as promised .
I installed the RC build recently on a PC I was reinstalling anyway and gave it a couple of days running.The new task bar is appalling.I like the ability to move the iconised windows around , but - I hate the grouping so I turned it off .
Guess what , all the windows still appeared grouped when you hovered over them , and they did n't helpfully show the titles - I had 3 firefox windows open , it was difficult to tell them apart .
This was a big downgrade to Vista 's 'quite nice ' preview-on-hover .
Also MSN Messenger ( we use it at work ) refused to minimise to the tray , so it stayed on the taskbar all the time.I can see little things like this giving W7 a much poorer reception than Vista if they 're still in the final build .
After all , no-one really cares that it is a bit faster if they 've bought it on a new PC - they 'll think the speed increase is due to the better hardware .
But good UI is really important .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>of course that's until they get it and realise the UI isn't quite as good as promised.
I installed the RC build recently on a PC I was reinstalling anyway and gave it a couple of days running.The new task bar is appalling.I like the ability to move the iconised windows around, but - I hate the grouping so I turned it off.
Guess what, all the windows still appeared grouped when you hovered over them, and they didn't helpfully show the titles - I had 3 firefox windows open, it was difficult to tell them apart.
This was a big downgrade to Vista's 'quite nice' preview-on-hover.
Also MSN Messenger (we use it at work) refused to minimise to the tray, so it stayed on the taskbar all the time.I can see little things like this giving W7 a much poorer reception than Vista if they're still in the final build.
After all, no-one really cares that it is a bit faster if they've bought it on a new PC - they'll think the speed increase is due to the better hardware.
But good UI is really important.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671963</id>
	<title>Re:Windows 7 makes me excited</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247412960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is an extrremely apt analysis of the hijincks MS have been enaging in to foist their OS on people. Oh, and also they were behind 9/11.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is an extrremely apt analysis of the hijincks MS have been enaging in to foist their OS on people .
Oh , and also they were behind 9/11 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is an extrremely apt analysis of the hijincks MS have been enaging in to foist their OS on people.
Oh, and also they were behind 9/11.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671085</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672051</id>
	<title>Re:OK, Since this is a non-event...</title>
	<author>amiga3D</author>
	<datestamp>1247413740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's not the fact that it's what people want.  It's what they're going to get whether they want it or not.  OEM's are going to ship it because M$ will tell them to.  That's how monopolies work.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not the fact that it 's what people want .
It 's what they 're going to get whether they want it or not .
OEM 's are going to ship it because M $ will tell them to .
That 's how monopolies work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not the fact that it's what people want.
It's what they're going to get whether they want it or not.
OEM's are going to ship it because M$ will tell them to.
That's how monopolies work.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671061</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674823</id>
	<title>Re:The "Lord of HOSTS" sayeth READ (serious)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247492520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Microsoft haven't really taken away the layers, they've just changed the underlying code structure of those layers. The firewall platform is still performing all the checks it always has, it's just integrated together now. This really doesn't mean it's less secure. Either a packet gets through each stage or it does not. If a specific stage has a vulnerability in it's still got the vulnerability at that stage if that stage is in it's own binary or not.</p><p>If we're talking about an internal threat then again disabling one or three files is going to make no difference in Windows, it's just as trivial for a malware writer.</p><p>The hosts stuff is a load of crap too, the top parent doesn't seem to understand what the hosts file is for, it's certainly not designed to be used as a 650,000 entry blacklist, it's merely meant to contain a couple of hosts and even then only as a fix for broken DNS. Filtering of base hosts should not be done in the hosts file, that's a really bad hack for someone who simply does not understand how to build their own security layer to filter inbound/outbound connections but a hack with negative repercussions - the hosts file has to be accessed and 650,000 names have to be checked every time you access a host, that's going to slow down your DNS lookups massively.</p><p>Real layered security comes quite rightly from separate devices, not separate pieces of software on a system. You might have a hardware router at the front, a hardware firewall behind it and so on. For most home users a simple router with a built in firewall is fine, but you'll probably want them separate in a commercial environment.</p><p>The real security threats don't tend to come from direct outside connection attempts nowadays much anyway simply because of the prevailance of NAT and stateful firewalls. The most prominent attack vectors now are the browser, e-mail attachments and that sort of thing, but even these are fairly trivial to defend against. Your browser should be fairly secure if you disable Javascript on untrusted sites and no one should be opening unsolicited e-mail attachments unless they're asking to be infected. The applications you use to connect out are a far bigger worry than any attempting to connect in if you're behind a NAT and/or firewall setup.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft have n't really taken away the layers , they 've just changed the underlying code structure of those layers .
The firewall platform is still performing all the checks it always has , it 's just integrated together now .
This really does n't mean it 's less secure .
Either a packet gets through each stage or it does not .
If a specific stage has a vulnerability in it 's still got the vulnerability at that stage if that stage is in it 's own binary or not.If we 're talking about an internal threat then again disabling one or three files is going to make no difference in Windows , it 's just as trivial for a malware writer.The hosts stuff is a load of crap too , the top parent does n't seem to understand what the hosts file is for , it 's certainly not designed to be used as a 650,000 entry blacklist , it 's merely meant to contain a couple of hosts and even then only as a fix for broken DNS .
Filtering of base hosts should not be done in the hosts file , that 's a really bad hack for someone who simply does not understand how to build their own security layer to filter inbound/outbound connections but a hack with negative repercussions - the hosts file has to be accessed and 650,000 names have to be checked every time you access a host , that 's going to slow down your DNS lookups massively.Real layered security comes quite rightly from separate devices , not separate pieces of software on a system .
You might have a hardware router at the front , a hardware firewall behind it and so on .
For most home users a simple router with a built in firewall is fine , but you 'll probably want them separate in a commercial environment.The real security threats do n't tend to come from direct outside connection attempts nowadays much anyway simply because of the prevailance of NAT and stateful firewalls .
The most prominent attack vectors now are the browser , e-mail attachments and that sort of thing , but even these are fairly trivial to defend against .
Your browser should be fairly secure if you disable Javascript on untrusted sites and no one should be opening unsolicited e-mail attachments unless they 're asking to be infected .
The applications you use to connect out are a far bigger worry than any attempting to connect in if you 're behind a NAT and/or firewall setup .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft haven't really taken away the layers, they've just changed the underlying code structure of those layers.
The firewall platform is still performing all the checks it always has, it's just integrated together now.
This really doesn't mean it's less secure.
Either a packet gets through each stage or it does not.
If a specific stage has a vulnerability in it's still got the vulnerability at that stage if that stage is in it's own binary or not.If we're talking about an internal threat then again disabling one or three files is going to make no difference in Windows, it's just as trivial for a malware writer.The hosts stuff is a load of crap too, the top parent doesn't seem to understand what the hosts file is for, it's certainly not designed to be used as a 650,000 entry blacklist, it's merely meant to contain a couple of hosts and even then only as a fix for broken DNS.
Filtering of base hosts should not be done in the hosts file, that's a really bad hack for someone who simply does not understand how to build their own security layer to filter inbound/outbound connections but a hack with negative repercussions - the hosts file has to be accessed and 650,000 names have to be checked every time you access a host, that's going to slow down your DNS lookups massively.Real layered security comes quite rightly from separate devices, not separate pieces of software on a system.
You might have a hardware router at the front, a hardware firewall behind it and so on.
For most home users a simple router with a built in firewall is fine, but you'll probably want them separate in a commercial environment.The real security threats don't tend to come from direct outside connection attempts nowadays much anyway simply because of the prevailance of NAT and stateful firewalls.
The most prominent attack vectors now are the browser, e-mail attachments and that sort of thing, but even these are fairly trivial to defend against.
Your browser should be fairly secure if you disable Javascript on untrusted sites and no one should be opening unsolicited e-mail attachments unless they're asking to be infected.
The applications you use to connect out are a far bigger worry than any attempting to connect in if you're behind a NAT and/or firewall setup.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672443</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671331</id>
	<title>Genius marketing</title>
	<author>atomic-penguin</author>
	<datestamp>1247406960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Say what you will about Microsoft, but they are geniuses when it comes to marketing.  I mean they can tell everyone that 6.1 is equal to 7.0, and sell Vista to the same pissed off customers again at $400 a head.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Say what you will about Microsoft , but they are geniuses when it comes to marketing .
I mean they can tell everyone that 6.1 is equal to 7.0 , and sell Vista to the same pissed off customers again at $ 400 a head .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Say what you will about Microsoft, but they are geniuses when it comes to marketing.
I mean they can tell everyone that 6.1 is equal to 7.0, and sell Vista to the same pissed off customers again at $400 a head.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671049</id>
	<title>Re:OK, Since this is a non-event...</title>
	<author>Darkness404</author>
	<datestamp>1247404080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> * Apple: OSX keeps getting better and better. Will they make enough improvement that people want to switch away from Microsoft?</p> </div><p>

I think OS X will only really beat MS if either A) Apple releases -cheap- computers or B) Licenses it out to other OEMs that make cheap computers. I mean, when I can buy a $400 laptop (not a netbook but a laptop) with Windows on it and do just about everything that a $999 Macbook can do, the choice is clear for most people. Yes, there are a few niche things that require OS X, but the vast majority of software works by default on Windows and may have a Mac port. I would imagine that a lot of people would love to have OS X rather than Windows but for a laptop that is $600 more than the competition that does the same thing, I can't see people flocking over to Apple when PC hardware is dirt cheap. Yes, Apple hardware is cheaper when you go by a component to component basis, but really for the average person, 3 gigs of DDR2 is going to be better than 3 gigs of DDR3 when the DDR3 RAM costs way more. If Apple lowers their prices, I can see them dominating, but these days who wants to pay $999 for Apple's cheapest laptop when you can buy a netbook for under $300 and a full laptop for $400 and under.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>* Apple : OSX keeps getting better and better .
Will they make enough improvement that people want to switch away from Microsoft ?
I think OS X will only really beat MS if either A ) Apple releases -cheap- computers or B ) Licenses it out to other OEMs that make cheap computers .
I mean , when I can buy a $ 400 laptop ( not a netbook but a laptop ) with Windows on it and do just about everything that a $ 999 Macbook can do , the choice is clear for most people .
Yes , there are a few niche things that require OS X , but the vast majority of software works by default on Windows and may have a Mac port .
I would imagine that a lot of people would love to have OS X rather than Windows but for a laptop that is $ 600 more than the competition that does the same thing , I ca n't see people flocking over to Apple when PC hardware is dirt cheap .
Yes , Apple hardware is cheaper when you go by a component to component basis , but really for the average person , 3 gigs of DDR2 is going to be better than 3 gigs of DDR3 when the DDR3 RAM costs way more .
If Apple lowers their prices , I can see them dominating , but these days who wants to pay $ 999 for Apple 's cheapest laptop when you can buy a netbook for under $ 300 and a full laptop for $ 400 and under .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> * Apple: OSX keeps getting better and better.
Will they make enough improvement that people want to switch away from Microsoft?
I think OS X will only really beat MS if either A) Apple releases -cheap- computers or B) Licenses it out to other OEMs that make cheap computers.
I mean, when I can buy a $400 laptop (not a netbook but a laptop) with Windows on it and do just about everything that a $999 Macbook can do, the choice is clear for most people.
Yes, there are a few niche things that require OS X, but the vast majority of software works by default on Windows and may have a Mac port.
I would imagine that a lot of people would love to have OS X rather than Windows but for a laptop that is $600 more than the competition that does the same thing, I can't see people flocking over to Apple when PC hardware is dirt cheap.
Yes, Apple hardware is cheaper when you go by a component to component basis, but really for the average person, 3 gigs of DDR2 is going to be better than 3 gigs of DDR3 when the DDR3 RAM costs way more.
If Apple lowers their prices, I can see them dominating, but these days who wants to pay $999 for Apple's cheapest laptop when you can buy a netbook for under $300 and a full laptop for $400 and under.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670827</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28680561</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>Ash Vince</author>
	<datestamp>1247514120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have also decided to move to Windows 7 directly and bypass Vista. I have used Vista on other peoples laptops, and I do not hate it, I just never had a PC that would do it justice. Now I have recently upgraded I wanted to put an OS on it that took advantage of all the memory (the only copies of XP I have are 32bit so cannot address all 4Gb)</p><p>So far I like Windows 7. It has not crashed since day one and that was a driver conflict. I really like the new taskbar and quick launch being combined. I have not even turned off UAC since it does not annoy me, I like being asked every time a piece of software wants to change my system. I like the ability to change each applications volume separately. All in all it seems a pretty good OS.</p><p>I know that this will now elicit responses of all the applications I could download to do all this in Windows XP, but why should I bother having programs from several different sources installed when you can be sure they were not tested all running on the same machine by their respective authors.</p><p>That is not to say I will be giving up my Gentoo box since many things I prefer to do in Linux, but I actually do prefer Windows 7 to Windows XP. As soon as the final build is out, I will be removing Windows XP and dual booting Windows 7 with Gentoo Linux set as the default.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have also decided to move to Windows 7 directly and bypass Vista .
I have used Vista on other peoples laptops , and I do not hate it , I just never had a PC that would do it justice .
Now I have recently upgraded I wanted to put an OS on it that took advantage of all the memory ( the only copies of XP I have are 32bit so can not address all 4Gb ) So far I like Windows 7 .
It has not crashed since day one and that was a driver conflict .
I really like the new taskbar and quick launch being combined .
I have not even turned off UAC since it does not annoy me , I like being asked every time a piece of software wants to change my system .
I like the ability to change each applications volume separately .
All in all it seems a pretty good OS.I know that this will now elicit responses of all the applications I could download to do all this in Windows XP , but why should I bother having programs from several different sources installed when you can be sure they were not tested all running on the same machine by their respective authors.That is not to say I will be giving up my Gentoo box since many things I prefer to do in Linux , but I actually do prefer Windows 7 to Windows XP .
As soon as the final build is out , I will be removing Windows XP and dual booting Windows 7 with Gentoo Linux set as the default .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have also decided to move to Windows 7 directly and bypass Vista.
I have used Vista on other peoples laptops, and I do not hate it, I just never had a PC that would do it justice.
Now I have recently upgraded I wanted to put an OS on it that took advantage of all the memory (the only copies of XP I have are 32bit so cannot address all 4Gb)So far I like Windows 7.
It has not crashed since day one and that was a driver conflict.
I really like the new taskbar and quick launch being combined.
I have not even turned off UAC since it does not annoy me, I like being asked every time a piece of software wants to change my system.
I like the ability to change each applications volume separately.
All in all it seems a pretty good OS.I know that this will now elicit responses of all the applications I could download to do all this in Windows XP, but why should I bother having programs from several different sources installed when you can be sure they were not tested all running on the same machine by their respective authors.That is not to say I will be giving up my Gentoo box since many things I prefer to do in Linux, but I actually do prefer Windows 7 to Windows XP.
As soon as the final build is out, I will be removing Windows XP and dual booting Windows 7 with Gentoo Linux set as the default.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671473</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672177</id>
	<title>Re:OK, Since this is a non-event...</title>
	<author>armanox</author>
	<datestamp>1247415120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Every laptop that I've purchased in the past 5 years that was under 1000USD was a major disappointment.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Every laptop that I 've purchased in the past 5 years that was under 1000USD was a major disappointment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Every laptop that I've purchased in the past 5 years that was under 1000USD was a major disappointment.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671049</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670993</id>
	<title>Re:And the Lord spake, saying,</title>
	<author>Brett Buck</author>
	<datestamp>1247403720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One!<br>Two!<br>Five, Uh, Three!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One ! Two ! Five , Uh , Three !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One!Two!Five, Uh, Three!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670771</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28688937</id>
	<title>C/C++ &amp; .NET? Known &amp; used them for years</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247576400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><div class="quote"><p><b>"Do us all a favour, quit posting anything to the internet, spend a few years updating your knowledge to learn a worthwhile language like C++, Java or one of the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET languages. Get a clue about security and understand why your applications are a far bigger security risk than anything you talk of and finally, stop threatening to sue anyone you disagree with."</b> - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13, @05:00AM (#28673669)</p></div><p>I have used C &amp; C++ since 1992 (where I learned it during my education/college) &amp; professionally in many assignments (MSVC++ and Borland C++ Builder) and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET I used most all last year (VB.NET &amp; ASP.NET via Visual Studio 2005) I seriously doubt you have ever used them yourself, so, so much for that.</p><p>----</p><div class="quote"><p><b>"But wait, it appears you didn't stop there, I also found this:"</b> - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13, @05:00AM (#28673669)" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13, @05:00AM (#28673669)</p></div><p>Thor SCHMUCK? LOL, the guy is a joke... what's he ever accomplished that's been noted in any publications in this field, and the Computer Associates (the joke the industry)? The last company I worked for used their "security suite" and had to take it out because it was screwing up the email system... I wrote an application for a fellow on the NTCompatible.com forums way back when who complained that Apache (old model he used) would not run invisibly on screen. It is trivial to use many function calls for spawning a process via their parameters possible to make an app launch invisibly so to help he, I wrote it up &amp; when I wrote them about it? Greg Jensen (head of that suite) couldn't even get my emails and for the same reasons. By the way, I was outraged at that, because Thor SCHMUCK submitted that old program of mine to them under "Peter Kowalski" so I'd never find it if I googled for it etc. - he is a jack ass of the first order &amp; so are the morons @ CA. I did their review to have it removed, 21 questions, and my application did not violate a SINGLE constraint. So much for them and Mr. Thor SCHMUCK. Others, like Dr. Mark Russinovich even, and Nir Sofer of Nirsoft have also been victimized by this type of thing happening, so I am not alone in that much.</p><p>----</p><div class="quote"><p><b>"Er, a program built entirely around breaking the hosts file using it for purposes it is simply not intended? Again, do you have any idea about the subject you preach? Do you realise that your very own programs pose a security risk? Do you realise how trivial it would be for Malware to hide malicious redirects in hosts files of the size you are talking meaning yet another one of your programs is a vessel for anti-security?"</b> - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13, @05:00AM (#28673669)</p></div><p>Do you even have a degree in this science, and have YOU ever written an application that did well (or any at all)? I'd like to see proof of either on your part. LOL, my program is for removing duplicated entries in HOSTS file, and to alphabetize entries in a HOSTS file, not to "bushwhack" it. Learn to read, or actually possess a degree around the science of programming (because after this statement, I am fairly certain you possess neither, nor any hands-on experience coding yourself, professionally).</p><p>----</p><div class="quote"><p><b>"And there's more:</b></p><p><b><a href="http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/51009562/m/3680937305" title="arstechnica.com" rel="nofollow">http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/51009562/m/3680937305</a> [arstechnica.com]</b></p><p><b>Threatening to sue again on online forums because people didn't like the fact you were using them to advertise your dodgy Delphi programs?"</b> - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13, @05:00AM (#28673669)" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13, @05:00AM (#28673669)</p></div><p>When you get libelled &amp; impersonated by someone? That's grounds for legal action, proof of that, by the dork @ "arstechnica" who did so? Ok, his own words quoted below (where he HAD to admit he did so, &amp; his hosting provider removed parts of his website because he did so):</p><p>----</p><p><b>"Anyway the "APK" registered here is just an affectionate clone of the original. In fact I prefer him to the original." - Jeremy Reimer - March 25, 2005</b></p><p><a href="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&amp;q=\%22OSY\%22+and+\%22affectionate+clone\%22+and+\%22Reimer\%22&amp;btnG=Search" title="google.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&amp;q=\%22OSY\%22+and+\%22affectionate+clone\%22+and+\%22Reimer\%22&amp;btnG=Search</a> [google.com]</p><p>----</p><p>He's the "main perpetrator" of much of it, &amp; is KNOWN for it... &amp; they eventually showed their face here in THIS VERY THREAD -&gt; <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1300193&amp;cid=28678549" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1300193&amp;cid=28678549</a> [slashdot.org] and I do NOT take kindly to being impersonated or libelled either. Nobody does.</p><p>(Giving themselves away, &amp; you are doubtless just another one of them - LOL, "you don't know me", b.s. -&gt; You could not have turned up that much in that short a time, &amp; it is obvious you have been following me around because over @ the New Tech? The forums there is SO SLOW, you'd have to have done that)</p><p><b>Folks here even call JEREMY REIMER a troll -&gt; </b> <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1273561&amp;threshold=-1&amp;commentsort=0&amp;mode=thread&amp;pid=28382013" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1273561&amp;threshold=-1&amp;commentsort=0&amp;mode=thread&amp;pid=28382013</a> [slashdot.org]</p><p>Again - so much for your "evidences"... &amp; it is clear you are just another "arstechnica loser" or THOR SCHMUCK himself...</p><p>(Give us a break)</p><p>APK</p><p>P.S.=&gt; Whoever "modded you up" is probably one of your sock puppet accounts, seeing as you post as A/C here, &amp; if all you have is libel of myself as you have done here instead of any visible accomplishments of your own? Then, you are just another troll online to be laughed at... lol! Who do you think you are fooling? apk</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Do us all a favour , quit posting anything to the internet , spend a few years updating your knowledge to learn a worthwhile language like C + + , Java or one of the .NET languages .
Get a clue about security and understand why your applications are a far bigger security risk than anything you talk of and finally , stop threatening to sue anyone you disagree with .
" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 , @ 05 : 00AM ( # 28673669 ) I have used C &amp; C + + since 1992 ( where I learned it during my education/college ) &amp; professionally in many assignments ( MSVC + + and Borland C + + Builder ) and .NET I used most all last year ( VB.NET &amp; ASP.NET via Visual Studio 2005 ) I seriously doubt you have ever used them yourself , so , so much for that.---- " But wait , it appears you did n't stop there , I also found this : " - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 , @ 05 : 00AM ( # 28673669 ) " - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 , @ 05 : 00AM ( # 28673669 ) Thor SCHMUCK ?
LOL , the guy is a joke... what 's he ever accomplished that 's been noted in any publications in this field , and the Computer Associates ( the joke the industry ) ?
The last company I worked for used their " security suite " and had to take it out because it was screwing up the email system... I wrote an application for a fellow on the NTCompatible.com forums way back when who complained that Apache ( old model he used ) would not run invisibly on screen .
It is trivial to use many function calls for spawning a process via their parameters possible to make an app launch invisibly so to help he , I wrote it up &amp; when I wrote them about it ?
Greg Jensen ( head of that suite ) could n't even get my emails and for the same reasons .
By the way , I was outraged at that , because Thor SCHMUCK submitted that old program of mine to them under " Peter Kowalski " so I 'd never find it if I googled for it etc .
- he is a jack ass of the first order &amp; so are the morons @ CA .
I did their review to have it removed , 21 questions , and my application did not violate a SINGLE constraint .
So much for them and Mr. Thor SCHMUCK .
Others , like Dr. Mark Russinovich even , and Nir Sofer of Nirsoft have also been victimized by this type of thing happening , so I am not alone in that much.---- " Er , a program built entirely around breaking the hosts file using it for purposes it is simply not intended ?
Again , do you have any idea about the subject you preach ?
Do you realise that your very own programs pose a security risk ?
Do you realise how trivial it would be for Malware to hide malicious redirects in hosts files of the size you are talking meaning yet another one of your programs is a vessel for anti-security ?
" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 , @ 05 : 00AM ( # 28673669 ) Do you even have a degree in this science , and have YOU ever written an application that did well ( or any at all ) ?
I 'd like to see proof of either on your part .
LOL , my program is for removing duplicated entries in HOSTS file , and to alphabetize entries in a HOSTS file , not to " bushwhack " it .
Learn to read , or actually possess a degree around the science of programming ( because after this statement , I am fairly certain you possess neither , nor any hands-on experience coding yourself , professionally ) .---- " And there 's more : http : //episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/51009562/m/3680937305 [ arstechnica.com ] Threatening to sue again on online forums because people did n't like the fact you were using them to advertise your dodgy Delphi programs ?
" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 , @ 05 : 00AM ( # 28673669 ) " - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 , @ 05 : 00AM ( # 28673669 ) When you get libelled &amp; impersonated by someone ?
That 's grounds for legal action , proof of that , by the dork @ " arstechnica " who did so ?
Ok , his own words quoted below ( where he HAD to admit he did so , &amp; his hosting provider removed parts of his website because he did so ) : ---- " Anyway the " APK " registered here is just an affectionate clone of the original .
In fact I prefer him to the original .
" - Jeremy Reimer - March 25 , 2005http : //www.google.com/search ? hl = en&amp;q = \ % 22OSY \ % 22 + and + \ % 22affectionate + clone \ % 22 + and + \ % 22Reimer \ % 22&amp;btnG = Search [ google.com ] ----He 's the " main perpetrator " of much of it , &amp; is KNOWN for it... &amp; they eventually showed their face here in THIS VERY THREAD - &gt; http : //tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 1300193&amp;cid = 28678549 [ slashdot.org ] and I do NOT take kindly to being impersonated or libelled either .
Nobody does .
( Giving themselves away , &amp; you are doubtless just another one of them - LOL , " you do n't know me " , b.s .
- &gt; You could not have turned up that much in that short a time , &amp; it is obvious you have been following me around because over @ the New Tech ?
The forums there is SO SLOW , you 'd have to have done that ) Folks here even call JEREMY REIMER a troll - &gt; http : //tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 1273561&amp;threshold = -1&amp;commentsort = 0&amp;mode = thread&amp;pid = 28382013 [ slashdot.org ] Again - so much for your " evidences " ... &amp; it is clear you are just another " arstechnica loser " or THOR SCHMUCK himself... ( Give us a break ) APKP.S. = &gt; Whoever " modded you up " is probably one of your sock puppet accounts , seeing as you post as A/C here , &amp; if all you have is libel of myself as you have done here instead of any visible accomplishments of your own ?
Then , you are just another troll online to be laughed at... lol ! Who do you think you are fooling ?
apk</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Do us all a favour, quit posting anything to the internet, spend a few years updating your knowledge to learn a worthwhile language like C++, Java or one of the .NET languages.
Get a clue about security and understand why your applications are a far bigger security risk than anything you talk of and finally, stop threatening to sue anyone you disagree with.
" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13, @05:00AM (#28673669)I have used C &amp; C++ since 1992 (where I learned it during my education/college) &amp; professionally in many assignments (MSVC++ and Borland C++ Builder) and .NET I used most all last year (VB.NET &amp; ASP.NET via Visual Studio 2005) I seriously doubt you have ever used them yourself, so, so much for that.----"But wait, it appears you didn't stop there, I also found this:" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13, @05:00AM (#28673669)" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13, @05:00AM (#28673669)Thor SCHMUCK?
LOL, the guy is a joke... what's he ever accomplished that's been noted in any publications in this field, and the Computer Associates (the joke the industry)?
The last company I worked for used their "security suite" and had to take it out because it was screwing up the email system... I wrote an application for a fellow on the NTCompatible.com forums way back when who complained that Apache (old model he used) would not run invisibly on screen.
It is trivial to use many function calls for spawning a process via their parameters possible to make an app launch invisibly so to help he, I wrote it up &amp; when I wrote them about it?
Greg Jensen (head of that suite) couldn't even get my emails and for the same reasons.
By the way, I was outraged at that, because Thor SCHMUCK submitted that old program of mine to them under "Peter Kowalski" so I'd never find it if I googled for it etc.
- he is a jack ass of the first order &amp; so are the morons @ CA.
I did their review to have it removed, 21 questions, and my application did not violate a SINGLE constraint.
So much for them and Mr. Thor SCHMUCK.
Others, like Dr. Mark Russinovich even, and Nir Sofer of Nirsoft have also been victimized by this type of thing happening, so I am not alone in that much.----"Er, a program built entirely around breaking the hosts file using it for purposes it is simply not intended?
Again, do you have any idea about the subject you preach?
Do you realise that your very own programs pose a security risk?
Do you realise how trivial it would be for Malware to hide malicious redirects in hosts files of the size you are talking meaning yet another one of your programs is a vessel for anti-security?
" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13, @05:00AM (#28673669)Do you even have a degree in this science, and have YOU ever written an application that did well (or any at all)?
I'd like to see proof of either on your part.
LOL, my program is for removing duplicated entries in HOSTS file, and to alphabetize entries in a HOSTS file, not to "bushwhack" it.
Learn to read, or actually possess a degree around the science of programming (because after this statement, I am fairly certain you possess neither, nor any hands-on experience coding yourself, professionally).----"And there's more:http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/51009562/m/3680937305 [arstechnica.com]Threatening to sue again on online forums because people didn't like the fact you were using them to advertise your dodgy Delphi programs?
" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13, @05:00AM (#28673669)" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13, @05:00AM (#28673669)When you get libelled &amp; impersonated by someone?
That's grounds for legal action, proof of that, by the dork @ "arstechnica" who did so?
Ok, his own words quoted below (where he HAD to admit he did so, &amp; his hosting provider removed parts of his website because he did so):----"Anyway the "APK" registered here is just an affectionate clone of the original.
In fact I prefer him to the original.
" - Jeremy Reimer - March 25, 2005http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&amp;q=\%22OSY\%22+and+\%22affectionate+clone\%22+and+\%22Reimer\%22&amp;btnG=Search [google.com]----He's the "main perpetrator" of much of it, &amp; is KNOWN for it... &amp; they eventually showed their face here in THIS VERY THREAD -&gt; http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1300193&amp;cid=28678549 [slashdot.org] and I do NOT take kindly to being impersonated or libelled either.
Nobody does.
(Giving themselves away, &amp; you are doubtless just another one of them - LOL, "you don't know me", b.s.
-&gt; You could not have turned up that much in that short a time, &amp; it is obvious you have been following me around because over @ the New Tech?
The forums there is SO SLOW, you'd have to have done that)Folks here even call JEREMY REIMER a troll -&gt;  http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1273561&amp;threshold=-1&amp;commentsort=0&amp;mode=thread&amp;pid=28382013 [slashdot.org]Again - so much for your "evidences"... &amp; it is clear you are just another "arstechnica loser" or THOR SCHMUCK himself...(Give us a break)APKP.S.=&gt; Whoever "modded you up" is probably one of your sock puppet accounts, seeing as you post as A/C here, &amp; if all you have is libel of myself as you have done here instead of any visible accomplishments of your own?
Then, you are just another troll online to be laughed at... lol! Who do you think you are fooling?
apk
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673669</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671317</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>cheesybagel</author>
	<datestamp>1247406840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Windows 2000 was pretty good (compared to its predecessors) and I don't remember as much hype that time around as this one. I still remember Windows 98 users telling me their OS was better! Hah! The laughs I had. It was even better once they upgraded to Me. When the Microsoft hype machine is in high gear it usually means this is a mediocre product at best. From what I heard so far it has little to offer versus Vista (which I use right now). But yeah, I'll probably upgrade.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows 2000 was pretty good ( compared to its predecessors ) and I do n't remember as much hype that time around as this one .
I still remember Windows 98 users telling me their OS was better !
Hah ! The laughs I had .
It was even better once they upgraded to Me .
When the Microsoft hype machine is in high gear it usually means this is a mediocre product at best .
From what I heard so far it has little to offer versus Vista ( which I use right now ) .
But yeah , I 'll probably upgrade .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows 2000 was pretty good (compared to its predecessors) and I don't remember as much hype that time around as this one.
I still remember Windows 98 users telling me their OS was better!
Hah! The laughs I had.
It was even better once they upgraded to Me.
When the Microsoft hype machine is in high gear it usually means this is a mediocre product at best.
From what I heard so far it has little to offer versus Vista (which I use right now).
But yeah, I'll probably upgrade.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674547</id>
	<title>Re:Windows 7 makes me excited</title>
	<author>cerberusss</author>
	<datestamp>1247490240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'd suck nine dicks to get a job posting pro-Microsoft stuff online</p></div><p>Says "sexwithanimals@gmail.com".... As a point of mild interest, would said dicks preferably be attached to human hosts or aren't you the picky type?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-D</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd suck nine dicks to get a job posting pro-Microsoft stuff onlineSays " sexwithanimals @ gmail.com " .... As a point of mild interest , would said dicks preferably be attached to human hosts or are n't you the picky type ?
: -D</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd suck nine dicks to get a job posting pro-Microsoft stuff onlineSays "sexwithanimals@gmail.com".... As a point of mild interest, would said dicks preferably be attached to human hosts or aren't you the picky type?
:-D
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671599</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673837</id>
	<title>Re:OK, Since this is a non-event...</title>
	<author>loonycyborg</author>
	<datestamp>1247481360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But talk to a gamer about classics like Fallout and his eyes will light up. Fallout is a $5 download from Gog.com. Ready to run on Vista and Win 7.</p></div><p>What about *real* classics that work only on DOS? Cross-platform emulator DOSBox(yet another program no one but a geek knows what it is<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P) is a *lot* better for running such games than directly on Windows XP/Vista/7. I remember using it on winXP before switching to Gentoo as my main OS which has dosbox in its repo (just 'emerge dosbox').</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But talk to a gamer about classics like Fallout and his eyes will light up .
Fallout is a $ 5 download from Gog.com .
Ready to run on Vista and Win 7.What about * real * classics that work only on DOS ?
Cross-platform emulator DOSBox ( yet another program no one but a geek knows what it is : P ) is a * lot * better for running such games than directly on Windows XP/Vista/7 .
I remember using it on winXP before switching to Gentoo as my main OS which has dosbox in its repo ( just 'emerge dosbox ' ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But talk to a gamer about classics like Fallout and his eyes will light up.
Fallout is a $5 download from Gog.com.
Ready to run on Vista and Win 7.What about *real* classics that work only on DOS?
Cross-platform emulator DOSBox(yet another program no one but a geek knows what it is :P) is a *lot* better for running such games than directly on Windows XP/Vista/7.
I remember using it on winXP before switching to Gentoo as my main OS which has dosbox in its repo (just 'emerge dosbox').
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672067</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670771</id>
	<title>And the Lord spake, saying,</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247401680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"First shalt thou take out the Holy Pin, then shalt thou count to three, no more, no less. Three shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, neither count thou two, excepting that thou then proceedest on to three. Five is right out. Once the number three, being the third number, be reached, then lobbest thou thy Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch towards thy foe, who being naughty in my sight, shall snuff it." Amen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" First shalt thou take out the Holy Pin , then shalt thou count to three , no more , no less .
Three shall be the number thou shalt count , and the number of the counting shall be three .
Four shalt thou not count , neither count thou two , excepting that thou then proceedest on to three .
Five is right out .
Once the number three , being the third number , be reached , then lobbest thou thy Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch towards thy foe , who being naughty in my sight , shall snuff it .
" Amen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"First shalt thou take out the Holy Pin, then shalt thou count to three, no more, no less.
Three shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three.
Four shalt thou not count, neither count thou two, excepting that thou then proceedest on to three.
Five is right out.
Once the number three, being the third number, be reached, then lobbest thou thy Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch towards thy foe, who being naughty in my sight, shall snuff it.
" Amen.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671061</id>
	<title>Re:OK, Since this is a non-event...</title>
	<author>Draek</author>
	<datestamp>1247404200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The main change is that Microsoft goes back to marketing a product people actually want. From what I can see, pushing Vista damaged their credibility pretty strongly, but with 7 they'll likely regain much of that trust, and in fact already have with the open beta/RC.</p><p>Other than that, nothing really, OSX isn't a contender and won't be for as long as Apple continues to ignore the business market, and Linux' freedom is far too tempting to OEMs to avoid fragmenting it and make it a viable long-term replacement for Windows.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The main change is that Microsoft goes back to marketing a product people actually want .
From what I can see , pushing Vista damaged their credibility pretty strongly , but with 7 they 'll likely regain much of that trust , and in fact already have with the open beta/RC.Other than that , nothing really , OSX is n't a contender and wo n't be for as long as Apple continues to ignore the business market , and Linux ' freedom is far too tempting to OEMs to avoid fragmenting it and make it a viable long-term replacement for Windows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The main change is that Microsoft goes back to marketing a product people actually want.
From what I can see, pushing Vista damaged their credibility pretty strongly, but with 7 they'll likely regain much of that trust, and in fact already have with the open beta/RC.Other than that, nothing really, OSX isn't a contender and won't be for as long as Apple continues to ignore the business market, and Linux' freedom is far too tempting to OEMs to avoid fragmenting it and make it a viable long-term replacement for Windows.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670827</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671339</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>Jugalator</author>
	<datestamp>1247407020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The same tired promises as ever, wrapped in fancier 3D windowing effects.</p></div><p>No, actually Aero Glass hasn't been updated noticeably, you troll.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The same tired promises as ever , wrapped in fancier 3D windowing effects.No , actually Aero Glass has n't been updated noticeably , you troll .
; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The same tired promises as ever, wrapped in fancier 3D windowing effects.No, actually Aero Glass hasn't been updated noticeably, you troll.
;-)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28686441</id>
	<title>Re:Windows 7 makes me excited</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247505240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why stop at nine?  Or is ten the magic number that flips you to professional dick sucker instead of professional troll?  Good luck with your future employment opportunities though.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why stop at nine ?
Or is ten the magic number that flips you to professional dick sucker instead of professional troll ?
Good luck with your future employment opportunities though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why stop at nine?
Or is ten the magic number that flips you to professional dick sucker instead of professional troll?
Good luck with your future employment opportunities though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671599</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672463</id>
	<title>Re:Efficiency</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247418360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're not thinking like an executive.  You have "people" to fix things for you.  Laptop broke?  Call IT.  They'll have it fixed in 45 minutes with a ghost image. Broken?  No big deal - our Dell lease will have us a new part tomorrow.  In the mean time, because it only cost $400 - IT has given me this loaner with all my files on it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're not thinking like an executive .
You have " people " to fix things for you .
Laptop broke ?
Call IT .
They 'll have it fixed in 45 minutes with a ghost image .
Broken ? No big deal - our Dell lease will have us a new part tomorrow .
In the mean time , because it only cost $ 400 - IT has given me this loaner with all my files on it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're not thinking like an executive.
You have "people" to fix things for you.
Laptop broke?
Call IT.
They'll have it fixed in 45 minutes with a ghost image.
Broken?  No big deal - our Dell lease will have us a new part tomorrow.
In the mean time, because it only cost $400 - IT has given me this loaner with all my files on it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28689055</id>
	<title>Anything significant about the 600?</title>
	<author>DanJ\_UK</author>
	<datestamp>1247577540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I seem to recall XP's RTM build was 2<strong>600</strong>, I recall it being very stable too.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I seem to recall XP 's RTM build was 2600 , I recall it being very stable too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I seem to recall XP's RTM build was 2600, I recall it being very stable too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671085</id>
	<title>Re:Windows 7 makes me excited</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247404440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Windows 7 is the first version of Windows that has me excited since as far back as I can remember.</i>
<p>
"As Microsoft strives to migrate their core technologies from the desktop onto the Web, so too is their propaganda machine migrating from the established press to the informal social web. Microsoft shills are invading social web sites everywhere - in forums, discussion groups, comments to news items, edits to Wikipedia, manipulation of search engines, comments to blogs - posing as innocent participants to promote their agenda and counter wide spread complaints about their shady marketing practises. Even in the comments section of blogs by Microsoft employees on their own corporate site they employ sock puppets to say the things the author felt inappropriate to say directly. They race to place their shill postings at the top spot in the comments section of news and blogs, or perhaps they are given advance notice enabling them to do this where they are a sponsor.

The evidence is here on Slashdot for all to see, without embellishments from me. What I say here is amounts to only a digest of hundreds of postings by others. A careful investigator can see for himself the evolution of discussions on Microsoft related issues, especially those accusing them of their usual hard ball tactics. As one reads from Slashdot's historical record on through to recent times, the evolution of Microsoft's efforts to pervert Slashdot's discussions becomes readily apparent. Microsoft's ambition is to twist internet discussions around a full 180 degrees until these discussions become a platform for propaganda from Microsoft's "Ministry of Truth". A study of the comments of the shills posted here can be cross-correlated with postings on other sites. Their pattern of saturating a discussion with shill postings, and the repeating of mindless memes becomes obvious. Their harassment, ridicule, and suppression of criticisms is designed to intimidated those who would speak out against them. They seek to establish and enforce a discipline of giving Microsoft "fair treatment" and their propaganda the same consideration and respect a real person would deserve.

In the process they are destroying Web 2 as we know it. This insidious attack on the infrastructure we rely upon to form our opinions in a complex world has both a direct and an inhibitory effect on free speech as a side effect.

We must stop this while it is in its infancy. Once it fully established, it will become much more difficult to root out, and other ruthless corporations, organizations, and even governments will want to emulate the success of Microsoft's campaign. This is the nightmare vision of the end of the social internet as we know it."

</p><p>
<a href="http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1284651&amp;cid=28502473" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1284651&amp;cid=28502473</a> [slashdot.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows 7 is the first version of Windows that has me excited since as far back as I can remember .
" As Microsoft strives to migrate their core technologies from the desktop onto the Web , so too is their propaganda machine migrating from the established press to the informal social web .
Microsoft shills are invading social web sites everywhere - in forums , discussion groups , comments to news items , edits to Wikipedia , manipulation of search engines , comments to blogs - posing as innocent participants to promote their agenda and counter wide spread complaints about their shady marketing practises .
Even in the comments section of blogs by Microsoft employees on their own corporate site they employ sock puppets to say the things the author felt inappropriate to say directly .
They race to place their shill postings at the top spot in the comments section of news and blogs , or perhaps they are given advance notice enabling them to do this where they are a sponsor .
The evidence is here on Slashdot for all to see , without embellishments from me .
What I say here is amounts to only a digest of hundreds of postings by others .
A careful investigator can see for himself the evolution of discussions on Microsoft related issues , especially those accusing them of their usual hard ball tactics .
As one reads from Slashdot 's historical record on through to recent times , the evolution of Microsoft 's efforts to pervert Slashdot 's discussions becomes readily apparent .
Microsoft 's ambition is to twist internet discussions around a full 180 degrees until these discussions become a platform for propaganda from Microsoft 's " Ministry of Truth " .
A study of the comments of the shills posted here can be cross-correlated with postings on other sites .
Their pattern of saturating a discussion with shill postings , and the repeating of mindless memes becomes obvious .
Their harassment , ridicule , and suppression of criticisms is designed to intimidated those who would speak out against them .
They seek to establish and enforce a discipline of giving Microsoft " fair treatment " and their propaganda the same consideration and respect a real person would deserve .
In the process they are destroying Web 2 as we know it .
This insidious attack on the infrastructure we rely upon to form our opinions in a complex world has both a direct and an inhibitory effect on free speech as a side effect .
We must stop this while it is in its infancy .
Once it fully established , it will become much more difficult to root out , and other ruthless corporations , organizations , and even governments will want to emulate the success of Microsoft 's campaign .
This is the nightmare vision of the end of the social internet as we know it .
" http : //news.slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 1284651&amp;cid = 28502473 [ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows 7 is the first version of Windows that has me excited since as far back as I can remember.
"As Microsoft strives to migrate their core technologies from the desktop onto the Web, so too is their propaganda machine migrating from the established press to the informal social web.
Microsoft shills are invading social web sites everywhere - in forums, discussion groups, comments to news items, edits to Wikipedia, manipulation of search engines, comments to blogs - posing as innocent participants to promote their agenda and counter wide spread complaints about their shady marketing practises.
Even in the comments section of blogs by Microsoft employees on their own corporate site they employ sock puppets to say the things the author felt inappropriate to say directly.
They race to place their shill postings at the top spot in the comments section of news and blogs, or perhaps they are given advance notice enabling them to do this where they are a sponsor.
The evidence is here on Slashdot for all to see, without embellishments from me.
What I say here is amounts to only a digest of hundreds of postings by others.
A careful investigator can see for himself the evolution of discussions on Microsoft related issues, especially those accusing them of their usual hard ball tactics.
As one reads from Slashdot's historical record on through to recent times, the evolution of Microsoft's efforts to pervert Slashdot's discussions becomes readily apparent.
Microsoft's ambition is to twist internet discussions around a full 180 degrees until these discussions become a platform for propaganda from Microsoft's "Ministry of Truth".
A study of the comments of the shills posted here can be cross-correlated with postings on other sites.
Their pattern of saturating a discussion with shill postings, and the repeating of mindless memes becomes obvious.
Their harassment, ridicule, and suppression of criticisms is designed to intimidated those who would speak out against them.
They seek to establish and enforce a discipline of giving Microsoft "fair treatment" and their propaganda the same consideration and respect a real person would deserve.
In the process they are destroying Web 2 as we know it.
This insidious attack on the infrastructure we rely upon to form our opinions in a complex world has both a direct and an inhibitory effect on free speech as a side effect.
We must stop this while it is in its infancy.
Once it fully established, it will become much more difficult to root out, and other ruthless corporations, organizations, and even governments will want to emulate the success of Microsoft's campaign.
This is the nightmare vision of the end of the social internet as we know it.
"


http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1284651&amp;cid=28502473 [slashdot.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670777</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672489</id>
	<title>Re:The "Lord of HOSTS" sayeth READ (serious)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247418720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While 0 is a valid IP address and should work in a hosts file, dude, STOP ABUSING the hosts file like a clueless idiot! Seriously, 14MB of plain text that needs to be parsed for every lookup? That's the most retarded thing I've ever seen.</p><p>At those proportions, there are WAY more efficient methods. Think about it, a hosts file can only match fully-qualified host names. If you want to block a whole domain you waste enormous amounts of space because you have to specify each and every host. Following that, you should instantly realize that security doesn't work with blacklists, i.e. if you know that domain evil.invalid is hostile, you can't afford to miss some hosts below it. Otherwise, what's the point?</p><p>And anyways, diverting traffic to 127.0.0.1 or 0.0.0.0 is changing semantics in so many ways. Suppose you start running a local HTTP server for testing purposes and all that traffic is suddenly hitting it. It's just wrong.</p><p>"Blocking" hosts by listing them in the hosts file is an evil evil evil ugly hack conceived by clueless idiots that can't manage to run a local proxy where you could block domains with simple regular expressions and only for protocols which need them blocked. Or running a local DNS cache where you could blacklist domains so you get a semantically correct (for your purpose) NXDOMAIN error.</p><p>If you weren't abusing it like that the whole 0 vs 0.0.0.0 issue would fly past you because noone ought to modify the hosts file anyway these days. That's what DNS is for.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While 0 is a valid IP address and should work in a hosts file , dude , STOP ABUSING the hosts file like a clueless idiot !
Seriously , 14MB of plain text that needs to be parsed for every lookup ?
That 's the most retarded thing I 've ever seen.At those proportions , there are WAY more efficient methods .
Think about it , a hosts file can only match fully-qualified host names .
If you want to block a whole domain you waste enormous amounts of space because you have to specify each and every host .
Following that , you should instantly realize that security does n't work with blacklists , i.e .
if you know that domain evil.invalid is hostile , you ca n't afford to miss some hosts below it .
Otherwise , what 's the point ? And anyways , diverting traffic to 127.0.0.1 or 0.0.0.0 is changing semantics in so many ways .
Suppose you start running a local HTTP server for testing purposes and all that traffic is suddenly hitting it .
It 's just wrong .
" Blocking " hosts by listing them in the hosts file is an evil evil evil ugly hack conceived by clueless idiots that ca n't manage to run a local proxy where you could block domains with simple regular expressions and only for protocols which need them blocked .
Or running a local DNS cache where you could blacklist domains so you get a semantically correct ( for your purpose ) NXDOMAIN error.If you were n't abusing it like that the whole 0 vs 0.0.0.0 issue would fly past you because noone ought to modify the hosts file anyway these days .
That 's what DNS is for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While 0 is a valid IP address and should work in a hosts file, dude, STOP ABUSING the hosts file like a clueless idiot!
Seriously, 14MB of plain text that needs to be parsed for every lookup?
That's the most retarded thing I've ever seen.At those proportions, there are WAY more efficient methods.
Think about it, a hosts file can only match fully-qualified host names.
If you want to block a whole domain you waste enormous amounts of space because you have to specify each and every host.
Following that, you should instantly realize that security doesn't work with blacklists, i.e.
if you know that domain evil.invalid is hostile, you can't afford to miss some hosts below it.
Otherwise, what's the point?And anyways, diverting traffic to 127.0.0.1 or 0.0.0.0 is changing semantics in so many ways.
Suppose you start running a local HTTP server for testing purposes and all that traffic is suddenly hitting it.
It's just wrong.
"Blocking" hosts by listing them in the hosts file is an evil evil evil ugly hack conceived by clueless idiots that can't manage to run a local proxy where you could block domains with simple regular expressions and only for protocols which need them blocked.
Or running a local DNS cache where you could blacklist domains so you get a semantically correct (for your purpose) NXDOMAIN error.If you weren't abusing it like that the whole 0 vs 0.0.0.0 issue would fly past you because noone ought to modify the hosts file anyway these days.
That's what DNS is for.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672163</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672281</id>
	<title>Re:Our world is saved!</title>
	<author>machine321</author>
	<datestamp>1247416020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With a five-digit slashdot ID and an email address like that?  God I hope not.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With a five-digit slashdot ID and an email address like that ?
God I hope not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With a five-digit slashdot ID and an email address like that?
God I hope not.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671093</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674829</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>Krneki</author>
	<datestamp>1247492580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The correct term is bloat-ware, of course you can choose advance install and avoid all the crap.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The correct term is bloat-ware , of course you can choose advance install and avoid all the crap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The correct term is bloat-ware, of course you can choose advance install and avoid all the crap.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671747</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672405</id>
	<title>Re:Don't speak like Mojo Jojo, just don't.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247417760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just be serious now for a minute. Are you an idiot, or just a really unfunny troll hoping someone replies with "WHOOSH"?</p><p>If it's the former, just google "holy hand grenade". If it's the latter, just fess up now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just be serious now for a minute .
Are you an idiot , or just a really unfunny troll hoping someone replies with " WHOOSH " ? If it 's the former , just google " holy hand grenade " .
If it 's the latter , just fess up now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just be serious now for a minute.
Are you an idiot, or just a really unfunny troll hoping someone replies with "WHOOSH"?If it's the former, just google "holy hand grenade".
If it's the latter, just fess up now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672113</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671415</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247407860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dude, you need to stop eating toe fungus. I like linux but my customers use Vista &amp; I forced myself to use it. After SP1 it wasn't the doom &amp; gloom everyone here made it out to be. The more you scream stuff that don't match users experience the less persuasive your argument becomes. It makes you look like a ranting lunatic. BTW Vista has a larger OS market share than linux + apple combined<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. not exactly an appeal from death row.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dude , you need to stop eating toe fungus .
I like linux but my customers use Vista &amp; I forced myself to use it .
After SP1 it was n't the doom &amp; gloom everyone here made it out to be .
The more you scream stuff that do n't match users experience the less persuasive your argument becomes .
It makes you look like a ranting lunatic .
BTW Vista has a larger OS market share than linux + apple combined .. not exactly an appeal from death row .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dude, you need to stop eating toe fungus.
I like linux but my customers use Vista &amp; I forced myself to use it.
After SP1 it wasn't the doom &amp; gloom everyone here made it out to be.
The more you scream stuff that don't match users experience the less persuasive your argument becomes.
It makes you look like a ranting lunatic.
BTW Vista has a larger OS market share than linux + apple combined .. not exactly an appeal from death row.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28689065</id>
	<title>HOSTS file is NOT slow to load &amp; it works</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247577660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><div class="quote"><p><b>"Your initial comments seemed idiotic, you were complaining about your 15mb+ hosts file being slow to load. Sorry, but what the fuck? You have a 15mb+ hosts file? are you really that clueless about IT?"</b> - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13, @05:00AM (#28673669)</p></div><p>Where did I say it was "slow to load", verbatim, first of all... I merely make it load F A S T E R, via using a smaller + more efficient blocking IP address for sites that house objectionable material, or are KNOWN to hijack users via malicious script housed in them, or other bad behavior on their part... &amp; do YOU have a "clue about IT" or even a degree in it of any kind? I'd like to see proof of YOUR "alleged expertise" in it.</p><p>The HOSTS file does work for blocking out KNOWN BAD SITES or adbanners that slow you down (&amp; a user has EVERY RIGHT to do that, especially since lately adbanners have been shown to harbor malicious script in them. In fact, there was a big article here on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. about it -&gt; <a href="http://it.slashdot.org/story/09/06/15/2056219/The-Next-Ad-You-Click-May-Be-a-Virus" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://it.slashdot.org/story/09/06/15/2056219/The-Next-Ad-You-Click-May-Be-a-Virus</a> [slashdot.org] so, so much for YOUR "know-how" in this art &amp; science...)</p><p>APK</p><p>P.S.=&gt; One day, you'll screwup here OR elsewhere online (since it is obvious you DO know me, &amp; aren't fooling anyone in that much by this point - you're doubtless another "arstechnica forums troll" (as Jeremy Reimer is even thought of as here -&gt;</p><p>----</p><p><b>"Anyway the "APK" registered here is just an affectionate clone of the original. In fact I prefer him to the original." - Jeremy Reimer - March 25, 2005</b></p><p><a href="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&amp;q=\%22OSY\%22+and+\%22affectionate+clone\%22+and+\%22Reimer\%22&amp;btnG=Search" title="google.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&amp;q=\%22OSY\%22+and+\%22affectionate+clone\%22+and+\%22Reimer\%22&amp;btnG=Search</a> [google.com]</p><p>----</p><p>He's the "main perpetrator" of much of it, &amp; is KNOWN for it... &amp; they eventually showed their face here in THIS VERY THREAD -&gt; <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1300193&amp;cid=28678549" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1300193&amp;cid=28678549</a> [slashdot.org] [slashdot.org] and I do NOT take kindly to being impersonated or libelled either. Nobody does.</p><p>(Giving themselves away, &amp; you are doubtless just another one of them - LOL, "you don't know me", b.s. -&gt; You could not have turned up that much in that short a time, &amp; it is obvious you have been following me around because over @ the New Tech? The forums there is SO SLOW, you'd have to have done that)</p><p><b>Folks here even call JEREMY REIMER a troll -&gt; </b> <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1273561&amp;threshold=-1&amp;commentsort=0&amp;mode=thread&amp;pid=28382013" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1273561&amp;threshold=-1&amp;commentsort=0&amp;mode=thread&amp;pid=28382013</a> [slashdot.org]</p><p>Again - so much for your "evidences"... &amp; it is clear you are just another "arstechnica loser" or THOR SCHMUCK himself... and I will know who YOU are - then, we'll see how you like being libelled as you have now done to myself... because I won't use falsehoods as you have done to myself here... apk</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Your initial comments seemed idiotic , you were complaining about your 15mb + hosts file being slow to load .
Sorry , but what the fuck ?
You have a 15mb + hosts file ?
are you really that clueless about IT ?
" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 , @ 05 : 00AM ( # 28673669 ) Where did I say it was " slow to load " , verbatim , first of all... I merely make it load F A S T E R , via using a smaller + more efficient blocking IP address for sites that house objectionable material , or are KNOWN to hijack users via malicious script housed in them , or other bad behavior on their part... &amp; do YOU have a " clue about IT " or even a degree in it of any kind ?
I 'd like to see proof of YOUR " alleged expertise " in it.The HOSTS file does work for blocking out KNOWN BAD SITES or adbanners that slow you down ( &amp; a user has EVERY RIGHT to do that , especially since lately adbanners have been shown to harbor malicious script in them .
In fact , there was a big article here on / .
about it - &gt; http : //it.slashdot.org/story/09/06/15/2056219/The-Next-Ad-You-Click-May-Be-a-Virus [ slashdot.org ] so , so much for YOUR " know-how " in this art &amp; science... ) APKP.S. = &gt; One day , you 'll screwup here OR elsewhere online ( since it is obvious you DO know me , &amp; are n't fooling anyone in that much by this point - you 're doubtless another " arstechnica forums troll " ( as Jeremy Reimer is even thought of as here - &gt; ---- " Anyway the " APK " registered here is just an affectionate clone of the original .
In fact I prefer him to the original .
" - Jeremy Reimer - March 25 , 2005http : //www.google.com/search ? hl = en&amp;q = \ % 22OSY \ % 22 + and + \ % 22affectionate + clone \ % 22 + and + \ % 22Reimer \ % 22&amp;btnG = Search [ google.com ] ----He 's the " main perpetrator " of much of it , &amp; is KNOWN for it... &amp; they eventually showed their face here in THIS VERY THREAD - &gt; http : //tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 1300193&amp;cid = 28678549 [ slashdot.org ] [ slashdot.org ] and I do NOT take kindly to being impersonated or libelled either .
Nobody does .
( Giving themselves away , &amp; you are doubtless just another one of them - LOL , " you do n't know me " , b.s .
- &gt; You could not have turned up that much in that short a time , &amp; it is obvious you have been following me around because over @ the New Tech ?
The forums there is SO SLOW , you 'd have to have done that ) Folks here even call JEREMY REIMER a troll - &gt; http : //tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 1273561&amp;threshold = -1&amp;commentsort = 0&amp;mode = thread&amp;pid = 28382013 [ slashdot.org ] Again - so much for your " evidences " ... &amp; it is clear you are just another " arstechnica loser " or THOR SCHMUCK himself... and I will know who YOU are - then , we 'll see how you like being libelled as you have now done to myself... because I wo n't use falsehoods as you have done to myself here... apk</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Your initial comments seemed idiotic, you were complaining about your 15mb+ hosts file being slow to load.
Sorry, but what the fuck?
You have a 15mb+ hosts file?
are you really that clueless about IT?
" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13, @05:00AM (#28673669)Where did I say it was "slow to load", verbatim, first of all... I merely make it load F A S T E R, via using a smaller + more efficient blocking IP address for sites that house objectionable material, or are KNOWN to hijack users via malicious script housed in them, or other bad behavior on their part... &amp; do YOU have a "clue about IT" or even a degree in it of any kind?
I'd like to see proof of YOUR "alleged expertise" in it.The HOSTS file does work for blocking out KNOWN BAD SITES or adbanners that slow you down (&amp; a user has EVERY RIGHT to do that, especially since lately adbanners have been shown to harbor malicious script in them.
In fact, there was a big article here on /.
about it -&gt; http://it.slashdot.org/story/09/06/15/2056219/The-Next-Ad-You-Click-May-Be-a-Virus [slashdot.org] so, so much for YOUR "know-how" in this art &amp; science...)APKP.S.=&gt; One day, you'll screwup here OR elsewhere online (since it is obvious you DO know me, &amp; aren't fooling anyone in that much by this point - you're doubtless another "arstechnica forums troll" (as Jeremy Reimer is even thought of as here -&gt;----"Anyway the "APK" registered here is just an affectionate clone of the original.
In fact I prefer him to the original.
" - Jeremy Reimer - March 25, 2005http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&amp;q=\%22OSY\%22+and+\%22affectionate+clone\%22+and+\%22Reimer\%22&amp;btnG=Search [google.com]----He's the "main perpetrator" of much of it, &amp; is KNOWN for it... &amp; they eventually showed their face here in THIS VERY THREAD -&gt; http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1300193&amp;cid=28678549 [slashdot.org] [slashdot.org] and I do NOT take kindly to being impersonated or libelled either.
Nobody does.
(Giving themselves away, &amp; you are doubtless just another one of them - LOL, "you don't know me", b.s.
-&gt; You could not have turned up that much in that short a time, &amp; it is obvious you have been following me around because over @ the New Tech?
The forums there is SO SLOW, you'd have to have done that)Folks here even call JEREMY REIMER a troll -&gt;  http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1273561&amp;threshold=-1&amp;commentsort=0&amp;mode=thread&amp;pid=28382013 [slashdot.org]Again - so much for your "evidences"... &amp; it is clear you are just another "arstechnica loser" or THOR SCHMUCK himself... and I will know who YOU are - then, we'll see how you like being libelled as you have now done to myself... because I won't use falsehoods as you have done to myself here... apk
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673669</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671187</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247405520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm tired of Microsoft so Windows XP 64-bit is the last Windows I'll use.  Been running Ubuntu on my home desktop and Fedora on my work laptop (at large corporation) for months now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm tired of Microsoft so Windows XP 64-bit is the last Windows I 'll use .
Been running Ubuntu on my home desktop and Fedora on my work laptop ( at large corporation ) for months now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm tired of Microsoft so Windows XP 64-bit is the last Windows I'll use.
Been running Ubuntu on my home desktop and Fedora on my work laptop (at large corporation) for months now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672067</id>
	<title>Re:OK, Since this is a non-event...</title>
	<author>westlake</author>
	<datestamp>1247413980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Vista didn't cause a switch away from Windows, only down to XP</i> </p><p>Even in the W3Schools stats Vista holds about a 20\% share. Net Applications 25\%.</p><p>The "downgrade" to XP did not happen in the consumer market.</p><p><i>Netbooks: hardware is getting cheaper and cheaper. WIll this cause people to switch to Linux (it's a $50 - $100 savings on a $200 computer)?</i> </p><p>The Atom netbook running XP drop-kicked Linux into the dumpster. On Price. On Specs. XP was the clear winner.</p><p>There are enormous economies of scale in producing for the Windows market - the price <b>always</b> comes down and the specs <b>always</b> look better.</p><p>The OEM Linux PC has little or no visibility at mid-line and higher. That's true even if the recession has you shopping for the WalMart price. It anchors Linux's reputation as the odd man out  - the bottom-feeder - in the consumer market. </p><p>There may be tens of thousands of programs in your distro's repository. The problem is that no one but a geek knows what they are.</p><p>But talk to a gamer about classics like Fallout and his eyes will light up. Fallout is a $5 download from Gog.com. Ready to run on Vista and Win 7.</p><p>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Vista did n't cause a switch away from Windows , only down to XP Even in the W3Schools stats Vista holds about a 20 \ % share .
Net Applications 25 \ % .The " downgrade " to XP did not happen in the consumer market.Netbooks : hardware is getting cheaper and cheaper .
WIll this cause people to switch to Linux ( it 's a $ 50 - $ 100 savings on a $ 200 computer ) ?
The Atom netbook running XP drop-kicked Linux into the dumpster .
On Price .
On Specs .
XP was the clear winner.There are enormous economies of scale in producing for the Windows market - the price always comes down and the specs always look better.The OEM Linux PC has little or no visibility at mid-line and higher .
That 's true even if the recession has you shopping for the WalMart price .
It anchors Linux 's reputation as the odd man out - the bottom-feeder - in the consumer market .
There may be tens of thousands of programs in your distro 's repository .
The problem is that no one but a geek knows what they are.But talk to a gamer about classics like Fallout and his eyes will light up .
Fallout is a $ 5 download from Gog.com .
Ready to run on Vista and Win 7 .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Vista didn't cause a switch away from Windows, only down to XP Even in the W3Schools stats Vista holds about a 20\% share.
Net Applications 25\%.The "downgrade" to XP did not happen in the consumer market.Netbooks: hardware is getting cheaper and cheaper.
WIll this cause people to switch to Linux (it's a $50 - $100 savings on a $200 computer)?
The Atom netbook running XP drop-kicked Linux into the dumpster.
On Price.
On Specs.
XP was the clear winner.There are enormous economies of scale in producing for the Windows market - the price always comes down and the specs always look better.The OEM Linux PC has little or no visibility at mid-line and higher.
That's true even if the recession has you shopping for the WalMart price.
It anchors Linux's reputation as the odd man out  - the bottom-feeder - in the consumer market.
There may be tens of thousands of programs in your distro's repository.
The problem is that no one but a geek knows what they are.But talk to a gamer about classics like Fallout and his eyes will light up.
Fallout is a $5 download from Gog.com.
Ready to run on Vista and Win 7.
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670827</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671755</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>BikeHelmet</author>
	<datestamp>1247410740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Probably the most useful new feature is the Linux-like window manager shortcuts, so you can maximise, snap to left/right of the screen etc. I've been using these in KDE for donkey's years.</p></div><p>Sold!</p><p>Ever since I discovered that feature in Trillian years and years ago, I've been addicted to it. Honestly, Linux has the best window snapping action (and window placement) I've ever seen - if they can match that, it'll be a huge breakthrough over just placing everything on top of whatever is already onscreen.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Probably the most useful new feature is the Linux-like window manager shortcuts , so you can maximise , snap to left/right of the screen etc .
I 've been using these in KDE for donkey 's years.Sold ! Ever since I discovered that feature in Trillian years and years ago , I 've been addicted to it .
Honestly , Linux has the best window snapping action ( and window placement ) I 've ever seen - if they can match that , it 'll be a huge breakthrough over just placing everything on top of whatever is already onscreen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Probably the most useful new feature is the Linux-like window manager shortcuts, so you can maximise, snap to left/right of the screen etc.
I've been using these in KDE for donkey's years.Sold!Ever since I discovered that feature in Trillian years and years ago, I've been addicted to it.
Honestly, Linux has the best window snapping action (and window placement) I've ever seen - if they can match that, it'll be a huge breakthrough over just placing everything on top of whatever is already onscreen.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671863</id>
	<title>Patch notes</title>
	<author>Veggiesama</author>
	<datestamp>1247411940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm using Build 7100 RC1, but I've seen other leaked versions pop up on TPB and Slashdot.</p><p>Anyone have a good idea of what has changed since the release candidate? Any big features or bugfixes I should be expecting for the final release?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm using Build 7100 RC1 , but I 've seen other leaked versions pop up on TPB and Slashdot.Anyone have a good idea of what has changed since the release candidate ?
Any big features or bugfixes I should be expecting for the final release ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm using Build 7100 RC1, but I've seen other leaked versions pop up on TPB and Slashdot.Anyone have a good idea of what has changed since the release candidate?
Any big features or bugfixes I should be expecting for the final release?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672827</id>
	<title>there is always something to improve</title>
	<author>sophialxw</author>
	<datestamp>1247422920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So many versions of Windows one by one, I saw Windows 7 on friend's PC, I like the interface,but my PC is old and maybe have to buy a new one if to run Windows 7.
<a href="http://www.lifting-anchor.com/" title="lifting-anchor.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.lifting-anchor.com/</a> [lifting-anchor.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>So many versions of Windows one by one , I saw Windows 7 on friend 's PC , I like the interface,but my PC is old and maybe have to buy a new one if to run Windows 7 . http : //www.lifting-anchor.com/ [ lifting-anchor.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So many versions of Windows one by one, I saw Windows 7 on friend's PC, I like the interface,but my PC is old and maybe have to buy a new one if to run Windows 7.
http://www.lifting-anchor.com/ [lifting-anchor.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28737131</id>
	<title>Why you won't reply to apk now is obvious</title>
	<author>MEK\_LoveBug</author>
	<datestamp>1247839020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The true anonymous coward here is not apk. The true anonymous coward refuses to reply because apk disproved all of his malarky point by point. The ac that modded apk down is clearly either this Thor Schrock character, or the arstechnica people (jeremy reimer) and as kings jowker said, apk told some truths about this material that has certain parties living in fear of it. Especially hosts files blocking the ad banners they make a living off of others with and that infects people with viruses by using malicious script in the ad banner content that was reported here at slashdot. apk illustrated evidences from others who are in the security realm in this science like Mr. Oliver Day of securityfocus.com even notes he surfs faster through the use of a custom hosts file and that it is useful for security purposes as well. As kingsjowker said, keep up the good work apk, despite the trolls from arstechnica and the obviously technically incompetent such as Thor Schmuck/Shrock also who try to give you a tough time here in trolling you but only fail because the sock puppet account mod up will only show others like myself what the truth is here, and especially after reading this where apk took every false misleading point the true anonymous coward (not apk) stated and put up documented and verifiable evidences to the contrary. Especially the words of Oliver Day and those of Jeremy Reimer from arstechnica showing his own words admitting the arstechnica people have impersonated you online. What a pack of losers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The true anonymous coward here is not apk .
The true anonymous coward refuses to reply because apk disproved all of his malarky point by point .
The ac that modded apk down is clearly either this Thor Schrock character , or the arstechnica people ( jeremy reimer ) and as kings jowker said , apk told some truths about this material that has certain parties living in fear of it .
Especially hosts files blocking the ad banners they make a living off of others with and that infects people with viruses by using malicious script in the ad banner content that was reported here at slashdot .
apk illustrated evidences from others who are in the security realm in this science like Mr. Oliver Day of securityfocus.com even notes he surfs faster through the use of a custom hosts file and that it is useful for security purposes as well .
As kingsjowker said , keep up the good work apk , despite the trolls from arstechnica and the obviously technically incompetent such as Thor Schmuck/Shrock also who try to give you a tough time here in trolling you but only fail because the sock puppet account mod up will only show others like myself what the truth is here , and especially after reading this where apk took every false misleading point the true anonymous coward ( not apk ) stated and put up documented and verifiable evidences to the contrary .
Especially the words of Oliver Day and those of Jeremy Reimer from arstechnica showing his own words admitting the arstechnica people have impersonated you online .
What a pack of losers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The true anonymous coward here is not apk.
The true anonymous coward refuses to reply because apk disproved all of his malarky point by point.
The ac that modded apk down is clearly either this Thor Schrock character, or the arstechnica people (jeremy reimer) and as kings jowker said, apk told some truths about this material that has certain parties living in fear of it.
Especially hosts files blocking the ad banners they make a living off of others with and that infects people with viruses by using malicious script in the ad banner content that was reported here at slashdot.
apk illustrated evidences from others who are in the security realm in this science like Mr. Oliver Day of securityfocus.com even notes he surfs faster through the use of a custom hosts file and that it is useful for security purposes as well.
As kingsjowker said, keep up the good work apk, despite the trolls from arstechnica and the obviously technically incompetent such as Thor Schmuck/Shrock also who try to give you a tough time here in trolling you but only fail because the sock puppet account mod up will only show others like myself what the truth is here, and especially after reading this where apk took every false misleading point the true anonymous coward (not apk) stated and put up documented and verifiable evidences to the contrary.
Especially the words of Oliver Day and those of Jeremy Reimer from arstechnica showing his own words admitting the arstechnica people have impersonated you online.
What a pack of losers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673669</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28676379</id>
	<title>Re:OK, Since this is a non-event...</title>
	<author>sootman</author>
	<datestamp>1247500440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I think OS X will only really beat MS if either A) Apple releases -cheap- computers or B) Licenses it out to other OEMs that make cheap computers.</i></p><p>For the one hundred hojillionth time... APPLE DOESN'T WANT TO BEAT MS! I mean, sure, if they "won" they'd be happy, but they are RIDICULOUSLY PROFITABLE RIGHT NOW and they don't need to change. Look at who "won"* in the PC world: HP, Dell, Compaq--you think Apple wants to be involved in that race to the bottom? (Let alone "win"?) Apple is a LUXURY BRAND. Do you think BMW execs lie awake at night worried that they aren't selling as many cars as Toyota?</p><p>Here's just one example of how well Apple is doing, and this is from 2006, before the iPhone even existed: "Apple's [retail] stores have hauled in annual sales per square foot of $4,032, compared with Best Buy's $930, Neiman Marcus' $611, and luxury store Tiffany &amp; Co.'s $2,666." (The original article is gone but there are many reports about it.)</p><p><i>I can't see people flocking over to Apple when PC hardware is dirt cheap.</i></p><p>HAHAHAHA! DUDE! Wake up! The answer is right in front of you. GO TO A DAMN APPLE STORE and start asking questions of customers! Never mind, Apple probably won't like that, but hint: you don't even have to bother. Just sit outside and watch how many people walk out with large boxes. THERE'S YOUR ANSWER! Just because "OMG TEH ECONOMY IS CRASHING!!!111" doesn't mean NO ONE has money. And many that do are willing to pay for a GOOD computing experience.</p><p>In other words: Apple is doing just fine, WITHOUT your "advice".</p><p>Also: Apple supporting other OEMs would KILL their profitability. Do you know why you can install ANY version of OS X on ANY supported Mac and EVERYTHING that came with the machine--video, networking, sound, wireless, etc.--all work without installing a SINGLE driver? Because Apple controls the hardware and they can include everything. Do you think they WANT to start testing a million other kinds of (cheap, variable-quality) hardware? HELL NO!</p><p>If I had almost no money, and my Mac laptop died, I'd quit eating out for a year if that's what it took to replace it with a Mac instead of a PC. OS X is THAT GOOD, and Windows is THAT BAD. To me**, anyway, and that's all that matters.</p><p>* besides MS, which doesn't make PC systems, so it's not quite a (you'll pardon the expression) apples-to-apples comparison.</p><p>** and to the millions of people who buy Apple computers every year. And that's all Apple needs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think OS X will only really beat MS if either A ) Apple releases -cheap- computers or B ) Licenses it out to other OEMs that make cheap computers.For the one hundred hojillionth time... APPLE DOES N'T WANT TO BEAT MS !
I mean , sure , if they " won " they 'd be happy , but they are RIDICULOUSLY PROFITABLE RIGHT NOW and they do n't need to change .
Look at who " won " * in the PC world : HP , Dell , Compaq--you think Apple wants to be involved in that race to the bottom ?
( Let alone " win " ?
) Apple is a LUXURY BRAND .
Do you think BMW execs lie awake at night worried that they are n't selling as many cars as Toyota ? Here 's just one example of how well Apple is doing , and this is from 2006 , before the iPhone even existed : " Apple 's [ retail ] stores have hauled in annual sales per square foot of $ 4,032 , compared with Best Buy 's $ 930 , Neiman Marcus ' $ 611 , and luxury store Tiffany &amp; Co. 's $ 2,666 .
" ( The original article is gone but there are many reports about it .
) I ca n't see people flocking over to Apple when PC hardware is dirt cheap.HAHAHAHA !
DUDE ! Wake up !
The answer is right in front of you .
GO TO A DAMN APPLE STORE and start asking questions of customers !
Never mind , Apple probably wo n't like that , but hint : you do n't even have to bother .
Just sit outside and watch how many people walk out with large boxes .
THERE 'S YOUR ANSWER !
Just because " OMG TEH ECONOMY IS CRASHING ! !
! 111 " does n't mean NO ONE has money .
And many that do are willing to pay for a GOOD computing experience.In other words : Apple is doing just fine , WITHOUT your " advice " .Also : Apple supporting other OEMs would KILL their profitability .
Do you know why you can install ANY version of OS X on ANY supported Mac and EVERYTHING that came with the machine--video , networking , sound , wireless , etc.--all work without installing a SINGLE driver ?
Because Apple controls the hardware and they can include everything .
Do you think they WANT to start testing a million other kinds of ( cheap , variable-quality ) hardware ?
HELL NO ! If I had almost no money , and my Mac laptop died , I 'd quit eating out for a year if that 's what it took to replace it with a Mac instead of a PC .
OS X is THAT GOOD , and Windows is THAT BAD .
To me * * , anyway , and that 's all that matters .
* besides MS , which does n't make PC systems , so it 's not quite a ( you 'll pardon the expression ) apples-to-apples comparison .
* * and to the millions of people who buy Apple computers every year .
And that 's all Apple needs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think OS X will only really beat MS if either A) Apple releases -cheap- computers or B) Licenses it out to other OEMs that make cheap computers.For the one hundred hojillionth time... APPLE DOESN'T WANT TO BEAT MS!
I mean, sure, if they "won" they'd be happy, but they are RIDICULOUSLY PROFITABLE RIGHT NOW and they don't need to change.
Look at who "won"* in the PC world: HP, Dell, Compaq--you think Apple wants to be involved in that race to the bottom?
(Let alone "win"?
) Apple is a LUXURY BRAND.
Do you think BMW execs lie awake at night worried that they aren't selling as many cars as Toyota?Here's just one example of how well Apple is doing, and this is from 2006, before the iPhone even existed: "Apple's [retail] stores have hauled in annual sales per square foot of $4,032, compared with Best Buy's $930, Neiman Marcus' $611, and luxury store Tiffany &amp; Co.'s $2,666.
" (The original article is gone but there are many reports about it.
)I can't see people flocking over to Apple when PC hardware is dirt cheap.HAHAHAHA!
DUDE! Wake up!
The answer is right in front of you.
GO TO A DAMN APPLE STORE and start asking questions of customers!
Never mind, Apple probably won't like that, but hint: you don't even have to bother.
Just sit outside and watch how many people walk out with large boxes.
THERE'S YOUR ANSWER!
Just because "OMG TEH ECONOMY IS CRASHING!!
!111" doesn't mean NO ONE has money.
And many that do are willing to pay for a GOOD computing experience.In other words: Apple is doing just fine, WITHOUT your "advice".Also: Apple supporting other OEMs would KILL their profitability.
Do you know why you can install ANY version of OS X on ANY supported Mac and EVERYTHING that came with the machine--video, networking, sound, wireless, etc.--all work without installing a SINGLE driver?
Because Apple controls the hardware and they can include everything.
Do you think they WANT to start testing a million other kinds of (cheap, variable-quality) hardware?
HELL NO!If I had almost no money, and my Mac laptop died, I'd quit eating out for a year if that's what it took to replace it with a Mac instead of a PC.
OS X is THAT GOOD, and Windows is THAT BAD.
To me**, anyway, and that's all that matters.
* besides MS, which doesn't make PC systems, so it's not quite a (you'll pardon the expression) apples-to-apples comparison.
** and to the millions of people who buy Apple computers every year.
And that's all Apple needs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671049</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28699151</id>
	<title>Re:Windows 7 makes me excited</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247584260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>May or maynot be true. However, let me tell you a Real World Experience. (TM)</p><p>Amongst other things, I am in charge of 50+ PC's in our organisation. Back in the day they were all XPSP3. When Vista came out, we converted 5 of them and let some of our more experienced user use them. Dis-fucking-aster. Vista was slow, buggy and just far too many rough edges. Switched them to Server2003 (yep, on the desktop).</p><p>When Widows 7 came out, we repeated the exercise. Much, much better. Still some apps that wouldn't install and / or run, but remarkably better.</p><p>So far just the usual Windows fanboi stuff? No.... Currently we are running ALL the PC's on Ubuntu 8.04 LTS, with Windows Server2003 as virtual machines for those staff members who need it. Windows 7 is nice... but frankly, we cannot see the point. U8.04 does the job. And the interesting thing was the number of staff members who asked me to REMOVE the Server2003 VM... because they never use it.</p><p>So yes, if you are a Windows person, then Windows 7 is most definitely better than Vista. It is not, IMHO, better than a customised version of Server2003.</p><p>But for peace of mind and unstressed computing, Ubuntu does the job.</p><p>$0.02</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>May or maynot be true .
However , let me tell you a Real World Experience .
( TM ) Amongst other things , I am in charge of 50 + PC 's in our organisation .
Back in the day they were all XPSP3 .
When Vista came out , we converted 5 of them and let some of our more experienced user use them .
Dis-fucking-aster. Vista was slow , buggy and just far too many rough edges .
Switched them to Server2003 ( yep , on the desktop ) .When Widows 7 came out , we repeated the exercise .
Much , much better .
Still some apps that would n't install and / or run , but remarkably better.So far just the usual Windows fanboi stuff ?
No.... Currently we are running ALL the PC 's on Ubuntu 8.04 LTS , with Windows Server2003 as virtual machines for those staff members who need it .
Windows 7 is nice... but frankly , we can not see the point .
U8.04 does the job .
And the interesting thing was the number of staff members who asked me to REMOVE the Server2003 VM... because they never use it.So yes , if you are a Windows person , then Windows 7 is most definitely better than Vista .
It is not , IMHO , better than a customised version of Server2003.But for peace of mind and unstressed computing , Ubuntu does the job. $ 0.02</tokentext>
<sentencetext>May or maynot be true.
However, let me tell you a Real World Experience.
(TM)Amongst other things, I am in charge of 50+ PC's in our organisation.
Back in the day they were all XPSP3.
When Vista came out, we converted 5 of them and let some of our more experienced user use them.
Dis-fucking-aster. Vista was slow, buggy and just far too many rough edges.
Switched them to Server2003 (yep, on the desktop).When Widows 7 came out, we repeated the exercise.
Much, much better.
Still some apps that wouldn't install and / or run, but remarkably better.So far just the usual Windows fanboi stuff?
No.... Currently we are running ALL the PC's on Ubuntu 8.04 LTS, with Windows Server2003 as virtual machines for those staff members who need it.
Windows 7 is nice... but frankly, we cannot see the point.
U8.04 does the job.
And the interesting thing was the number of staff members who asked me to REMOVE the Server2003 VM... because they never use it.So yes, if you are a Windows person, then Windows 7 is most definitely better than Vista.
It is not, IMHO, better than a customised version of Server2003.But for peace of mind and unstressed computing, Ubuntu does the job.$0.02</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671085</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670827</id>
	<title>OK, Since this is a non-event...</title>
	<author>phantomfive</author>
	<datestamp>1247402160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have a question I've been trying to figure out.  What exactly is going to be the effect of Windows 7?  I think there are a few issues, but I haven't been able to come to a clear conclusion.  There are a few issues:<br> <br>
* Windows 7 is like Vista, except without as many obvious bad things.<br>
* If Microsoft writes it, people will put it on their systems.  OK, Vista showed that's not entirely true, but it didn't cause a switch away from Windows, only down to XP.  So, will people begin to switch away from Microsoft, or move on to Windows 7?  All it has to do is be no more annoying than XP.<br>
* Netbooks: hardware is getting cheaper and cheaper.  WIll this cause people to switch to Linux (it's a $50 - $100 savings on a $200 computer)?<br>
* Apple: OSX keeps getting better and better. Will they make enough improvement that people want to switch away from Microsoft?<br> <br>
I don't really know the answers to these issues, but I've been trying to figure out.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a question I 've been trying to figure out .
What exactly is going to be the effect of Windows 7 ?
I think there are a few issues , but I have n't been able to come to a clear conclusion .
There are a few issues : * Windows 7 is like Vista , except without as many obvious bad things .
* If Microsoft writes it , people will put it on their systems .
OK , Vista showed that 's not entirely true , but it did n't cause a switch away from Windows , only down to XP .
So , will people begin to switch away from Microsoft , or move on to Windows 7 ?
All it has to do is be no more annoying than XP .
* Netbooks : hardware is getting cheaper and cheaper .
WIll this cause people to switch to Linux ( it 's a $ 50 - $ 100 savings on a $ 200 computer ) ?
* Apple : OSX keeps getting better and better .
Will they make enough improvement that people want to switch away from Microsoft ?
I do n't really know the answers to these issues , but I 've been trying to figure out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a question I've been trying to figure out.
What exactly is going to be the effect of Windows 7?
I think there are a few issues, but I haven't been able to come to a clear conclusion.
There are a few issues: 
* Windows 7 is like Vista, except without as many obvious bad things.
* If Microsoft writes it, people will put it on their systems.
OK, Vista showed that's not entirely true, but it didn't cause a switch away from Windows, only down to XP.
So, will people begin to switch away from Microsoft, or move on to Windows 7?
All it has to do is be no more annoying than XP.
* Netbooks: hardware is getting cheaper and cheaper.
WIll this cause people to switch to Linux (it's a $50 - $100 savings on a $200 computer)?
* Apple: OSX keeps getting better and better.
Will they make enough improvement that people want to switch away from Microsoft?
I don't really know the answers to these issues, but I've been trying to figure out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673629</id>
	<title>Re:OK, Since this is a non-event...</title>
	<author>AmiMoJo</author>
	<datestamp>1247478660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple seems to be trying to convert Windows users by installing OSX on their PCs. Think about it - you get an iPod/iPhone, install iTunes and you get Quicktime, Apple Software Update, Bonjour, iPod Services and are offered Safari. All you need is an OSX skin and your PC is practically a Mac!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple seems to be trying to convert Windows users by installing OSX on their PCs .
Think about it - you get an iPod/iPhone , install iTunes and you get Quicktime , Apple Software Update , Bonjour , iPod Services and are offered Safari .
All you need is an OSX skin and your PC is practically a Mac !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple seems to be trying to convert Windows users by installing OSX on their PCs.
Think about it - you get an iPod/iPhone, install iTunes and you get Quicktime, Apple Software Update, Bonjour, iPod Services and are offered Safari.
All you need is an OSX skin and your PC is practically a Mac!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671049</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671047</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247404080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Absolutely, I'm gonna play that game. I hated Vista, skipped it after trying it for a week, and now that I've tried Windows 7 I'm convinced of moving away from XP.</p><p>Everything works (very few apps need to enable "compatability mode"), and it's generally more useable and, well, just pretty, than XP. Plus, 64-bit, and other neat stuff in the UI.</p><p>I'm sure W7 is gonna be a big thing, it's been years(decades? Win95) since I've actually been looking forward to a Microsoft new OS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Absolutely , I 'm gon na play that game .
I hated Vista , skipped it after trying it for a week , and now that I 've tried Windows 7 I 'm convinced of moving away from XP.Everything works ( very few apps need to enable " compatability mode " ) , and it 's generally more useable and , well , just pretty , than XP .
Plus , 64-bit , and other neat stuff in the UI.I 'm sure W7 is gon na be a big thing , it 's been years ( decades ?
Win95 ) since I 've actually been looking forward to a Microsoft new OS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Absolutely, I'm gonna play that game.
I hated Vista, skipped it after trying it for a week, and now that I've tried Windows 7 I'm convinced of moving away from XP.Everything works (very few apps need to enable "compatability mode"), and it's generally more useable and, well, just pretty, than XP.
Plus, 64-bit, and other neat stuff in the UI.I'm sure W7 is gonna be a big thing, it's been years(decades?
Win95) since I've actually been looking forward to a Microsoft new OS.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28675109</id>
	<title>File extensions</title>
	<author>Lodewijk</author>
	<datestamp>1247494560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Will Window 7 be able to show file extensions out of the box? Or will it keep on tricking its users to install spyware?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Will Window 7 be able to show file extensions out of the box ?
Or will it keep on tricking its users to install spyware ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Will Window 7 be able to show file extensions out of the box?
Or will it keep on tricking its users to install spyware?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672687</id>
	<title>Re:Windows 7 makes me excited</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247421000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Also, 9/11 was an inside job and we never landed on the moon.</p><p>Do you really think a couple hundred Microsoft shills could carry more weight than millions of slashdot readers?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Also , 9/11 was an inside job and we never landed on the moon.Do you really think a couple hundred Microsoft shills could carry more weight than millions of slashdot readers ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also, 9/11 was an inside job and we never landed on the moon.Do you really think a couple hundred Microsoft shills could carry more weight than millions of slashdot readers?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671085</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671431</id>
	<title>apple shuold have thinker systems and not higher p</title>
	<author>Joe The Dragon</author>
	<datestamp>1247408040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>apple should have thinker systems and not higher pried thin system come on the older imacs had real video card now most of them have 9400m at with laptop dual cores at prices where you can get a desktop core i7 systems with much better video cards at the same price levels.</p><p>And PEOPLE WANT MATE Displays, Not have cpu power tied to screen size, easy to get HD come on the dell and others AIO have at where it is very easy to get to the HD, and whats up with mini DP and no free mini dp to DP and mini dp to dvi cable?</p><p>The mac video cards should of had a full size DP port with a free DP to mini dp cable as well maybe even 2 DP ports with a free DP to DVI DL cable and DP to mini DP.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>apple should have thinker systems and not higher pried thin system come on the older imacs had real video card now most of them have 9400m at with laptop dual cores at prices where you can get a desktop core i7 systems with much better video cards at the same price levels.And PEOPLE WANT MATE Displays , Not have cpu power tied to screen size , easy to get HD come on the dell and others AIO have at where it is very easy to get to the HD , and whats up with mini DP and no free mini dp to DP and mini dp to dvi cable ? The mac video cards should of had a full size DP port with a free DP to mini dp cable as well maybe even 2 DP ports with a free DP to DVI DL cable and DP to mini DP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>apple should have thinker systems and not higher pried thin system come on the older imacs had real video card now most of them have 9400m at with laptop dual cores at prices where you can get a desktop core i7 systems with much better video cards at the same price levels.And PEOPLE WANT MATE Displays, Not have cpu power tied to screen size, easy to get HD come on the dell and others AIO have at where it is very easy to get to the HD, and whats up with mini DP and no free mini dp to DP and mini dp to dvi cable?The mac video cards should of had a full size DP port with a free DP to mini dp cable as well maybe even 2 DP ports with a free DP to DVI DL cable and DP to mini DP.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671049</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671613</id>
	<title>I plan to install it</title>
	<author>msobkow</author>
	<datestamp>1247409360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
I plan to purchase a copy and install it, having skipped Vista as I didn't have "Vista capable" hardware for the past couple of years.  The old WinXP box just kept chugging along, and I didn't really "need" to upgrade.  But with XP getting a little long in the tooth and Microsoft dropping free support/patches for XP in a year or so, it's time to "invest" again.
</p><p>
However, I'll be upgrading my CPU (P4 3.8 GHz) before I consider springing money on Windows 7.  What I might do is buy the upgraded CPU and Windows 7 at the same time so I can get an OEM edition instead of wasting money on a retail version.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I plan to purchase a copy and install it , having skipped Vista as I did n't have " Vista capable " hardware for the past couple of years .
The old WinXP box just kept chugging along , and I did n't really " need " to upgrade .
But with XP getting a little long in the tooth and Microsoft dropping free support/patches for XP in a year or so , it 's time to " invest " again .
However , I 'll be upgrading my CPU ( P4 3.8 GHz ) before I consider springing money on Windows 7 .
What I might do is buy the upgraded CPU and Windows 7 at the same time so I can get an OEM edition instead of wasting money on a retail version .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
I plan to purchase a copy and install it, having skipped Vista as I didn't have "Vista capable" hardware for the past couple of years.
The old WinXP box just kept chugging along, and I didn't really "need" to upgrade.
But with XP getting a little long in the tooth and Microsoft dropping free support/patches for XP in a year or so, it's time to "invest" again.
However, I'll be upgrading my CPU (P4 3.8 GHz) before I consider springing money on Windows 7.
What I might do is buy the upgraded CPU and Windows 7 at the same time so I can get an OEM edition instead of wasting money on a retail version.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670827</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671983</id>
	<title>Windows 7, VISTA, &amp; Server 2k8 have 2 problems</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247413200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Windows 7, VISTA, &amp; Server 2008 have a couple of "issues" I don't like in them, &amp; you may not either, depending on your point of view (mine's based solely on efficiency &amp; security):</p><p> <b>1.) HOSTS files being unable to use "0" for a blocking IP address</b> - this started in 12/09/2008 after an "MS Patch Tuesday" in fact for VISTA (when it had NO problem using it before that, as Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 still can)... &amp; yes, this continues in its descendants, Windows Server 2008 &amp;/or Windows 7 as well.</p><p> <b>So, why is this a "problem" you might ask?</b> </p><p>Ok - since you can technically use either:</p><p>a.) 127.0.0.1 (the "loopback adapter address")<br>b.) 0.0.0.0 (next smallest &amp; next most efficient)<br>c.) The smallest &amp; fastest plain-jane 0</p><p>PER EACH HOSTS FILE ENTRY/RECORD...</p><p>You can use ANY of those, in order to block out known bad sites &amp;/or adbanners in a HOSTS file this way??</p><p> <b>Microsoft has "promoted bloat" in doing so... no questions asked.</b> </p><p> <b>Simply because</b> </p><p> <b>1.) 127.0.0.1 = 9 bytes in size on disk &amp; is the largest/slowest<br>2.) 0.0.0.0 = 7 bytes &amp; is the next largest/slowest in size on disk<br>3.) 0 = 1 byte</b> </p><p>(&amp; HOSTS files extend across EVERY webbrowser, email program, or in general every webbound program you use &amp; thus HOSTS are "global" in coverage this way AND function on any OS that uses the BSD derived IP stack (which most all do mind you, even MS is based off of it, as BSD's IS truly, "the best in the business"), &amp; when coupled with say, IE restricted zones, FireFox addons like NoScript &amp;/or AdBlock, or Opera filter.ini/urlfilter.ini, for layered security in this capacity for webbrowsers &amp; SOME email programs (here, I mean ones "built into" browsers themselves like Opera has for example))</p><p>MS has literally promoted bloat in this file, making it load slower from disk, into memory! This compounds itself, the more entries your HOSTS file contains... &amp; for instance? Mine currently contains nearly 654,000 entries of known bad adbanners, bad websites, &amp;/or bad nameservers (used for controlling botnets, misdirecting net requests, etc. et al).</p><p>Now, IF I were to use 127.0.0.1? My "huge" HOSTS file would be approximately 27mb in size... using 0.0.0.0 (next smallest) it would be 19mb in size - HOWEVER? Using 0 as my blocking IP, it is only 14mb in size. See my point?</p><p>(For loads either in the local DNS cache, or system diskcache if you run w/out the local DNS client service running, this gets slower the larger each HOSTS file entry is (which you have to stall the DNS client service in Windows for larger ones, especially if you use a "giant HOSTS file" (purely relative term, but once it goes over (iirc) 4mb in size, you have to cut the local DNS cache client service)))</p><p>NO questions asked - <b>the physics of it backed me up in theory alone, but when I was questioned on it for PROOF thereof?</b> </p><p> <b>I wrote a small test program to load such a list into a "pascal record"</b> (which is analagous to a C/C++ structure), <b>which is EXACTLY what the DNS client/DNS API does as well, using a C/C++ structure</b> (basically an array of sorts really, &amp; a structure/record is a precursor part to a full-blown CLASS or OBJECT, minus the functions built in, this is for treating numerous variables as a SINGLE VARIABLE (for efficiency, which FORTRAN as a single example, lacks as a feature, @ least Fortran 77 did, but other languages do not))!</p><p>I even wrote another that just loaded my HOSTS file's entirety into a listbox, same results... slowest using 127.0.0.1, next slowest using 0.0.0.0, &amp; fastest using 0.</p><p>And, sure: Some MORE "goes on" during DNS API loads (iirc, removal of duplicated entries (which I made sure my personal copy does not have these via a program I wrote to purge it of duplicated entries + to sort each entry alphabetically for easier mgt. via say, notepad.exe) &amp; a conversion from decimal values to hex ones), but, nevertheless? My point</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows 7 , VISTA , &amp; Server 2008 have a couple of " issues " I do n't like in them , &amp; you may not either , depending on your point of view ( mine 's based solely on efficiency &amp; security ) : 1 .
) HOSTS files being unable to use " 0 " for a blocking IP address - this started in 12/09/2008 after an " MS Patch Tuesday " in fact for VISTA ( when it had NO problem using it before that , as Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 still can ) ... &amp; yes , this continues in its descendants , Windows Server 2008 &amp;/or Windows 7 as well .
So , why is this a " problem " you might ask ?
Ok - since you can technically use either : a .
) 127.0.0.1 ( the " loopback adapter address " ) b .
) 0.0.0.0 ( next smallest &amp; next most efficient ) c. ) The smallest &amp; fastest plain-jane 0PER EACH HOSTS FILE ENTRY/RECORD...You can use ANY of those , in order to block out known bad sites &amp;/or adbanners in a HOSTS file this way ? ?
Microsoft has " promoted bloat " in doing so... no questions asked .
Simply because 1 .
) 127.0.0.1 = 9 bytes in size on disk &amp; is the largest/slowest2 .
) 0.0.0.0 = 7 bytes &amp; is the next largest/slowest in size on disk3 .
) 0 = 1 byte ( &amp; HOSTS files extend across EVERY webbrowser , email program , or in general every webbound program you use &amp; thus HOSTS are " global " in coverage this way AND function on any OS that uses the BSD derived IP stack ( which most all do mind you , even MS is based off of it , as BSD 's IS truly , " the best in the business " ) , &amp; when coupled with say , IE restricted zones , FireFox addons like NoScript &amp;/or AdBlock , or Opera filter.ini/urlfilter.ini , for layered security in this capacity for webbrowsers &amp; SOME email programs ( here , I mean ones " built into " browsers themselves like Opera has for example ) ) MS has literally promoted bloat in this file , making it load slower from disk , into memory !
This compounds itself , the more entries your HOSTS file contains... &amp; for instance ?
Mine currently contains nearly 654,000 entries of known bad adbanners , bad websites , &amp;/or bad nameservers ( used for controlling botnets , misdirecting net requests , etc .
et al ) .Now , IF I were to use 127.0.0.1 ?
My " huge " HOSTS file would be approximately 27mb in size... using 0.0.0.0 ( next smallest ) it would be 19mb in size - HOWEVER ?
Using 0 as my blocking IP , it is only 14mb in size .
See my point ?
( For loads either in the local DNS cache , or system diskcache if you run w/out the local DNS client service running , this gets slower the larger each HOSTS file entry is ( which you have to stall the DNS client service in Windows for larger ones , especially if you use a " giant HOSTS file " ( purely relative term , but once it goes over ( iirc ) 4mb in size , you have to cut the local DNS cache client service ) ) ) NO questions asked - the physics of it backed me up in theory alone , but when I was questioned on it for PROOF thereof ?
I wrote a small test program to load such a list into a " pascal record " ( which is analagous to a C/C + + structure ) , which is EXACTLY what the DNS client/DNS API does as well , using a C/C + + structure ( basically an array of sorts really , &amp; a structure/record is a precursor part to a full-blown CLASS or OBJECT , minus the functions built in , this is for treating numerous variables as a SINGLE VARIABLE ( for efficiency , which FORTRAN as a single example , lacks as a feature , @ least Fortran 77 did , but other languages do not ) ) ! I even wrote another that just loaded my HOSTS file 's entirety into a listbox , same results... slowest using 127.0.0.1 , next slowest using 0.0.0.0 , &amp; fastest using 0.And , sure : Some MORE " goes on " during DNS API loads ( iirc , removal of duplicated entries ( which I made sure my personal copy does not have these via a program I wrote to purge it of duplicated entries + to sort each entry alphabetically for easier mgt .
via say , notepad.exe ) &amp; a conversion from decimal values to hex ones ) , but , nevertheless ?
My point</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows 7, VISTA, &amp; Server 2008 have a couple of "issues" I don't like in them, &amp; you may not either, depending on your point of view (mine's based solely on efficiency &amp; security): 1.
) HOSTS files being unable to use "0" for a blocking IP address - this started in 12/09/2008 after an "MS Patch Tuesday" in fact for VISTA (when it had NO problem using it before that, as Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 still can)... &amp; yes, this continues in its descendants, Windows Server 2008 &amp;/or Windows 7 as well.
So, why is this a "problem" you might ask?
Ok - since you can technically use either:a.
) 127.0.0.1 (the "loopback adapter address")b.
) 0.0.0.0 (next smallest &amp; next most efficient)c.) The smallest &amp; fastest plain-jane 0PER EACH HOSTS FILE ENTRY/RECORD...You can use ANY of those, in order to block out known bad sites &amp;/or adbanners in a HOSTS file this way??
Microsoft has "promoted bloat" in doing so... no questions asked.
Simply because  1.
) 127.0.0.1 = 9 bytes in size on disk &amp; is the largest/slowest2.
) 0.0.0.0 = 7 bytes &amp; is the next largest/slowest in size on disk3.
) 0 = 1 byte (&amp; HOSTS files extend across EVERY webbrowser, email program, or in general every webbound program you use &amp; thus HOSTS are "global" in coverage this way AND function on any OS that uses the BSD derived IP stack (which most all do mind you, even MS is based off of it, as BSD's IS truly, "the best in the business"), &amp; when coupled with say, IE restricted zones, FireFox addons like NoScript &amp;/or AdBlock, or Opera filter.ini/urlfilter.ini, for layered security in this capacity for webbrowsers &amp; SOME email programs (here, I mean ones "built into" browsers themselves like Opera has for example))MS has literally promoted bloat in this file, making it load slower from disk, into memory!
This compounds itself, the more entries your HOSTS file contains... &amp; for instance?
Mine currently contains nearly 654,000 entries of known bad adbanners, bad websites, &amp;/or bad nameservers (used for controlling botnets, misdirecting net requests, etc.
et al).Now, IF I were to use 127.0.0.1?
My "huge" HOSTS file would be approximately 27mb in size... using 0.0.0.0 (next smallest) it would be 19mb in size - HOWEVER?
Using 0 as my blocking IP, it is only 14mb in size.
See my point?
(For loads either in the local DNS cache, or system diskcache if you run w/out the local DNS client service running, this gets slower the larger each HOSTS file entry is (which you have to stall the DNS client service in Windows for larger ones, especially if you use a "giant HOSTS file" (purely relative term, but once it goes over (iirc) 4mb in size, you have to cut the local DNS cache client service)))NO questions asked - the physics of it backed me up in theory alone, but when I was questioned on it for PROOF thereof?
I wrote a small test program to load such a list into a "pascal record" (which is analagous to a C/C++ structure), which is EXACTLY what the DNS client/DNS API does as well, using a C/C++ structure (basically an array of sorts really, &amp; a structure/record is a precursor part to a full-blown CLASS or OBJECT, minus the functions built in, this is for treating numerous variables as a SINGLE VARIABLE (for efficiency, which FORTRAN as a single example, lacks as a feature, @ least Fortran 77 did, but other languages do not))!I even wrote another that just loaded my HOSTS file's entirety into a listbox, same results... slowest using 127.0.0.1, next slowest using 0.0.0.0, &amp; fastest using 0.And, sure: Some MORE "goes on" during DNS API loads (iirc, removal of duplicated entries (which I made sure my personal copy does not have these via a program I wrote to purge it of duplicated entries + to sort each entry alphabetically for easier mgt.
via say, notepad.exe) &amp; a conversion from decimal values to hex ones), but, nevertheless?
My point</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673919</id>
	<title>webizm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247482320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>does windows7 has problem with usb devices?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>does windows7 has problem with usb devices ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>does windows7 has problem with usb devices?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28711077</id>
	<title>Re:I am going to take a chance on Windows 7</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247667120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is there a particular reason why you continually reference Windows 7 as "Windows 7.0"?  None of the windows versions (after 3.1 to the best of my knowledge) have a non-integer number as a name.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is there a particular reason why you continually reference Windows 7 as " Windows 7.0 " ?
None of the windows versions ( after 3.1 to the best of my knowledge ) have a non-integer number as a name .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is there a particular reason why you continually reference Windows 7 as "Windows 7.0"?
None of the windows versions (after 3.1 to the best of my knowledge) have a non-integer number as a name.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671437</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672343</id>
	<title>Re:Windows 7 makes me excited</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247416800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, I wholeheartedly agree about the shills and I react very adversely to them appearing in the forums I run. They are ridiculed and banned on the spot. We had some cocktail wiener named IE8Nate not long ago, extolling the virtues of Internet Explorer popping into a thread where people were having problems. Note that he wasn't offering any help, only correcting us for our misguided positions and offering those who want to know more, to contact him.</p><p>I've been a Linux user for a good 10 years, but in the past few years have gotten into PC games heavily. Unsatisfied with the content available for Linux (and needing titles like Call of Duty, 2, 3, 4, world at war etc. to play with my friends) I had to install Windows. XP, Vista and now I'm using Windows 7 x64 for all of my games.</p><p>While the scope of my Windows use is for goofing off and playing games (I'd never use it for anything important and in fact I feel crippled in that environment) I must say I'm impressed with Windows 7. It's certainly the nicest thing that Microsoft has ever extruded out their gaping sphincters.</p><p>It doesn't make me want to puke.</p><p>They've cleaned it up a lot since Vista. It's attractive, performs well, with fewer annoyances and seems relatively reliable. This is without getting it infected of course... we'll see how much fun it is then. Vista is a real treat to disinfect (I work on Windows systems... ever had to run multiple malware scans on a Vista 64 system with all the duplicated system files and junk? It almost doesn't pay.) and I would expect this one to be at least as bad. I feel it will be resistant to fixing and will result in a lot of clean installs, due to the lack of recovery mechanisms. There's repairing the boot loader, system restore and restoring the system from backup. You can operate on it to some extent with a BartPE based CD but it's not a fully compatible environment.</p><p>They probably won't need shills for this one when it gets on enough computers. I think people are going to be happy with Windows 7. I'll fork out the cash for it when it's released. (I'll probably buy an OEM Windows 7 Professional because I can't stand crippled network, policy and filesystem controls)</p><p>I wouldn't say I'm "excited" about it, but I'm basically swallowing my pride here saying I "like" something from Microsoft. However I've got to give credit where its due.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , I wholeheartedly agree about the shills and I react very adversely to them appearing in the forums I run .
They are ridiculed and banned on the spot .
We had some cocktail wiener named IE8Nate not long ago , extolling the virtues of Internet Explorer popping into a thread where people were having problems .
Note that he was n't offering any help , only correcting us for our misguided positions and offering those who want to know more , to contact him.I 've been a Linux user for a good 10 years , but in the past few years have gotten into PC games heavily .
Unsatisfied with the content available for Linux ( and needing titles like Call of Duty , 2 , 3 , 4 , world at war etc .
to play with my friends ) I had to install Windows .
XP , Vista and now I 'm using Windows 7 x64 for all of my games.While the scope of my Windows use is for goofing off and playing games ( I 'd never use it for anything important and in fact I feel crippled in that environment ) I must say I 'm impressed with Windows 7 .
It 's certainly the nicest thing that Microsoft has ever extruded out their gaping sphincters.It does n't make me want to puke.They 've cleaned it up a lot since Vista .
It 's attractive , performs well , with fewer annoyances and seems relatively reliable .
This is without getting it infected of course... we 'll see how much fun it is then .
Vista is a real treat to disinfect ( I work on Windows systems... ever had to run multiple malware scans on a Vista 64 system with all the duplicated system files and junk ?
It almost does n't pay .
) and I would expect this one to be at least as bad .
I feel it will be resistant to fixing and will result in a lot of clean installs , due to the lack of recovery mechanisms .
There 's repairing the boot loader , system restore and restoring the system from backup .
You can operate on it to some extent with a BartPE based CD but it 's not a fully compatible environment.They probably wo n't need shills for this one when it gets on enough computers .
I think people are going to be happy with Windows 7 .
I 'll fork out the cash for it when it 's released .
( I 'll probably buy an OEM Windows 7 Professional because I ca n't stand crippled network , policy and filesystem controls ) I would n't say I 'm " excited " about it , but I 'm basically swallowing my pride here saying I " like " something from Microsoft .
However I 've got to give credit where its due .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, I wholeheartedly agree about the shills and I react very adversely to them appearing in the forums I run.
They are ridiculed and banned on the spot.
We had some cocktail wiener named IE8Nate not long ago, extolling the virtues of Internet Explorer popping into a thread where people were having problems.
Note that he wasn't offering any help, only correcting us for our misguided positions and offering those who want to know more, to contact him.I've been a Linux user for a good 10 years, but in the past few years have gotten into PC games heavily.
Unsatisfied with the content available for Linux (and needing titles like Call of Duty, 2, 3, 4, world at war etc.
to play with my friends) I had to install Windows.
XP, Vista and now I'm using Windows 7 x64 for all of my games.While the scope of my Windows use is for goofing off and playing games (I'd never use it for anything important and in fact I feel crippled in that environment) I must say I'm impressed with Windows 7.
It's certainly the nicest thing that Microsoft has ever extruded out their gaping sphincters.It doesn't make me want to puke.They've cleaned it up a lot since Vista.
It's attractive, performs well, with fewer annoyances and seems relatively reliable.
This is without getting it infected of course... we'll see how much fun it is then.
Vista is a real treat to disinfect (I work on Windows systems... ever had to run multiple malware scans on a Vista 64 system with all the duplicated system files and junk?
It almost doesn't pay.
) and I would expect this one to be at least as bad.
I feel it will be resistant to fixing and will result in a lot of clean installs, due to the lack of recovery mechanisms.
There's repairing the boot loader, system restore and restoring the system from backup.
You can operate on it to some extent with a BartPE based CD but it's not a fully compatible environment.They probably won't need shills for this one when it gets on enough computers.
I think people are going to be happy with Windows 7.
I'll fork out the cash for it when it's released.
(I'll probably buy an OEM Windows 7 Professional because I can't stand crippled network, policy and filesystem controls)I wouldn't say I'm "excited" about it, but I'm basically swallowing my pride here saying I "like" something from Microsoft.
However I've got to give credit where its due.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671085</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671713</id>
	<title>Re:Windows 7 makes me excited</title>
	<author>symbolset</author>
	<datestamp>1247410320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They are a blessing and a curse.  They can be very amusing as they attempt to argue their points from the shallow depth of their experience.  I've seen them attribute all manner of things to Microsoft: multitasking, BSD, heirarchical filesystems, multithreading, shared libraries, and on and on.  But they can be bullheaded in their attempts to keep their post count up and their scripts are necessarily shallow as there can only be so many response tabs in a talking points folder.  Their command of American idiom can be amusing too.
</p><p>I dread the inevitable "my favorite feature is more important than your favorite feature because..." threads.  May FSM protect us from any of that garbage being posted as an actual article.  Bangalore must be a dismal place that hundreds of people will line up for a job blogging in a cube 3' square for 12 hours a day for a couple bucks a day.
</p><p>They're not the doom of Web 2.0, but they can be a nuisance.  We're at the same point we were at before the launch of Window Vista - attempting to build momentum and energy for a huge launch day where people stand in line to get the product at midnight.  I don't see it happening yet, but they could get that going.
</p><p>I propose that we call them MATT: Microsoft AstroTurf Team.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They are a blessing and a curse .
They can be very amusing as they attempt to argue their points from the shallow depth of their experience .
I 've seen them attribute all manner of things to Microsoft : multitasking , BSD , heirarchical filesystems , multithreading , shared libraries , and on and on .
But they can be bullheaded in their attempts to keep their post count up and their scripts are necessarily shallow as there can only be so many response tabs in a talking points folder .
Their command of American idiom can be amusing too .
I dread the inevitable " my favorite feature is more important than your favorite feature because... " threads .
May FSM protect us from any of that garbage being posted as an actual article .
Bangalore must be a dismal place that hundreds of people will line up for a job blogging in a cube 3 ' square for 12 hours a day for a couple bucks a day .
They 're not the doom of Web 2.0 , but they can be a nuisance .
We 're at the same point we were at before the launch of Window Vista - attempting to build momentum and energy for a huge launch day where people stand in line to get the product at midnight .
I do n't see it happening yet , but they could get that going .
I propose that we call them MATT : Microsoft AstroTurf Team .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They are a blessing and a curse.
They can be very amusing as they attempt to argue their points from the shallow depth of their experience.
I've seen them attribute all manner of things to Microsoft: multitasking, BSD, heirarchical filesystems, multithreading, shared libraries, and on and on.
But they can be bullheaded in their attempts to keep their post count up and their scripts are necessarily shallow as there can only be so many response tabs in a talking points folder.
Their command of American idiom can be amusing too.
I dread the inevitable "my favorite feature is more important than your favorite feature because..." threads.
May FSM protect us from any of that garbage being posted as an actual article.
Bangalore must be a dismal place that hundreds of people will line up for a job blogging in a cube 3' square for 12 hours a day for a couple bucks a day.
They're not the doom of Web 2.0, but they can be a nuisance.
We're at the same point we were at before the launch of Window Vista - attempting to build momentum and energy for a huge launch day where people stand in line to get the product at midnight.
I don't see it happening yet, but they could get that going.
I propose that we call them MATT: Microsoft AstroTurf Team.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671085</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673257</id>
	<title>Re:Windows 7 makes me excited</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247516040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can only assume that anyone who has anything nice about Vista to say is either<br>1) A Microsoft shill<br>2) Never used a real OS before</p><p>I actually quite like Win7 (no, i'm not a shill) - but I dispise Vista - which was as big a piece of shite as Microsoft Office is for "real" applications<br>AC</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can only assume that anyone who has anything nice about Vista to say is either1 ) A Microsoft shill2 ) Never used a real OS beforeI actually quite like Win7 ( no , i 'm not a shill ) - but I dispise Vista - which was as big a piece of shite as Microsoft Office is for " real " applicationsAC</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can only assume that anyone who has anything nice about Vista to say is either1) A Microsoft shill2) Never used a real OS beforeI actually quite like Win7 (no, i'm not a shill) - but I dispise Vista - which was as big a piece of shite as Microsoft Office is for "real" applicationsAC</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671085</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28701603</id>
	<title>Why won't you reply to these posts?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247659620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1300193&amp;cid=28690179" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1300193&amp;cid=28690179</a> [slashdot.org]</p><p><a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1300193&amp;cid=28674253" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1300193&amp;cid=28674253</a> [slashdot.org]</p><p><a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1300193&amp;cid=28688937" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1300193&amp;cid=28688937</a> [slashdot.org]</p><p>I would like to see you reply to my points in each of those url's (as well as disprove my points in them as well) which I supplied in reply to your original reply here -&gt; <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1300193&amp;cid=28673669" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1300193&amp;cid=28673669</a> [slashdot.org] with you responding to each of those postings' points from the urls above.</p><p>APK</p><p>P.S.=&gt; <b>Are you avoiding replying to the url's points above, because they disprove your blatant b.s. from your original reply?</b> apk</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 1300193&amp;cid = 28690179 [ slashdot.org ] http : //tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 1300193&amp;cid = 28674253 [ slashdot.org ] http : //tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 1300193&amp;cid = 28688937 [ slashdot.org ] I would like to see you reply to my points in each of those url 's ( as well as disprove my points in them as well ) which I supplied in reply to your original reply here - &gt; http : //tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 1300193&amp;cid = 28673669 [ slashdot.org ] with you responding to each of those postings ' points from the urls above.APKP.S. = &gt; Are you avoiding replying to the url 's points above , because they disprove your blatant b.s .
from your original reply ?
apk</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1300193&amp;cid=28690179 [slashdot.org]http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1300193&amp;cid=28674253 [slashdot.org]http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1300193&amp;cid=28688937 [slashdot.org]I would like to see you reply to my points in each of those url's (as well as disprove my points in them as well) which I supplied in reply to your original reply here -&gt; http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1300193&amp;cid=28673669 [slashdot.org] with you responding to each of those postings' points from the urls above.APKP.S.=&gt; Are you avoiding replying to the url's points above, because they disprove your blatant b.s.
from your original reply?
apk</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673669</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28685367</id>
	<title>Re:The "Lord of HOSTS" sayeth READ (serious)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247496960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>the one tat is full of crap is you i use the hosts file just fine. and it does not slow me down as long as it is "0" format and not in "127.0.0.1" or the "0.0.0.0" format.

yes disabling JavaScript helps stop the viruses but using the hosts file helps too.

can you tell me what kind of mail is unsolicited email.

i do not care what kind of firewall you have it still can be hacked if the person is good enough. and that is why i still use a hosts file.

before i had a hosts file i would get hit with viruses and maleware and trojens. i would get 10 -20 of these a week some times more. with out a hosts file.

so i believe the only on full of crap is you.</htmltext>
<tokenext>the one tat is full of crap is you i use the hosts file just fine .
and it does not slow me down as long as it is " 0 " format and not in " 127.0.0.1 " or the " 0.0.0.0 " format .
yes disabling JavaScript helps stop the viruses but using the hosts file helps too .
can you tell me what kind of mail is unsolicited email .
i do not care what kind of firewall you have it still can be hacked if the person is good enough .
and that is why i still use a hosts file .
before i had a hosts file i would get hit with viruses and maleware and trojens .
i would get 10 -20 of these a week some times more .
with out a hosts file .
so i believe the only on full of crap is you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the one tat is full of crap is you i use the hosts file just fine.
and it does not slow me down as long as it is "0" format and not in "127.0.0.1" or the "0.0.0.0" format.
yes disabling JavaScript helps stop the viruses but using the hosts file helps too.
can you tell me what kind of mail is unsolicited email.
i do not care what kind of firewall you have it still can be hacked if the person is good enough.
and that is why i still use a hosts file.
before i had a hosts file i would get hit with viruses and maleware and trojens.
i would get 10 -20 of these a week some times more.
with out a hosts file.
so i believe the only on full of crap is you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674823</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671747</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>Ifandbut</author>
	<datestamp>1247410620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>* You might be able to burn ISOs, but you still can't mount them. Loopback device anyone? Do I really need to pay $XX, or install some spyware-infested freeware crap, just to mount ISOs?</p></div><p>As far as I know Daemon Tools is not spyware-infested.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>* You might be able to burn ISOs , but you still ca n't mount them .
Loopback device anyone ?
Do I really need to pay $ XX , or install some spyware-infested freeware crap , just to mount ISOs ? As far as I know Daemon Tools is not spyware-infested .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>* You might be able to burn ISOs, but you still can't mount them.
Loopback device anyone?
Do I really need to pay $XX, or install some spyware-infested freeware crap, just to mount ISOs?As far as I know Daemon Tools is not spyware-infested.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671245</id>
	<title>Re:And the Lord spake, saying,</title>
	<author>BatGnat</author>
	<datestamp>1247406120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Throw it at "TUTTE HERMSGERVORDENBROTBORDA", the M&#195;&#195;se trainer.....</htmltext>
<tokenext>Throw it at " TUTTE HERMSGERVORDENBROTBORDA " , the M     se trainer.... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Throw it at "TUTTE HERMSGERVORDENBROTBORDA", the MÃÃse trainer.....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670771</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28682037</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247477100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Interesting you mention that.</p><p>Daemon Tools is one of the few programs that flat out doesn't work with Windows 7</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Interesting you mention that.Daemon Tools is one of the few programs that flat out does n't work with Windows 7</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interesting you mention that.Daemon Tools is one of the few programs that flat out doesn't work with Windows 7</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671747</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28740689</id>
	<title>Re:The "Lord of HOSTS" sayeth READ (serious)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247931240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>look i do not no who you are but this is the last time i am telling you that i am not who you think i am and you keep giving these people false information. then this is going to be an all out war. with you being the losers.

if you really think i am APK  or his sock puppet then go look in to the title jerk off and you will see who i really am. and do not tell me you can not do that because i know you can. even if you do not want to admit it to me.

by the way you still have not answered any of the questions put to you are you scared to answer, or are you scared because you know AC is right.

and by the way why would not give me my password to a previous account i had with you i know why because you did not like what i said the last time we talked retards.</htmltext>
<tokenext>look i do not no who you are but this is the last time i am telling you that i am not who you think i am and you keep giving these people false information .
then this is going to be an all out war .
with you being the losers .
if you really think i am APK or his sock puppet then go look in to the title jerk off and you will see who i really am .
and do not tell me you can not do that because i know you can .
even if you do not want to admit it to me .
by the way you still have not answered any of the questions put to you are you scared to answer , or are you scared because you know AC is right .
and by the way why would not give me my password to a previous account i had with you i know why because you did not like what i said the last time we talked retards .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>look i do not no who you are but this is the last time i am telling you that i am not who you think i am and you keep giving these people false information.
then this is going to be an all out war.
with you being the losers.
if you really think i am APK  or his sock puppet then go look in to the title jerk off and you will see who i really am.
and do not tell me you can not do that because i know you can.
even if you do not want to admit it to me.
by the way you still have not answered any of the questions put to you are you scared to answer, or are you scared because you know AC is right.
and by the way why would not give me my password to a previous account i had with you i know why because you did not like what i said the last time we talked retards.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673669</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671255</id>
	<title>Wow!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247406240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A bunch of sheepherders have decided to fleece their flock yet again.  In other news, the Sun continues to rise in the East and Steve Ballmer continues to be the second biggest cunt ever born.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A bunch of sheepherders have decided to fleece their flock yet again .
In other news , the Sun continues to rise in the East and Steve Ballmer continues to be the second biggest cunt ever born .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A bunch of sheepherders have decided to fleece their flock yet again.
In other news, the Sun continues to rise in the East and Steve Ballmer continues to be the second biggest cunt ever born.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672509</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1247418900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I bought a $750 computer+monitor (gateway box set probably from wally world) because Vista SP1 + Symantec utterly failed some poor woman. Trust me, Vista still blows, just like Windows always blew. I didn't even have to bad-mouth Vista, <em>she</em> did it, and she's the kind of person who buys a new computer when a computer fails... and Vista wasn't her first Windows.</p><p>So far I have no complaints other than interface annoyances. In fact, it's interface^2... where is my "repair"? Fuck <em>diagnose</em>, just <em>FIX</em> the damned thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I bought a $ 750 computer + monitor ( gateway box set probably from wally world ) because Vista SP1 + Symantec utterly failed some poor woman .
Trust me , Vista still blows , just like Windows always blew .
I did n't even have to bad-mouth Vista , she did it , and she 's the kind of person who buys a new computer when a computer fails... and Vista was n't her first Windows.So far I have no complaints other than interface annoyances .
In fact , it 's interface ^ 2... where is my " repair " ?
Fuck diagnose , just FIX the damned thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I bought a $750 computer+monitor (gateway box set probably from wally world) because Vista SP1 + Symantec utterly failed some poor woman.
Trust me, Vista still blows, just like Windows always blew.
I didn't even have to bad-mouth Vista, she did it, and she's the kind of person who buys a new computer when a computer fails... and Vista wasn't her first Windows.So far I have no complaints other than interface annoyances.
In fact, it's interface^2... where is my "repair"?
Fuck diagnose, just FIX the damned thing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671415</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673097</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>mgblst</author>
	<datestamp>1247427120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why? XP Still works. Sure, if you are going to buy a new computer, you pretty much have no choice, since there won't be drivers for XP (unless you get an IBM). There is no way I will installing a copy of 7 over XP.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why ?
XP Still works .
Sure , if you are going to buy a new computer , you pretty much have no choice , since there wo n't be drivers for XP ( unless you get an IBM ) .
There is no way I will installing a copy of 7 over XP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why?
XP Still works.
Sure, if you are going to buy a new computer, you pretty much have no choice, since there won't be drivers for XP (unless you get an IBM).
There is no way I will installing a copy of 7 over XP.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671289</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28675239</id>
	<title>Is anybody else getting BSODs?</title>
	<author>jernejk</author>
	<datestamp>1247495460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I keep seeing BSODs with 7 beta. Some days it works ok and some days it's crashing like mad.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I keep seeing BSODs with 7 beta .
Some days it works ok and some days it 's crashing like mad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I keep seeing BSODs with 7 beta.
Some days it works ok and some days it's crashing like mad.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671491</id>
	<title>Re:OK, Since this is a non-event...</title>
	<author>cheesybagel</author>
	<datestamp>1247408460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah, this is about my usage scenario as well. I use Windows as a glorified games console/web browsing system. Funny thing is, older DOS games work better over a multi-platform free software program (DOSBox), than plain Windows itself. I suspect we will get to a point when Wine is better at running pre-dx10 games than Windows itself is. Also, the game I played the most recently was, believe it or not, Plants vs Zombies which might as well have been a Flash game... Pretty insane. Ok, ok, I played Mass Effect before that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , this is about my usage scenario as well .
I use Windows as a glorified games console/web browsing system .
Funny thing is , older DOS games work better over a multi-platform free software program ( DOSBox ) , than plain Windows itself .
I suspect we will get to a point when Wine is better at running pre-dx10 games than Windows itself is .
Also , the game I played the most recently was , believe it or not , Plants vs Zombies which might as well have been a Flash game... Pretty insane .
Ok , ok , I played Mass Effect before that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, this is about my usage scenario as well.
I use Windows as a glorified games console/web browsing system.
Funny thing is, older DOS games work better over a multi-platform free software program (DOSBox), than plain Windows itself.
I suspect we will get to a point when Wine is better at running pre-dx10 games than Windows itself is.
Also, the game I played the most recently was, believe it or not, Plants vs Zombies which might as well have been a Flash game... Pretty insane.
Ok, ok, I played Mass Effect before that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671197</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671779</id>
	<title>RE: a product people actually want</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247411040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The main change is that Microsoft goes back to marketing a product people actually want. From what I can see, pushing Vista damaged their credibility pretty strongly, but with 7 they'll likely regain much of that trust, and in fact already have with the open beta/RC.</p></div><p>Let's fix that - a product people <i> <b>might</b> </i> actually want.  It's well established that Vista is a product that people don't want.  Whether or not Vista 7 is a product people <i>actually</i> want will depend on what's in the RTM version: whether it's more useful than XP, if it's not more painful to use, if it supports enough hardware and software, if it includes enough new functionality to replace the utility of the inevitable incompatibilities, if it's secure enough to get through the first six months without a major worm.
</p><p>Since we don't have it yet, we don't know yet how it weighs in the balance.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The main change is that Microsoft goes back to marketing a product people actually want .
From what I can see , pushing Vista damaged their credibility pretty strongly , but with 7 they 'll likely regain much of that trust , and in fact already have with the open beta/RC.Let 's fix that - a product people might actually want .
It 's well established that Vista is a product that people do n't want .
Whether or not Vista 7 is a product people actually want will depend on what 's in the RTM version : whether it 's more useful than XP , if it 's not more painful to use , if it supports enough hardware and software , if it includes enough new functionality to replace the utility of the inevitable incompatibilities , if it 's secure enough to get through the first six months without a major worm .
Since we do n't have it yet , we do n't know yet how it weighs in the balance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The main change is that Microsoft goes back to marketing a product people actually want.
From what I can see, pushing Vista damaged their credibility pretty strongly, but with 7 they'll likely regain much of that trust, and in fact already have with the open beta/RC.Let's fix that - a product people  might  actually want.
It's well established that Vista is a product that people don't want.
Whether or not Vista 7 is a product people actually want will depend on what's in the RTM version: whether it's more useful than XP, if it's not more painful to use, if it supports enough hardware and software, if it includes enough new functionality to replace the utility of the inevitable incompatibilities, if it's secure enough to get through the first six months without a major worm.
Since we don't have it yet, we don't know yet how it weighs in the balance.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671061</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674839</id>
	<title>I don't care</title>
	<author>ZarathustraDK</author>
	<datestamp>1247492640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Linux is philanthropic and intrinsically good in its conception.<br> <br>

Windows is not.<br> <br>

That ought to be enough reason for people to choose Linux. Your actions is, and should be, guided by your ethics; but people rather want to put on their blindfold and play Crysis because they're used to technology being a field devoid of ethics.<br> <br>

And don't play the "Well, when you want some REAL work done..."-card or the "Food on the table"-card, if the need for personal integrity does not trumph those, then this world is going to hell in a handbasket.<br> <br>

And yes IAA philosopher.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Linux is philanthropic and intrinsically good in its conception .
Windows is not .
That ought to be enough reason for people to choose Linux .
Your actions is , and should be , guided by your ethics ; but people rather want to put on their blindfold and play Crysis because they 're used to technology being a field devoid of ethics .
And do n't play the " Well , when you want some REAL work done... " -card or the " Food on the table " -card , if the need for personal integrity does not trumph those , then this world is going to hell in a handbasket .
And yes IAA philosopher .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Linux is philanthropic and intrinsically good in its conception.
Windows is not.
That ought to be enough reason for people to choose Linux.
Your actions is, and should be, guided by your ethics; but people rather want to put on their blindfold and play Crysis because they're used to technology being a field devoid of ethics.
And don't play the "Well, when you want some REAL work done..."-card or the "Food on the table"-card, if the need for personal integrity does not trumph those, then this world is going to hell in a handbasket.
And yes IAA philosopher.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671345</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247407080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So far the difference between Windows 7 and Windows Vista is greater than the difference between Windows XP and Windows 2000, at least in terms of gross development work, although the code base is larger as a percentage of reworking not much would have changed. The interface update is more like 98 -&gt; XP but self-righteous trolls don't seem to see past this.
<br> <br>
Microsoft's Tick-Tock seems to be n1xx is a infrastructure release n6xx is the main release where n is NT 5 / 6 / 7 (Win2K was build 2195, XP 2600, Vista 6000, Windows 7 7279 the last time I looked). 7600 is a bit of a jump, not a real number of builds.<p><div class="quote"><p>Windows 7 is the last appeal from death row. The same tired promises as ever, wrapped in fancier 3D windowing effects.</p></div><p>Oh you were trolling. I shouldn't have posted, now I can't mod your ass down.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So far the difference between Windows 7 and Windows Vista is greater than the difference between Windows XP and Windows 2000 , at least in terms of gross development work , although the code base is larger as a percentage of reworking not much would have changed .
The interface update is more like 98 - &gt; XP but self-righteous trolls do n't seem to see past this .
Microsoft 's Tick-Tock seems to be n1xx is a infrastructure release n6xx is the main release where n is NT 5 / 6 / 7 ( Win2K was build 2195 , XP 2600 , Vista 6000 , Windows 7 7279 the last time I looked ) .
7600 is a bit of a jump , not a real number of builds.Windows 7 is the last appeal from death row .
The same tired promises as ever , wrapped in fancier 3D windowing effects.Oh you were trolling .
I should n't have posted , now I ca n't mod your ass down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So far the difference between Windows 7 and Windows Vista is greater than the difference between Windows XP and Windows 2000, at least in terms of gross development work, although the code base is larger as a percentage of reworking not much would have changed.
The interface update is more like 98 -&gt; XP but self-righteous trolls don't seem to see past this.
Microsoft's Tick-Tock seems to be n1xx is a infrastructure release n6xx is the main release where n is NT 5 / 6 / 7 (Win2K was build 2195, XP 2600, Vista 6000, Windows 7 7279 the last time I looked).
7600 is a bit of a jump, not a real number of builds.Windows 7 is the last appeal from death row.
The same tired promises as ever, wrapped in fancier 3D windowing effects.Oh you were trolling.
I shouldn't have posted, now I can't mod your ass down.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671197</id>
	<title>Re:OK, Since this is a non-event...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247405580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Am I the only one who sees Win7 pointless?<br><br>I like to play games and browse the web, I'm using both Linux and XP. But since I can't play games under Linux and I can't be arsed to dual-boot I stay in XP most of the time.<br><br>I saw some benchmark of Vista in games and I see no advantage over XP, now I'm checking Win7 and again XP is still ahead. DX10 could be a reason to upgrade, but then I'd have to waste even more money on the PC and game makers don't dare to drop dx9 support.<br><br>I say no thanks, XP is more then enough for me. And anyway I never install a M$ product before SP1.<br><br>Apple? I don't give a shit, games don't work and is over-priced.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Am I the only one who sees Win7 pointless ? I like to play games and browse the web , I 'm using both Linux and XP .
But since I ca n't play games under Linux and I ca n't be arsed to dual-boot I stay in XP most of the time.I saw some benchmark of Vista in games and I see no advantage over XP , now I 'm checking Win7 and again XP is still ahead .
DX10 could be a reason to upgrade , but then I 'd have to waste even more money on the PC and game makers do n't dare to drop dx9 support.I say no thanks , XP is more then enough for me .
And anyway I never install a M $ product before SP1.Apple ?
I do n't give a shit , games do n't work and is over-priced .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Am I the only one who sees Win7 pointless?I like to play games and browse the web, I'm using both Linux and XP.
But since I can't play games under Linux and I can't be arsed to dual-boot I stay in XP most of the time.I saw some benchmark of Vista in games and I see no advantage over XP, now I'm checking Win7 and again XP is still ahead.
DX10 could be a reason to upgrade, but then I'd have to waste even more money on the PC and game makers don't dare to drop dx9 support.I say no thanks, XP is more then enough for me.
And anyway I never install a M$ product before SP1.Apple?
I don't give a shit, games don't work and is over-priced.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670827</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28738319</id>
	<title>Re:The "Lord of HOSTS" sayeth READ (serious)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247852280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>yes oh ok emo oh ok retard oh ok rager.. keep raging hard you little faggot troll</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>yes oh ok emo oh ok retard oh ok rager.. keep raging hard you little faggot troll</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yes oh ok emo oh ok retard oh ok rager.. keep raging hard you little faggot troll</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672489</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672425</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247418000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>BitKeeper is pretty crap - it needs about 1.5GB unencrypted space to hold the 'system' files - but the installer now creates this space by default, so it's easier to actually turn encryption on.</p></div><p>Yeah, BitKeeper is pretty crappy (compared to GIT, anyway), but BitLocker rocks. Oh, and the system volume occupies 100MB on Windows 7.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>BitKeeper is pretty crap - it needs about 1.5GB unencrypted space to hold the 'system ' files - but the installer now creates this space by default , so it 's easier to actually turn encryption on.Yeah , BitKeeper is pretty crappy ( compared to GIT , anyway ) , but BitLocker rocks .
Oh , and the system volume occupies 100MB on Windows 7 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>BitKeeper is pretty crap - it needs about 1.5GB unencrypted space to hold the 'system' files - but the installer now creates this space by default, so it's easier to actually turn encryption on.Yeah, BitKeeper is pretty crappy (compared to GIT, anyway), but BitLocker rocks.
Oh, and the system volume occupies 100MB on Windows 7.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28737087</id>
	<title>APK is right on why you refuse to reply now</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247838660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He refuses to reply because you disproved all of his malarky point by point. The ac that modded you down apk is clearly either this Thor Schrock character, or the arstechnica people (jeremy reimer) and as kings jowker said, you are telling a truth about this material that has certain parties living in fear of it. Especially hosts files blocking the ad banners they make a living off of others with and that infects people with viruses by using malicious script in the ad banner content that was reported here at slashdot. You did show evidence that others who are in the security realm in this science like Mr. Oliver Day of securityfocus.com even notes he surfs faster through the use of a custom hosts file and that it is useful for security purposes as well. As kingsjowker said, keep up the good work apk, despite the trolls from arstechnica and the obviously technically incompetent such as Thor Schmuck/Shrock also who try to give you a tough time here in trolling you but only fail because the sock puppet account mod up will only show others like myself after reading this that you took every false misleading point they stated and put up documented and verifiable evidences to the contrary. Especially the words of Oliver Day and those of Jeremy Reimer from arstechnica showing his own words admitting the arstechnica people have impersonated you online. What a pack of losers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He refuses to reply because you disproved all of his malarky point by point .
The ac that modded you down apk is clearly either this Thor Schrock character , or the arstechnica people ( jeremy reimer ) and as kings jowker said , you are telling a truth about this material that has certain parties living in fear of it .
Especially hosts files blocking the ad banners they make a living off of others with and that infects people with viruses by using malicious script in the ad banner content that was reported here at slashdot .
You did show evidence that others who are in the security realm in this science like Mr. Oliver Day of securityfocus.com even notes he surfs faster through the use of a custom hosts file and that it is useful for security purposes as well .
As kingsjowker said , keep up the good work apk , despite the trolls from arstechnica and the obviously technically incompetent such as Thor Schmuck/Shrock also who try to give you a tough time here in trolling you but only fail because the sock puppet account mod up will only show others like myself after reading this that you took every false misleading point they stated and put up documented and verifiable evidences to the contrary .
Especially the words of Oliver Day and those of Jeremy Reimer from arstechnica showing his own words admitting the arstechnica people have impersonated you online .
What a pack of losers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He refuses to reply because you disproved all of his malarky point by point.
The ac that modded you down apk is clearly either this Thor Schrock character, or the arstechnica people (jeremy reimer) and as kings jowker said, you are telling a truth about this material that has certain parties living in fear of it.
Especially hosts files blocking the ad banners they make a living off of others with and that infects people with viruses by using malicious script in the ad banner content that was reported here at slashdot.
You did show evidence that others who are in the security realm in this science like Mr. Oliver Day of securityfocus.com even notes he surfs faster through the use of a custom hosts file and that it is useful for security purposes as well.
As kingsjowker said, keep up the good work apk, despite the trolls from arstechnica and the obviously technically incompetent such as Thor Schmuck/Shrock also who try to give you a tough time here in trolling you but only fail because the sock puppet account mod up will only show others like myself after reading this that you took every false misleading point they stated and put up documented and verifiable evidences to the contrary.
Especially the words of Oliver Day and those of Jeremy Reimer from arstechnica showing his own words admitting the arstechnica people have impersonated you online.
What a pack of losers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673669</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674925</id>
	<title>Re:Win7 netbook dream</title>
	<author>Krneki</author>
	<datestamp>1247493420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Stop giving facts, no one gives a shit about them.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/sarcasm off</htmltext>
<tokenext>Stop giving facts , no one gives a shit about them .
/sarcasm off</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stop giving facts, no one gives a shit about them.
/sarcasm off</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672639</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671343</id>
	<title>Re:Our world is saved!</title>
	<author>BatGnat</author>
	<datestamp>1247407080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>NO!
<br>
That is bad for the environment.....</htmltext>
<tokenext>NO !
That is bad for the environment.... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NO!
That is bad for the environment.....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671093</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672449</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247418300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The free daemon-tools comes with a nice toolbar... Anyways there's also slysoft virtual clonedrive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The free daemon-tools comes with a nice toolbar... Anyways there 's also slysoft virtual clonedrive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The free daemon-tools comes with a nice toolbar... Anyways there's also slysoft virtual clonedrive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671747</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671319</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>elashish14</author>
	<datestamp>1247406900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In defense of Microsoft (someone smack me please), Win7 will have far fewer "features" (ie. bloat) than Vista (or so I hear). This may be a promise of fewer bugs, though that's not to say that there will be none. Besides, they've done more testing by offering free use of the beta/RC than any previous Windows version, so hopefully this will be more robust.</p><p>But whatever. Lamb in sheep's clothing, putting pig on a lipstick, etc.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/goes back to my super-stable Debian machine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In defense of Microsoft ( someone smack me please ) , Win7 will have far fewer " features " ( ie .
bloat ) than Vista ( or so I hear ) .
This may be a promise of fewer bugs , though that 's not to say that there will be none .
Besides , they 've done more testing by offering free use of the beta/RC than any previous Windows version , so hopefully this will be more robust.But whatever .
Lamb in sheep 's clothing , putting pig on a lipstick , etc .
/goes back to my super-stable Debian machine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In defense of Microsoft (someone smack me please), Win7 will have far fewer "features" (ie.
bloat) than Vista (or so I hear).
This may be a promise of fewer bugs, though that's not to say that there will be none.
Besides, they've done more testing by offering free use of the beta/RC than any previous Windows version, so hopefully this will be more robust.But whatever.
Lamb in sheep's clothing, putting pig on a lipstick, etc.
/goes back to my super-stable Debian machine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674581</id>
	<title>Re:OK, Since this is a non-event...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247490420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can I make this simple for you,<br>OS X = BMW.<br>Linux = Bugatti.<br>Windows = Toyota.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can I make this simple for you,OS X = BMW.Linux = Bugatti.Windows = Toyota .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can I make this simple for you,OS X = BMW.Linux = Bugatti.Windows = Toyota.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671049</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671305</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>GreatBunzinni</author>
	<datestamp>1247406780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> <i>* The backup utility actually lets you select what files to backup again, rather than just "Pictures" or "Documents".</i></p></div> </blockquote><p>
Does that justify a multi-hundred euros upgrade?</p><blockquote><div><p> <i>
* You can burn ISO files straight from Explorer.
</i></p></div> </blockquote><p>
Wow, something that it's being done in linux since... 2003? And what timing. Who burns CDs anymore? Microsoft releases that functionality exactly when people are starting to use memory cards, USB flash drives and external HDs instead of CDs (measly 700MB of data) and even DVDs.

<br>So what exactly does windows 7 have that is either exciting or even worth a hundred euros?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>* The backup utility actually lets you select what files to backup again , rather than just " Pictures " or " Documents " .
Does that justify a multi-hundred euros upgrade ?
* You can burn ISO files straight from Explorer .
Wow , something that it 's being done in linux since... 2003 ? And what timing .
Who burns CDs anymore ?
Microsoft releases that functionality exactly when people are starting to use memory cards , USB flash drives and external HDs instead of CDs ( measly 700MB of data ) and even DVDs .
So what exactly does windows 7 have that is either exciting or even worth a hundred euros ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> * The backup utility actually lets you select what files to backup again, rather than just "Pictures" or "Documents".
Does that justify a multi-hundred euros upgrade?
* You can burn ISO files straight from Explorer.
Wow, something that it's being done in linux since... 2003? And what timing.
Who burns CDs anymore?
Microsoft releases that functionality exactly when people are starting to use memory cards, USB flash drives and external HDs instead of CDs (measly 700MB of data) and even DVDs.
So what exactly does windows 7 have that is either exciting or even worth a hundred euros?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672163</id>
	<title>The "Lord of HOSTS" sayeth READ (serious)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247414940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Windows 7, VISTA, &amp; Server 2008 have a couple of "issues" I don't like in them, &amp; you may not either, depending on your point of view (mine's based solely on efficiency &amp; security), &amp; if my take on these issues aren't "good enough"? I suggest reading what ROOTKIT.COM says, link URL is in my "p.s." @ the bottom of this post:</p><p> <b>1.) HOSTS files being unable to use "0" for a blocking IP address</b> - this started in 12/09/2008 after an "MS Patch Tuesday" in fact for VISTA (when it had NO problem using it before that, as Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 still can)... &amp; yes, this continues in its descendants, Windows Server 2008 &amp;/or Windows 7 as well.</p><p> <b>So, why is this a "problem" you might ask?</b> </p><p>Ok - since you can technically use either:</p><p>a.) 127.0.0.1 (the "loopback adapter address")<br>b.) 0.0.0.0 (next smallest &amp; next most efficient)<br>c.) The smallest &amp; fastest plain-jane 0</p><p>PER EACH HOSTS FILE ENTRY/RECORD...</p><p>You can use ANY of those, in order to block out known bad sites &amp;/or adbanners in a HOSTS file this way??</p><p> <b>Microsoft has "promoted bloat" in doing so... no questions asked.</b> </p><p> <b>Simply because</b> </p><p> <b>1.) 127.0.0.1 = 9 bytes in size on disk &amp; is the largest/slowest<br>2.) 0.0.0.0 = 7 bytes &amp; is the next largest/slowest in size on disk<br>3.) 0 = 1 byte</b> </p><p>(&amp; HOSTS files extend across EVERY webbrowser, email program, or in general every webbound program you use &amp; thus HOSTS are "global" in coverage this way AND function on any OS that uses the BSD derived IP stack (which most all do mind you, even MS is based off of it, as BSD's IS truly, "the best in the business"), &amp; when coupled with say, IE restricted zones, FireFox addons like NoScript &amp;/or AdBlock, or Opera filter.ini/urlfilter.ini, for layered security in this capacity for webbrowsers &amp; SOME email programs (here, I mean ones "built into" browsers themselves like Opera has for example))</p><p>MS has literally promoted bloat in this file, making it load slower from disk, into memory! This compounds itself, the more entries your HOSTS file contains... &amp; for instance? Mine currently contains nearly 654,000 entries of known bad adbanners, bad websites, &amp;/or bad nameservers (used for controlling botnets, misdirecting net requests, etc. et al).</p><p>Now, IF I were to use 127.0.0.1? My "huge" HOSTS file would be approximately 27mb in size... using 0.0.0.0 (next smallest) it would be 19mb in size - HOWEVER? Using 0 as my blocking IP, it is only 14mb in size. See my point?</p><p>(For loads either in the local DNS cache, or system diskcache if you run w/out the local DNS client service running, this gets slower the larger each HOSTS file entry is (which you have to stall the DNS client service in Windows for larger ones, especially if you use a "giant HOSTS file" (purely relative term, but once it goes over (iirc) 4mb in size, you have to cut the local DNS cache client service)))</p><p>NO questions asked - <b>the physics of it backed me up in theory alone, but when I was questioned on it for PROOF thereof?</b> </p><p> <b>I wrote a small test program to load such a list into a "pascal record"</b> (which is analagous to a C/C++ structure), <b>which is EXACTLY what the DNS client/DNS API does as well, using a C/C++ structure</b> (basically an array of sorts really, &amp; a structure/record is a precursor part to a full-blown CLASS or OBJECT, minus the functions built in, this is for treating numerous variables as a SINGLE VARIABLE (for efficiency, which FORTRAN as a single example, lacks as a feature, @ least Fortran 77 did, but other languages do not))!</p><p>I even wrote another that just loaded my HOSTS file's entirety into a listbox, same results... slowest using 127.0.0.1, next slowest using 0.0.0.0, &amp; fastest using 0.</p><p>And, sure: Some MORE "goes on" during DNS API loads (iirc, removal of duplicated entries (which I made sure my personal copy does not have these via a program I wrote to purge it of duplicated entries + to so</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows 7 , VISTA , &amp; Server 2008 have a couple of " issues " I do n't like in them , &amp; you may not either , depending on your point of view ( mine 's based solely on efficiency &amp; security ) , &amp; if my take on these issues are n't " good enough " ?
I suggest reading what ROOTKIT.COM says , link URL is in my " p.s .
" @ the bottom of this post : 1 .
) HOSTS files being unable to use " 0 " for a blocking IP address - this started in 12/09/2008 after an " MS Patch Tuesday " in fact for VISTA ( when it had NO problem using it before that , as Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 still can ) ... &amp; yes , this continues in its descendants , Windows Server 2008 &amp;/or Windows 7 as well .
So , why is this a " problem " you might ask ?
Ok - since you can technically use either : a .
) 127.0.0.1 ( the " loopback adapter address " ) b .
) 0.0.0.0 ( next smallest &amp; next most efficient ) c. ) The smallest &amp; fastest plain-jane 0PER EACH HOSTS FILE ENTRY/RECORD...You can use ANY of those , in order to block out known bad sites &amp;/or adbanners in a HOSTS file this way ? ?
Microsoft has " promoted bloat " in doing so... no questions asked .
Simply because 1 .
) 127.0.0.1 = 9 bytes in size on disk &amp; is the largest/slowest2 .
) 0.0.0.0 = 7 bytes &amp; is the next largest/slowest in size on disk3 .
) 0 = 1 byte ( &amp; HOSTS files extend across EVERY webbrowser , email program , or in general every webbound program you use &amp; thus HOSTS are " global " in coverage this way AND function on any OS that uses the BSD derived IP stack ( which most all do mind you , even MS is based off of it , as BSD 's IS truly , " the best in the business " ) , &amp; when coupled with say , IE restricted zones , FireFox addons like NoScript &amp;/or AdBlock , or Opera filter.ini/urlfilter.ini , for layered security in this capacity for webbrowsers &amp; SOME email programs ( here , I mean ones " built into " browsers themselves like Opera has for example ) ) MS has literally promoted bloat in this file , making it load slower from disk , into memory !
This compounds itself , the more entries your HOSTS file contains... &amp; for instance ?
Mine currently contains nearly 654,000 entries of known bad adbanners , bad websites , &amp;/or bad nameservers ( used for controlling botnets , misdirecting net requests , etc .
et al ) .Now , IF I were to use 127.0.0.1 ?
My " huge " HOSTS file would be approximately 27mb in size... using 0.0.0.0 ( next smallest ) it would be 19mb in size - HOWEVER ?
Using 0 as my blocking IP , it is only 14mb in size .
See my point ?
( For loads either in the local DNS cache , or system diskcache if you run w/out the local DNS client service running , this gets slower the larger each HOSTS file entry is ( which you have to stall the DNS client service in Windows for larger ones , especially if you use a " giant HOSTS file " ( purely relative term , but once it goes over ( iirc ) 4mb in size , you have to cut the local DNS cache client service ) ) ) NO questions asked - the physics of it backed me up in theory alone , but when I was questioned on it for PROOF thereof ?
I wrote a small test program to load such a list into a " pascal record " ( which is analagous to a C/C + + structure ) , which is EXACTLY what the DNS client/DNS API does as well , using a C/C + + structure ( basically an array of sorts really , &amp; a structure/record is a precursor part to a full-blown CLASS or OBJECT , minus the functions built in , this is for treating numerous variables as a SINGLE VARIABLE ( for efficiency , which FORTRAN as a single example , lacks as a feature , @ least Fortran 77 did , but other languages do not ) ) ! I even wrote another that just loaded my HOSTS file 's entirety into a listbox , same results... slowest using 127.0.0.1 , next slowest using 0.0.0.0 , &amp; fastest using 0.And , sure : Some MORE " goes on " during DNS API loads ( iirc , removal of duplicated entries ( which I made sure my personal copy does not have these via a program I wrote to purge it of duplicated entries + to so</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows 7, VISTA, &amp; Server 2008 have a couple of "issues" I don't like in them, &amp; you may not either, depending on your point of view (mine's based solely on efficiency &amp; security), &amp; if my take on these issues aren't "good enough"?
I suggest reading what ROOTKIT.COM says, link URL is in my "p.s.
" @ the bottom of this post: 1.
) HOSTS files being unable to use "0" for a blocking IP address - this started in 12/09/2008 after an "MS Patch Tuesday" in fact for VISTA (when it had NO problem using it before that, as Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 still can)... &amp; yes, this continues in its descendants, Windows Server 2008 &amp;/or Windows 7 as well.
So, why is this a "problem" you might ask?
Ok - since you can technically use either:a.
) 127.0.0.1 (the "loopback adapter address")b.
) 0.0.0.0 (next smallest &amp; next most efficient)c.) The smallest &amp; fastest plain-jane 0PER EACH HOSTS FILE ENTRY/RECORD...You can use ANY of those, in order to block out known bad sites &amp;/or adbanners in a HOSTS file this way??
Microsoft has "promoted bloat" in doing so... no questions asked.
Simply because  1.
) 127.0.0.1 = 9 bytes in size on disk &amp; is the largest/slowest2.
) 0.0.0.0 = 7 bytes &amp; is the next largest/slowest in size on disk3.
) 0 = 1 byte (&amp; HOSTS files extend across EVERY webbrowser, email program, or in general every webbound program you use &amp; thus HOSTS are "global" in coverage this way AND function on any OS that uses the BSD derived IP stack (which most all do mind you, even MS is based off of it, as BSD's IS truly, "the best in the business"), &amp; when coupled with say, IE restricted zones, FireFox addons like NoScript &amp;/or AdBlock, or Opera filter.ini/urlfilter.ini, for layered security in this capacity for webbrowsers &amp; SOME email programs (here, I mean ones "built into" browsers themselves like Opera has for example))MS has literally promoted bloat in this file, making it load slower from disk, into memory!
This compounds itself, the more entries your HOSTS file contains... &amp; for instance?
Mine currently contains nearly 654,000 entries of known bad adbanners, bad websites, &amp;/or bad nameservers (used for controlling botnets, misdirecting net requests, etc.
et al).Now, IF I were to use 127.0.0.1?
My "huge" HOSTS file would be approximately 27mb in size... using 0.0.0.0 (next smallest) it would be 19mb in size - HOWEVER?
Using 0 as my blocking IP, it is only 14mb in size.
See my point?
(For loads either in the local DNS cache, or system diskcache if you run w/out the local DNS client service running, this gets slower the larger each HOSTS file entry is (which you have to stall the DNS client service in Windows for larger ones, especially if you use a "giant HOSTS file" (purely relative term, but once it goes over (iirc) 4mb in size, you have to cut the local DNS cache client service)))NO questions asked - the physics of it backed me up in theory alone, but when I was questioned on it for PROOF thereof?
I wrote a small test program to load such a list into a "pascal record" (which is analagous to a C/C++ structure), which is EXACTLY what the DNS client/DNS API does as well, using a C/C++ structure (basically an array of sorts really, &amp; a structure/record is a precursor part to a full-blown CLASS or OBJECT, minus the functions built in, this is for treating numerous variables as a SINGLE VARIABLE (for efficiency, which FORTRAN as a single example, lacks as a feature, @ least Fortran 77 did, but other languages do not))!I even wrote another that just loaded my HOSTS file's entirety into a listbox, same results... slowest using 127.0.0.1, next slowest using 0.0.0.0, &amp; fastest using 0.And, sure: Some MORE "goes on" during DNS API loads (iirc, removal of duplicated entries (which I made sure my personal copy does not have these via a program I wrote to purge it of duplicated entries + to so</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670771</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28683329</id>
	<title>Re:Win7 netbook dream</title>
	<author>fat\_mike</author>
	<datestamp>1247482620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's funny, I've been running the RC for two months now and I haven't seen a single ribbon on any WINDOWS windows.  Don't blame the OS for a choice the app maker takes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's funny , I 've been running the RC for two months now and I have n't seen a single ribbon on any WINDOWS windows .
Do n't blame the OS for a choice the app maker takes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's funny, I've been running the RC for two months now and I haven't seen a single ribbon on any WINDOWS windows.
Don't blame the OS for a choice the app maker takes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672639</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672933</id>
	<title>Re:The "Lord of HOSTS" sayeth READ (serious)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247424720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm not necessarily defending the method, but is the hosts file really parsed each time a lookup is performed? Surely it checks the file modification time (cached in memory) of the latest change, and if it has changed only then it parses it and adds it into its own internal indexed DNS cache?<br>
You can bet DNS queries aren't performed every time you need to find google.com, so why would it read<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/etc/hosts every time?<br> <br>

I haven't even read GP and why he's doing it, so it may be a total waste of memory, and it sure isn't an elegant, robust solution, but I don't think it'd be as bad as you say.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not necessarily defending the method , but is the hosts file really parsed each time a lookup is performed ?
Surely it checks the file modification time ( cached in memory ) of the latest change , and if it has changed only then it parses it and adds it into its own internal indexed DNS cache ?
You can bet DNS queries are n't performed every time you need to find google.com , so why would it read /etc/hosts every time ?
I have n't even read GP and why he 's doing it , so it may be a total waste of memory , and it sure is n't an elegant , robust solution , but I do n't think it 'd be as bad as you say .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not necessarily defending the method, but is the hosts file really parsed each time a lookup is performed?
Surely it checks the file modification time (cached in memory) of the latest change, and if it has changed only then it parses it and adds it into its own internal indexed DNS cache?
You can bet DNS queries aren't performed every time you need to find google.com, so why would it read /etc/hosts every time?
I haven't even read GP and why he's doing it, so it may be a total waste of memory, and it sure isn't an elegant, robust solution, but I don't think it'd be as bad as you say.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672489</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671637</id>
	<title>Efficiency</title>
	<author>AlpineR</author>
	<datestamp>1247409660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Licenses it out to other OEMs that make cheap computers. I mean, when I can buy a $400 laptop (not a netbook but a laptop) with Windows on it and do just about everything that a $999 Macbook can do, the choice is clear for most people.</p></div></blockquote><p>A $400 Windows laptop is cheap only if your time has no value.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Licenses it out to other OEMs that make cheap computers .
I mean , when I can buy a $ 400 laptop ( not a netbook but a laptop ) with Windows on it and do just about everything that a $ 999 Macbook can do , the choice is clear for most people.A $ 400 Windows laptop is cheap only if your time has no value .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Licenses it out to other OEMs that make cheap computers.
I mean, when I can buy a $400 laptop (not a netbook but a laptop) with Windows on it and do just about everything that a $999 Macbook can do, the choice is clear for most people.A $400 Windows laptop is cheap only if your time has no value.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671049</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674467</id>
	<title>Re:OK, Since this is a non-event...</title>
	<author>Idiomatick</author>
	<datestamp>1247489580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That and it isn't cheaper on a piece by piece basis either.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That and it is n't cheaper on a piece by piece basis either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That and it isn't cheaper on a piece by piece basis either.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671049</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672639</id>
	<title>Win7 netbook dream</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247420580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I see a lot of people saying that win7 is going to be a viable OS for netbooks. I just installed it this weekend on a netbook, and frankly it was a miserable experience. When finished, it was totally unusable for two primary reasons. First the netbook has a 1024x600 10" screen, once windows was done drawing all its art in the form of huge taskbars and big ribbons, plus assorted other screen junk, about 1/3 of the extremely limited screen remained. Secondly, it was just a dog, the 1G memory and low end CPU just makes it crawl along.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I see a lot of people saying that win7 is going to be a viable OS for netbooks .
I just installed it this weekend on a netbook , and frankly it was a miserable experience .
When finished , it was totally unusable for two primary reasons .
First the netbook has a 1024x600 10 " screen , once windows was done drawing all its art in the form of huge taskbars and big ribbons , plus assorted other screen junk , about 1/3 of the extremely limited screen remained .
Secondly , it was just a dog , the 1G memory and low end CPU just makes it crawl along .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I see a lot of people saying that win7 is going to be a viable OS for netbooks.
I just installed it this weekend on a netbook, and frankly it was a miserable experience.
When finished, it was totally unusable for two primary reasons.
First the netbook has a 1024x600 10" screen, once windows was done drawing all its art in the form of huge taskbars and big ribbons, plus assorted other screen junk, about 1/3 of the extremely limited screen remained.
Secondly, it was just a dog, the 1G memory and low end CPU just makes it crawl along.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673233</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>colourmyeyes</author>
	<datestamp>1247515800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>For mounting ISO's under WinXP, this has worked for me. It's small and simple and doesn't have any extra crap:<br> <br>

<a href="http://download.microsoft.com/download/7/b/6/7b6abd84-7841-4978-96f5-bd58df02efa2/winxpvirtualcdcontrolpanel\_21.exe" title="microsoft.com">http://download.microsoft.com/download/7/b/6/7b6abd84-7841-4978-96f5-bd58df02efa2/winxpvirtualcdcontrolpanel\_21.exe</a> [microsoft.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>For mounting ISO 's under WinXP , this has worked for me .
It 's small and simple and does n't have any extra crap : http : //download.microsoft.com/download/7/b/6/7b6abd84-7841-4978-96f5-bd58df02efa2/winxpvirtualcdcontrolpanel \ _21.exe [ microsoft.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For mounting ISO's under WinXP, this has worked for me.
It's small and simple and doesn't have any extra crap: 

http://download.microsoft.com/download/7/b/6/7b6abd84-7841-4978-96f5-bd58df02efa2/winxpvirtualcdcontrolpanel\_21.exe [microsoft.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28678121</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>The Moof</author>
	<datestamp>1247506020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You might be able to burn ISOs, but you still can't mount them.</p></div><p>Back in XP, Microsoft had a utility you could download called "Windows XP Virtual CD" that let you mount ISO images.  Not sure if they ported it into Vista.  Interestingly enough, you can't find it via MS's download pages, but it's linked from several KB and MSDN articles.<br> <br>
<a href="http://support.microsoft.com/kb/916902" title="microsoft.com">Here's an article</a> [microsoft.com] that links it if you're interested in it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You might be able to burn ISOs , but you still ca n't mount them.Back in XP , Microsoft had a utility you could download called " Windows XP Virtual CD " that let you mount ISO images .
Not sure if they ported it into Vista .
Interestingly enough , you ca n't find it via MS 's download pages , but it 's linked from several KB and MSDN articles .
Here 's an article [ microsoft.com ] that links it if you 're interested in it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You might be able to burn ISOs, but you still can't mount them.Back in XP, Microsoft had a utility you could download called "Windows XP Virtual CD" that let you mount ISO images.
Not sure if they ported it into Vista.
Interestingly enough, you can't find it via MS's download pages, but it's linked from several KB and MSDN articles.
Here's an article [microsoft.com] that links it if you're interested in it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671145</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>Dunbal</author>
	<datestamp>1247404980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>People are really going to play that game?</i></p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Redmond is counting on that old saying, "there's one born every minute"...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People are really going to play that game ?
      Redmond is counting on that old saying , " there 's one born every minute " .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People are really going to play that game?
      Redmond is counting on that old saying, "there's one born every minute"...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28675619</id>
	<title>Re:And coke reintroduces coca cola classic</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247497200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You should really have that cough checked out.  Doesn't sound good.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You should really have that cough checked out .
Does n't sound good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You should really have that cough checked out.
Doesn't sound good.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671233</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674253</id>
	<title>On Delphi? See VBPJ Sept./Oct. 1997 issue</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247486640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><div class="quote"><p><b>"You complain here about how people obviously aren't programmers because they disagree with you yet your language of choice is object pascal via Delphi, hardly the language of choice for an expert programmer and second only to pre-.NET Visual Basic for the horifically bad bloatware it results in."</b> - by Anonymous Coward<br>on Monday July 13, @05:00AM (#28673669)</p></div><p>Per my subject-line above?</p><p>See VISUAL BASIC PROGRAMMER'S JOURNAL, Sept/Oct 1997 issue entitled "INSIDE THE VB5 COMPILER":</p><p>That's where Delphi, oddly considering it was a competing language trade journal for coders, absolutely KNOCKED THE SNOT out of both VB5 &amp; MSVC++ 5 also mind you, in 7/10 tests done...</p><p>(AND, most importantly, doubling even C++ in math &amp; strings work (which mind you? EVERY PROGRAM DOES) speed...)</p><p>So much for that...</p><p>(By the way, if you are the person who impersonated me here earlier this week, &amp; put words in my mouth I never stated as well? I'd like you to stop... &amp; where did I say others are not "real progrmmers" here? Please - show us that, verbatim on my part, thanks!)</p><p>Proof is always nice, but putting words into others' mouths they never stated? Is not, &amp; it certainly doesn't win debates... facts, like the ones about Delphi above though? Indisputable... &amp; totally legit + verifiable (I am looking at the article now, as it was what turned me from VB mostly, &amp; even MSVC++ (by the by, I have taken over 8 languages formally in college, in FORTRAN, COBOL, C, C++, MASM, PASCAL, BASIC + VB))</p><p>So much for your b.s.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... &amp; thanks for the laugh!</p><p>APK</p><p>P.S.=&gt; Ever wonder WHY Microsoft hired away BOTH Mr. Anders Heijelsberg (sp?) from BORLAND?</p><p><b>Hey - He designed<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET by the by for them</b> (&amp; VB.NET has Try-Catch an excellent construct for err trapping that ObjectPascal/Delphi has had from the get-go for above &amp; beyond "structured built in err handlers" in the compiler/language of BOTH delphi &amp; vb.net for example)?</p><p><b>Oh, &amp; BY THE WAY? Mr. H. also designed BORLAND DELPHI...</b></p><p>(LOL, &amp; THEN, to "top that off"? MS hired away Mr. H's co-designer from BORLAND, my fellow "polish person", Mr. Chuck Andrewzewski (sp?))</p><p>Why is that? Mr. Gates is a WISE MAN, &amp; recognized talent in the builders of the "VBKILLER" as it was called early on, in Delphi, in those two men... plus, Mr. H.? Only 1 of 16 "DISTINGUISHED ENGINEERS" @ BORLAND... &amp; even the other MS guys say "his design skills are WAY ABOVE THE NORM"... nuff said! apk</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" You complain here about how people obviously are n't programmers because they disagree with you yet your language of choice is object pascal via Delphi , hardly the language of choice for an expert programmer and second only to pre-.NET Visual Basic for the horifically bad bloatware it results in .
" - by Anonymous Cowardon Monday July 13 , @ 05 : 00AM ( # 28673669 ) Per my subject-line above ? See VISUAL BASIC PROGRAMMER 'S JOURNAL , Sept/Oct 1997 issue entitled " INSIDE THE VB5 COMPILER " : That 's where Delphi , oddly considering it was a competing language trade journal for coders , absolutely KNOCKED THE SNOT out of both VB5 &amp; MSVC + + 5 also mind you , in 7/10 tests done... ( AND , most importantly , doubling even C + + in math &amp; strings work ( which mind you ?
EVERY PROGRAM DOES ) speed... ) So much for that... ( By the way , if you are the person who impersonated me here earlier this week , &amp; put words in my mouth I never stated as well ?
I 'd like you to stop... &amp; where did I say others are not " real progrmmers " here ?
Please - show us that , verbatim on my part , thanks !
) Proof is always nice , but putting words into others ' mouths they never stated ?
Is not , &amp; it certainly does n't win debates... facts , like the ones about Delphi above though ?
Indisputable... &amp; totally legit + verifiable ( I am looking at the article now , as it was what turned me from VB mostly , &amp; even MSVC + + ( by the by , I have taken over 8 languages formally in college , in FORTRAN , COBOL , C , C + + , MASM , PASCAL , BASIC + VB ) ) So much for your b.s .
... &amp; thanks for the laugh ! APKP.S. = &gt; Ever wonder WHY Microsoft hired away BOTH Mr. Anders Heijelsberg ( sp ?
) from BORLAND ? Hey - He designed .NET by the by for them ( &amp; VB.NET has Try-Catch an excellent construct for err trapping that ObjectPascal/Delphi has had from the get-go for above &amp; beyond " structured built in err handlers " in the compiler/language of BOTH delphi &amp; vb.net for example ) ? Oh , &amp; BY THE WAY ?
Mr. H. also designed BORLAND DELPHI... ( LOL , &amp; THEN , to " top that off " ?
MS hired away Mr. H 's co-designer from BORLAND , my fellow " polish person " , Mr. Chuck Andrewzewski ( sp ?
) ) Why is that ?
Mr. Gates is a WISE MAN , &amp; recognized talent in the builders of the " VBKILLER " as it was called early on , in Delphi , in those two men... plus , Mr. H. ? Only 1 of 16 " DISTINGUISHED ENGINEERS " @ BORLAND... &amp; even the other MS guys say " his design skills are WAY ABOVE THE NORM " ... nuff said !
apk</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"You complain here about how people obviously aren't programmers because they disagree with you yet your language of choice is object pascal via Delphi, hardly the language of choice for an expert programmer and second only to pre-.NET Visual Basic for the horifically bad bloatware it results in.
" - by Anonymous Cowardon Monday July 13, @05:00AM (#28673669)Per my subject-line above?See VISUAL BASIC PROGRAMMER'S JOURNAL, Sept/Oct 1997 issue entitled "INSIDE THE VB5 COMPILER":That's where Delphi, oddly considering it was a competing language trade journal for coders, absolutely KNOCKED THE SNOT out of both VB5 &amp; MSVC++ 5 also mind you, in 7/10 tests done...(AND, most importantly, doubling even C++ in math &amp; strings work (which mind you?
EVERY PROGRAM DOES) speed...)So much for that...(By the way, if you are the person who impersonated me here earlier this week, &amp; put words in my mouth I never stated as well?
I'd like you to stop... &amp; where did I say others are not "real progrmmers" here?
Please - show us that, verbatim on my part, thanks!
)Proof is always nice, but putting words into others' mouths they never stated?
Is not, &amp; it certainly doesn't win debates... facts, like the ones about Delphi above though?
Indisputable... &amp; totally legit + verifiable (I am looking at the article now, as it was what turned me from VB mostly, &amp; even MSVC++ (by the by, I have taken over 8 languages formally in college, in FORTRAN, COBOL, C, C++, MASM, PASCAL, BASIC + VB))So much for your b.s.
... &amp; thanks for the laugh!APKP.S.=&gt; Ever wonder WHY Microsoft hired away BOTH Mr. Anders Heijelsberg (sp?
) from BORLAND?Hey - He designed .NET by the by for them (&amp; VB.NET has Try-Catch an excellent construct for err trapping that ObjectPascal/Delphi has had from the get-go for above &amp; beyond "structured built in err handlers" in the compiler/language of BOTH delphi &amp; vb.net for example)?Oh, &amp; BY THE WAY?
Mr. H. also designed BORLAND DELPHI...(LOL, &amp; THEN, to "top that off"?
MS hired away Mr. H's co-designer from BORLAND, my fellow "polish person", Mr. Chuck Andrewzewski (sp?
))Why is that?
Mr. Gates is a WISE MAN, &amp; recognized talent in the builders of the "VBKILLER" as it was called early on, in Delphi, in those two men... plus, Mr. H.? Only 1 of 16 "DISTINGUISHED ENGINEERS" @ BORLAND... &amp; even the other MS guys say "his design skills are WAY ABOVE THE NORM"... nuff said!
apk
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673669</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671327</id>
	<title>As Lincoln said ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247406900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can fool some of the people All the Time<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>"And that's our target market", said the marketing droid.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can fool some of the people All the Time ... " And that 's our target market " , said the marketing droid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can fool some of the people All the Time ..."And that's our target market", said the marketing droid.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28675343</id>
	<title>Re:OK, Since this is a non-event...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247495820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does Apple really want the business market? It's the reason why MS has to keep a high level of compatibility in their OSes. Don't go blaming Grandma and her 20 year old DOS calendar app.  At my job we still have multiport serial cards!  I have 8 in a closet and one in actual use.  With 6 modems and phone lines attached to them.  In our server room, you can still hear the clicking of the calls coming in and out. That NT 4 box is still running.  Every upgrade attempt has been met with failure.  We only have a weekend IT guy because of that box and a old mainframe with the world's loudest dot-matrix printer!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does Apple really want the business market ?
It 's the reason why MS has to keep a high level of compatibility in their OSes .
Do n't go blaming Grandma and her 20 year old DOS calendar app .
At my job we still have multiport serial cards !
I have 8 in a closet and one in actual use .
With 6 modems and phone lines attached to them .
In our server room , you can still hear the clicking of the calls coming in and out .
That NT 4 box is still running .
Every upgrade attempt has been met with failure .
We only have a weekend IT guy because of that box and a old mainframe with the world 's loudest dot-matrix printer !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does Apple really want the business market?
It's the reason why MS has to keep a high level of compatibility in their OSes.
Don't go blaming Grandma and her 20 year old DOS calendar app.
At my job we still have multiport serial cards!
I have 8 in a closet and one in actual use.
With 6 modems and phone lines attached to them.
In our server room, you can still hear the clicking of the calls coming in and out.
That NT 4 box is still running.
Every upgrade attempt has been met with failure.
We only have a weekend IT guy because of that box and a old mainframe with the world's loudest dot-matrix printer!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671061</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28677533</id>
	<title>Re:You just typed yourself a shill or an idiot</title>
	<author>Orion Blastar</author>
	<datestamp>1247504220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because the beta version may not be the same as the RTM version. By the time the RTM version comes out, some softwre incompatible issues may be resolved by them.</p><p>Right now I am running the Windows 7 beta in VirtualBox as a test. But I would not run it as my main OS, just in case there is a bug that prevents me from doing something.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because the beta version may not be the same as the RTM version .
By the time the RTM version comes out , some softwre incompatible issues may be resolved by them.Right now I am running the Windows 7 beta in VirtualBox as a test .
But I would not run it as my main OS , just in case there is a bug that prevents me from doing something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because the beta version may not be the same as the RTM version.
By the time the RTM version comes out, some softwre incompatible issues may be resolved by them.Right now I am running the Windows 7 beta in VirtualBox as a test.
But I would not run it as my main OS, just in case there is a bug that prevents me from doing something.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672435</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672805</id>
	<title>Re:I am going to take a chance on Windows 7</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247422740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I seem to have stumbled into some random guy's blog. I thought I was reading slashdot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I seem to have stumbled into some random guy 's blog .
I thought I was reading slashdot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I seem to have stumbled into some random guy's blog.
I thought I was reading slashdot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671437</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672125</id>
	<title>Already leaked.</title>
	<author>Doug52392</author>
	<datestamp>1247414580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://forums.mydigitallife.info/showthread.php?t=6293" title="mydigitallife.info"> Windows 7 7600 RTM x64</a> [mydigitallife.info] <br> <br>
Not sure if a 32 bit version has been "leaked" yet...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows 7 7600 RTM x64 [ mydigitallife.info ] Not sure if a 32 bit version has been " leaked " yet.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Windows 7 7600 RTM x64 [mydigitallife.info]  
Not sure if a 32 bit version has been "leaked" yet...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28676539</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247500920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You haven't needed to use Daemon Tools or Alcohol 120 for years.</p><p>http://www.tech-recipes.com/rx/620/xp\_small\_free\_way\_to\_use\_and\_mount\_images\_iso\_files\_without\_burning\_them/</p><p>I use this all the time and it's not perfect, but it's much better than good enough.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You have n't needed to use Daemon Tools or Alcohol 120 for years.http : //www.tech-recipes.com/rx/620/xp \ _small \ _free \ _way \ _to \ _use \ _and \ _mount \ _images \ _iso \ _files \ _without \ _burning \ _them/I use this all the time and it 's not perfect , but it 's much better than good enough .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You haven't needed to use Daemon Tools or Alcohol 120 for years.http://www.tech-recipes.com/rx/620/xp\_small\_free\_way\_to\_use\_and\_mount\_images\_iso\_files\_without\_burning\_them/I use this all the time and it's not perfect, but it's much better than good enough.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672989</id>
	<title>Re:The "Lord of HOSTS" sayeth READ (serious)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247425560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The HOSTS file was never intended as a filtering mechanism, and MS, et al have no obligation to make it work or continue to work for that purpose. Run a proxy or firewall.</p><p>The ludicrously minimal built-in firewall was never intended to be an anti-spyware utility. If you want to run dangerous code on your system, and not have it bypass your security, then relying on any version of Windows' firewall is insane. More than half of the windows GUI runs SUID root, for chrissakes!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The HOSTS file was never intended as a filtering mechanism , and MS , et al have no obligation to make it work or continue to work for that purpose .
Run a proxy or firewall.The ludicrously minimal built-in firewall was never intended to be an anti-spyware utility .
If you want to run dangerous code on your system , and not have it bypass your security , then relying on any version of Windows ' firewall is insane .
More than half of the windows GUI runs SUID root , for chrissakes !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The HOSTS file was never intended as a filtering mechanism, and MS, et al have no obligation to make it work or continue to work for that purpose.
Run a proxy or firewall.The ludicrously minimal built-in firewall was never intended to be an anti-spyware utility.
If you want to run dangerous code on your system, and not have it bypass your security, then relying on any version of Windows' firewall is insane.
More than half of the windows GUI runs SUID root, for chrissakes!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672163</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671599</id>
	<title>Re:Windows 7 makes me excited</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247409240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd suck nine dicks to get a job posting pro-Microsoft stuff online.  Just got laid off and would LOVE to get a check while still being able to troll people like you.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd suck nine dicks to get a job posting pro-Microsoft stuff online .
Just got laid off and would LOVE to get a check while still being able to troll people like you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd suck nine dicks to get a job posting pro-Microsoft stuff online.
Just got laid off and would LOVE to get a check while still being able to troll people like you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671085</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805</id>
	<title>I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247401980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just got sweaty palms and fell out of my chair.</p><p>Seriously?  Windows 7?  People are really going to play that game?</p><p>Does anybody recall any other launch of a Windows product?  They always claim to have fixed all the bugs present in the previous one.  They have claimed since Windows 98 that there is better security.  Vista was supposed to be XP that had been fixed, remember?</p><p>After all these years and years of people eagerly anticipating the next Windows provide a lot of laughs, but it's really very sad when you think about it.</p><p>Windows 7 is the last appeal from death row.  The same tired promises as ever, wrapped in fancier 3D windowing effects.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just got sweaty palms and fell out of my chair.Seriously ?
Windows 7 ?
People are really going to play that game ? Does anybody recall any other launch of a Windows product ?
They always claim to have fixed all the bugs present in the previous one .
They have claimed since Windows 98 that there is better security .
Vista was supposed to be XP that had been fixed , remember ? After all these years and years of people eagerly anticipating the next Windows provide a lot of laughs , but it 's really very sad when you think about it.Windows 7 is the last appeal from death row .
The same tired promises as ever , wrapped in fancier 3D windowing effects .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just got sweaty palms and fell out of my chair.Seriously?
Windows 7?
People are really going to play that game?Does anybody recall any other launch of a Windows product?
They always claim to have fixed all the bugs present in the previous one.
They have claimed since Windows 98 that there is better security.
Vista was supposed to be XP that had been fixed, remember?After all these years and years of people eagerly anticipating the next Windows provide a lot of laughs, but it's really very sad when you think about it.Windows 7 is the last appeal from death row.
The same tired promises as ever, wrapped in fancier 3D windowing effects.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671951</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>GeckoAddict</author>
	<datestamp>1247412780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Microsoft's (technically unsupported) ISO mounting tool: VirtualCD<br> <br>

<a href="http://www.tech-recipes.com/rx/620/xp\_small\_free\_way\_to\_use\_and\_mount\_images\_iso\_files\_without\_burning\_them/" title="tech-recipes.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.tech-recipes.com/rx/620/xp\_small\_free\_way\_to\_use\_and\_mount\_images\_iso\_files\_without\_burning\_them/</a> [tech-recipes.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft 's ( technically unsupported ) ISO mounting tool : VirtualCD http : //www.tech-recipes.com/rx/620/xp \ _small \ _free \ _way \ _to \ _use \ _and \ _mount \ _images \ _iso \ _files \ _without \ _burning \ _them/ [ tech-recipes.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft's (technically unsupported) ISO mounting tool: VirtualCD 

http://www.tech-recipes.com/rx/620/xp\_small\_free\_way\_to\_use\_and\_mount\_images\_iso\_files\_without\_burning\_them/ [tech-recipes.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674517</id>
	<title>Re:Genius marketing</title>
	<author>Erikderzweite</author>
	<datestamp>1247489940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, and that's after they've sold Vista AND XP to "downgrade" to the same pissed off customer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , and that 's after they 've sold Vista AND XP to " downgrade " to the same pissed off customer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, and that's after they've sold Vista AND XP to "downgrade" to the same pissed off customer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672235</id>
	<title>Re:OK, Since this is a non-event...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247415600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The future...</p><p>Google OS's</p><p>Nuff said.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The future...Google OS'sNuff said .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The future...Google OS'sNuff said.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671049</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671583</id>
	<title>Bless their hearts</title>
	<author>fishbowl</author>
	<datestamp>1247409060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They are still making "Windows?"<br>That's cute.  I guess there's always a market for retro stuff.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They are still making " Windows ?
" That 's cute .
I guess there 's always a market for retro stuff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They are still making "Windows?
"That's cute.
I guess there's always a market for retro stuff.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28677687</id>
	<title>Re:The "Lord of HOSTS" sayeth READ (serious)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247504820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>The hosts stuff is a load of crap too, the top parent doesn't seem to understand what the hosts file is for, it's certainly not designed to be used as a 650,000 entry blacklist, it's merely meant to contain a couple of hosts and even then only as a fix for broken DNS. Filtering of base hosts should not be done in the hosts file, that's a really bad hack for someone who simply does not understand how to build their own security layer to filter inbound/outbound connections but a hack with negative repercussions - the hosts file has to be accessed and 650,000 names have to be checked every time you access a host, that's going to slow down your DNS lookups massively.</i> <br>
<br>
Prior to the invention of DNS, hosts files were the only way to do name -&gt; address lookups on a IP network.  So hosts files quickly became rather large.<br>
<br>
(We're just lucky they didn't add some concept of #include to the hosts file.  That might have pushed the concept of DNS back another decade.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>The hosts stuff is a load of crap too , the top parent does n't seem to understand what the hosts file is for , it 's certainly not designed to be used as a 650,000 entry blacklist , it 's merely meant to contain a couple of hosts and even then only as a fix for broken DNS .
Filtering of base hosts should not be done in the hosts file , that 's a really bad hack for someone who simply does not understand how to build their own security layer to filter inbound/outbound connections but a hack with negative repercussions - the hosts file has to be accessed and 650,000 names have to be checked every time you access a host , that 's going to slow down your DNS lookups massively .
Prior to the invention of DNS , hosts files were the only way to do name - &gt; address lookups on a IP network .
So hosts files quickly became rather large .
( We 're just lucky they did n't add some concept of # include to the hosts file .
That might have pushed the concept of DNS back another decade .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The hosts stuff is a load of crap too, the top parent doesn't seem to understand what the hosts file is for, it's certainly not designed to be used as a 650,000 entry blacklist, it's merely meant to contain a couple of hosts and even then only as a fix for broken DNS.
Filtering of base hosts should not be done in the hosts file, that's a really bad hack for someone who simply does not understand how to build their own security layer to filter inbound/outbound connections but a hack with negative repercussions - the hosts file has to be accessed and 650,000 names have to be checked every time you access a host, that's going to slow down your DNS lookups massively.
Prior to the invention of DNS, hosts files were the only way to do name -&gt; address lookups on a IP network.
So hosts files quickly became rather large.
(We're just lucky they didn't add some concept of #include to the hosts file.
That might have pushed the concept of DNS back another decade.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674823</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671035</id>
	<title>apple needs better hardware like a real desktop to</title>
	<author>Joe The Dragon</author>
	<datestamp>1247403960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>apple needs better hardware like a real desktop to get people and big business to switch. The mini is too limited but the big part of that can be fixed by having a easy to open case and a desktop hd and imac does not fit in to there reuse the old displays that a lot of do. Also the mac pro is bad as they can get a systems from dell , hp and others for about $1000-$1500 less with more ram and better base video card.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>apple needs better hardware like a real desktop to get people and big business to switch .
The mini is too limited but the big part of that can be fixed by having a easy to open case and a desktop hd and imac does not fit in to there reuse the old displays that a lot of do .
Also the mac pro is bad as they can get a systems from dell , hp and others for about $ 1000- $ 1500 less with more ram and better base video card .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>apple needs better hardware like a real desktop to get people and big business to switch.
The mini is too limited but the big part of that can be fixed by having a easy to open case and a desktop hd and imac does not fit in to there reuse the old displays that a lot of do.
Also the mac pro is bad as they can get a systems from dell , hp and others for about $1000-$1500 less with more ram and better base video card.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670827</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28754531</id>
	<title>+5 INFORMATIVE is b.s.: See inside... apk</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1248091320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><div class="quote"><p><b>"You want to know why I refuse to disprove what you wrote? I've told you - I don't care about them."</b> - by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 19, @04:16PM (#28749759)</p></div><p>Well, you ought to: After all  - <b>They're in direct response to your words &amp;/or "points" that were geared to "discredit me" &amp; completely disprove your words and your outrageous b.s., so that "said &amp; aside"?</b></p><p><b>Well... I will quote each, "A - D", next below, AND just as you stated them in your 'sock puppet modded up' post that "earned" a "+5 INFORMATIVE" score</b> (b.s.):</p><p>----</p><p><b>A.) ON HOSTS FILES AND WHAT THEY CAN BE USED FOR (security and added speed online)</b></p><div class="quote"><p><b>"Your complaint is about the performance of using the hosts file for something it's never meant to be used for and the resultant performance drops of reading such a large file."</b> - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13, @05:00AM (#28673669)</p></div><p>WoW... you are REALLY clueless, aren't you - are you trying to say that downloading adbanner data speeds up my system? It slows you down, and?? Adbanners have been shown to harbor malicious script in them (was "big news" here on this very website in fact, here):</p><p>----</p><p><b>THE NEXT ADBANNER YOU CLICK ON MAY BE A VIRUS:</b></p><p><a href="http://it.slashdot.org/story/09/06/15/2056219/The-Next-Ad-You-Click-May-Be-a-Virus" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://it.slashdot.org/story/09/06/15/2056219/The-Next-Ad-You-Click-May-Be-a-Virus</a> [slashdot.org]</p><p>----</p><p><b>Care to dispute the findings that even slashdot posted about?</b> Good luck...</p><p>AND, <b>I am NOT the only person noting you go faster online by using a custom HOSTS file</b> (for blocking adbanners &amp;/or hardcoding your favs into it for their URL-to-IP resolution, which also stops you from using possibly compromised DNS Servers (Dan Kaminsky did GREAT work last year &amp; this year on that latter note by the by proving it happens via DNS poisonings etc. et al)):</p><p>----</p><p><a href="http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491" title="securityfocus.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491</a> [securityfocus.com]</p><p><b>PERTINENT QUOTE:</b></p><p>"The host file on my day-to-day laptop is now over 16,000 lines long. Accessing the Internet particularly browsing the Web is actually faster now." <b>Mr. Oliver Day, SECURITYFOCUS.COM</b></p><p>(HOSTS files are also used by "Spybot 'Search &amp; Destroy'" to help secure Windows' systems vs. malware attacks as well!)</p><p>I go faster, hardcoding in 250 of my favorite websites also, not doing port 53 udp queries to a possibly downed or redirected/DNS poisoned DNS server which are slower than calling them from a HOSTS file, then I block out ALL adbanners for more speed still, &amp; then protect my system from KNOWN bad sites that bear malicious javascript code exploits etc. et al for the utmost in security protection from them (IF YOU CAN'T GET INTO THE KITCHEN YOU CAN'T GET BURNED, is why).</p><p>The way I do it, using 0 as my blocking IP address (vs. 127.0.0.1 loopback adapter, or 0.0.0.0) makes the file perform F A S T E R since there is less of it to read (ranging from 30\% (0.0.0.0) - 40\% (127.0.0.1) less), so the file loads faster, &amp; is more efficient on caching (since more of it fits into each 4kb read of the cache/memory/file kernel mode subsystems @ work) + can potentially avoid the hex-to-decimal conversion that takes place when these are used by the IP stack, since 0 decimal = 0 hexadecimal... then, lastly, I place mine on a Gigabyte IRAM SSD (4gb DRAM based, fast on reads + writes &amp; longer lasting than FLASH solutions) via altering the DataBasePath Parameter here -&gt; HKEY\_LOCAL\_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\Tcpip\Parameters, putting my HOSTS file onto an NTFS compressed 4kb/allocation unit-cluster formatted disk (to match the memory/caching/filesystem readsize too), so the file is smaller still &amp; reads up @ a 134mb/sec rate on this SSD, &amp; access @ 0.1 ms + 3\% CPU usage (SSD), only...</p><p>----</p><p><b>B.) ON BORLAND DELPHI (vs. MSVC++ &amp;/or MSVB and HOW MUCH FASTER IT IS (&amp; Delphi's creator CREATED<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET for MS!))</b></p><div class="quote"><p><b>"You complain here about how people obviously aren't programmers because they disagree with you yet your language of choice is object pascal via Delphi, hardly the language of choice for an expert programmer and second only to pre-.NET Visual Basic for the horifically bad bloatware it results in."</b> - by Anonymous Coward<br>on Monday July 13, @05:00AM (#28673669)</p></div><p>Per my subject-line above?</p><p><b>See VISUAL BASIC PROGRAMMER'S JOURNAL, Sept/Oct 1997 issue entitled "INSIDE THE VB5 COMPILER":</b></p><p>That's where <b>Delphi</b>, oddly considering it was a competing language trade journal for coders, <b>absolutely KNOCKED THE SNOT out of both VB5 &amp; MSVC++ 5 also mind you, in 7/10 tests done</b>...</p><p>(AND, most importantly, <b>doubling even C++ in math &amp; strings work</b> (which mind you? EVERY PROGRAM DOES, &amp; strings work is crucial to HOSTS file processing) speed...)</p><p>So much for that...</p><p>Proof is always nice, but putting words into others' mouths they never stated? Is not, &amp; it certainly doesn't win debates... facts, like the ones about Delphi above though? Indisputable... &amp; totally legit + verifiable (I am looking at the article now, as it was what turned me from VB mostly, &amp; even MSVC++ (by the by, I have taken over 8 languages formally in college, in FORTRAN, COBOL, C, C++, MASM, PASCAL, BASIC + VB)) AND?</p><p><b>Ever wonder WHY Microsoft hired away BOTH Mr. Anders Heijelsberg</b> (sp?) <b> &amp; his colleague Chuck Andrejewski, from BORLAND?</b></p><p>Hey - <b>He designed<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET by the by for Microsoft</b> (&amp; VB.NET has Try-Catch an excellent construct for err trapping that ObjectPascal/Delphi has had from the get-go for above &amp; beyond "structured built in err handlers" in the compiler/language of BOTH delphi &amp; vb.net for example)?</p><p>Why is that??</p><p>Well - Mr. Gates is a WISE MAN, &amp; recognized talent in the builders of the "VBKILLER" as it was called early on, in Delphi, in those two men... plus, Mr. H.? Only 1 of 16 "DISTINGUISHED ENGINEERS" @ MICROSOFT... &amp; even the other MS guys say "his design skills are WAY ABOVE THE NORM"... nuff said!</p><p>ALSO - A QUESTION:</p><p><b>WHERE DID I EVER SAY PEOPLE HERE ARE NOT "REAL PROGRAMMERS", or, THAT I SAID OTHER LANGUAGES THEY MAY USE ARE NO GOOD?</b></p><p>Please, prove that, show us where I did so...</p><p>----</p><p><b>C.) ON YOUR SAYING I NEVER CODED IN C/C++ or<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET:</b></p><div class="quote"><p><b>"Do us all a favour, quit posting anything to the internet, spend a few years updating your knowledge to learn a worthwhile language like C++, Java or one of the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET languages. Get a clue about security and understand why your applications are a far bigger security risk than anything you talk of and finally, stop threatening to sue anyone you disagree with."</b> - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13, @05:00AM (#28673669)</p></div><p>So much for that:  <b>I have used C &amp; C++ since 1992</b> (where I learned it during my education/college) <b>&amp; professionally in many assignments</b> (MSVC++ and Borland C++ Builder) - Fact is, I program fluently in C/C++, BASIC, FORTRAN, COBOL, X86 ASSEMBLY, PASCAL, &amp;<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET + "dialects/variations", thereof...<nobr> <wbr></nobr><b>.NET I used most all last year</b> (VB.NET &amp; ASP.NET via Visual Studio 2005) I seriously doubt you have ever used them yourself, so, so much for that</p><p>----</p><p><b>D.) ON YOUR SAYING I AM A MALWARE MAKER:</b></p><div class="quote"><p><b>"But wait, it appears you didn't stop there, I also found this:" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13, @05:00AM (#28673669)"</b> - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13, @05:00AM (#28673669)</p></div><p>@ CA - I did their review to have it removed, 21 questions, and my application did not violate a SINGLE constraint. So much for them and Mr. Thor SCHMUCK. <b>Others, like Dr. Mark Russinovich even, and Nir Sofer of Nirsoft have also been victimized by this type of thing happening, so I am not alone in that much.</b></p><p>(Write them yourself, they will tell you ALL about this happening with legit apps! So, as you can see? It truly DOES "happen to the best of us...")</p><p>APK</p><p>P.S.=&gt; </p><div class="quote"><p><b>"I stick around "trolling you" because I've seen how you troll others. I've seen your tactics."</b> - by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 19, @04:16PM (#28749759)</p></div><p>WoW<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I have a "psycho internet stalker" after me, too late - The "Arstechnica 'not men'" have already beaten YOU, to that punch, &amp; right in this very thread/post here -&gt; <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1300193&amp;cid=28678549" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1300193&amp;cid=28678549</a> [slashdot.org]</p><p>(Please - grow up (&amp; learn to respect your betters!))</p><p>apk</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" You want to know why I refuse to disprove what you wrote ?
I 've told you - I do n't care about them .
" - by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 19 , @ 04 : 16PM ( # 28749759 ) Well , you ought to : After all - They 're in direct response to your words &amp;/or " points " that were geared to " discredit me " &amp; completely disprove your words and your outrageous b.s. , so that " said &amp; aside " ? Well... I will quote each , " A - D " , next below , AND just as you stated them in your 'sock puppet modded up ' post that " earned " a " + 5 INFORMATIVE " score ( b.s. ) : ----A .
) ON HOSTS FILES AND WHAT THEY CAN BE USED FOR ( security and added speed online ) " Your complaint is about the performance of using the hosts file for something it 's never meant to be used for and the resultant performance drops of reading such a large file .
" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 , @ 05 : 00AM ( # 28673669 ) WoW... you are REALLY clueless , are n't you - are you trying to say that downloading adbanner data speeds up my system ?
It slows you down , and ? ?
Adbanners have been shown to harbor malicious script in them ( was " big news " here on this very website in fact , here ) : ----THE NEXT ADBANNER YOU CLICK ON MAY BE A VIRUS : http : //it.slashdot.org/story/09/06/15/2056219/The-Next-Ad-You-Click-May-Be-a-Virus [ slashdot.org ] ----Care to dispute the findings that even slashdot posted about ?
Good luck...AND , I am NOT the only person noting you go faster online by using a custom HOSTS file ( for blocking adbanners &amp;/or hardcoding your favs into it for their URL-to-IP resolution , which also stops you from using possibly compromised DNS Servers ( Dan Kaminsky did GREAT work last year &amp; this year on that latter note by the by proving it happens via DNS poisonings etc .
et al ) ) : ----http : //www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491 [ securityfocus.com ] PERTINENT QUOTE : " The host file on my day-to-day laptop is now over 16,000 lines long .
Accessing the Internet particularly browsing the Web is actually faster now .
" Mr. Oliver Day , SECURITYFOCUS.COM ( HOSTS files are also used by " Spybot 'Search &amp; Destroy ' " to help secure Windows ' systems vs. malware attacks as well !
) I go faster , hardcoding in 250 of my favorite websites also , not doing port 53 udp queries to a possibly downed or redirected/DNS poisoned DNS server which are slower than calling them from a HOSTS file , then I block out ALL adbanners for more speed still , &amp; then protect my system from KNOWN bad sites that bear malicious javascript code exploits etc .
et al for the utmost in security protection from them ( IF YOU CA N'T GET INTO THE KITCHEN YOU CA N'T GET BURNED , is why ) .The way I do it , using 0 as my blocking IP address ( vs. 127.0.0.1 loopback adapter , or 0.0.0.0 ) makes the file perform F A S T E R since there is less of it to read ( ranging from 30 \ % ( 0.0.0.0 ) - 40 \ % ( 127.0.0.1 ) less ) , so the file loads faster , &amp; is more efficient on caching ( since more of it fits into each 4kb read of the cache/memory/file kernel mode subsystems @ work ) + can potentially avoid the hex-to-decimal conversion that takes place when these are used by the IP stack , since 0 decimal = 0 hexadecimal... then , lastly , I place mine on a Gigabyte IRAM SSD ( 4gb DRAM based , fast on reads + writes &amp; longer lasting than FLASH solutions ) via altering the DataBasePath Parameter here - &gt; HKEY \ _LOCAL \ _MACHINE \ SYSTEM \ CurrentControlSet \ Services \ Tcpip \ Parameters , putting my HOSTS file onto an NTFS compressed 4kb/allocation unit-cluster formatted disk ( to match the memory/caching/filesystem readsize too ) , so the file is smaller still &amp; reads up @ a 134mb/sec rate on this SSD , &amp; access @ 0.1 ms + 3 \ % CPU usage ( SSD ) , only...----B .
) ON BORLAND DELPHI ( vs. MSVC + + &amp;/or MSVB and HOW MUCH FASTER IT IS ( &amp; Delphi 's creator CREATED .NET for MS !
) ) " You complain here about how people obviously are n't programmers because they disagree with you yet your language of choice is object pascal via Delphi , hardly the language of choice for an expert programmer and second only to pre-.NET Visual Basic for the horifically bad bloatware it results in .
" - by Anonymous Cowardon Monday July 13 , @ 05 : 00AM ( # 28673669 ) Per my subject-line above ? See VISUAL BASIC PROGRAMMER 'S JOURNAL , Sept/Oct 1997 issue entitled " INSIDE THE VB5 COMPILER " : That 's where Delphi , oddly considering it was a competing language trade journal for coders , absolutely KNOCKED THE SNOT out of both VB5 &amp; MSVC + + 5 also mind you , in 7/10 tests done... ( AND , most importantly , doubling even C + + in math &amp; strings work ( which mind you ?
EVERY PROGRAM DOES , &amp; strings work is crucial to HOSTS file processing ) speed... ) So much for that...Proof is always nice , but putting words into others ' mouths they never stated ?
Is not , &amp; it certainly does n't win debates... facts , like the ones about Delphi above though ?
Indisputable... &amp; totally legit + verifiable ( I am looking at the article now , as it was what turned me from VB mostly , &amp; even MSVC + + ( by the by , I have taken over 8 languages formally in college , in FORTRAN , COBOL , C , C + + , MASM , PASCAL , BASIC + VB ) ) AND ? Ever wonder WHY Microsoft hired away BOTH Mr. Anders Heijelsberg ( sp ?
) &amp; his colleague Chuck Andrejewski , from BORLAND ? Hey - He designed .NET by the by for Microsoft ( &amp; VB.NET has Try-Catch an excellent construct for err trapping that ObjectPascal/Delphi has had from the get-go for above &amp; beyond " structured built in err handlers " in the compiler/language of BOTH delphi &amp; vb.net for example ) ? Why is that ?
? Well - Mr. Gates is a WISE MAN , &amp; recognized talent in the builders of the " VBKILLER " as it was called early on , in Delphi , in those two men... plus , Mr. H. ? Only 1 of 16 " DISTINGUISHED ENGINEERS " @ MICROSOFT... &amp; even the other MS guys say " his design skills are WAY ABOVE THE NORM " ... nuff said ! ALSO - A QUESTION : WHERE DID I EVER SAY PEOPLE HERE ARE NOT " REAL PROGRAMMERS " , or , THAT I SAID OTHER LANGUAGES THEY MAY USE ARE NO GOOD ? Please , prove that , show us where I did so...----C. ) ON YOUR SAYING I NEVER CODED IN C/C + + or .NET : " Do us all a favour , quit posting anything to the internet , spend a few years updating your knowledge to learn a worthwhile language like C + + , Java or one of the .NET languages .
Get a clue about security and understand why your applications are a far bigger security risk than anything you talk of and finally , stop threatening to sue anyone you disagree with .
" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 , @ 05 : 00AM ( # 28673669 ) So much for that : I have used C &amp; C + + since 1992 ( where I learned it during my education/college ) &amp; professionally in many assignments ( MSVC + + and Borland C + + Builder ) - Fact is , I program fluently in C/C + + , BASIC , FORTRAN , COBOL , X86 ASSEMBLY , PASCAL , &amp; .NET + " dialects/variations " , thereof... .NET I used most all last year ( VB.NET &amp; ASP.NET via Visual Studio 2005 ) I seriously doubt you have ever used them yourself , so , so much for that----D. ) ON YOUR SAYING I AM A MALWARE MAKER : " But wait , it appears you did n't stop there , I also found this : " - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 , @ 05 : 00AM ( # 28673669 ) " - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 , @ 05 : 00AM ( # 28673669 ) @ CA - I did their review to have it removed , 21 questions , and my application did not violate a SINGLE constraint .
So much for them and Mr. Thor SCHMUCK .
Others , like Dr. Mark Russinovich even , and Nir Sofer of Nirsoft have also been victimized by this type of thing happening , so I am not alone in that much .
( Write them yourself , they will tell you ALL about this happening with legit apps !
So , as you can see ?
It truly DOES " happen to the best of us... " ) APKP.S. = &gt; " I stick around " trolling you " because I 've seen how you troll others .
I 've seen your tactics .
" - by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 19 , @ 04 : 16PM ( # 28749759 ) WoW ... I have a " psycho internet stalker " after me , too late - The " Arstechnica 'not men ' " have already beaten YOU , to that punch , &amp; right in this very thread/post here - &gt; http : //tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 1300193&amp;cid = 28678549 [ slashdot.org ] ( Please - grow up ( &amp; learn to respect your betters !
) ) apk</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"You want to know why I refuse to disprove what you wrote?
I've told you - I don't care about them.
" - by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 19, @04:16PM (#28749759)Well, you ought to: After all  - They're in direct response to your words &amp;/or "points" that were geared to "discredit me" &amp; completely disprove your words and your outrageous b.s., so that "said &amp; aside"?Well... I will quote each, "A - D", next below, AND just as you stated them in your 'sock puppet modded up' post that "earned" a "+5 INFORMATIVE" score (b.s.):----A.
) ON HOSTS FILES AND WHAT THEY CAN BE USED FOR (security and added speed online)"Your complaint is about the performance of using the hosts file for something it's never meant to be used for and the resultant performance drops of reading such a large file.
" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13, @05:00AM (#28673669)WoW... you are REALLY clueless, aren't you - are you trying to say that downloading adbanner data speeds up my system?
It slows you down, and??
Adbanners have been shown to harbor malicious script in them (was "big news" here on this very website in fact, here):----THE NEXT ADBANNER YOU CLICK ON MAY BE A VIRUS:http://it.slashdot.org/story/09/06/15/2056219/The-Next-Ad-You-Click-May-Be-a-Virus [slashdot.org]----Care to dispute the findings that even slashdot posted about?
Good luck...AND, I am NOT the only person noting you go faster online by using a custom HOSTS file (for blocking adbanners &amp;/or hardcoding your favs into it for their URL-to-IP resolution, which also stops you from using possibly compromised DNS Servers (Dan Kaminsky did GREAT work last year &amp; this year on that latter note by the by proving it happens via DNS poisonings etc.
et al)):----http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491 [securityfocus.com]PERTINENT QUOTE:"The host file on my day-to-day laptop is now over 16,000 lines long.
Accessing the Internet particularly browsing the Web is actually faster now.
" Mr. Oliver Day, SECURITYFOCUS.COM(HOSTS files are also used by "Spybot 'Search &amp; Destroy'" to help secure Windows' systems vs. malware attacks as well!
)I go faster, hardcoding in 250 of my favorite websites also, not doing port 53 udp queries to a possibly downed or redirected/DNS poisoned DNS server which are slower than calling them from a HOSTS file, then I block out ALL adbanners for more speed still, &amp; then protect my system from KNOWN bad sites that bear malicious javascript code exploits etc.
et al for the utmost in security protection from them (IF YOU CAN'T GET INTO THE KITCHEN YOU CAN'T GET BURNED, is why).The way I do it, using 0 as my blocking IP address (vs. 127.0.0.1 loopback adapter, or 0.0.0.0) makes the file perform F A S T E R since there is less of it to read (ranging from 30\% (0.0.0.0) - 40\% (127.0.0.1) less), so the file loads faster, &amp; is more efficient on caching (since more of it fits into each 4kb read of the cache/memory/file kernel mode subsystems @ work) + can potentially avoid the hex-to-decimal conversion that takes place when these are used by the IP stack, since 0 decimal = 0 hexadecimal... then, lastly, I place mine on a Gigabyte IRAM SSD (4gb DRAM based, fast on reads + writes &amp; longer lasting than FLASH solutions) via altering the DataBasePath Parameter here -&gt; HKEY\_LOCAL\_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\Tcpip\Parameters, putting my HOSTS file onto an NTFS compressed 4kb/allocation unit-cluster formatted disk (to match the memory/caching/filesystem readsize too), so the file is smaller still &amp; reads up @ a 134mb/sec rate on this SSD, &amp; access @ 0.1 ms + 3\% CPU usage (SSD), only...----B.
) ON BORLAND DELPHI (vs. MSVC++ &amp;/or MSVB and HOW MUCH FASTER IT IS (&amp; Delphi's creator CREATED .NET for MS!
))"You complain here about how people obviously aren't programmers because they disagree with you yet your language of choice is object pascal via Delphi, hardly the language of choice for an expert programmer and second only to pre-.NET Visual Basic for the horifically bad bloatware it results in.
" - by Anonymous Cowardon Monday July 13, @05:00AM (#28673669)Per my subject-line above?See VISUAL BASIC PROGRAMMER'S JOURNAL, Sept/Oct 1997 issue entitled "INSIDE THE VB5 COMPILER":That's where Delphi, oddly considering it was a competing language trade journal for coders, absolutely KNOCKED THE SNOT out of both VB5 &amp; MSVC++ 5 also mind you, in 7/10 tests done...(AND, most importantly, doubling even C++ in math &amp; strings work (which mind you?
EVERY PROGRAM DOES, &amp; strings work is crucial to HOSTS file processing) speed...)So much for that...Proof is always nice, but putting words into others' mouths they never stated?
Is not, &amp; it certainly doesn't win debates... facts, like the ones about Delphi above though?
Indisputable... &amp; totally legit + verifiable (I am looking at the article now, as it was what turned me from VB mostly, &amp; even MSVC++ (by the by, I have taken over 8 languages formally in college, in FORTRAN, COBOL, C, C++, MASM, PASCAL, BASIC + VB)) AND?Ever wonder WHY Microsoft hired away BOTH Mr. Anders Heijelsberg (sp?
)  &amp; his colleague Chuck Andrejewski, from BORLAND?Hey - He designed .NET by the by for Microsoft (&amp; VB.NET has Try-Catch an excellent construct for err trapping that ObjectPascal/Delphi has had from the get-go for above &amp; beyond "structured built in err handlers" in the compiler/language of BOTH delphi &amp; vb.net for example)?Why is that?
?Well - Mr. Gates is a WISE MAN, &amp; recognized talent in the builders of the "VBKILLER" as it was called early on, in Delphi, in those two men... plus, Mr. H.? Only 1 of 16 "DISTINGUISHED ENGINEERS" @ MICROSOFT... &amp; even the other MS guys say "his design skills are WAY ABOVE THE NORM"... nuff said!ALSO - A QUESTION:WHERE DID I EVER SAY PEOPLE HERE ARE NOT "REAL PROGRAMMERS", or, THAT I SAID OTHER LANGUAGES THEY MAY USE ARE NO GOOD?Please, prove that, show us where I did so...----C.) ON YOUR SAYING I NEVER CODED IN C/C++ or .NET:"Do us all a favour, quit posting anything to the internet, spend a few years updating your knowledge to learn a worthwhile language like C++, Java or one of the .NET languages.
Get a clue about security and understand why your applications are a far bigger security risk than anything you talk of and finally, stop threatening to sue anyone you disagree with.
" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13, @05:00AM (#28673669)So much for that:  I have used C &amp; C++ since 1992 (where I learned it during my education/college) &amp; professionally in many assignments (MSVC++ and Borland C++ Builder) - Fact is, I program fluently in C/C++, BASIC, FORTRAN, COBOL, X86 ASSEMBLY, PASCAL, &amp; .NET + "dialects/variations", thereof... .NET I used most all last year (VB.NET &amp; ASP.NET via Visual Studio 2005) I seriously doubt you have ever used them yourself, so, so much for that----D.) ON YOUR SAYING I AM A MALWARE MAKER:"But wait, it appears you didn't stop there, I also found this:" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13, @05:00AM (#28673669)" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13, @05:00AM (#28673669)@ CA - I did their review to have it removed, 21 questions, and my application did not violate a SINGLE constraint.
So much for them and Mr. Thor SCHMUCK.
Others, like Dr. Mark Russinovich even, and Nir Sofer of Nirsoft have also been victimized by this type of thing happening, so I am not alone in that much.
(Write them yourself, they will tell you ALL about this happening with legit apps!
So, as you can see?
It truly DOES "happen to the best of us...")APKP.S.=&gt; "I stick around "trolling you" because I've seen how you troll others.
I've seen your tactics.
" - by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 19, @04:16PM (#28749759)WoW ... I have a "psycho internet stalker" after me, too late - The "Arstechnica 'not men'" have already beaten YOU, to that punch, &amp; right in this very thread/post here -&gt; http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1300193&amp;cid=28678549 [slashdot.org](Please - grow up (&amp; learn to respect your betters!
))apk
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673669</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672585</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247419860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You must have not reinstalled recently.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You must have not reinstalled recently .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You must have not reinstalled recently.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671747</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672847</id>
	<title>I don't know about the rest...</title>
	<author>arazor</author>
	<datestamp>1247423220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For myself all the programs I wanted to run under XP 64 crashed like a mofo. MS conspiracy I dunno. But the windows 7 public betas and rc run those programs perfectly it is almost as if MS wanted vista to be a total failure just to get even pirates to purchase windows 7.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For myself all the programs I wanted to run under XP 64 crashed like a mofo .
MS conspiracy I dunno .
But the windows 7 public betas and rc run those programs perfectly it is almost as if MS wanted vista to be a total failure just to get even pirates to purchase windows 7 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For myself all the programs I wanted to run under XP 64 crashed like a mofo.
MS conspiracy I dunno.
But the windows 7 public betas and rc run those programs perfectly it is almost as if MS wanted vista to be a total failure just to get even pirates to purchase windows 7.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672073</id>
	<title>Re:And coke reintroduces coca cola classic</title>
	<author>sapphire wyvern</author>
	<datestamp>1247414040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Then, they released "coca-cola classic".. err.. i mean windows xp again...err.. i mean "windows 7".. which the public raved was so much better than before!</p></div><p>Except, of course, that Win 7 is far more like Vista than it is like XP.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Then , they released " coca-cola classic " .. err.. i mean windows xp again...err.. i mean " windows 7 " .. which the public raved was so much better than before ! Except , of course , that Win 7 is far more like Vista than it is like XP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then, they released "coca-cola classic".. err.. i mean windows xp again...err.. i mean "windows 7".. which the public raved was so much better than before!Except, of course, that Win 7 is far more like Vista than it is like XP.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671233</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28675419</id>
	<title>Re:The "Lord of HOSTS" sayeth READ (serious)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247496240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Seriously, 14MB of plain text that needs to be parsed for every lookup? That's the most retarded thing I've ever seen.</p></div><p>While I agree with you, Vista has two technologies which speed up this sort of thing. Actually, three. Two are shared with XP, one of which is shared with pretty much everyone in existence. Vista has disk caching, which will probably keep that 14MB in RAM at all times. If it doesn't, and you have some ReadyBoost-enabled flash hooked up, then the file will probably end up copied to flash because it will be very frequently read. Three, XP and Vista both reorg files to be contiguously located on the disk to speed up boot time.</p><p>Obviously, tampering with DNS results is a better solution than tampering the hosts file. It's not available to dumbasses though... but it seems like it should be, and it wouldn't be that hard to just give people a package that would provide it. I wonder if you can run dnsmasq on Windows<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , 14MB of plain text that needs to be parsed for every lookup ?
That 's the most retarded thing I 've ever seen.While I agree with you , Vista has two technologies which speed up this sort of thing .
Actually , three .
Two are shared with XP , one of which is shared with pretty much everyone in existence .
Vista has disk caching , which will probably keep that 14MB in RAM at all times .
If it does n't , and you have some ReadyBoost-enabled flash hooked up , then the file will probably end up copied to flash because it will be very frequently read .
Three , XP and Vista both reorg files to be contiguously located on the disk to speed up boot time.Obviously , tampering with DNS results is a better solution than tampering the hosts file .
It 's not available to dumbasses though... but it seems like it should be , and it would n't be that hard to just give people a package that would provide it .
I wonder if you can run dnsmasq on Windows : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, 14MB of plain text that needs to be parsed for every lookup?
That's the most retarded thing I've ever seen.While I agree with you, Vista has two technologies which speed up this sort of thing.
Actually, three.
Two are shared with XP, one of which is shared with pretty much everyone in existence.
Vista has disk caching, which will probably keep that 14MB in RAM at all times.
If it doesn't, and you have some ReadyBoost-enabled flash hooked up, then the file will probably end up copied to flash because it will be very frequently read.
Three, XP and Vista both reorg files to be contiguously located on the disk to speed up boot time.Obviously, tampering with DNS results is a better solution than tampering the hosts file.
It's not available to dumbasses though... but it seems like it should be, and it wouldn't be that hard to just give people a package that would provide it.
I wonder if you can run dnsmasq on Windows :)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672489</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672435</id>
	<title>You just typed yourself a shill or an idiot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247418120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Your announcing on a technology site that you just pre-ordered TWO copies of an OS that's in a free public beta? See if you can cancel the order, create a (free) <a href="http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/evalcenter/dd353205.aspx?ITPID=mscomsc" title="microsoft.com">technet account</a> [microsoft.com] and download then burn your disks. You can use this version until March 1, 2010 and then decide if it's worth your money.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Your announcing on a technology site that you just pre-ordered TWO copies of an OS that 's in a free public beta ?
See if you can cancel the order , create a ( free ) technet account [ microsoft.com ] and download then burn your disks .
You can use this version until March 1 , 2010 and then decide if it 's worth your money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your announcing on a technology site that you just pre-ordered TWO copies of an OS that's in a free public beta?
See if you can cancel the order, create a (free) technet account [microsoft.com] and download then burn your disks.
You can use this version until March 1, 2010 and then decide if it's worth your money.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671437</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28677241</id>
	<title>I Sing of the Body Microsoftic</title>
	<author>DannyO152</author>
	<datestamp>1247503140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Any company that employs a public relations company has had the opportunity to pay for astroturfing for years. In fact, I sort of wish we could recognize and reward the companies that don't do it. In Microsoft's case, there are documents from the Iowa case which basically lays out the tactics, like astroturfing, they use to influence the public perception of their technical merits.</p><p>Now, over at ZDNet, all the Windows 7 articles are accompanied by legions of talk backs wherein the writer relates how flawlessly the beta and RC of Win7 have operated. Then, the weekend that the Wall Street Journal reports Jobs' liver transplant, Dan "Fake Steve Jobs" Lyons makes a blog post wherein he describes his frustration in trying to write an article in Word on Win7 beta while it kept crashing. He had to go to his Plan B, write it on his Mac, and he excoriated Microsoft for the quality of its software. His commenters took issue with him critiquing a company for beta software, which is a fair point. But, in one place, dozens of testimonials that they are testing it and there's never a cough in the carload and it's ready to ship now, and at another place, for an arbitrary user, it fails when he needs it to get his job done. It's possible that that's just the way it broke. I think it's more probable that some of the "flawless" posts are pr product.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Any company that employs a public relations company has had the opportunity to pay for astroturfing for years .
In fact , I sort of wish we could recognize and reward the companies that do n't do it .
In Microsoft 's case , there are documents from the Iowa case which basically lays out the tactics , like astroturfing , they use to influence the public perception of their technical merits.Now , over at ZDNet , all the Windows 7 articles are accompanied by legions of talk backs wherein the writer relates how flawlessly the beta and RC of Win7 have operated .
Then , the weekend that the Wall Street Journal reports Jobs ' liver transplant , Dan " Fake Steve Jobs " Lyons makes a blog post wherein he describes his frustration in trying to write an article in Word on Win7 beta while it kept crashing .
He had to go to his Plan B , write it on his Mac , and he excoriated Microsoft for the quality of its software .
His commenters took issue with him critiquing a company for beta software , which is a fair point .
But , in one place , dozens of testimonials that they are testing it and there 's never a cough in the carload and it 's ready to ship now , and at another place , for an arbitrary user , it fails when he needs it to get his job done .
It 's possible that that 's just the way it broke .
I think it 's more probable that some of the " flawless " posts are pr product .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any company that employs a public relations company has had the opportunity to pay for astroturfing for years.
In fact, I sort of wish we could recognize and reward the companies that don't do it.
In Microsoft's case, there are documents from the Iowa case which basically lays out the tactics, like astroturfing, they use to influence the public perception of their technical merits.Now, over at ZDNet, all the Windows 7 articles are accompanied by legions of talk backs wherein the writer relates how flawlessly the beta and RC of Win7 have operated.
Then, the weekend that the Wall Street Journal reports Jobs' liver transplant, Dan "Fake Steve Jobs" Lyons makes a blog post wherein he describes his frustration in trying to write an article in Word on Win7 beta while it kept crashing.
He had to go to his Plan B, write it on his Mac, and he excoriated Microsoft for the quality of its software.
His commenters took issue with him critiquing a company for beta software, which is a fair point.
But, in one place, dozens of testimonials that they are testing it and there's never a cough in the carload and it's ready to ship now, and at another place, for an arbitrary user, it fails when he needs it to get his job done.
It's possible that that's just the way it broke.
I think it's more probable that some of the "flawless" posts are pr product.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672203</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671445</id>
	<title>Re:And the Lord spake, saying,</title>
	<author>moon3</author>
	<datestamp>1247408100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.memedepot.com/uploads/500/729\_1242618977342.jpg" title="memedepot.com">http://www.memedepot.com/uploads/500/729\_1242618977342.jpg</a> [memedepot.com] <br> <br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>/s</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.memedepot.com/uploads/500/729 \ _1242618977342.jpg [ memedepot.com ] /s</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.memedepot.com/uploads/500/729\_1242618977342.jpg [memedepot.com]   /s</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670771</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672265</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>melikamp</author>
	<datestamp>1247415840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are using Windows for working with data which is precious enough to need a backup?
I admire your faith.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are using Windows for working with data which is precious enough to need a backup ?
I admire your faith .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are using Windows for working with data which is precious enough to need a backup?
I admire your faith.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671701</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247410140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think you meant BitLocker.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you meant BitLocker .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you meant BitLocker.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674167</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>arkhan\_jg</author>
	<datestamp>1247485740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While ISO loopback mounting really should be in the OS by now, there's the entirely free (with no adware/spyware/nagware) <a href="http://forum.slysoft.com/forumdisplay.php?f=21" title="slysoft.com">virtual clonedrive</a> [slysoft.com] from slysoft, i.e. the guys that do anydvd and clonedvd. You just need the beta version from the forum for the moment for win 7 support.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While ISO loopback mounting really should be in the OS by now , there 's the entirely free ( with no adware/spyware/nagware ) virtual clonedrive [ slysoft.com ] from slysoft , i.e .
the guys that do anydvd and clonedvd .
You just need the beta version from the forum for the moment for win 7 support .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While ISO loopback mounting really should be in the OS by now, there's the entirely free (with no adware/spyware/nagware) virtual clonedrive [slysoft.com] from slysoft, i.e.
the guys that do anydvd and clonedvd.
You just need the beta version from the forum for the moment for win 7 support.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28680501</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>Life2Death</author>
	<datestamp>1247513940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Windows 7 Ultimate Will is reccomended to have 15GB of space.<br>To install the Windows XP Pro addon, you need another 15GB of space.</p><p>Whats wrong here?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows 7 Ultimate Will is reccomended to have 15GB of space.To install the Windows XP Pro addon , you need another 15GB of space.Whats wrong here ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows 7 Ultimate Will is reccomended to have 15GB of space.To install the Windows XP Pro addon, you need another 15GB of space.Whats wrong here?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671363</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>master811</author>
	<datestamp>1247407380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's actually called BitLocker, rather than keeper.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's actually called BitLocker , rather than keeper .
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's actually called BitLocker, rather than keeper.
;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672375</id>
	<title>Re:Windows 7 makes me excited</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247417340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I like windows 7 more than a wall of text!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I like windows 7 more than a wall of text !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like windows 7 more than a wall of text!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671085</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671555</id>
	<title>Re:Our world is saved!</title>
	<author>gbarules2999</author>
	<datestamp>1247408880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>You can keep burning those Linux discs, sure. The Mac DVD's probably aren't legal, though.<br> <br>If you're setting them on fire, put them on your junk first. It will melt into a permanent condom. You'll need it for Windows.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You can keep burning those Linux discs , sure .
The Mac DVD 's probably are n't legal , though .
If you 're setting them on fire , put them on your junk first .
It will melt into a permanent condom .
You 'll need it for Windows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can keep burning those Linux discs, sure.
The Mac DVD's probably aren't legal, though.
If you're setting them on fire, put them on your junk first.
It will melt into a permanent condom.
You'll need it for Windows.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671093</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671463</id>
	<title>Re:Windows 7 makes me excited</title>
	<author>gbarules2999</author>
	<datestamp>1247408220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This should be modded up, if not for the discussion that may come after. ASTROTURF!!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>This should be modded up , if not for the discussion that may come after .
ASTROTURF ! ! !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This should be modded up, if not for the discussion that may come after.
ASTROTURF!!!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671085</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672021</id>
	<title>Re:And coke reintroduces coca cola classic</title>
	<author>vp0ng</author>
	<datestamp>1247413500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.snopes.com/cokelore/newcoke.asp" title="snopes.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.snopes.com/cokelore/newcoke.asp</a> [snopes.com]

The New-Coke as a clever marketing ploy is a common misconception.</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.snopes.com/cokelore/newcoke.asp [ snopes.com ] The New-Coke as a clever marketing ploy is a common misconception .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.snopes.com/cokelore/newcoke.asp [snopes.com]

The New-Coke as a clever marketing ploy is a common misconception.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671233</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671233</id>
	<title>And coke reintroduces coca cola classic</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247406000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A while back coke.. err i mean microsoft.. introduced "new coke".. err.. i mean windows vista.. which was an unfort--*cough*purposeful*cough*--unate flop.</p><p>Then, they released "coca-cola classic".. err.. i mean windows xp again...err.. i mean "windows 7".. which the public raved was so much better than before!</p><p>HURRAY! *cough*and microsoft gets away with zero innovation by simply engineering expectations*cough*</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A while back coke.. err i mean microsoft.. introduced " new coke " .. err.. i mean windows vista.. which was an unfort-- * cough * purposeful * cough * --unate flop.Then , they released " coca-cola classic " .. err.. i mean windows xp again...err.. i mean " windows 7 " .. which the public raved was so much better than before ! HURRAY !
* cough * and microsoft gets away with zero innovation by simply engineering expectations * cough *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A while back coke.. err i mean microsoft.. introduced "new coke".. err.. i mean windows vista.. which was an unfort--*cough*purposeful*cough*--unate flop.Then, they released "coca-cola classic".. err.. i mean windows xp again...err.. i mean "windows 7".. which the public raved was so much better than before!HURRAY!
*cough*and microsoft gets away with zero innovation by simply engineering expectations*cough*</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28676747</id>
	<title>Re:I am going to take a chance on Windows 7</title>
	<author>SoonerSkeene</author>
	<datestamp>1247501520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Please don't call it version 7.0.  It's name is Windows 7, but it's version 6.1.  Adding the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.0 to it's name is like saying "I use Windows XP.0".  And I'm sure this whole 7-is-actually-6.1 nonsense is going to confuse people.  And what about when it comes times for Windows 8?  Well, that probably won't matter because Microsoft can't stick to any naming convention.  Hell, 7 is the first OS since 3.11 that has a number as a name -- but at least back then it was the version number, not just a random digit.

Microsoft, you look stupid.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Please do n't call it version 7.0 .
It 's name is Windows 7 , but it 's version 6.1 .
Adding the .0 to it 's name is like saying " I use Windows XP.0 " .
And I 'm sure this whole 7-is-actually-6.1 nonsense is going to confuse people .
And what about when it comes times for Windows 8 ?
Well , that probably wo n't matter because Microsoft ca n't stick to any naming convention .
Hell , 7 is the first OS since 3.11 that has a number as a name -- but at least back then it was the version number , not just a random digit .
Microsoft , you look stupid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please don't call it version 7.0.
It's name is Windows 7, but it's version 6.1.
Adding the .0 to it's name is like saying "I use Windows XP.0".
And I'm sure this whole 7-is-actually-6.1 nonsense is going to confuse people.
And what about when it comes times for Windows 8?
Well, that probably won't matter because Microsoft can't stick to any naming convention.
Hell, 7 is the first OS since 3.11 that has a number as a name -- but at least back then it was the version number, not just a random digit.
Microsoft, you look stupid.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671437</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671509</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247408580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>don't forget disk mirroring, forgetting RAID for a second. Every other OS around lets you at least create mirrors and windows won't unless you buy freaking Datacenter?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>do n't forget disk mirroring , forgetting RAID for a second .
Every other OS around lets you at least create mirrors and windows wo n't unless you buy freaking Datacenter ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>don't forget disk mirroring, forgetting RAID for a second.
Every other OS around lets you at least create mirrors and windows won't unless you buy freaking Datacenter?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28676423</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247500560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Try the open-source ImDisk Virtual Disk Driver for mounting ISOs and floppy and hard drive images.  I haven't tried it on Windows 7, but it works on NT/2000/XP/2003/Vista/2008.<br>http://www.ltr-data.se/opencode.html#ImDisk</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Try the open-source ImDisk Virtual Disk Driver for mounting ISOs and floppy and hard drive images .
I have n't tried it on Windows 7 , but it works on NT/2000/XP/2003/Vista/2008.http : //www.ltr-data.se/opencode.html # ImDisk</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Try the open-source ImDisk Virtual Disk Driver for mounting ISOs and floppy and hard drive images.
I haven't tried it on Windows 7, but it works on NT/2000/XP/2003/Vista/2008.http://www.ltr-data.se/opencode.html#ImDisk</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671747</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671473</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>gbarules2999</author>
	<datestamp>1247408340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Absolutely, I'm gonna play that game. I hated Vista, skipped it after trying it for a week, and now that I've tried Windows 7 I'm convinced of moving away from XP.</p></div><p>Having used both, I can't understand this. They run the same, they operate the same, they are the same in most respects. The only way they differ in ways most people see is the UI.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Absolutely , I 'm gon na play that game .
I hated Vista , skipped it after trying it for a week , and now that I 've tried Windows 7 I 'm convinced of moving away from XP.Having used both , I ca n't understand this .
They run the same , they operate the same , they are the same in most respects .
The only way they differ in ways most people see is the UI .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Absolutely, I'm gonna play that game.
I hated Vista, skipped it after trying it for a week, and now that I've tried Windows 7 I'm convinced of moving away from XP.Having used both, I can't understand this.
They run the same, they operate the same, they are the same in most respects.
The only way they differ in ways most people see is the UI.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671047</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28677363</id>
	<title>Re:The "Lord of HOSTS" sayeth READ (serious)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247503620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr><i>...STOP ABUSING the hosts file like a clueless idiot! Seriously, 14MB of plain text that needs to be parsed for every lookup? That's the most retarded thing I've ever seen.</i> <br>
 <br>Mine is only 216k and comes from <a href="http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm" title="mvps.org">here.</a> [mvps.org] <br>
 <br>
 <i>At those proportions, there are WAY more efficient methods...</i> <br>
 <br>I use a custom<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/etc/hosts to block ads. I don't need to block them <i>all</i>, I'm happy with<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/etc/hosts blocking <i>most</i>. I don't know what happens when a hosts file gets as huge as the GP is describing but on a modern multi-gigahertz machine, my file gets parsed basically instantly. And, in fact, it actually worked just fine on my 800 MHz G3 iBook six years ago. So basically, for any modern computer, it has zero visible impact. And even if it took, say, a second to parse, that would be more than offset by the MANY seconds saved by not downloading and rendering ads.<br>
 <br><nobr> <wbr></nobr><i>...if you know that domain evil.invalid is hostile, you can't afford to miss some hosts below it. Otherwise, what's the point?</i> <br>
 <br>I agree that it's not perfect, but it's not like I run around engaging in any risky behavior just because I have a custom<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/etc/hosts file. Something is better than nothing. You're making two things black and white. LOTS of things aren't perfect--that doesn't mean they're completely worthless. Your car isn't as safe as a tank, so why bother driving at all, right?<br>
 <br>
 <i>And anyways, diverting traffic to 127.0.0.1 or 0.0.0.0 is changing semantics in so many ways. Suppose you start running a local HTTP server for testing purposes and all that traffic is suddenly hitting it. It's just wrong.</i> <br>
 <br>Well, first of all, I don't care about being theoretically "wrong" if the actual, real-life result is "just fine." I have noticed NO ill effects from running a custom<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/etc/hosts file for the last several years. And as a matter of fact I DO run http servers on my computers and I've never had an<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/etc/hosts-related problem. (The only thing I could see that might cause an issue would be logging, but that's easy enough to fix in httpd.conf.) In fact, it's better than fine. I've got a custom 404 page which says "Another blocked ad!" so I get a little happy reminder every time I see it in an iframe instead of an ad. And, if I ever get around to it, I'll make that page a PHP script that asks "Do you want to unblock this page?" because my wife occasionally hits it when she clicks on a Google ad, or you run into occasional dumbness like if you go to wellsfargo.com and click on "Sign up now" in the left column the link goes to <a href="https://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/6878-38920-3408-45" title="mediaplex.com">https://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/6878-38920-3408-45</a> [mediaplex.com] -- wtf?!?!?<br>
 <br>
 <i>"Blocking" hosts by listing them in the hosts file is an evil evil evil ugly hack conceived by clueless idiots that can't manage to run a local proxy where you could block domains with simple regular expressions and only for protocols which need them blocked. Or running a local DNS cache where you could blacklist domains so you get a semantically correct (for your purpose) NXDOMAIN error.</i> <br>
 <br>Yeah, but it works. And it's easier than installing and maintaining yet more software. (I've tried a couple proxies in the past and both were non-trivial to get working.) And regarding this: "Or running a local DNS cache where you could blacklist domains"--didn't you just say "you should instantly realize that security doesn't work with blacklists"?<br>
 <br>All I know is that whenever I go to another computer and get swamped by ads, I'm reminded of how great my little system is.<br>
 <br>One more thing: if all you want to do is block an ad or a software update or a validity check, WHO GIVES A FUCK if you get a "semantically correct NXDOMAIN error"?!?!?!? I don't lie awake at night wo</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...STOP ABUSING the hosts file like a clueless idiot !
Seriously , 14MB of plain text that needs to be parsed for every lookup ?
That 's the most retarded thing I 've ever seen .
Mine is only 216k and comes from here .
[ mvps.org ] At those proportions , there are WAY more efficient methods.. . I use a custom /etc/hosts to block ads .
I do n't need to block them all , I 'm happy with /etc/hosts blocking most .
I do n't know what happens when a hosts file gets as huge as the GP is describing but on a modern multi-gigahertz machine , my file gets parsed basically instantly .
And , in fact , it actually worked just fine on my 800 MHz G3 iBook six years ago .
So basically , for any modern computer , it has zero visible impact .
And even if it took , say , a second to parse , that would be more than offset by the MANY seconds saved by not downloading and rendering ads .
...if you know that domain evil.invalid is hostile , you ca n't afford to miss some hosts below it .
Otherwise , what 's the point ?
I agree that it 's not perfect , but it 's not like I run around engaging in any risky behavior just because I have a custom /etc/hosts file .
Something is better than nothing .
You 're making two things black and white .
LOTS of things are n't perfect--that does n't mean they 're completely worthless .
Your car is n't as safe as a tank , so why bother driving at all , right ?
And anyways , diverting traffic to 127.0.0.1 or 0.0.0.0 is changing semantics in so many ways .
Suppose you start running a local HTTP server for testing purposes and all that traffic is suddenly hitting it .
It 's just wrong .
Well , first of all , I do n't care about being theoretically " wrong " if the actual , real-life result is " just fine .
" I have noticed NO ill effects from running a custom /etc/hosts file for the last several years .
And as a matter of fact I DO run http servers on my computers and I 've never had an /etc/hosts-related problem .
( The only thing I could see that might cause an issue would be logging , but that 's easy enough to fix in httpd.conf .
) In fact , it 's better than fine .
I 've got a custom 404 page which says " Another blocked ad !
" so I get a little happy reminder every time I see it in an iframe instead of an ad .
And , if I ever get around to it , I 'll make that page a PHP script that asks " Do you want to unblock this page ?
" because my wife occasionally hits it when she clicks on a Google ad , or you run into occasional dumbness like if you go to wellsfargo.com and click on " Sign up now " in the left column the link goes to https : //adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/6878-38920-3408-45 [ mediaplex.com ] -- wtf ? ! ? ! ?
" Blocking " hosts by listing them in the hosts file is an evil evil evil ugly hack conceived by clueless idiots that ca n't manage to run a local proxy where you could block domains with simple regular expressions and only for protocols which need them blocked .
Or running a local DNS cache where you could blacklist domains so you get a semantically correct ( for your purpose ) NXDOMAIN error .
Yeah , but it works .
And it 's easier than installing and maintaining yet more software .
( I 've tried a couple proxies in the past and both were non-trivial to get working .
) And regarding this : " Or running a local DNS cache where you could blacklist domains " --did n't you just say " you should instantly realize that security does n't work with blacklists " ?
All I know is that whenever I go to another computer and get swamped by ads , I 'm reminded of how great my little system is .
One more thing : if all you want to do is block an ad or a software update or a validity check , WHO GIVES A FUCK if you get a " semantically correct NXDOMAIN error " ? ! ? ! ? ! ?
I do n't lie awake at night wo</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...STOP ABUSING the hosts file like a clueless idiot!
Seriously, 14MB of plain text that needs to be parsed for every lookup?
That's the most retarded thing I've ever seen.
Mine is only 216k and comes from here.
[mvps.org] 
 
 At those proportions, there are WAY more efficient methods... 
 I use a custom /etc/hosts to block ads.
I don't need to block them all, I'm happy with /etc/hosts blocking most.
I don't know what happens when a hosts file gets as huge as the GP is describing but on a modern multi-gigahertz machine, my file gets parsed basically instantly.
And, in fact, it actually worked just fine on my 800 MHz G3 iBook six years ago.
So basically, for any modern computer, it has zero visible impact.
And even if it took, say, a second to parse, that would be more than offset by the MANY seconds saved by not downloading and rendering ads.
...if you know that domain evil.invalid is hostile, you can't afford to miss some hosts below it.
Otherwise, what's the point?
I agree that it's not perfect, but it's not like I run around engaging in any risky behavior just because I have a custom /etc/hosts file.
Something is better than nothing.
You're making two things black and white.
LOTS of things aren't perfect--that doesn't mean they're completely worthless.
Your car isn't as safe as a tank, so why bother driving at all, right?
And anyways, diverting traffic to 127.0.0.1 or 0.0.0.0 is changing semantics in so many ways.
Suppose you start running a local HTTP server for testing purposes and all that traffic is suddenly hitting it.
It's just wrong.
Well, first of all, I don't care about being theoretically "wrong" if the actual, real-life result is "just fine.
" I have noticed NO ill effects from running a custom /etc/hosts file for the last several years.
And as a matter of fact I DO run http servers on my computers and I've never had an /etc/hosts-related problem.
(The only thing I could see that might cause an issue would be logging, but that's easy enough to fix in httpd.conf.
) In fact, it's better than fine.
I've got a custom 404 page which says "Another blocked ad!
" so I get a little happy reminder every time I see it in an iframe instead of an ad.
And, if I ever get around to it, I'll make that page a PHP script that asks "Do you want to unblock this page?
" because my wife occasionally hits it when she clicks on a Google ad, or you run into occasional dumbness like if you go to wellsfargo.com and click on "Sign up now" in the left column the link goes to https://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/6878-38920-3408-45 [mediaplex.com] -- wtf?!?!?
"Blocking" hosts by listing them in the hosts file is an evil evil evil ugly hack conceived by clueless idiots that can't manage to run a local proxy where you could block domains with simple regular expressions and only for protocols which need them blocked.
Or running a local DNS cache where you could blacklist domains so you get a semantically correct (for your purpose) NXDOMAIN error.
Yeah, but it works.
And it's easier than installing and maintaining yet more software.
(I've tried a couple proxies in the past and both were non-trivial to get working.
) And regarding this: "Or running a local DNS cache where you could blacklist domains"--didn't you just say "you should instantly realize that security doesn't work with blacklists"?
All I know is that whenever I go to another computer and get swamped by ads, I'm reminded of how great my little system is.
One more thing: if all you want to do is block an ad or a software update or a validity check, WHO GIVES A FUCK if you get a "semantically correct NXDOMAIN error"?!?!?!?
I don't lie awake at night wo</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672489</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671943</id>
	<title>Re:Genius marketing</title>
	<author>nschubach</author>
	<datestamp>1247412780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One of the programmers slipped in an operator overload in the the version subsystem effectively changing the period to an addition operation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the programmers slipped in an operator overload in the the version subsystem effectively changing the period to an addition operation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the programmers slipped in an operator overload in the the version subsystem effectively changing the period to an addition operation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673669</id>
	<title>Re:The "Lord of HOSTS" sayeth READ (serious)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247479200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So I've never heard of you before, but you seem to like throwing your initials round APK, or Alexander Peter Kowalski.</p><p>Your initial comments seemed idiotic, you were complaining about your 15mb+ hosts file being slow to load. Sorry, but what the fuck? You have a 15mb+ hosts file? are you really that clueless about IT?</p><p>But you try and justify it all by talking about security so I figured hey, I'll see what this guys credentials are. Well, a quick search turned this up:</p><p><a href="http://www.ca.com/us/securityadvisor/pest/pest.aspx?id=51276" title="ca.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.ca.com/us/securityadvisor/pest/pest.aspx?id=51276</a> [ca.com]</p><p>A piece of software that can arbitrarily run applications invisibly? Sorry what, did you really try and throw such a security threat onto consumer's PCs??</p><p>But wait, it appears you didn't stop there, I also found this:</p><p><a href="http://www.thorschrock.com/2008/05/19/how-to-respond-when-people-threaten-to-sue-you-on-the-web/" title="thorschrock.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.thorschrock.com/2008/05/19/how-to-respond-when-people-threaten-to-sue-you-on-the-web/</a> [thorschrock.com]</p><p>So not only do you produce an app. that is a massive security risk, not only do you fail to see why it has been validly categorised as such, but you throw a hissy fit and threaten to sue? Not only that, but continue to spam the comments section of that site for over a month continuing to whine?</p><p>People make mistakes though so fair enough, I figured I'm sure there's more to this guy. I found this:</p><p><a href="http://www.thenewtech.com/forums/chit-chat/today-4378/index32.html" title="thenewtech.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.thenewtech.com/forums/chit-chat/today-4378/index32.html</a> [thenewtech.com]</p><p>Er, a program built entirely around breaking the hosts file using it for purposes it is simply not intended? Again, do you have any idea about the subject you preach? Do you realise that your very own programs pose a security risk? Do you realise how trivial it would be for Malware to hide malicious redirects in hosts files of the size you are talking meaning yet another one of your programs is a vessel for anti-security?</p><p>And there's more:</p><p><a href="http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/51009562/m/3680937305" title="arstechnica.com" rel="nofollow">http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/51009562/m/3680937305</a> [arstechnica.com]</p><p>Threatening to sue again on online forums because people didn't like the fact you were using them to advertise your dodgy Delphi programs?</p><p>Other than that, all I could find was a couple of dead web pages of yours and mention of a couple of long obsolete Delphi programs.</p><p>Your complaint is about the performance of using the hosts file for something it's never meant to be used for and the resultant performance drops of reading such a large file.</p><p>The fact that using the hosts file so incorrectly inherently severely decreases performance of DNS lookups anyway seems lost on you.</p><p>You talk of security yet you produce applications that are security threats.</p><p>You threaten to sue anyone who points out that your applications are security threats, you threaten to sue people who do not like you using technical forums to advertise your programs.</p><p>You complain here about how people obviously aren't programmers because they disagree with you yet your language of choice is object pascal via Delphi, hardly the language of choice for an expert programmer and second only to pre-.NET Visual Basic for the horifically bad bloatware it results in.</p><p>Do us all a favour, quit posting anything to the internet, spend a few years updating your knowledge to learn a worthwhile language like C++, Java or one of the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET languages. Get a clue about security and understand why your applications are a far bigger security risk than anything you talk of and finally, stop threatening to sue anyone you disagree with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So I 've never heard of you before , but you seem to like throwing your initials round APK , or Alexander Peter Kowalski.Your initial comments seemed idiotic , you were complaining about your 15mb + hosts file being slow to load .
Sorry , but what the fuck ?
You have a 15mb + hosts file ?
are you really that clueless about IT ? But you try and justify it all by talking about security so I figured hey , I 'll see what this guys credentials are .
Well , a quick search turned this up : http : //www.ca.com/us/securityadvisor/pest/pest.aspx ? id = 51276 [ ca.com ] A piece of software that can arbitrarily run applications invisibly ?
Sorry what , did you really try and throw such a security threat onto consumer 's PCs ?
? But wait , it appears you did n't stop there , I also found this : http : //www.thorschrock.com/2008/05/19/how-to-respond-when-people-threaten-to-sue-you-on-the-web/ [ thorschrock.com ] So not only do you produce an app .
that is a massive security risk , not only do you fail to see why it has been validly categorised as such , but you throw a hissy fit and threaten to sue ?
Not only that , but continue to spam the comments section of that site for over a month continuing to whine ? People make mistakes though so fair enough , I figured I 'm sure there 's more to this guy .
I found this : http : //www.thenewtech.com/forums/chit-chat/today-4378/index32.html [ thenewtech.com ] Er , a program built entirely around breaking the hosts file using it for purposes it is simply not intended ?
Again , do you have any idea about the subject you preach ?
Do you realise that your very own programs pose a security risk ?
Do you realise how trivial it would be for Malware to hide malicious redirects in hosts files of the size you are talking meaning yet another one of your programs is a vessel for anti-security ? And there 's more : http : //episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/51009562/m/3680937305 [ arstechnica.com ] Threatening to sue again on online forums because people did n't like the fact you were using them to advertise your dodgy Delphi programs ? Other than that , all I could find was a couple of dead web pages of yours and mention of a couple of long obsolete Delphi programs.Your complaint is about the performance of using the hosts file for something it 's never meant to be used for and the resultant performance drops of reading such a large file.The fact that using the hosts file so incorrectly inherently severely decreases performance of DNS lookups anyway seems lost on you.You talk of security yet you produce applications that are security threats.You threaten to sue anyone who points out that your applications are security threats , you threaten to sue people who do not like you using technical forums to advertise your programs.You complain here about how people obviously are n't programmers because they disagree with you yet your language of choice is object pascal via Delphi , hardly the language of choice for an expert programmer and second only to pre-.NET Visual Basic for the horifically bad bloatware it results in.Do us all a favour , quit posting anything to the internet , spend a few years updating your knowledge to learn a worthwhile language like C + + , Java or one of the .NET languages .
Get a clue about security and understand why your applications are a far bigger security risk than anything you talk of and finally , stop threatening to sue anyone you disagree with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So I've never heard of you before, but you seem to like throwing your initials round APK, or Alexander Peter Kowalski.Your initial comments seemed idiotic, you were complaining about your 15mb+ hosts file being slow to load.
Sorry, but what the fuck?
You have a 15mb+ hosts file?
are you really that clueless about IT?But you try and justify it all by talking about security so I figured hey, I'll see what this guys credentials are.
Well, a quick search turned this up:http://www.ca.com/us/securityadvisor/pest/pest.aspx?id=51276 [ca.com]A piece of software that can arbitrarily run applications invisibly?
Sorry what, did you really try and throw such a security threat onto consumer's PCs?
?But wait, it appears you didn't stop there, I also found this:http://www.thorschrock.com/2008/05/19/how-to-respond-when-people-threaten-to-sue-you-on-the-web/ [thorschrock.com]So not only do you produce an app.
that is a massive security risk, not only do you fail to see why it has been validly categorised as such, but you throw a hissy fit and threaten to sue?
Not only that, but continue to spam the comments section of that site for over a month continuing to whine?People make mistakes though so fair enough, I figured I'm sure there's more to this guy.
I found this:http://www.thenewtech.com/forums/chit-chat/today-4378/index32.html [thenewtech.com]Er, a program built entirely around breaking the hosts file using it for purposes it is simply not intended?
Again, do you have any idea about the subject you preach?
Do you realise that your very own programs pose a security risk?
Do you realise how trivial it would be for Malware to hide malicious redirects in hosts files of the size you are talking meaning yet another one of your programs is a vessel for anti-security?And there's more:http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/51009562/m/3680937305 [arstechnica.com]Threatening to sue again on online forums because people didn't like the fact you were using them to advertise your dodgy Delphi programs?Other than that, all I could find was a couple of dead web pages of yours and mention of a couple of long obsolete Delphi programs.Your complaint is about the performance of using the hosts file for something it's never meant to be used for and the resultant performance drops of reading such a large file.The fact that using the hosts file so incorrectly inherently severely decreases performance of DNS lookups anyway seems lost on you.You talk of security yet you produce applications that are security threats.You threaten to sue anyone who points out that your applications are security threats, you threaten to sue people who do not like you using technical forums to advertise your programs.You complain here about how people obviously aren't programmers because they disagree with you yet your language of choice is object pascal via Delphi, hardly the language of choice for an expert programmer and second only to pre-.NET Visual Basic for the horifically bad bloatware it results in.Do us all a favour, quit posting anything to the internet, spend a few years updating your knowledge to learn a worthwhile language like C++, Java or one of the .NET languages.
Get a clue about security and understand why your applications are a far bigger security risk than anything you talk of and finally, stop threatening to sue anyone you disagree with.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672163</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28684235</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247487900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>just download magic ISO. free, cheap and easy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>just download magic ISO .
free , cheap and easy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>just download magic ISO.
free, cheap and easy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674817</id>
	<title>Re:OK, Since this is a non-event...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247492340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So i went to best buy and was shopping for a video card, and i wanted to look up this certain video card on the internet. I asked the sales person to show me to a computer that has the internet and he showed me a mac and just walked off. First, the keyboard was to damn small, very annoying, second and most important it couldnt get the internet very well. I asked another sales person why they put me on the mac and he said "we want you to try the best" i just laughed and asked him to show me a windows computer that has the internet cause this isnt working right, his response was that "geek squad was doing there job (dont ask me)" I made a smart ass remark about somone downloading pirated software and taking all the bandwidth, i was not to sure it was the mac at this time and it might of been geek squad "doing there job" (or lack thereof) but the guy didnt seem to have a sense of humor, he played around with the mac for a second then walked over to a windows machine and started IE. Internet came up, and i got to look up my product.</p><p>point is...my first real experience with mac was not that good, and as always, best buy still sucks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So i went to best buy and was shopping for a video card , and i wanted to look up this certain video card on the internet .
I asked the sales person to show me to a computer that has the internet and he showed me a mac and just walked off .
First , the keyboard was to damn small , very annoying , second and most important it couldnt get the internet very well .
I asked another sales person why they put me on the mac and he said " we want you to try the best " i just laughed and asked him to show me a windows computer that has the internet cause this isnt working right , his response was that " geek squad was doing there job ( dont ask me ) " I made a smart ass remark about somone downloading pirated software and taking all the bandwidth , i was not to sure it was the mac at this time and it might of been geek squad " doing there job " ( or lack thereof ) but the guy didnt seem to have a sense of humor , he played around with the mac for a second then walked over to a windows machine and started IE .
Internet came up , and i got to look up my product.point is...my first real experience with mac was not that good , and as always , best buy still sucks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So i went to best buy and was shopping for a video card, and i wanted to look up this certain video card on the internet.
I asked the sales person to show me to a computer that has the internet and he showed me a mac and just walked off.
First, the keyboard was to damn small, very annoying, second and most important it couldnt get the internet very well.
I asked another sales person why they put me on the mac and he said "we want you to try the best" i just laughed and asked him to show me a windows computer that has the internet cause this isnt working right, his response was that "geek squad was doing there job (dont ask me)" I made a smart ass remark about somone downloading pirated software and taking all the bandwidth, i was not to sure it was the mac at this time and it might of been geek squad "doing there job" (or lack thereof) but the guy didnt seem to have a sense of humor, he played around with the mac for a second then walked over to a windows machine and started IE.
Internet came up, and i got to look up my product.point is...my first real experience with mac was not that good, and as always, best buy still sucks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671049</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673393</id>
	<title>Re:Bless their hearts</title>
	<author>Toreo asesino</author>
	<datestamp>1247518080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know; now Apple and Linux have flooded the desktop market, it's nice to see good old Windows still trying to enter that elusive segment.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know ; now Apple and Linux have flooded the desktop market , it 's nice to see good old Windows still trying to enter that elusive segment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know; now Apple and Linux have flooded the desktop market, it's nice to see good old Windows still trying to enter that elusive segment.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671583</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672553</id>
	<title>2000 was the best, even xbox/360 still uses it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247419380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Reason for this is they don't have to authenticate the installation online.<br>2000 only requires a serial and you're set.</p><p>XP/Vista/7 all require online autentication.</p><p>Now if I can only figure out how to get DX10 to install on 2000.</p><p>* But you can't run 2000 on power pc?<br>+ Wrong, you can there was a special version of NT created for it<br>* But 2000 don't support the hardware.<br>+ ATI has the source code</p><p>Gates is gone, Release the source code Balmer!<br>RELEASE THE SOURCE.<br>Quit making me register and call you when I want to use my computer.<br>Quit making me put up with Linus Torvalds oral fixations on code placement and breaking my bin drivers.<br>Damn Cox with his showboating.<br>Damn the developers changing shit.</p><p>My computer is never stable.  I can't even run my Intel video card in linux without it puking or having side effects.</p><p>Damn Windows running ass slow because I think 1 gig of ram is plenty..</p><p>There is no win win situation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Reason for this is they do n't have to authenticate the installation online.2000 only requires a serial and you 're set.XP/Vista/7 all require online autentication.Now if I can only figure out how to get DX10 to install on 2000 .
* But you ca n't run 2000 on power pc ? + Wrong , you can there was a special version of NT created for it * But 2000 do n't support the hardware. + ATI has the source codeGates is gone , Release the source code Balmer ! RELEASE THE SOURCE.Quit making me register and call you when I want to use my computer.Quit making me put up with Linus Torvalds oral fixations on code placement and breaking my bin drivers.Damn Cox with his showboating.Damn the developers changing shit.My computer is never stable .
I ca n't even run my Intel video card in linux without it puking or having side effects.Damn Windows running ass slow because I think 1 gig of ram is plenty..There is no win win situation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reason for this is they don't have to authenticate the installation online.2000 only requires a serial and you're set.XP/Vista/7 all require online autentication.Now if I can only figure out how to get DX10 to install on 2000.
* But you can't run 2000 on power pc?+ Wrong, you can there was a special version of NT created for it* But 2000 don't support the hardware.+ ATI has the source codeGates is gone, Release the source code Balmer!RELEASE THE SOURCE.Quit making me register and call you when I want to use my computer.Quit making me put up with Linus Torvalds oral fixations on code placement and breaking my bin drivers.Damn Cox with his showboating.Damn the developers changing shit.My computer is never stable.
I can't even run my Intel video card in linux without it puking or having side effects.Damn Windows running ass slow because I think 1 gig of ram is plenty..There is no win win situation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671047</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672461</id>
	<title>Re:Windows 7 makes me excited</title>
	<author>dbIII</author>
	<datestamp>1247418360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm not so sure that they are just clueless fanboys instead of paid shills.  For example, there was one clueless fanboy here the other week that was convinced that RMS had written linux and that linux needed a "runas" feature despite the fact that it had been in linux since 1991 and other forms of *nix long before then ("su" and more recently "sudo").  A paid shill would know more.  It's just like the cult of Apple cheering for the technological underdog this time.<br>Despite the hype MS Windows will get better, and hopefully by the time MS Windows 7 is released it will actually recognise my IDE DVD drive and actually install from it (yes I know it is a beta).</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not so sure that they are just clueless fanboys instead of paid shills .
For example , there was one clueless fanboy here the other week that was convinced that RMS had written linux and that linux needed a " runas " feature despite the fact that it had been in linux since 1991 and other forms of * nix long before then ( " su " and more recently " sudo " ) .
A paid shill would know more .
It 's just like the cult of Apple cheering for the technological underdog this time.Despite the hype MS Windows will get better , and hopefully by the time MS Windows 7 is released it will actually recognise my IDE DVD drive and actually install from it ( yes I know it is a beta ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not so sure that they are just clueless fanboys instead of paid shills.
For example, there was one clueless fanboy here the other week that was convinced that RMS had written linux and that linux needed a "runas" feature despite the fact that it had been in linux since 1991 and other forms of *nix long before then ("su" and more recently "sudo").
A paid shill would know more.
It's just like the cult of Apple cheering for the technological underdog this time.Despite the hype MS Windows will get better, and hopefully by the time MS Windows 7 is released it will actually recognise my IDE DVD drive and actually install from it (yes I know it is a beta).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671085</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672815</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>Amiralul</author>
	<datestamp>1247422800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You guys are something...
When Microsoft includes an Internet browser (which, IMHO, represent a more basic feature than an ISO mounter), EU fined them and goes into the records books for the amount of money they got from MS. I find more surprising the fact that there isn't any widespread open-source ISO mounter for Widnows, or even a decent, reliable, widespread backup utility for Windows.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You guys are something.. . When Microsoft includes an Internet browser ( which , IMHO , represent a more basic feature than an ISO mounter ) , EU fined them and goes into the records books for the amount of money they got from MS. I find more surprising the fact that there is n't any widespread open-source ISO mounter for Widnows , or even a decent , reliable , widespread backup utility for Windows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You guys are something...
When Microsoft includes an Internet browser (which, IMHO, represent a more basic feature than an ISO mounter), EU fined them and goes into the records books for the amount of money they got from MS. I find more surprising the fact that there isn't any widespread open-source ISO mounter for Widnows, or even a decent, reliable, widespread backup utility for Windows.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672103</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671809</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247411340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Do I really need to pay $XX, or install some spyware-infested freeware crap, just to mount ISOs?</i></p><p>No you don't. Just use <a href="http://www.magiciso.com/tutorials/miso-magicdisc-overview.htm" title="magiciso.com" rel="nofollow">MagicDisc</a> [magiciso.com]. I have no problem running it on Windows 7.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do I really need to pay $ XX , or install some spyware-infested freeware crap , just to mount ISOs ? No you do n't .
Just use MagicDisc [ magiciso.com ] .
I have no problem running it on Windows 7 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do I really need to pay $XX, or install some spyware-infested freeware crap, just to mount ISOs?No you don't.
Just use MagicDisc [magiciso.com].
I have no problem running it on Windows 7.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670873</id>
	<title>Re:And the Lord spake, saying,</title>
	<author>Heed00</author>
	<datestamp>1247402700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Run away! Run away!
<br>
<br>
I try to tell them. Just look at the bones!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Run away !
Run away !
I try to tell them .
Just look at the bones !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Run away!
Run away!
I try to tell them.
Just look at the bones!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670771</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673439</id>
	<title>Re:The "Lord of HOSTS" sayeth READ (serious)</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1247518560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I doubt it even bothers checking the date - NTFS has built-in change notification mechanisms which do not require polling.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I doubt it even bothers checking the date - NTFS has built-in change notification mechanisms which do not require polling .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I doubt it even bothers checking the date - NTFS has built-in change notification mechanisms which do not require polling.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671413</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247407860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Fuck microsoft</p><p>The only reason they have styled their build #'s based on 72xx and 76xx is because Cisco is a world leader in communiation and they are trying to ride their train.   Tell them to get their own train !!!!!!</p><p>-yep I'm an0nymous!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Fuck microsoftThe only reason they have styled their build # 's based on 72xx and 76xx is because Cisco is a world leader in communiation and they are trying to ride their train .
Tell them to get their own train ! ! ! ! !
! -yep I 'm an0nymous !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fuck microsoftThe only reason they have styled their build #'s based on 72xx and 76xx is because Cisco is a world leader in communiation and they are trying to ride their train.
Tell them to get their own train !!!!!
!-yep I'm an0nymous!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671093</id>
	<title>Our world is saved!</title>
	<author>SL Baur</author>
	<datestamp>1247404560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does this mean I can go out on the streets dancing naked and burning my Linux and OS X DVDs?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does this mean I can go out on the streets dancing naked and burning my Linux and OS X DVDs ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does this mean I can go out on the streets dancing naked and burning my Linux and OS X DVDs?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671437</id>
	<title>I am going to take a chance on Windows 7</title>
	<author>Orion Blastar</author>
	<datestamp>1247408100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I pre-ordered a copy for myself and my son.</p><p>Of course my Laptop will dual-boot both Windows 7.0 Pro and Fedora 11, so that if Windows 7.0 fails me, at least I have Fedora 11 to use. I will try to use the Windows XP virtual machine option with 7.0 Pro to run legacy software.</p><p>My son has been begging me for Windows 7.0 so I got him a Windows 7.0 Home Premium, I could not afford two 7.0 Pro copies, so I bought him a Home Premium version. If he needs the 7.0 Pro version Microsoft allows an upgrade to 7.0 Pro via the Internet and I can afford that later if needed.</p><p>If the XP virtual machine does not work to well, I'll be buying two old copies of XP Pro from pricewatch.com and run them in Sun VirtualBox later. I hope I don't have to do that, but the current Windows XP licenses would be invalid after the upgrade to 7.0.</p><p>My son's system uses a wireless adapter that does not have Linux support, and he showed no interest in Linux, most of his games work in Windows XP, and if they don't work in Windows 7.0 I'll look for upgrade patches to work with 7.0 or he'll have to skip playing those games until I can get a virtual machine set up to play his games.</p><p>Both systems were Vista boxes, downgraded to Windows XP Pro, so they should run Windows 7.0.</p><p>I know I am taking a risk, but I hope to find out what problems friends and relatives will have when they upgrade to Windows 7.0 as they'll be calling me and asking for help. Upgrading from XP requires a reformat and reinstall, and most of my friends and relatives are using XP and some are using Vista.</p><p>I preordered before July 11 to qualify for that half off special on upgrade copies. I am not sure if the old XP licenses will still work if Windows 7.0 fails and I have to reinstall XP, or if I have to buy new licenses for XP to switch back to XP.</p><p>Anyway I could always buy my son a wireless card that works with Linux and install Fedora 11 with WINE and see if that runs his video games better than Windows 7.0 and save money on XP licenses and virtual machines, and teach him how to use Linux as an alternative. But it is more important that he learn how the Windows upgrade process works and any troubles with it and how to resolve them. Right now to him the Windows 7.0 is cool, but if there are issues and it won't run his video games, he will learn that sometimes newer technology is not always better and even if it looks cool, it might not always do what he wants it to do. Because eventually they will upgrade to Windows 7.0 in his school, too bad they don't support Linux.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I pre-ordered a copy for myself and my son.Of course my Laptop will dual-boot both Windows 7.0 Pro and Fedora 11 , so that if Windows 7.0 fails me , at least I have Fedora 11 to use .
I will try to use the Windows XP virtual machine option with 7.0 Pro to run legacy software.My son has been begging me for Windows 7.0 so I got him a Windows 7.0 Home Premium , I could not afford two 7.0 Pro copies , so I bought him a Home Premium version .
If he needs the 7.0 Pro version Microsoft allows an upgrade to 7.0 Pro via the Internet and I can afford that later if needed.If the XP virtual machine does not work to well , I 'll be buying two old copies of XP Pro from pricewatch.com and run them in Sun VirtualBox later .
I hope I do n't have to do that , but the current Windows XP licenses would be invalid after the upgrade to 7.0.My son 's system uses a wireless adapter that does not have Linux support , and he showed no interest in Linux , most of his games work in Windows XP , and if they do n't work in Windows 7.0 I 'll look for upgrade patches to work with 7.0 or he 'll have to skip playing those games until I can get a virtual machine set up to play his games.Both systems were Vista boxes , downgraded to Windows XP Pro , so they should run Windows 7.0.I know I am taking a risk , but I hope to find out what problems friends and relatives will have when they upgrade to Windows 7.0 as they 'll be calling me and asking for help .
Upgrading from XP requires a reformat and reinstall , and most of my friends and relatives are using XP and some are using Vista.I preordered before July 11 to qualify for that half off special on upgrade copies .
I am not sure if the old XP licenses will still work if Windows 7.0 fails and I have to reinstall XP , or if I have to buy new licenses for XP to switch back to XP.Anyway I could always buy my son a wireless card that works with Linux and install Fedora 11 with WINE and see if that runs his video games better than Windows 7.0 and save money on XP licenses and virtual machines , and teach him how to use Linux as an alternative .
But it is more important that he learn how the Windows upgrade process works and any troubles with it and how to resolve them .
Right now to him the Windows 7.0 is cool , but if there are issues and it wo n't run his video games , he will learn that sometimes newer technology is not always better and even if it looks cool , it might not always do what he wants it to do .
Because eventually they will upgrade to Windows 7.0 in his school , too bad they do n't support Linux .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I pre-ordered a copy for myself and my son.Of course my Laptop will dual-boot both Windows 7.0 Pro and Fedora 11, so that if Windows 7.0 fails me, at least I have Fedora 11 to use.
I will try to use the Windows XP virtual machine option with 7.0 Pro to run legacy software.My son has been begging me for Windows 7.0 so I got him a Windows 7.0 Home Premium, I could not afford two 7.0 Pro copies, so I bought him a Home Premium version.
If he needs the 7.0 Pro version Microsoft allows an upgrade to 7.0 Pro via the Internet and I can afford that later if needed.If the XP virtual machine does not work to well, I'll be buying two old copies of XP Pro from pricewatch.com and run them in Sun VirtualBox later.
I hope I don't have to do that, but the current Windows XP licenses would be invalid after the upgrade to 7.0.My son's system uses a wireless adapter that does not have Linux support, and he showed no interest in Linux, most of his games work in Windows XP, and if they don't work in Windows 7.0 I'll look for upgrade patches to work with 7.0 or he'll have to skip playing those games until I can get a virtual machine set up to play his games.Both systems were Vista boxes, downgraded to Windows XP Pro, so they should run Windows 7.0.I know I am taking a risk, but I hope to find out what problems friends and relatives will have when they upgrade to Windows 7.0 as they'll be calling me and asking for help.
Upgrading from XP requires a reformat and reinstall, and most of my friends and relatives are using XP and some are using Vista.I preordered before July 11 to qualify for that half off special on upgrade copies.
I am not sure if the old XP licenses will still work if Windows 7.0 fails and I have to reinstall XP, or if I have to buy new licenses for XP to switch back to XP.Anyway I could always buy my son a wireless card that works with Linux and install Fedora 11 with WINE and see if that runs his video games better than Windows 7.0 and save money on XP licenses and virtual machines, and teach him how to use Linux as an alternative.
But it is more important that he learn how the Windows upgrade process works and any troubles with it and how to resolve them.
Right now to him the Windows 7.0 is cool, but if there are issues and it won't run his video games, he will learn that sometimes newer technology is not always better and even if it looks cool, it might not always do what he wants it to do.
Because eventually they will upgrade to Windows 7.0 in his school, too bad they don't support Linux.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671289</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>BatGnat</author>
	<datestamp>1247406660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>It is so funny, When XP was released I couldn't wait, and loved it, but a lot people said, that they were going to stick with win98, Then vista (which I liked) comes out and everyone says "i'm gonna stick with XP".  Just accept it and move on.....</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is so funny , When XP was released I could n't wait , and loved it , but a lot people said , that they were going to stick with win98 , Then vista ( which I liked ) comes out and everyone says " i 'm gon na stick with XP " .
Just accept it and move on.... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is so funny, When XP was released I couldn't wait, and loved it, but a lot people said, that they were going to stick with win98, Then vista (which I liked) comes out and everyone says "i'm gonna stick with XP".
Just accept it and move on.....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28698495</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>Mex</author>
	<datestamp>1247578800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The UI is the biggest reason for me, yeah.</p><p>Little things like when you want to unplug something or close a file and XP only says "File is in use", 7 lets you know which program is using it, file previews are neat, the taskbar is much much improved (being able to pin and unpin your programs, managing the tray and which icons show up, the calendar, etc), the Control Panel makes some sense and you can search inside it... Being able to customize the start button is cool too. Multiple monitor managing is neat also, alt+tabbing is nicer and for instance if you're watching a video on a monitor it shows the video playing in the at+tabbing.</p><p>Search is another improved side of Windows 7, specially file and within-file searching. Indexing seems much more reliable now.</p><p>Little touches like the background rotation, volume channels and individual management for each app (ie you can set an app to have a louder volume than another) and all that, it just really helps provide a much better experience than XP. Compatability mode has worked perfectly for me (only LeapFTP has needed it enabled, really, all my XP apps work, OpenOffice.org works too, no hassles or workarounds.).</p><p>The Windows Media Center integration is quite neat (and Windows Media Player is actually tolerable now!), setting it to work with my Xbox was flawless.</p><p>Add in the networking (so much easier and has cool little stuff like your network map) and a very tolerable UAC and Windows update management, and there's just no reason to stick with XP. For me at least.</p><p>Honestly I've never written anything positive about a previous windows OS but Windows 7 has me quite convinced. It's almost a little scary.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The UI is the biggest reason for me , yeah.Little things like when you want to unplug something or close a file and XP only says " File is in use " , 7 lets you know which program is using it , file previews are neat , the taskbar is much much improved ( being able to pin and unpin your programs , managing the tray and which icons show up , the calendar , etc ) , the Control Panel makes some sense and you can search inside it... Being able to customize the start button is cool too .
Multiple monitor managing is neat also , alt + tabbing is nicer and for instance if you 're watching a video on a monitor it shows the video playing in the at + tabbing.Search is another improved side of Windows 7 , specially file and within-file searching .
Indexing seems much more reliable now.Little touches like the background rotation , volume channels and individual management for each app ( ie you can set an app to have a louder volume than another ) and all that , it just really helps provide a much better experience than XP .
Compatability mode has worked perfectly for me ( only LeapFTP has needed it enabled , really , all my XP apps work , OpenOffice.org works too , no hassles or workarounds .
) .The Windows Media Center integration is quite neat ( and Windows Media Player is actually tolerable now !
) , setting it to work with my Xbox was flawless.Add in the networking ( so much easier and has cool little stuff like your network map ) and a very tolerable UAC and Windows update management , and there 's just no reason to stick with XP .
For me at least.Honestly I 've never written anything positive about a previous windows OS but Windows 7 has me quite convinced .
It 's almost a little scary .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The UI is the biggest reason for me, yeah.Little things like when you want to unplug something or close a file and XP only says "File is in use", 7 lets you know which program is using it, file previews are neat, the taskbar is much much improved (being able to pin and unpin your programs, managing the tray and which icons show up, the calendar, etc), the Control Panel makes some sense and you can search inside it... Being able to customize the start button is cool too.
Multiple monitor managing is neat also, alt+tabbing is nicer and for instance if you're watching a video on a monitor it shows the video playing in the at+tabbing.Search is another improved side of Windows 7, specially file and within-file searching.
Indexing seems much more reliable now.Little touches like the background rotation, volume channels and individual management for each app (ie you can set an app to have a louder volume than another) and all that, it just really helps provide a much better experience than XP.
Compatability mode has worked perfectly for me (only LeapFTP has needed it enabled, really, all my XP apps work, OpenOffice.org works too, no hassles or workarounds.
).The Windows Media Center integration is quite neat (and Windows Media Player is actually tolerable now!
), setting it to work with my Xbox was flawless.Add in the networking (so much easier and has cool little stuff like your network map) and a very tolerable UAC and Windows update management, and there's just no reason to stick with XP.
For me at least.Honestly I've never written anything positive about a previous windows OS but Windows 7 has me quite convinced.
It's almost a little scary.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671473</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671299</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247406660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>yea yea, I know what you are saying, that Linux is the supreme power, crap, Linux as a kernel i guess is ok. But the rest of the packaging stinks. I have yet to use a linux based OS that aktually works as flawlessly as windows. (And MAC OS-X)<br>The day i use a linux flawour again will be the day it works! Untill then, i will stick to Windows (now 7) or mac os-x. Bye bye</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>yea yea , I know what you are saying , that Linux is the supreme power , crap , Linux as a kernel i guess is ok. But the rest of the packaging stinks .
I have yet to use a linux based OS that aktually works as flawlessly as windows .
( And MAC OS-X ) The day i use a linux flawour again will be the day it works !
Untill then , i will stick to Windows ( now 7 ) or mac os-x .
Bye bye</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yea yea, I know what you are saying, that Linux is the supreme power, crap, Linux as a kernel i guess is ok. But the rest of the packaging stinks.
I have yet to use a linux based OS that aktually works as flawlessly as windows.
(And MAC OS-X)The day i use a linux flawour again will be the day it works!
Untill then, i will stick to Windows (now 7) or mac os-x.
Bye bye</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674491</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247489760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>7Zip is where it's at<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>7Zip is where it 's at : - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>7Zip is where it's at :-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671747</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247403900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><em>Seriously? Windows 7? People are really going to play that game?</em></p><p>Yes - it seems there's genuine excitement about Windows 7. From what I can see, it does fix some of the glaring problems with Vista, and adds a few features:</p><p>* The backup utility actually lets you select what files to backup again, rather than just "Pictures" or "Documents".</p><p>* You can burn ISO files straight from Explorer.</p><p>* It's easier to enable BitKeeper. BitKeeper is pretty crap - it needs about 1.5GB unencrypted space to hold the 'system' files - but the installer now creates this space by default, so it's easier to actually turn encryption on.</p><p>But, as always, there are caveats:</p><p>* The backup utility actually stores backups as sets of 200MB zip archives. What. The. Fuck? Is something like Time Machine (which is like rdiff-backup) so complicated?</p><p>* You might be able to burn ISOs, but you still can't mount them. Loopback device anyone? Do I really need to pay $XX, or install some spyware-infested freeware crap, just to mount ISOs?</p><p>* BitKeeper is still only available in 'Ultimate' form.</p><p>Probably the most useful new feature is the Linux-like window manager shortcuts, so you can maximise, snap to left/right of the screen etc. I've been using these in KDE for donkey's years.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously ?
Windows 7 ?
People are really going to play that game ? Yes - it seems there 's genuine excitement about Windows 7 .
From what I can see , it does fix some of the glaring problems with Vista , and adds a few features : * The backup utility actually lets you select what files to backup again , rather than just " Pictures " or " Documents " .
* You can burn ISO files straight from Explorer .
* It 's easier to enable BitKeeper .
BitKeeper is pretty crap - it needs about 1.5GB unencrypted space to hold the 'system ' files - but the installer now creates this space by default , so it 's easier to actually turn encryption on.But , as always , there are caveats : * The backup utility actually stores backups as sets of 200MB zip archives .
What. The .
Fuck ? Is something like Time Machine ( which is like rdiff-backup ) so complicated ?
* You might be able to burn ISOs , but you still ca n't mount them .
Loopback device anyone ?
Do I really need to pay $ XX , or install some spyware-infested freeware crap , just to mount ISOs ?
* BitKeeper is still only available in 'Ultimate ' form.Probably the most useful new feature is the Linux-like window manager shortcuts , so you can maximise , snap to left/right of the screen etc .
I 've been using these in KDE for donkey 's years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously?
Windows 7?
People are really going to play that game?Yes - it seems there's genuine excitement about Windows 7.
From what I can see, it does fix some of the glaring problems with Vista, and adds a few features:* The backup utility actually lets you select what files to backup again, rather than just "Pictures" or "Documents".
* You can burn ISO files straight from Explorer.
* It's easier to enable BitKeeper.
BitKeeper is pretty crap - it needs about 1.5GB unencrypted space to hold the 'system' files - but the installer now creates this space by default, so it's easier to actually turn encryption on.But, as always, there are caveats:* The backup utility actually stores backups as sets of 200MB zip archives.
What. The.
Fuck? Is something like Time Machine (which is like rdiff-backup) so complicated?
* You might be able to burn ISOs, but you still can't mount them.
Loopback device anyone?
Do I really need to pay $XX, or install some spyware-infested freeware crap, just to mount ISOs?
* BitKeeper is still only available in 'Ultimate' form.Probably the most useful new feature is the Linux-like window manager shortcuts, so you can maximise, snap to left/right of the screen etc.
I've been using these in KDE for donkey's years.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28677105</id>
	<title>Re:I am going to take a chance on Windows 7</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247502660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Of course my Laptop will dual-boot both Windows 7.0 Pro and Fedora 11, so that if Windows 7.0 fails me, at least I have Fedora 11 to use.</p></div></blockquote><p>Excuse me? Seems like a typical Slasahdot response, being so pro-Linux and all. How is Fedora 11 a fallback option? Seems like you are not fairly comparing apples to apples here. Shouldn't you have XP as a boot option?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course my Laptop will dual-boot both Windows 7.0 Pro and Fedora 11 , so that if Windows 7.0 fails me , at least I have Fedora 11 to use.Excuse me ?
Seems like a typical Slasahdot response , being so pro-Linux and all .
How is Fedora 11 a fallback option ?
Seems like you are not fairly comparing apples to apples here .
Should n't you have XP as a boot option ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course my Laptop will dual-boot both Windows 7.0 Pro and Fedora 11, so that if Windows 7.0 fails me, at least I have Fedora 11 to use.Excuse me?
Seems like a typical Slasahdot response, being so pro-Linux and all.
How is Fedora 11 a fallback option?
Seems like you are not fairly comparing apples to apples here.
Shouldn't you have XP as a boot option?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671437</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673771</id>
	<title>Re:I just got sweaty palms...</title>
	<author>MemoryDragon</author>
	<datestamp>1247480340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think the excitement comes from the speed, it finally again is more or less at the same speed levels as XP (how well this will work out if you have myriads of files on your machine, only time will tell)<br>It is not that Vista per se was bad, it just was such a resource hog that it was unbearable (I remember horribly the 20 minutes disk thrashing on my notebook hd after startup). But I agree there are still a load of stupid things in Windows, and instead of becoming less they just shift to other areas!<br>I personally found windows7</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the excitement comes from the speed , it finally again is more or less at the same speed levels as XP ( how well this will work out if you have myriads of files on your machine , only time will tell ) It is not that Vista per se was bad , it just was such a resource hog that it was unbearable ( I remember horribly the 20 minutes disk thrashing on my notebook hd after startup ) .
But I agree there are still a load of stupid things in Windows , and instead of becoming less they just shift to other areas ! I personally found windows7</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the excitement comes from the speed, it finally again is more or less at the same speed levels as XP (how well this will work out if you have myriads of files on your machine, only time will tell)It is not that Vista per se was bad, it just was such a resource hog that it was unbearable (I remember horribly the 20 minutes disk thrashing on my notebook hd after startup).
But I agree there are still a load of stupid things in Windows, and instead of becoming less they just shift to other areas!I personally found windows7</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28690449</id>
	<title>Re:Win7 netbook dream</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247583600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You should get a netbook with i7</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You should get a netbook with i7</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You should get a netbook with i7</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672639</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672833</id>
	<title>Re:I plan to install it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247423040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm sorry to say, I think you missed the value upgrade boat already.<br>Until yesterday people in the US anyway could preorder the Win 7 Home Premium upgrade for $49, and Win 7 Pro upgrade for $99, for delivery after the October 22 release date.  Now as rabidly as I generally hate Microsoft (with cause), I have to admit that paying $50-$100 once every few years for a piece of software which I'll use heavily isn't that unreasonable in the first world anyway.  Those were retail upgrade versions, and not restricted to a single piece of hardware like OEM versions are AFAIK.<br>At the $100 or $199 list prices for the retail upgrade versions, though, I would've balked at the price and likely never have bought the upgrades, but half of that seemed reasonable.  I couldn't bear to buy OEM edition just because I'm religiously against having an OS tied to work with only one piece of hardware.  If I upgrade my PC I darn well expect to be able to use the OS I paid for on the upgraded PC.  Supposedly there may be a "Family Pack" deal coming on "Home Premium" though which might be a reasonable value choice if you have 3 pcs you need to run it on in your household.<br>I believe the preorder discounts are going to be available in some other market regions over the future weeks to come, though, so hopefully the europeans / australians / et. al. will also be able to get a better deal on it -- they almost always get screwed on hardware / software prices relative to US pricing / sales.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sorry to say , I think you missed the value upgrade boat already.Until yesterday people in the US anyway could preorder the Win 7 Home Premium upgrade for $ 49 , and Win 7 Pro upgrade for $ 99 , for delivery after the October 22 release date .
Now as rabidly as I generally hate Microsoft ( with cause ) , I have to admit that paying $ 50- $ 100 once every few years for a piece of software which I 'll use heavily is n't that unreasonable in the first world anyway .
Those were retail upgrade versions , and not restricted to a single piece of hardware like OEM versions are AFAIK.At the $ 100 or $ 199 list prices for the retail upgrade versions , though , I would 've balked at the price and likely never have bought the upgrades , but half of that seemed reasonable .
I could n't bear to buy OEM edition just because I 'm religiously against having an OS tied to work with only one piece of hardware .
If I upgrade my PC I darn well expect to be able to use the OS I paid for on the upgraded PC .
Supposedly there may be a " Family Pack " deal coming on " Home Premium " though which might be a reasonable value choice if you have 3 pcs you need to run it on in your household.I believe the preorder discounts are going to be available in some other market regions over the future weeks to come , though , so hopefully the europeans / australians / et .
al. will also be able to get a better deal on it -- they almost always get screwed on hardware / software prices relative to US pricing / sales .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sorry to say, I think you missed the value upgrade boat already.Until yesterday people in the US anyway could preorder the Win 7 Home Premium upgrade for $49, and Win 7 Pro upgrade for $99, for delivery after the October 22 release date.
Now as rabidly as I generally hate Microsoft (with cause), I have to admit that paying $50-$100 once every few years for a piece of software which I'll use heavily isn't that unreasonable in the first world anyway.
Those were retail upgrade versions, and not restricted to a single piece of hardware like OEM versions are AFAIK.At the $100 or $199 list prices for the retail upgrade versions, though, I would've balked at the price and likely never have bought the upgrades, but half of that seemed reasonable.
I couldn't bear to buy OEM edition just because I'm religiously against having an OS tied to work with only one piece of hardware.
If I upgrade my PC I darn well expect to be able to use the OS I paid for on the upgraded PC.
Supposedly there may be a "Family Pack" deal coming on "Home Premium" though which might be a reasonable value choice if you have 3 pcs you need to run it on in your household.I believe the preorder discounts are going to be available in some other market regions over the future weeks to come, though, so hopefully the europeans / australians / et.
al. will also be able to get a better deal on it -- they almost always get screwed on hardware / software prices relative to US pricing / sales.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671613</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670777</id>
	<title>Windows 7 makes me excited</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247401680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Windows 7 is the first version of Windows that has me excited since as far back as I can remember.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows 7 is the first version of Windows that has me excited since as far back as I can remember .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows 7 is the first version of Windows that has me excited since as far back as I can remember.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672603</id>
	<title>I'm not amazed...</title>
	<author>DarkNinja75</author>
	<datestamp>1247420160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I liked Vista just fine. The basic version came installed on my laptop. But I wanted Windows Media Center to connect to my Xbox, so I downloaded the RC of 7. And honestly, the only difference I've noticed is the ability to change the background at time intervals.

I didn't think Vista was bad (way more stable than XP on my desktop), and I don't think 7 is anything impressive. What am I missing?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I liked Vista just fine .
The basic version came installed on my laptop .
But I wanted Windows Media Center to connect to my Xbox , so I downloaded the RC of 7 .
And honestly , the only difference I 've noticed is the ability to change the background at time intervals .
I did n't think Vista was bad ( way more stable than XP on my desktop ) , and I do n't think 7 is anything impressive .
What am I missing ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I liked Vista just fine.
The basic version came installed on my laptop.
But I wanted Windows Media Center to connect to my Xbox, so I downloaded the RC of 7.
And honestly, the only difference I've noticed is the ability to change the background at time intervals.
I didn't think Vista was bad (way more stable than XP on my desktop), and I don't think 7 is anything impressive.
What am I missing?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672443</id>
	<title>Re:The "Lord of HOSTS" sayeth READ (serious)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247418240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow.  Helluva rundown.  Almost over my head, too.  Now I have to do some reading, to see how well I can really understand all that.  Oh, don't worry, I got the "in a nutshell" idea of it.  Firewall is a layered defense, and Microsoft took away the layers. Which just begs the question: do 3rd party firewalls provide the layers of defense, or do they just rely on Window's API's?  And, if 3rd party firewalls provide a good layered defense, which ones do so?</p><p>I'm glad I have a good gateway machine, lol.  I just didn't realize how important it might be!!</p><p>And, I understood the HOSTS thing just fine.</p><p>Thanks for the info, and I'm off to find more.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow .
Helluva rundown .
Almost over my head , too .
Now I have to do some reading , to see how well I can really understand all that .
Oh , do n't worry , I got the " in a nutshell " idea of it .
Firewall is a layered defense , and Microsoft took away the layers .
Which just begs the question : do 3rd party firewalls provide the layers of defense , or do they just rely on Window 's API 's ?
And , if 3rd party firewalls provide a good layered defense , which ones do so ? I 'm glad I have a good gateway machine , lol .
I just did n't realize how important it might be !
! And , I understood the HOSTS thing just fine.Thanks for the info , and I 'm off to find more .
: - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow.
Helluva rundown.
Almost over my head, too.
Now I have to do some reading, to see how well I can really understand all that.
Oh, don't worry, I got the "in a nutshell" idea of it.
Firewall is a layered defense, and Microsoft took away the layers.
Which just begs the question: do 3rd party firewalls provide the layers of defense, or do they just rely on Window's API's?
And, if 3rd party firewalls provide a good layered defense, which ones do so?I'm glad I have a good gateway machine, lol.
I just didn't realize how important it might be!
!And, I understood the HOSTS thing just fine.Thanks for the info, and I'm off to find more.
:-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672163</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670771
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673669
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28737131
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671233
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672021
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_105</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670771
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671245
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671747
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674829
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670771
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671117
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671093
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672281
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670827
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671049
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674581
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670827
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671049
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673629
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673763
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671299
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671951
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_111</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671187
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673233
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670771
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672989
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671047
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671473
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28680561
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_110</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670771
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673669
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28740689
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671253
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670777
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671085
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672375
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671437
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672805
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_104</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670827
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671035
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671289
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673097
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671047
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672553
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670777
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671085
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672461
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670827
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671049
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674049
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_98</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28680501
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670827
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671049
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674467
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_103</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670771
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28677363
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28684235
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672639
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674925
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672639
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28683329
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671345
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_99</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670771
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673669
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28688937
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_93</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671747
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672585
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671415
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672157
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670777
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671085
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673257
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670827
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671197
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671491
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671437
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28711077
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671437
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28676747
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670827
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672067
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673837
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_109</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670777
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671085
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672687
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670827
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671049
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671431
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670771
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671445
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_100</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670827
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671049
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672463
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_102</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671701
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671319
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671233
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672073
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671331
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674517
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670827
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671519
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670771
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670993
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_92</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28678121
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670771
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673669
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674253
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670777
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671085
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672047
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670771
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673439
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_91</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670771
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673669
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28701603
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670827
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671061
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671779
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671747
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672449
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_108</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672265
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670777
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671085
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672343
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670771
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673669
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28690179
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671583
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673527
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_107</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670827
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671049
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674817
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670771
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28675419
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671047
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671473
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28698495
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671331
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670771
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672113
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672405
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_97</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671983
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670827
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671049
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28686201
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672639
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28690449
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671583
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673393
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_90</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671363
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670827
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671061
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672051
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670771
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673669
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28737087
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671809
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671327
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671317
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_106</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671339
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671145
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671755
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671437
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28677105
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671747
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674491
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674167
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_96</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671509
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671747
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28682037
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_101</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670827
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671049
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672177
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670777
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671085
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671713
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671437
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672435
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28677533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_95</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670827
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671049
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672235
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671415
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672509
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28676539
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673771
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670827
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671061
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28675343
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670771
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672443
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674823
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28685367
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670771
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673669
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28754531
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670777
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671085
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671599
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28686441
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670771
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673669
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28689065
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670777
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671085
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671599
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674547
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672425
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671233
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28675619
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671305
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670827
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671613
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672833
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670827
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671397
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_94</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670771
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670873
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670777
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671085
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671463
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670771
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28738319
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670771
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672443
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674823
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28677687
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670777
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671085
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28699151
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671093
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671343
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672103
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672815
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_112</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670827
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671049
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28676379
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670777
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671085
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671963
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670777
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671085
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672203
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28677241
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671747
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28676423
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_2324216_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671093
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671555
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_2324216.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671331
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671943
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674517
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_2324216.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28675239
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_2324216.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671863
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_2324216.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670805
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671289
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673097
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671327
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671047
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671473
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28698495
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28680561
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672553
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671345
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671339
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671317
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671145
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671021
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671983
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673233
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671809
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671253
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28684235
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671755
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673771
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672265
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671747
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672449
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674491
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28676423
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28682037
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674829
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672585
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673763
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671951
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671305
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672425
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28680501
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671363
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672103
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672815
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671509
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671701
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674167
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28676539
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28678121
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671187
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671415
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672509
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672157
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671299
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671319
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_2324216.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672603
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_2324216.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670771
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672113
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672405
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671117
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670873
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670993
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672163
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672443
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674823
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28685367
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28677687
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672489
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28738319
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28677363
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672933
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673439
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28675419
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673669
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28740689
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28689065
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28690179
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674253
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28688937
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28754531
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28737087
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28701603
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28737131
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672989
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671245
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671445
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_2324216.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670827
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671519
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671197
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671491
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671061
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28675343
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672051
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671779
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671049
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28676379
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672177
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673629
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672235
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674817
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671637
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28686201
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672463
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674467
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671431
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674581
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674049
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672067
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673837
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671035
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671397
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671613
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672833
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_2324216.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671583
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673393
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673527
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_2324216.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671093
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672281
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671555
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671343
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_2324216.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672847
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_2324216.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671233
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672021
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672073
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28675619
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_2324216.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28670777
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671085
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28699151
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672047
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671963
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671463
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671713
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672375
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672343
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672687
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671599
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674547
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28686441
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672203
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28677241
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672461
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28673257
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_2324216.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671413
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_2324216.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28675109
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_2324216.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671255
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_2324216.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672639
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28690449
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28674925
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28683329
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_2324216.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28671437
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28677105
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28711077
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28676747
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672805
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28672435
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_2324216.28677533
</commentlist>
</conversation>
