<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_18_1557210</id>
	<title>Are Software Developers Naturally Weird?</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1255885680000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>jammag writes <i>"Well, c'mon, yes &mdash; let's admit it. As a veteran coder discusses as he looks at his career, software development is brimming with <a href="http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/features/article.php/3844291/Are-Software-Developers-Naturally-Weird.htm">the offbeat, the quirky and the downright odd</a>. As he remembers, there was the 'Software Lyrics' guy and the 'Inappropriate Phone Call' programmer, among others. Are unique types drawn to the profession, or are we 'transformed over time by our darkened working environments and exposure to computer screen radiation?'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>jammag writes " Well , c'mon , yes    let 's admit it .
As a veteran coder discusses as he looks at his career , software development is brimming with the offbeat , the quirky and the downright odd .
As he remembers , there was the 'Software Lyrics ' guy and the 'Inappropriate Phone Call ' programmer , among others .
Are unique types drawn to the profession , or are we 'transformed over time by our darkened working environments and exposure to computer screen radiation ?
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>jammag writes "Well, c'mon, yes — let's admit it.
As a veteran coder discusses as he looks at his career, software development is brimming with the offbeat, the quirky and the downright odd.
As he remembers, there was the 'Software Lyrics' guy and the 'Inappropriate Phone Call' programmer, among others.
Are unique types drawn to the profession, or are we 'transformed over time by our darkened working environments and exposure to computer screen radiation?
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785817</id>
	<title>It's called autism</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255895400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Premise 1)  Most hackish types are either probably or definitely autistic.</p><p>Premise 2)  Most autistic individuals genuinely *are* basement dwelling freaks, on a level that would make the Joker or the Addams Family look normal.  Before you call me a bigot for saying that, realise that I'm an autistic person myself.  My Quasimodo/Frankenstein/Joseph Merrick complex is both strong, and fully justified.  Most of us genuinely are the sort of person who was interviewed in the documentary, "Trekkies."</p><p>I don't have a girlfriend, I've only had one sexual partner, and I lost my virginity very late.  (at 26)  Part of my current celibacy is by choice; female psychology simply doesn't have what it takes to be able to tolerate an autistic male.  Women just aren't strong enough to be able to handle us.  I realised that, and so I made a decision to never put another woman through what I put my ex through again.</p><p>In that film "Adam," the guy who tried to tell the woman not to get into a relationship with Adam was right.</p><p>My father was a misogynist, but I honestly am not.  I loved my ex, despite what I put her through; and I left her because I loved her.  I wanted her to find someone who she could be truly happy with.</p><p>If you're an autistic person, you have a moral responsibility to stay away from neurotypicals, particularly from women.  They need to be protected from us.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Premise 1 ) Most hackish types are either probably or definitely autistic.Premise 2 ) Most autistic individuals genuinely * are * basement dwelling freaks , on a level that would make the Joker or the Addams Family look normal .
Before you call me a bigot for saying that , realise that I 'm an autistic person myself .
My Quasimodo/Frankenstein/Joseph Merrick complex is both strong , and fully justified .
Most of us genuinely are the sort of person who was interviewed in the documentary , " Trekkies .
" I do n't have a girlfriend , I 've only had one sexual partner , and I lost my virginity very late .
( at 26 ) Part of my current celibacy is by choice ; female psychology simply does n't have what it takes to be able to tolerate an autistic male .
Women just are n't strong enough to be able to handle us .
I realised that , and so I made a decision to never put another woman through what I put my ex through again.In that film " Adam , " the guy who tried to tell the woman not to get into a relationship with Adam was right.My father was a misogynist , but I honestly am not .
I loved my ex , despite what I put her through ; and I left her because I loved her .
I wanted her to find someone who she could be truly happy with.If you 're an autistic person , you have a moral responsibility to stay away from neurotypicals , particularly from women .
They need to be protected from us .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Premise 1)  Most hackish types are either probably or definitely autistic.Premise 2)  Most autistic individuals genuinely *are* basement dwelling freaks, on a level that would make the Joker or the Addams Family look normal.
Before you call me a bigot for saying that, realise that I'm an autistic person myself.
My Quasimodo/Frankenstein/Joseph Merrick complex is both strong, and fully justified.
Most of us genuinely are the sort of person who was interviewed in the documentary, "Trekkies.
"I don't have a girlfriend, I've only had one sexual partner, and I lost my virginity very late.
(at 26)  Part of my current celibacy is by choice; female psychology simply doesn't have what it takes to be able to tolerate an autistic male.
Women just aren't strong enough to be able to handle us.
I realised that, and so I made a decision to never put another woman through what I put my ex through again.In that film "Adam," the guy who tried to tell the woman not to get into a relationship with Adam was right.My father was a misogynist, but I honestly am not.
I loved my ex, despite what I put her through; and I left her because I loved her.
I wanted her to find someone who she could be truly happy with.If you're an autistic person, you have a moral responsibility to stay away from neurotypicals, particularly from women.
They need to be protected from us.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787365</id>
	<title>Re:Yes. Computers are unnatural.</title>
	<author>elmartinos</author>
	<datestamp>1255863360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Computers work really natural. Did you ever notice that the toilet door behaves exactly like a mutex? I did. Only one can lock it at a time, and other processes might queue up for it if you take too long.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Computers work really natural .
Did you ever notice that the toilet door behaves exactly like a mutex ?
I did .
Only one can lock it at a time , and other processes might queue up for it if you take too long .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Computers work really natural.
Did you ever notice that the toilet door behaves exactly like a mutex?
I did.
Only one can lock it at a time, and other processes might queue up for it if you take too long.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785399</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786515</id>
	<title>It's the kind of memory programmers have...</title>
	<author>TheNarrator</author>
	<datestamp>1255857540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In order to be a good programmer, one has to have a very good memory for trivia.  Why do you think Ken Jennings, a programmer, was the best Jeopardy contestant of all time?  Computer systems and APIs are so complicated that if one cannot remember a good chunk of the APIs and how trivia about how parts of the systems work, it can be difficult to get anything done.</p><p>Having a good memory for trivia makes it easy to see all kinds of connections among things in non-programming life, namely in culture, or in day-to-day life in general.  This usually leads to a special kind of creativity in which one brings together one's own set of personal behaviors from tying things together instead of just following a template that society provides for us.  For instance, instead of trying to imitate the confident corporate person they see on TV, a programmer will choose their outfit based on utility and comfort, pulling together shoes, pants, gadgets, etc, based on utility and comfort.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In order to be a good programmer , one has to have a very good memory for trivia .
Why do you think Ken Jennings , a programmer , was the best Jeopardy contestant of all time ?
Computer systems and APIs are so complicated that if one can not remember a good chunk of the APIs and how trivia about how parts of the systems work , it can be difficult to get anything done.Having a good memory for trivia makes it easy to see all kinds of connections among things in non-programming life , namely in culture , or in day-to-day life in general .
This usually leads to a special kind of creativity in which one brings together one 's own set of personal behaviors from tying things together instead of just following a template that society provides for us .
For instance , instead of trying to imitate the confident corporate person they see on TV , a programmer will choose their outfit based on utility and comfort , pulling together shoes , pants , gadgets , etc , based on utility and comfort .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In order to be a good programmer, one has to have a very good memory for trivia.
Why do you think Ken Jennings, a programmer, was the best Jeopardy contestant of all time?
Computer systems and APIs are so complicated that if one cannot remember a good chunk of the APIs and how trivia about how parts of the systems work, it can be difficult to get anything done.Having a good memory for trivia makes it easy to see all kinds of connections among things in non-programming life, namely in culture, or in day-to-day life in general.
This usually leads to a special kind of creativity in which one brings together one's own set of personal behaviors from tying things together instead of just following a template that society provides for us.
For instance, instead of trying to imitate the confident corporate person they see on TV, a programmer will choose their outfit based on utility and comfort, pulling together shoes, pants, gadgets, etc, based on utility and comfort.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29791979</id>
	<title>TFA Sucks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255954020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously, "I'm going to perpetuate negative stereotypes about my own profession by telling completely unrelated stories about a guy who didn't take his work too seriously, a friendly guy and a girl who (shockingly!) liked to talk on the phone; all of which have absolutely nothing to do with software development."</p><p>Are software developers naturally weird? No... but society will continue to unfairly assume they are because of idiots like the guy who wrote this article. Thanks a lot, asshole.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , " I 'm going to perpetuate negative stereotypes about my own profession by telling completely unrelated stories about a guy who did n't take his work too seriously , a friendly guy and a girl who ( shockingly !
) liked to talk on the phone ; all of which have absolutely nothing to do with software development .
" Are software developers naturally weird ?
No... but society will continue to unfairly assume they are because of idiots like the guy who wrote this article .
Thanks a lot , asshole .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, "I'm going to perpetuate negative stereotypes about my own profession by telling completely unrelated stories about a guy who didn't take his work too seriously, a friendly guy and a girl who (shockingly!
) liked to talk on the phone; all of which have absolutely nothing to do with software development.
"Are software developers naturally weird?
No... but society will continue to unfairly assume they are because of idiots like the guy who wrote this article.
Thanks a lot, asshole.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29790109</id>
	<title>Re:Short r&#233;sum&#233;</title>
	<author>Flere Imsaho</author>
	<datestamp>1255887780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785721</id>
	<title>Re:Asperger's syndrome.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255894560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I find the best programmers are the ones with the maturity to complete a task when they said they would. Who can perform an exhaustive session of testing without complaining (even though it's boring, but necessary work). Who will produce the required documentation to a high standard and will play nice with the other members of the team they are in.</p></div><p>That is one kind of 'best'.  But in my experience, the folks who grind through exhaustive &amp; tedious tasks with nary a peep of discontent, rarely have good creative skills.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I find the best programmers are the ones with the maturity to complete a task when they said they would .
Who can perform an exhaustive session of testing without complaining ( even though it 's boring , but necessary work ) .
Who will produce the required documentation to a high standard and will play nice with the other members of the team they are in.That is one kind of 'best' .
But in my experience , the folks who grind through exhaustive &amp; tedious tasks with nary a peep of discontent , rarely have good creative skills .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find the best programmers are the ones with the maturity to complete a task when they said they would.
Who can perform an exhaustive session of testing without complaining (even though it's boring, but necessary work).
Who will produce the required documentation to a high standard and will play nice with the other members of the team they are in.That is one kind of 'best'.
But in my experience, the folks who grind through exhaustive &amp; tedious tasks with nary a peep of discontent, rarely have good creative skills.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785279</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29818821</id>
	<title>We're all mutants... (Quote from Fringe)</title>
	<author>tomhartung</author>
	<datestamp>1256055420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"We're all mutants. What's more remarkable is how many of us appear to be normal." Walter, Fringe</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" We 're all mutants .
What 's more remarkable is how many of us appear to be normal .
" Walter , Fringe</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"We're all mutants.
What's more remarkable is how many of us appear to be normal.
" Walter, Fringe</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787389</id>
	<title>Re:Short r&#233;sum&#233;</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255863480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786341</id>
	<title>Programmer stereotypes are not the rule</title>
	<author>dirkdodgers</author>
	<datestamp>1255899360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But the minority of programmers who got into the profession because they spent their evenings and weekends in school hardware hacking or hobbyist programming rather than socializing, are bound to behave strangely when placed into a highly social environment - the workplace - and when their strange behavior is accepted rather than questioned or openly mocked as it would have been in those school days, they are bound to persist in it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But the minority of programmers who got into the profession because they spent their evenings and weekends in school hardware hacking or hobbyist programming rather than socializing , are bound to behave strangely when placed into a highly social environment - the workplace - and when their strange behavior is accepted rather than questioned or openly mocked as it would have been in those school days , they are bound to persist in it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But the minority of programmers who got into the profession because they spent their evenings and weekends in school hardware hacking or hobbyist programming rather than socializing, are bound to behave strangely when placed into a highly social environment - the workplace - and when their strange behavior is accepted rather than questioned or openly mocked as it would have been in those school days, they are bound to persist in it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785759</id>
	<title>The machine is using us.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255894920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Our social skills diminish with the time spent with the computer rather than in society. We're just not used to those basic unwritten rules, and the computer is to blame. There were some hints of programmers getting around in society, but those are not hardcore coders (hackers). As proof that hackers understand it very well, you can see ESR's essay on hackers, which even suggest that us being apart from the society (or rather, socializing) is a good thing. Personally, that's just the way you comfort yourself, but it's true that our time is invested elsewhere. Could we still manage to do both if we really tried? I'm afraid it might be too late for me to try. The process of rehabilitation would be too long and too intense anyway. What's your excuse?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Our social skills diminish with the time spent with the computer rather than in society .
We 're just not used to those basic unwritten rules , and the computer is to blame .
There were some hints of programmers getting around in society , but those are not hardcore coders ( hackers ) .
As proof that hackers understand it very well , you can see ESR 's essay on hackers , which even suggest that us being apart from the society ( or rather , socializing ) is a good thing .
Personally , that 's just the way you comfort yourself , but it 's true that our time is invested elsewhere .
Could we still manage to do both if we really tried ?
I 'm afraid it might be too late for me to try .
The process of rehabilitation would be too long and too intense anyway .
What 's your excuse ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Our social skills diminish with the time spent with the computer rather than in society.
We're just not used to those basic unwritten rules, and the computer is to blame.
There were some hints of programmers getting around in society, but those are not hardcore coders (hackers).
As proof that hackers understand it very well, you can see ESR's essay on hackers, which even suggest that us being apart from the society (or rather, socializing) is a good thing.
Personally, that's just the way you comfort yourself, but it's true that our time is invested elsewhere.
Could we still manage to do both if we really tried?
I'm afraid it might be too late for me to try.
The process of rehabilitation would be too long and too intense anyway.
What's your excuse?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785745</id>
	<title>Weird, or just plain socially annoying?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255894800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I work in a small company that has an in-house programmer on staff who creates small custom utilities to help with many day-to-day work tasks.</p><p>He's quite stereotypical in that he lives off Coca-cola, spends his free time playing online role playing games, and at 31 is still a self-confessed virgin.  (He does not, however, live with his mother -- he owns his own house.)</p><p>But this guy completely lacks social grace.  He's loud, obnoxious, crude, and has no concept of "when to shut up", especially around female employees.</p><p>However, the worst part is lack of personal hygenie: Rarely showers, rarely does his laundry, has breath to kill a small country, and has not yet discovered the miracle of toilet paper.  (Even after I not-so-subtly hung a Tommy Toilet poster on the bathroom wall...)</p><p>After numerous complaints from numerous staff, he now slathers on cologne in an attempt to hide his smell, but the result is more of a vulgar mix of feces, sweat, BO, and cologne.  Ugh.</p><p>Although he does his work reasonably well (nothing sterling, mind you) his eccentricities will be his undoing.  Pretty much everyone wishes this loud-mouthed stink-bomb to be fired, myself included.</p><p>Weird can be acceptable, even entertaining, but it has limits.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I work in a small company that has an in-house programmer on staff who creates small custom utilities to help with many day-to-day work tasks.He 's quite stereotypical in that he lives off Coca-cola , spends his free time playing online role playing games , and at 31 is still a self-confessed virgin .
( He does not , however , live with his mother -- he owns his own house .
) But this guy completely lacks social grace .
He 's loud , obnoxious , crude , and has no concept of " when to shut up " , especially around female employees.However , the worst part is lack of personal hygenie : Rarely showers , rarely does his laundry , has breath to kill a small country , and has not yet discovered the miracle of toilet paper .
( Even after I not-so-subtly hung a Tommy Toilet poster on the bathroom wall... ) After numerous complaints from numerous staff , he now slathers on cologne in an attempt to hide his smell , but the result is more of a vulgar mix of feces , sweat , BO , and cologne .
Ugh.Although he does his work reasonably well ( nothing sterling , mind you ) his eccentricities will be his undoing .
Pretty much everyone wishes this loud-mouthed stink-bomb to be fired , myself included.Weird can be acceptable , even entertaining , but it has limits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work in a small company that has an in-house programmer on staff who creates small custom utilities to help with many day-to-day work tasks.He's quite stereotypical in that he lives off Coca-cola, spends his free time playing online role playing games, and at 31 is still a self-confessed virgin.
(He does not, however, live with his mother -- he owns his own house.
)But this guy completely lacks social grace.
He's loud, obnoxious, crude, and has no concept of "when to shut up", especially around female employees.However, the worst part is lack of personal hygenie: Rarely showers, rarely does his laundry, has breath to kill a small country, and has not yet discovered the miracle of toilet paper.
(Even after I not-so-subtly hung a Tommy Toilet poster on the bathroom wall...)After numerous complaints from numerous staff, he now slathers on cologne in an attempt to hide his smell, but the result is more of a vulgar mix of feces, sweat, BO, and cologne.
Ugh.Although he does his work reasonably well (nothing sterling, mind you) his eccentricities will be his undoing.
Pretty much everyone wishes this loud-mouthed stink-bomb to be fired, myself included.Weird can be acceptable, even entertaining, but it has limits.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786763</id>
	<title>Our World is viewed differently</title>
	<author>Wamoc</author>
	<datestamp>1255859040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Other fields people know exactly what/how it is done. Accountants crunch numbers to get results. Marketers create ads for people to see.

With Software Developers we somehow create a "blackbox" from nothing that does what people need it to do.

With the differences for how our work is seen, that creates a different understanding of it, allowing others to see programmers differently.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Other fields people know exactly what/how it is done .
Accountants crunch numbers to get results .
Marketers create ads for people to see .
With Software Developers we somehow create a " blackbox " from nothing that does what people need it to do .
With the differences for how our work is seen , that creates a different understanding of it , allowing others to see programmers differently .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Other fields people know exactly what/how it is done.
Accountants crunch numbers to get results.
Marketers create ads for people to see.
With Software Developers we somehow create a "blackbox" from nothing that does what people need it to do.
With the differences for how our work is seen, that creates a different understanding of it, allowing others to see programmers differently.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785399</id>
	<title>Yes. Computers are unnatural.</title>
	<author>Admiral Burrito</author>
	<datestamp>1255891920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes. Computing is warping our minds.</p><p>Computers are just so damn logical, working with them is completely removed from normal everyday life. It's well known that people anthropomorphize computers in order to deal with them in our own frame of reference, but conversely we also mentally shift our thinking into a logical form which we aren't evolved to deal with, so that we can work effectively with computers. The more closely you work with computers, the more this will affect you.</p><p>I don't think this is a new thing though. Mathematicians and people working in hard sciences have certainly faced the same sort of thing. For example, many early scientists (eg. Galileo) have faced persecution because they have found a mode of thinking that "normal" people have found objectionable.</p><p>It'll only get worse as technology progresses.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes .
Computing is warping our minds.Computers are just so damn logical , working with them is completely removed from normal everyday life .
It 's well known that people anthropomorphize computers in order to deal with them in our own frame of reference , but conversely we also mentally shift our thinking into a logical form which we are n't evolved to deal with , so that we can work effectively with computers .
The more closely you work with computers , the more this will affect you.I do n't think this is a new thing though .
Mathematicians and people working in hard sciences have certainly faced the same sort of thing .
For example , many early scientists ( eg .
Galileo ) have faced persecution because they have found a mode of thinking that " normal " people have found objectionable.It 'll only get worse as technology progresses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes.
Computing is warping our minds.Computers are just so damn logical, working with them is completely removed from normal everyday life.
It's well known that people anthropomorphize computers in order to deal with them in our own frame of reference, but conversely we also mentally shift our thinking into a logical form which we aren't evolved to deal with, so that we can work effectively with computers.
The more closely you work with computers, the more this will affect you.I don't think this is a new thing though.
Mathematicians and people working in hard sciences have certainly faced the same sort of thing.
For example, many early scientists (eg.
Galileo) have faced persecution because they have found a mode of thinking that "normal" people have found objectionable.It'll only get worse as technology progresses.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29789549</id>
	<title>Re:Short r&#233;sum&#233;</title>
	<author>jonoid</author>
	<datestamp>1255883940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"You're unique, just like everybody else."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" You 're unique , just like everybody else .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"You're unique, just like everybody else.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785823</id>
	<title>Re:Asperger's syndrome.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255895400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's true, but due to the the prevailing stereotype that the best programmers are "weird", the mature, cooperative guy is always rejected in favour of some rude rainman wannabe.</p><p>Conveying "I'm an eccentric asshole and therefore a genius" is a lot easier than conveying "I'm a thoroughly dependable guy who's better in the long run".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's true , but due to the the prevailing stereotype that the best programmers are " weird " , the mature , cooperative guy is always rejected in favour of some rude rainman wannabe.Conveying " I 'm an eccentric asshole and therefore a genius " is a lot easier than conveying " I 'm a thoroughly dependable guy who 's better in the long run " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's true, but due to the the prevailing stereotype that the best programmers are "weird", the mature, cooperative guy is always rejected in favour of some rude rainman wannabe.Conveying "I'm an eccentric asshole and therefore a genius" is a lot easier than conveying "I'm a thoroughly dependable guy who's better in the long run".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785279</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29790197</id>
	<title>Normal people are the ones you don't know well.</title>
	<author>emeade</author>
	<datestamp>1255888500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The only normal people are the ones you don't know very well." Joe Ancis http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/634.html</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" The only normal people are the ones you do n't know very well .
" Joe Ancis http : //www.quotationspage.com/quote/634.html</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The only normal people are the ones you don't know very well.
" Joe Ancis http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/634.html
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788859</id>
	<title>Self-reinforcing stereotypes</title>
	<author>4D6963</author>
	<datestamp>1255878060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, I think you are transformed by your stereotypes. In the Anglo-Saxon world, but more particularly in the USA, people are often pigeonholed/pigeonhole themselves into categories, and the stereotypes of their group only serves to reinforce their traits. "Jocks" are more "jocky", "nerds" are more "nerdy", "popular girls" try hard to be more like popular girls, and so on. It's not just in high school either, it works for anything else too.

</p><p>I think there's a culture in Anglo-Saxon countries (but again particularly in the USA) for people to trade some of their individual identity for their group identity, which makes people that are strongly defined by the group they feel they belong to, and who identify strongly with those groups. In other words I think that the Anglo-Saxon civilisation is more naturally geared toward communitarianism and self-segregation.

</p><p>To contrast with this, in France (where I was born and raised), this phenomenon is practically non-existent, or only extended to social classes (e.g. "les bourges" or "les racailles"). As a result, people (of the same social class) tend to have a feeling of belonging to the same group as anyone else, and personal identity is therefore almost entirely solely reliant on individuality and personal traits, and generally there's a lack of self-awareness as to which pigeonhole one would fit in.

</p><p>The consequence of that lack of segregation is that people in a profession don't seem necessarily much more different than people in another. That's how you can have more colleagues in IT who look like rugby players or bikers than colleagues who look like stereotypical nerds. A small confirmation of this was the admission from Irish engineering students that all the foreign French students they had seen in Engineering were much more 'normal' than Irish engineering students were.

</p><p>So my answer to the question is, besides aspies, self-reinforcing nerd stereotypes, and a strong awareness that you're "just a full-blown nerd".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , I think you are transformed by your stereotypes .
In the Anglo-Saxon world , but more particularly in the USA , people are often pigeonholed/pigeonhole themselves into categories , and the stereotypes of their group only serves to reinforce their traits .
" Jocks " are more " jocky " , " nerds " are more " nerdy " , " popular girls " try hard to be more like popular girls , and so on .
It 's not just in high school either , it works for anything else too .
I think there 's a culture in Anglo-Saxon countries ( but again particularly in the USA ) for people to trade some of their individual identity for their group identity , which makes people that are strongly defined by the group they feel they belong to , and who identify strongly with those groups .
In other words I think that the Anglo-Saxon civilisation is more naturally geared toward communitarianism and self-segregation .
To contrast with this , in France ( where I was born and raised ) , this phenomenon is practically non-existent , or only extended to social classes ( e.g .
" les bourges " or " les racailles " ) .
As a result , people ( of the same social class ) tend to have a feeling of belonging to the same group as anyone else , and personal identity is therefore almost entirely solely reliant on individuality and personal traits , and generally there 's a lack of self-awareness as to which pigeonhole one would fit in .
The consequence of that lack of segregation is that people in a profession do n't seem necessarily much more different than people in another .
That 's how you can have more colleagues in IT who look like rugby players or bikers than colleagues who look like stereotypical nerds .
A small confirmation of this was the admission from Irish engineering students that all the foreign French students they had seen in Engineering were much more 'normal ' than Irish engineering students were .
So my answer to the question is , besides aspies , self-reinforcing nerd stereotypes , and a strong awareness that you 're " just a full-blown nerd " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, I think you are transformed by your stereotypes.
In the Anglo-Saxon world, but more particularly in the USA, people are often pigeonholed/pigeonhole themselves into categories, and the stereotypes of their group only serves to reinforce their traits.
"Jocks" are more "jocky", "nerds" are more "nerdy", "popular girls" try hard to be more like popular girls, and so on.
It's not just in high school either, it works for anything else too.
I think there's a culture in Anglo-Saxon countries (but again particularly in the USA) for people to trade some of their individual identity for their group identity, which makes people that are strongly defined by the group they feel they belong to, and who identify strongly with those groups.
In other words I think that the Anglo-Saxon civilisation is more naturally geared toward communitarianism and self-segregation.
To contrast with this, in France (where I was born and raised), this phenomenon is practically non-existent, or only extended to social classes (e.g.
"les bourges" or "les racailles").
As a result, people (of the same social class) tend to have a feeling of belonging to the same group as anyone else, and personal identity is therefore almost entirely solely reliant on individuality and personal traits, and generally there's a lack of self-awareness as to which pigeonhole one would fit in.
The consequence of that lack of segregation is that people in a profession don't seem necessarily much more different than people in another.
That's how you can have more colleagues in IT who look like rugby players or bikers than colleagues who look like stereotypical nerds.
A small confirmation of this was the admission from Irish engineering students that all the foreign French students they had seen in Engineering were much more 'normal' than Irish engineering students were.
So my answer to the question is, besides aspies, self-reinforcing nerd stereotypes, and a strong awareness that you're "just a full-blown nerd".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787421</id>
	<title>Re:Talk about slow news day</title>
	<author>Scrameustache</author>
	<datestamp>1255863780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>He was just peppering the code with random lyrics.</p></div><p>Not even random lyrics, RELEVANT lyrics! "You spin me right 'round" comment next to a loop? That's awesome! I wanna work with people like that.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>He was just peppering the code with random lyrics.Not even random lyrics , RELEVANT lyrics !
" You spin me right 'round " comment next to a loop ?
That 's awesome !
I wan na work with people like that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He was just peppering the code with random lyrics.Not even random lyrics, RELEVANT lyrics!
"You spin me right 'round" comment next to a loop?
That's awesome!
I wanna work with people like that.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785503</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785313</id>
	<title>Re:Talk about slow news day</title>
	<author>Hal\_Porter</author>
	<datestamp>1255891140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>(I bet a lot of people thought Tom Cruise was normal before he started jumping on Oprah's couch.)</p></div><p>Actually I think the dude has serious issues. Normally he'd be on some sort of drug and seeing a psychiatrist. Unfortunately he's in Scientology, and that means auditing which is probably not a good idea for people with mental health issues, a ban on seeing psychiatrists or taking medication. Plus Scientologists are supposed to disconnect from friends and family outside the group. And they suck money out of their members pretty effectively.</p><p>Given that Scientology probably attracts people who are a bit unsure of themselves to start with and you have a recipe for crazy.</p><p>So it's sort of ironic to see him behaving in a manic way and ranting about the benefits of Scientology, because if he wasn't in it he'd probably have more money, no audit sessions and would be able to shop around psychiatrists until he found one that could help him.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>( I bet a lot of people thought Tom Cruise was normal before he started jumping on Oprah 's couch .
) Actually I think the dude has serious issues .
Normally he 'd be on some sort of drug and seeing a psychiatrist .
Unfortunately he 's in Scientology , and that means auditing which is probably not a good idea for people with mental health issues , a ban on seeing psychiatrists or taking medication .
Plus Scientologists are supposed to disconnect from friends and family outside the group .
And they suck money out of their members pretty effectively.Given that Scientology probably attracts people who are a bit unsure of themselves to start with and you have a recipe for crazy.So it 's sort of ironic to see him behaving in a manic way and ranting about the benefits of Scientology , because if he was n't in it he 'd probably have more money , no audit sessions and would be able to shop around psychiatrists until he found one that could help him .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(I bet a lot of people thought Tom Cruise was normal before he started jumping on Oprah's couch.
)Actually I think the dude has serious issues.
Normally he'd be on some sort of drug and seeing a psychiatrist.
Unfortunately he's in Scientology, and that means auditing which is probably not a good idea for people with mental health issues, a ban on seeing psychiatrists or taking medication.
Plus Scientologists are supposed to disconnect from friends and family outside the group.
And they suck money out of their members pretty effectively.Given that Scientology probably attracts people who are a bit unsure of themselves to start with and you have a recipe for crazy.So it's sort of ironic to see him behaving in a manic way and ranting about the benefits of Scientology, because if he wasn't in it he'd probably have more money, no audit sessions and would be able to shop around psychiatrists until he found one that could help him.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785157</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29789199</id>
	<title>Bright = Weird</title>
	<author>OrigamiMarie</author>
	<datestamp>1255881720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Bright people tend to be kind of strange.  We don't quite fit in, we have unusual ideas about how the world should work, and standard solutions to life's problems don't tend to make us happy.  Programmers as a group have a much higher fraction of bright people than the population at large.  So programmers tend to be weird.  You'll get that in any profession that attracts bright people, though of course it will get expressed differently depending on which subset of skills you filter for.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bright people tend to be kind of strange .
We do n't quite fit in , we have unusual ideas about how the world should work , and standard solutions to life 's problems do n't tend to make us happy .
Programmers as a group have a much higher fraction of bright people than the population at large .
So programmers tend to be weird .
You 'll get that in any profession that attracts bright people , though of course it will get expressed differently depending on which subset of skills you filter for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bright people tend to be kind of strange.
We don't quite fit in, we have unusual ideas about how the world should work, and standard solutions to life's problems don't tend to make us happy.
Programmers as a group have a much higher fraction of bright people than the population at large.
So programmers tend to be weird.
You'll get that in any profession that attracts bright people, though of course it will get expressed differently depending on which subset of skills you filter for.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29790765</id>
	<title>And You're all Color-blind Lefties</title>
	<author>Phloebas</author>
	<datestamp>1255893840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've also noticed this, and considered doing a little research into the psychology of coders - especially those employed as enterprise developers.  I've noticed that a disproportionate number of the coders at my company are either color-blind, left-handed or both.  Does anyone have any insight into this? Left-handedness is fairly easy to explain, but the color-blindness comes as a bit of a surprise.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've also noticed this , and considered doing a little research into the psychology of coders - especially those employed as enterprise developers .
I 've noticed that a disproportionate number of the coders at my company are either color-blind , left-handed or both .
Does anyone have any insight into this ?
Left-handedness is fairly easy to explain , but the color-blindness comes as a bit of a surprise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've also noticed this, and considered doing a little research into the psychology of coders - especially those employed as enterprise developers.
I've noticed that a disproportionate number of the coders at my company are either color-blind, left-handed or both.
Does anyone have any insight into this?
Left-handedness is fairly easy to explain, but the color-blindness comes as a bit of a surprise.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29820285</id>
	<title>Re:Weird, yes. Naturally, no.</title>
	<author>Sinterklaas</author>
	<datestamp>1256156940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, there are many different variants of autism, which is why the term 'autism spectrum' is often used. Some variants do not have mental retardation as a symptom and the people who have those variants may be quite productive, within the confines of their abilities. In some cases, they may be more productive than 'normal' people. For example, tasks that are fairly repetitive, but require intense focus on details are much better suited to autists, who will not grow bored unlike 'normal' people.</p><p>Autism is diagnosed based on symptoms, not by testing for the causes (since they are unknown). One of the primary criteria for diagnosing someone as autistic is whether or not their symptoms are severe enough to affect their life (actually, that is the primary diagnotic criterium in all of medicine). That doesn't mean that people who do not meet the diagnostic criteria are not autistic. Frankly, we cannot tell, because we cannot test for the causes, so we do not know how many people have very mild autism that is not diagnosed. Personally I believe that autism is an (partial) lack of of certain abilities that all humans possess, sometimes combined with an excess in other abilities. For instance, we all have a limited ability for empathy. Most people can enjoy doing repetitive things for a while (video games!). When you take these to extremes, we call them symptoms of autism. In mild cases, we call them personality traits. So I feel that it is perfectly acceptable for people to identify themselves as mild autists when they have mild symptoms.</p><p>We know that there are many more diagnosed cases of autism in Silicon Valley than in other areas, so it appears that there is a correlation between the ability and/or choice to program and autism. One of the most common complaints about programmers is their inability to conform. In the anecdotes, the programmer usually hasn't got a clue that his behavior is unwanted, despite non-verbal hints. This matches up well with the lack of demonstrated empathy and inability to pick up on certain types of nuanced communication that is typical of autism. There is a very important rule that can prevent lots of pain and suffering when dealing with (mildly) autistic people, which is to be explicit. Tell the autistic person in simple direct messages what he needs to do. That will help him greatly to conform and to foster relationships. Unfortunately, as children we learn that it is rude to communicate this way. Supposedly, we should not embarrass people by telling them to shower more often. Instead, we should gossip about it and ostracize them. I prefer that mild autists understand their personality traits and mentor people on how they should be treated, so they can foster good relationships. If that requires people to self-diagnose themselves as autists, when the medical community doesn't agree, that's fine with me.</p><p>PS. I'm not saying that geeks do not have affectations, nor claiming that all geeks are so autistic that they cannot help but misbehave (most are not). However, the geeks that people complain about usually seem to be autistic.<br>PS2. Be seeing you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , there are many different variants of autism , which is why the term 'autism spectrum ' is often used .
Some variants do not have mental retardation as a symptom and the people who have those variants may be quite productive , within the confines of their abilities .
In some cases , they may be more productive than 'normal ' people .
For example , tasks that are fairly repetitive , but require intense focus on details are much better suited to autists , who will not grow bored unlike 'normal ' people.Autism is diagnosed based on symptoms , not by testing for the causes ( since they are unknown ) .
One of the primary criteria for diagnosing someone as autistic is whether or not their symptoms are severe enough to affect their life ( actually , that is the primary diagnotic criterium in all of medicine ) .
That does n't mean that people who do not meet the diagnostic criteria are not autistic .
Frankly , we can not tell , because we can not test for the causes , so we do not know how many people have very mild autism that is not diagnosed .
Personally I believe that autism is an ( partial ) lack of of certain abilities that all humans possess , sometimes combined with an excess in other abilities .
For instance , we all have a limited ability for empathy .
Most people can enjoy doing repetitive things for a while ( video games ! ) .
When you take these to extremes , we call them symptoms of autism .
In mild cases , we call them personality traits .
So I feel that it is perfectly acceptable for people to identify themselves as mild autists when they have mild symptoms.We know that there are many more diagnosed cases of autism in Silicon Valley than in other areas , so it appears that there is a correlation between the ability and/or choice to program and autism .
One of the most common complaints about programmers is their inability to conform .
In the anecdotes , the programmer usually has n't got a clue that his behavior is unwanted , despite non-verbal hints .
This matches up well with the lack of demonstrated empathy and inability to pick up on certain types of nuanced communication that is typical of autism .
There is a very important rule that can prevent lots of pain and suffering when dealing with ( mildly ) autistic people , which is to be explicit .
Tell the autistic person in simple direct messages what he needs to do .
That will help him greatly to conform and to foster relationships .
Unfortunately , as children we learn that it is rude to communicate this way .
Supposedly , we should not embarrass people by telling them to shower more often .
Instead , we should gossip about it and ostracize them .
I prefer that mild autists understand their personality traits and mentor people on how they should be treated , so they can foster good relationships .
If that requires people to self-diagnose themselves as autists , when the medical community does n't agree , that 's fine with me.PS .
I 'm not saying that geeks do not have affectations , nor claiming that all geeks are so autistic that they can not help but misbehave ( most are not ) .
However , the geeks that people complain about usually seem to be autistic.PS2 .
Be seeing you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, there are many different variants of autism, which is why the term 'autism spectrum' is often used.
Some variants do not have mental retardation as a symptom and the people who have those variants may be quite productive, within the confines of their abilities.
In some cases, they may be more productive than 'normal' people.
For example, tasks that are fairly repetitive, but require intense focus on details are much better suited to autists, who will not grow bored unlike 'normal' people.Autism is diagnosed based on symptoms, not by testing for the causes (since they are unknown).
One of the primary criteria for diagnosing someone as autistic is whether or not their symptoms are severe enough to affect their life (actually, that is the primary diagnotic criterium in all of medicine).
That doesn't mean that people who do not meet the diagnostic criteria are not autistic.
Frankly, we cannot tell, because we cannot test for the causes, so we do not know how many people have very mild autism that is not diagnosed.
Personally I believe that autism is an (partial) lack of of certain abilities that all humans possess, sometimes combined with an excess in other abilities.
For instance, we all have a limited ability for empathy.
Most people can enjoy doing repetitive things for a while (video games!).
When you take these to extremes, we call them symptoms of autism.
In mild cases, we call them personality traits.
So I feel that it is perfectly acceptable for people to identify themselves as mild autists when they have mild symptoms.We know that there are many more diagnosed cases of autism in Silicon Valley than in other areas, so it appears that there is a correlation between the ability and/or choice to program and autism.
One of the most common complaints about programmers is their inability to conform.
In the anecdotes, the programmer usually hasn't got a clue that his behavior is unwanted, despite non-verbal hints.
This matches up well with the lack of demonstrated empathy and inability to pick up on certain types of nuanced communication that is typical of autism.
There is a very important rule that can prevent lots of pain and suffering when dealing with (mildly) autistic people, which is to be explicit.
Tell the autistic person in simple direct messages what he needs to do.
That will help him greatly to conform and to foster relationships.
Unfortunately, as children we learn that it is rude to communicate this way.
Supposedly, we should not embarrass people by telling them to shower more often.
Instead, we should gossip about it and ostracize them.
I prefer that mild autists understand their personality traits and mentor people on how they should be treated, so they can foster good relationships.
If that requires people to self-diagnose themselves as autists, when the medical community doesn't agree, that's fine with me.PS.
I'm not saying that geeks do not have affectations, nor claiming that all geeks are so autistic that they cannot help but misbehave (most are not).
However, the geeks that people complain about usually seem to be autistic.PS2.
Be seeing you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787859</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785323</id>
	<title>yes.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255891260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>yes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>yes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29791913</id>
	<title>Re:Weird is OK, jerks are not</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1255953420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think it's slightly deeper than that.  A lot of good people in every profession develop large egos.  If you think programmers' egos are big, spend some time with good chefs.  The difference is the metrics available.  Anyone (well, almost anyone) can hire a good chef.  Bring him in, get him to cook something, taste it, and you can compare his performance to other candidates trivially.  Want to hire a good lawyer?  Take a look at the cases he's won or lost.  Professional associations for people like doctors, lawyers, and engineers provide accreditation for the most competent and so you can generally find the good ones without understanding the field.</p><p>
Not so with programmers.  It is very difficult for a non-programmer to tell the difference between good, bad, and average programmers.  If you have already hired one, then you can have him interview new candidates, but how do you hire the first one?  </p><p>
Without an accurate way of hiring good programmers, companies often go with vague correlations.  A lot of good programmers have big egos, so if we hire someone with a big ego then hopefully he will be a good programmer.  They then tolerate him, because they can't easily tell whether he is really competent or not.  They let him sit in on interviews, and he makes sure that they never hire anyone more competent than him so that they never get a basis for comparison.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think it 's slightly deeper than that .
A lot of good people in every profession develop large egos .
If you think programmers ' egos are big , spend some time with good chefs .
The difference is the metrics available .
Anyone ( well , almost anyone ) can hire a good chef .
Bring him in , get him to cook something , taste it , and you can compare his performance to other candidates trivially .
Want to hire a good lawyer ?
Take a look at the cases he 's won or lost .
Professional associations for people like doctors , lawyers , and engineers provide accreditation for the most competent and so you can generally find the good ones without understanding the field .
Not so with programmers .
It is very difficult for a non-programmer to tell the difference between good , bad , and average programmers .
If you have already hired one , then you can have him interview new candidates , but how do you hire the first one ?
Without an accurate way of hiring good programmers , companies often go with vague correlations .
A lot of good programmers have big egos , so if we hire someone with a big ego then hopefully he will be a good programmer .
They then tolerate him , because they ca n't easily tell whether he is really competent or not .
They let him sit in on interviews , and he makes sure that they never hire anyone more competent than him so that they never get a basis for comparison .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think it's slightly deeper than that.
A lot of good people in every profession develop large egos.
If you think programmers' egos are big, spend some time with good chefs.
The difference is the metrics available.
Anyone (well, almost anyone) can hire a good chef.
Bring him in, get him to cook something, taste it, and you can compare his performance to other candidates trivially.
Want to hire a good lawyer?
Take a look at the cases he's won or lost.
Professional associations for people like doctors, lawyers, and engineers provide accreditation for the most competent and so you can generally find the good ones without understanding the field.
Not so with programmers.
It is very difficult for a non-programmer to tell the difference between good, bad, and average programmers.
If you have already hired one, then you can have him interview new candidates, but how do you hire the first one?
Without an accurate way of hiring good programmers, companies often go with vague correlations.
A lot of good programmers have big egos, so if we hire someone with a big ego then hopefully he will be a good programmer.
They then tolerate him, because they can't easily tell whether he is really competent or not.
They let him sit in on interviews, and he makes sure that they never hire anyone more competent than him so that they never get a basis for comparison.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785309</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786713</id>
	<title>Re:Asperger's syndrome.</title>
	<author>russotto</author>
	<datestamp>1255858740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I find the best programmers are the ones with the maturity to complete a task when they said they would.</p></div></blockquote><p>Ahh, the m-word, a great modern method of poisoning the well... who could argue against this, for to do so is to admit immaturity?</p><p>There are any number of reasons a programmer (or anyone, in fact) might not complete a task when they said they would.  Few have anything to do with "maturity" per se.  Most common is likely poor estimating skills.  Another very common one is that some requirement for that task (outside the person's control) was not fulfilled; even if the programmer placed a caveat in his estimate, it gets conveniently forgotten by management.  Or the programmer may have been subsequently given another task with higher priority.</p><blockquote><div><p> Who can perform an exhaustive session of testing without complaining (even though it's boring, but necessary work).</p></div></blockquote><p>Division of labor.  Look it up.  Developers shouldn't usually be doing that kind of exhaustive testing.  Not only are they generally temperamentally unsuited for it, but their knowledge of the code can lead to gaps in the testing; the same mistaken assumptions which resulted in the bug can result in the test missing the bug.  And if the developers are not only doing it, but doing it without complaining about it, it probably means they believe complaining about it will result in negative consequences... and therefore they're probably looking for another job where this isn't true.</p><blockquote><div><p> Who will produce the required documentation to a high standard</p></div></blockquote><p>So why is it you expect developers to be technical writers as well?  Do you expect your tech writers to write code?</p><blockquote><div><p> and will play nice with the other members of the team they are in.</p></div></blockquote><p>Always good.  Of course, since the developers seem to be the testers and the tech writers as well, interaction with the OTHER teams isn't an issue, is it?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I find the best programmers are the ones with the maturity to complete a task when they said they would.Ahh , the m-word , a great modern method of poisoning the well... who could argue against this , for to do so is to admit immaturity ? There are any number of reasons a programmer ( or anyone , in fact ) might not complete a task when they said they would .
Few have anything to do with " maturity " per se .
Most common is likely poor estimating skills .
Another very common one is that some requirement for that task ( outside the person 's control ) was not fulfilled ; even if the programmer placed a caveat in his estimate , it gets conveniently forgotten by management .
Or the programmer may have been subsequently given another task with higher priority .
Who can perform an exhaustive session of testing without complaining ( even though it 's boring , but necessary work ) .Division of labor .
Look it up .
Developers should n't usually be doing that kind of exhaustive testing .
Not only are they generally temperamentally unsuited for it , but their knowledge of the code can lead to gaps in the testing ; the same mistaken assumptions which resulted in the bug can result in the test missing the bug .
And if the developers are not only doing it , but doing it without complaining about it , it probably means they believe complaining about it will result in negative consequences... and therefore they 're probably looking for another job where this is n't true .
Who will produce the required documentation to a high standardSo why is it you expect developers to be technical writers as well ?
Do you expect your tech writers to write code ?
and will play nice with the other members of the team they are in.Always good .
Of course , since the developers seem to be the testers and the tech writers as well , interaction with the OTHER teams is n't an issue , is it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find the best programmers are the ones with the maturity to complete a task when they said they would.Ahh, the m-word, a great modern method of poisoning the well... who could argue against this, for to do so is to admit immaturity?There are any number of reasons a programmer (or anyone, in fact) might not complete a task when they said they would.
Few have anything to do with "maturity" per se.
Most common is likely poor estimating skills.
Another very common one is that some requirement for that task (outside the person's control) was not fulfilled; even if the programmer placed a caveat in his estimate, it gets conveniently forgotten by management.
Or the programmer may have been subsequently given another task with higher priority.
Who can perform an exhaustive session of testing without complaining (even though it's boring, but necessary work).Division of labor.
Look it up.
Developers shouldn't usually be doing that kind of exhaustive testing.
Not only are they generally temperamentally unsuited for it, but their knowledge of the code can lead to gaps in the testing; the same mistaken assumptions which resulted in the bug can result in the test missing the bug.
And if the developers are not only doing it, but doing it without complaining about it, it probably means they believe complaining about it will result in negative consequences... and therefore they're probably looking for another job where this isn't true.
Who will produce the required documentation to a high standardSo why is it you expect developers to be technical writers as well?
Do you expect your tech writers to write code?
and will play nice with the other members of the team they are in.Always good.
Of course, since the developers seem to be the testers and the tech writers as well, interaction with the OTHER teams isn't an issue, is it?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785279</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785605</id>
	<title>You're seeing the long term effects of isolation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255893780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Programming, and engineering in general, is a solitary practice.  Living in your own head so often for so long makes you weird.  Period.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Programming , and engineering in general , is a solitary practice .
Living in your own head so often for so long makes you weird .
Period .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Programming, and engineering in general, is a solitary practice.
Living in your own head so often for so long makes you weird.
Period.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788221</id>
	<title>Re:No, but they're naturally narcissistic</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255871400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Programming will mature as a discipline when programmers see themselves as not that different from any other skilled, educated professional."</p><p>I think that's key, but I think that's why you'll also always find oddball programmers. Many companies have pits of programmers who just sit and write code, they're told what to write by other people, and sometimes, even how to write it.</p><p>Personally, I'm fortunate enough to work as a real analyst programmer, no, not one of those people who are stuck in a coding pit and told what to write but are given that title regardless, I actually interact with the engineers and other staff who use the applications we build to find out their requirements, analyse them, and work with them to form an ideal solution. I'm grateful for this position because it really is interesting when I spend time with the engineers, spend time with the finance team and so on, learning about their job, their requirements and so on for applications. It's not just that though, I also find out that really, other departments are often no more different than us- there are those in finance who sit number crunching and little else, whilst there are those who actually have to feed those numbers into reports and attend meetings to use them in. There are those who have to chase up invoices and so on.</p><p>The point is this, in pretty much all departments there is room for oddballs who never see outside their department, but similarly there is room for people in those same departments whose job requires them to interact with others. You see, I don't think it's a question of a programming maturing as a discipline, I think it's a question of when individual programmers mature themselves and become capable of social interaction if they ever do then they'll naturally find themselves interacting with others as I now do. It's not a discipline wide problem, it's a problem across all disciplines- there are those who are just naturally anti-social, and in their closed worlds they have close minded views of things, they have the traits you mention- effectively, they make excuses as to why they don't interact with others or why they feel they don't need to.</p><p>In the end though, those who accept they're just a normal person and that they do need to speak to other people, accept that they're not necessarily any better than them are the ones who move up and move on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Programming will mature as a discipline when programmers see themselves as not that different from any other skilled , educated professional .
" I think that 's key , but I think that 's why you 'll also always find oddball programmers .
Many companies have pits of programmers who just sit and write code , they 're told what to write by other people , and sometimes , even how to write it.Personally , I 'm fortunate enough to work as a real analyst programmer , no , not one of those people who are stuck in a coding pit and told what to write but are given that title regardless , I actually interact with the engineers and other staff who use the applications we build to find out their requirements , analyse them , and work with them to form an ideal solution .
I 'm grateful for this position because it really is interesting when I spend time with the engineers , spend time with the finance team and so on , learning about their job , their requirements and so on for applications .
It 's not just that though , I also find out that really , other departments are often no more different than us- there are those in finance who sit number crunching and little else , whilst there are those who actually have to feed those numbers into reports and attend meetings to use them in .
There are those who have to chase up invoices and so on.The point is this , in pretty much all departments there is room for oddballs who never see outside their department , but similarly there is room for people in those same departments whose job requires them to interact with others .
You see , I do n't think it 's a question of a programming maturing as a discipline , I think it 's a question of when individual programmers mature themselves and become capable of social interaction if they ever do then they 'll naturally find themselves interacting with others as I now do .
It 's not a discipline wide problem , it 's a problem across all disciplines- there are those who are just naturally anti-social , and in their closed worlds they have close minded views of things , they have the traits you mention- effectively , they make excuses as to why they do n't interact with others or why they feel they do n't need to.In the end though , those who accept they 're just a normal person and that they do need to speak to other people , accept that they 're not necessarily any better than them are the ones who move up and move on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Programming will mature as a discipline when programmers see themselves as not that different from any other skilled, educated professional.
"I think that's key, but I think that's why you'll also always find oddball programmers.
Many companies have pits of programmers who just sit and write code, they're told what to write by other people, and sometimes, even how to write it.Personally, I'm fortunate enough to work as a real analyst programmer, no, not one of those people who are stuck in a coding pit and told what to write but are given that title regardless, I actually interact with the engineers and other staff who use the applications we build to find out their requirements, analyse them, and work with them to form an ideal solution.
I'm grateful for this position because it really is interesting when I spend time with the engineers, spend time with the finance team and so on, learning about their job, their requirements and so on for applications.
It's not just that though, I also find out that really, other departments are often no more different than us- there are those in finance who sit number crunching and little else, whilst there are those who actually have to feed those numbers into reports and attend meetings to use them in.
There are those who have to chase up invoices and so on.The point is this, in pretty much all departments there is room for oddballs who never see outside their department, but similarly there is room for people in those same departments whose job requires them to interact with others.
You see, I don't think it's a question of a programming maturing as a discipline, I think it's a question of when individual programmers mature themselves and become capable of social interaction if they ever do then they'll naturally find themselves interacting with others as I now do.
It's not a discipline wide problem, it's a problem across all disciplines- there are those who are just naturally anti-social, and in their closed worlds they have close minded views of things, they have the traits you mention- effectively, they make excuses as to why they don't interact with others or why they feel they don't need to.In the end though, those who accept they're just a normal person and that they do need to speak to other people, accept that they're not necessarily any better than them are the ones who move up and move on.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785363</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786067</id>
	<title>Re:Asperger's syndrome.</title>
	<author>Eli Gottlieb</author>
	<datestamp>1255897020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, actually some of us make time for computer work, a social life, <i>and</i> Humans vs Zombies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , actually some of us make time for computer work , a social life , and Humans vs Zombies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, actually some of us make time for computer work, a social life, and Humans vs Zombies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785243</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786737</id>
	<title>Re:No, not that wierd</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255858860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.pobronson.com/index\_bombardiers.htm" title="pobronson.com" rel="nofollow">Po</a> [pobronson.com]? is that you?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Po [ pobronson.com ] ?
is that you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Po [pobronson.com]?
is that you?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785447</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788259</id>
	<title>Now this is truly WEIRD...</title>
	<author>sgt\_doom</author>
	<datestamp>1255871820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Now <a href="http://blog.wfmu.org/freeform/2007/03/79\_versions\_of\_.html" title="wfmu.org">this site</a> [wfmu.org] is truly weird....and wonderful....can never get enough of this song....and Zombie movies....</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now this site [ wfmu.org ] is truly weird....and wonderful....can never get enough of this song....and Zombie movies... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now this site [wfmu.org] is truly weird....and wonderful....can never get enough of this song....and Zombie movies....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785273</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785179</id>
	<title>People are strange</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255889940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From my experience, programmers are no weirder than retail sales people, bakers or general laborers.</p><p>What may make programmers skew a little more weird is that programming talent is still rather rare or is certainly not an off-the-shelf commodity. So weirdness that might get you fired as a day laborer is more tolerated in programming. As I would think in any of the creative areas with relative shortages of talent.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From my experience , programmers are no weirder than retail sales people , bakers or general laborers.What may make programmers skew a little more weird is that programming talent is still rather rare or is certainly not an off-the-shelf commodity .
So weirdness that might get you fired as a day laborer is more tolerated in programming .
As I would think in any of the creative areas with relative shortages of talent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From my experience, programmers are no weirder than retail sales people, bakers or general laborers.What may make programmers skew a little more weird is that programming talent is still rather rare or is certainly not an off-the-shelf commodity.
So weirdness that might get you fired as a day laborer is more tolerated in programming.
As I would think in any of the creative areas with relative shortages of talent.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785707</id>
	<title>All the logic goes to coding</title>
	<author>riT-k0MA</author>
	<datestamp>1255894440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've noticed many programmers, including myself, act completely illogically outside of work (and on breaks). My personal theory is that everyone has a finite amount of logic, some more than others, and coders use up most of theirs at work. Hence acting wierd and illogically away from their computers.
<br>
<br>
Maybe that's why one cannot code some days. The Logic Reserve is depleted.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've noticed many programmers , including myself , act completely illogically outside of work ( and on breaks ) .
My personal theory is that everyone has a finite amount of logic , some more than others , and coders use up most of theirs at work .
Hence acting wierd and illogically away from their computers .
Maybe that 's why one can not code some days .
The Logic Reserve is depleted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've noticed many programmers, including myself, act completely illogically outside of work (and on breaks).
My personal theory is that everyone has a finite amount of logic, some more than others, and coders use up most of theirs at work.
Hence acting wierd and illogically away from their computers.
Maybe that's why one cannot code some days.
The Logic Reserve is depleted.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29798807</id>
	<title>Re:Weird, yes. Naturally, no.</title>
	<author>Zayne S Halsall</author>
	<datestamp>1255985100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ignoring the pretension and condescension in your comment (is that affectation?), I'd like to point out that you might have considered taking English communication skills as a subject along with the psychology you studied.
<br> <br>
For the benefit of those trying to make sense of your Nietzsche-like meanderings, I'll offer this translation: people are posers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ignoring the pretension and condescension in your comment ( is that affectation ?
) , I 'd like to point out that you might have considered taking English communication skills as a subject along with the psychology you studied .
For the benefit of those trying to make sense of your Nietzsche-like meanderings , I 'll offer this translation : people are posers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ignoring the pretension and condescension in your comment (is that affectation?
), I'd like to point out that you might have considered taking English communication skills as a subject along with the psychology you studied.
For the benefit of those trying to make sense of your Nietzsche-like meanderings, I'll offer this translation: people are posers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787859</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788403</id>
	<title>Kalitos Guey</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255873200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ill agree, methodus 2000 is the reason I got into programming.<br>I said, I wanna make cool stuff like that!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ill agree , methodus 2000 is the reason I got into programming.I said , I wan na make cool stuff like that !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ill agree, methodus 2000 is the reason I got into programming.I said, I wanna make cool stuff like that!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29789897</id>
	<title>Visual-Spatial</title>
	<author>poofmeisterp</author>
	<datestamp>1255886400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Visual-spatial memory and thought are my primary driver.</p><p>For those who don't "have it," I may appear to be a completely weird person that they can't understand... someone who can look at things from 200,000 different angles and still say that there is no answer.</p><p>It's hard to find friends, lemme tell ya.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Visual-spatial memory and thought are my primary driver.For those who do n't " have it , " I may appear to be a completely weird person that they ca n't understand... someone who can look at things from 200,000 different angles and still say that there is no answer.It 's hard to find friends , lem me tell ya .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Visual-spatial memory and thought are my primary driver.For those who don't "have it," I may appear to be a completely weird person that they can't understand... someone who can look at things from 200,000 different angles and still say that there is no answer.It's hard to find friends, lemme tell ya.
:)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29794741</id>
	<title>Re:It's called autism</title>
	<author>KillerBob</author>
	<datestamp>1255969800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Premise 1) Most hackish types are either probably or definitely autistic.</p></div></blockquote><p>I'd disagree with your basic premise. Most of the geeky types I know are certainly not autistic. And those that claim some form of Autism or Asperger's are self-diagnosed based on a short list of symptoms, and they use it as an excuse and blanket justification to avoid developping social skills.</p><blockquote><div><p>Premise 2) Most autistic individuals genuinely *are* basement dwelling freaks, on a level that would make the Joker or the Addams Family look normal. Before you call me a bigot for saying that, realise that I'm an autistic person myself. My Quasimodo/Frankenstein/Joseph Merrick complex is both strong, and fully justified. Most of us genuinely are the sort of person who was interviewed in the documentary, "Trekkies."</p></div></blockquote><p>Living with your parents does not make you a freak, nor does it make you autistic or a quasimodo. And those people I know who actually are genuinely autistic actually don't live with their parents at all. Only one of the ones I know actually has any form of assistance in his existence at all, the others are all living on their own. (low autism, not high autism... but if you had high autism, I'd have a hard time believing that you were able to hold a job at all)</p><blockquote><div><p>I don't have a girlfriend, I've only had one sexual partner, and I lost my virginity very late. (at 26) Part of my current celibacy is by choice; female psychology simply doesn't have what it takes to be able to tolerate an autistic male. Women just aren't strong enough to be able to handle us. I realised that, and so I made a decision to never put another woman through what I put my ex through again.</p></div></blockquote><p>You're generalizing females. I don't like it. It's insulting to the whole gender, for one, and for two, you're setting yourself up for a self-fulfilling prophecy. Why don't you let a woman decide if she can handle you? We aren't as weak as you seem to think. As long as you're honest up front, and we know what we're getting ourselves into, the it isn't that much of a big deal. (and no, I'm not offering... I'm in a happy relationship with somebody, and she would be very miffed, and probably a little confused, if I hooked up with some guy from the Internet)</p><blockquote><div><p>My father was a misogynist, but I honestly am not. I loved my ex, despite what I put her through; and I left her because I loved her. I wanted her to find someone who she could be truly happy with.</p><p>If you're an autistic person, you have a moral responsibility to stay away from neurotypicals, particularly from women. They need to be protected from us.</p></div></blockquote><p>That's a pretty damned misogynistic thing to say, IMO. You had one bad experience, and generalizing an entire group based on it. Seriously bad juju.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Premise 1 ) Most hackish types are either probably or definitely autistic.I 'd disagree with your basic premise .
Most of the geeky types I know are certainly not autistic .
And those that claim some form of Autism or Asperger 's are self-diagnosed based on a short list of symptoms , and they use it as an excuse and blanket justification to avoid developping social skills.Premise 2 ) Most autistic individuals genuinely * are * basement dwelling freaks , on a level that would make the Joker or the Addams Family look normal .
Before you call me a bigot for saying that , realise that I 'm an autistic person myself .
My Quasimodo/Frankenstein/Joseph Merrick complex is both strong , and fully justified .
Most of us genuinely are the sort of person who was interviewed in the documentary , " Trekkies .
" Living with your parents does not make you a freak , nor does it make you autistic or a quasimodo .
And those people I know who actually are genuinely autistic actually do n't live with their parents at all .
Only one of the ones I know actually has any form of assistance in his existence at all , the others are all living on their own .
( low autism , not high autism... but if you had high autism , I 'd have a hard time believing that you were able to hold a job at all ) I do n't have a girlfriend , I 've only had one sexual partner , and I lost my virginity very late .
( at 26 ) Part of my current celibacy is by choice ; female psychology simply does n't have what it takes to be able to tolerate an autistic male .
Women just are n't strong enough to be able to handle us .
I realised that , and so I made a decision to never put another woman through what I put my ex through again.You 're generalizing females .
I do n't like it .
It 's insulting to the whole gender , for one , and for two , you 're setting yourself up for a self-fulfilling prophecy .
Why do n't you let a woman decide if she can handle you ?
We are n't as weak as you seem to think .
As long as you 're honest up front , and we know what we 're getting ourselves into , the it is n't that much of a big deal .
( and no , I 'm not offering... I 'm in a happy relationship with somebody , and she would be very miffed , and probably a little confused , if I hooked up with some guy from the Internet ) My father was a misogynist , but I honestly am not .
I loved my ex , despite what I put her through ; and I left her because I loved her .
I wanted her to find someone who she could be truly happy with.If you 're an autistic person , you have a moral responsibility to stay away from neurotypicals , particularly from women .
They need to be protected from us.That 's a pretty damned misogynistic thing to say , IMO .
You had one bad experience , and generalizing an entire group based on it .
Seriously bad juju .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Premise 1) Most hackish types are either probably or definitely autistic.I'd disagree with your basic premise.
Most of the geeky types I know are certainly not autistic.
And those that claim some form of Autism or Asperger's are self-diagnosed based on a short list of symptoms, and they use it as an excuse and blanket justification to avoid developping social skills.Premise 2) Most autistic individuals genuinely *are* basement dwelling freaks, on a level that would make the Joker or the Addams Family look normal.
Before you call me a bigot for saying that, realise that I'm an autistic person myself.
My Quasimodo/Frankenstein/Joseph Merrick complex is both strong, and fully justified.
Most of us genuinely are the sort of person who was interviewed in the documentary, "Trekkies.
"Living with your parents does not make you a freak, nor does it make you autistic or a quasimodo.
And those people I know who actually are genuinely autistic actually don't live with their parents at all.
Only one of the ones I know actually has any form of assistance in his existence at all, the others are all living on their own.
(low autism, not high autism... but if you had high autism, I'd have a hard time believing that you were able to hold a job at all)I don't have a girlfriend, I've only had one sexual partner, and I lost my virginity very late.
(at 26) Part of my current celibacy is by choice; female psychology simply doesn't have what it takes to be able to tolerate an autistic male.
Women just aren't strong enough to be able to handle us.
I realised that, and so I made a decision to never put another woman through what I put my ex through again.You're generalizing females.
I don't like it.
It's insulting to the whole gender, for one, and for two, you're setting yourself up for a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Why don't you let a woman decide if she can handle you?
We aren't as weak as you seem to think.
As long as you're honest up front, and we know what we're getting ourselves into, the it isn't that much of a big deal.
(and no, I'm not offering... I'm in a happy relationship with somebody, and she would be very miffed, and probably a little confused, if I hooked up with some guy from the Internet)My father was a misogynist, but I honestly am not.
I loved my ex, despite what I put her through; and I left her because I loved her.
I wanted her to find someone who she could be truly happy with.If you're an autistic person, you have a moral responsibility to stay away from neurotypicals, particularly from women.
They need to be protected from us.That's a pretty damned misogynistic thing to say, IMO.
You had one bad experience, and generalizing an entire group based on it.
Seriously bad juju.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785817</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787001</id>
	<title>Are Software Developers Naturally Weird?</title>
	<author>LesFerg</author>
	<datestamp>1255860900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do all Americans get trained at school on the subject of appropriately stereotyping people into roles?  Do you get told as you leave school what your job is going to be because of the stereotype you fit into?  What I'm really wondering is, does everybody else in the world think that everybody working in software must be a 'geek'?</p><p>After 20 years in software development, I have worked with a few people that could be classified as geeks, but the majority of people were not.  They did their job well, and most had a busy life away from the pooters also.  Here in NZ you don't have to fit an American character profile to get a job in IT.</p><p>It seems these days many people want to feel different, and out there, and weird, as opposed to an older, more puritanical society in which most people wanted to just fit in and appear normal.  This does not seem to be exclusive to computer workers.  As for the examples in the article tho, my impression is that these incidents are more of an indicator of the decline in good management, as a good manager should monitor new employees and provide guidance, instead of letting bad behavior persist in the workplace.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do all Americans get trained at school on the subject of appropriately stereotyping people into roles ?
Do you get told as you leave school what your job is going to be because of the stereotype you fit into ?
What I 'm really wondering is , does everybody else in the world think that everybody working in software must be a 'geek ' ? After 20 years in software development , I have worked with a few people that could be classified as geeks , but the majority of people were not .
They did their job well , and most had a busy life away from the pooters also .
Here in NZ you do n't have to fit an American character profile to get a job in IT.It seems these days many people want to feel different , and out there , and weird , as opposed to an older , more puritanical society in which most people wanted to just fit in and appear normal .
This does not seem to be exclusive to computer workers .
As for the examples in the article tho , my impression is that these incidents are more of an indicator of the decline in good management , as a good manager should monitor new employees and provide guidance , instead of letting bad behavior persist in the workplace .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do all Americans get trained at school on the subject of appropriately stereotyping people into roles?
Do you get told as you leave school what your job is going to be because of the stereotype you fit into?
What I'm really wondering is, does everybody else in the world think that everybody working in software must be a 'geek'?After 20 years in software development, I have worked with a few people that could be classified as geeks, but the majority of people were not.
They did their job well, and most had a busy life away from the pooters also.
Here in NZ you don't have to fit an American character profile to get a job in IT.It seems these days many people want to feel different, and out there, and weird, as opposed to an older, more puritanical society in which most people wanted to just fit in and appear normal.
This does not seem to be exclusive to computer workers.
As for the examples in the article tho, my impression is that these incidents are more of an indicator of the decline in good management, as a good manager should monitor new employees and provide guidance, instead of letting bad behavior persist in the workplace.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786831</id>
	<title>Why I like programmers...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255859520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>In my experience, software developers are quirky and somewhat socially challenged, but they tend to be honest, hard working, loyal, genuinely interested, fair minded, and ethical people who get treated with WAY less respect than they deserve for their skills and talents.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In my experience , software developers are quirky and somewhat socially challenged , but they tend to be honest , hard working , loyal , genuinely interested , fair minded , and ethical people who get treated with WAY less respect than they deserve for their skills and talents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my experience, software developers are quirky and somewhat socially challenged, but they tend to be honest, hard working, loyal, genuinely interested, fair minded, and ethical people who get treated with WAY less respect than they deserve for their skills and talents.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29793469</id>
	<title>That's what we do...</title>
	<author>hesaigo999ca</author>
	<datestamp>1255964340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The fact we don't mind sitting behind a computer all day long looking for bugs in a software that 6 months down the road will probably be replaced, etc..etc... usually means you have your own "unique" way of looking at things. The worst is when a computer geek tries to turn into a management suit, and stays within the same company. It doesn't work for long, and makes the environment worse for the wear.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The fact we do n't mind sitting behind a computer all day long looking for bugs in a software that 6 months down the road will probably be replaced , etc..etc... usually means you have your own " unique " way of looking at things .
The worst is when a computer geek tries to turn into a management suit , and stays within the same company .
It does n't work for long , and makes the environment worse for the wear .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The fact we don't mind sitting behind a computer all day long looking for bugs in a software that 6 months down the road will probably be replaced, etc..etc... usually means you have your own "unique" way of looking at things.
The worst is when a computer geek tries to turn into a management suit, and stays within the same company.
It doesn't work for long, and makes the environment worse for the wear.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785367</id>
	<title>viewpoint</title>
	<author>ei4anb</author>
	<datestamp>1255891740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Weird" is an irregular adjective that varies with the pronoun. An example illustrates best:<br>
<b>I</b> am interesting<br>
<b>You</b> are eccentric<br>
<b>He</b> is weird</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Weird " is an irregular adjective that varies with the pronoun .
An example illustrates best : I am interesting You are eccentric He is weird</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Weird" is an irregular adjective that varies with the pronoun.
An example illustrates best:
I am interesting
You are eccentric
He is weird</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29791175</id>
	<title>Re:Developers...</title>
	<author>Aceticon</author>
	<datestamp>1255943400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Coding a 3D engine does require quite a lot of mathematical and domain knowledge. Not only do you have to understand the mathematics behind things like geometry and vectors, but you also have to understand domain specific subjects like z-buffers and alpha channels.</p><p>I would recommend that you either aim for a 2D game (that's how I started myself, by doing a mine-sweeper clone for the ZX Spectrum while still in high-school) or get a pre-existing 3D engine (like one of the Unreal engines) to deal with the 3D rendering and building on top of it (which means looking at the procedural side of things - how objects/entities act/react/behave - and graphics).</p><p>Good luck!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Coding a 3D engine does require quite a lot of mathematical and domain knowledge .
Not only do you have to understand the mathematics behind things like geometry and vectors , but you also have to understand domain specific subjects like z-buffers and alpha channels.I would recommend that you either aim for a 2D game ( that 's how I started myself , by doing a mine-sweeper clone for the ZX Spectrum while still in high-school ) or get a pre-existing 3D engine ( like one of the Unreal engines ) to deal with the 3D rendering and building on top of it ( which means looking at the procedural side of things - how objects/entities act/react/behave - and graphics ) .Good luck !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Coding a 3D engine does require quite a lot of mathematical and domain knowledge.
Not only do you have to understand the mathematics behind things like geometry and vectors, but you also have to understand domain specific subjects like z-buffers and alpha channels.I would recommend that you either aim for a 2D game (that's how I started myself, by doing a mine-sweeper clone for the ZX Spectrum while still in high-school) or get a pre-existing 3D engine (like one of the Unreal engines) to deal with the 3D rendering and building on top of it (which means looking at the procedural side of things - how objects/entities act/react/behave - and graphics).Good luck!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785553</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786209</id>
	<title>Just sayin...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255898100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a 2nd home in Vegas and visit often. While I am not a frequenter of the strip clubs I am aquainted with a couple girls who moonlight as strippers. Their fortunes can vary based upon the makeup of the conventioneers in town at the time. They always say that the clubs are the most crowded when the "computer nerds" are in town. This was especially true during compuserve's hey day.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a 2nd home in Vegas and visit often .
While I am not a frequenter of the strip clubs I am aquainted with a couple girls who moonlight as strippers .
Their fortunes can vary based upon the makeup of the conventioneers in town at the time .
They always say that the clubs are the most crowded when the " computer nerds " are in town .
This was especially true during compuserve 's hey day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a 2nd home in Vegas and visit often.
While I am not a frequenter of the strip clubs I am aquainted with a couple girls who moonlight as strippers.
Their fortunes can vary based upon the makeup of the conventioneers in town at the time.
They always say that the clubs are the most crowded when the "computer nerds" are in town.
This was especially true during compuserve's hey day.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786001</id>
	<title>"Are software developers naturally weird?"</title>
	<author>skornenicholas</author>
	<datestamp>1255896540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>There is NOTHING natural about the urge to write code in Haiku, have Hello Kitty usb-powered leg warmers, play real life missile command via web cam, or to sit for hours in artificially lit rooms as a favorite pastime. Short answer? Yes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is NOTHING natural about the urge to write code in Haiku , have Hello Kitty usb-powered leg warmers , play real life missile command via web cam , or to sit for hours in artificially lit rooms as a favorite pastime .
Short answer ?
Yes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is NOTHING natural about the urge to write code in Haiku, have Hello Kitty usb-powered leg warmers, play real life missile command via web cam, or to sit for hours in artificially lit rooms as a favorite pastime.
Short answer?
Yes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788709</id>
	<title>Re:Short r&#233;sum&#233;</title>
	<author>Falconhell</author>
	<datestamp>1255876500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The multitude scene, Life Of Brian.</p><p>Brian "You must be individuals"</p><p>Crowd (As one) "Yes we are individuals!"</p><p>One bloke at the back; "I'm not"</p><p>(-:</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The multitude scene , Life Of Brian.Brian " You must be individuals " Crowd ( As one ) " Yes we are individuals !
" One bloke at the back ; " I 'm not " ( - :</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The multitude scene, Life Of Brian.Brian "You must be individuals"Crowd (As one) "Yes we are individuals!
"One bloke at the back; "I'm not"(-:</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29791659</id>
	<title>Re:viewpoint</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255950780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And <b>we</b> have a disassociative multi-personality disorder.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And we have a disassociative multi-personality disorder .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And we have a disassociative multi-personality disorder.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785367</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787181</id>
	<title>Yes and no</title>
	<author>Kjella</author>
	<datestamp>1255862040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It takes a certain level of analytics and tech interest to be a software developer, that makes people wierd. On the other hand, I've seen very few that were the kind of irrational crazy not-connecting-the-dots people as software developers. Just like you see very few introvert people working in sales and marketing. Some differences just come with the job description, but there's infinite variations on crazy and plenty left for everyone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It takes a certain level of analytics and tech interest to be a software developer , that makes people wierd .
On the other hand , I 've seen very few that were the kind of irrational crazy not-connecting-the-dots people as software developers .
Just like you see very few introvert people working in sales and marketing .
Some differences just come with the job description , but there 's infinite variations on crazy and plenty left for everyone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It takes a certain level of analytics and tech interest to be a software developer, that makes people wierd.
On the other hand, I've seen very few that were the kind of irrational crazy not-connecting-the-dots people as software developers.
Just like you see very few introvert people working in sales and marketing.
Some differences just come with the job description, but there's infinite variations on crazy and plenty left for everyone.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786093</id>
	<title>song lyrics weird??</title>
	<author>ysth</author>
	<datestamp>1255897200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't get it; doesn't everyone use quotes from songs, literature, or film in their code?  "I always have a quotation for everything - it saves original thinking."</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't get it ; does n't everyone use quotes from songs , literature , or film in their code ?
" I always have a quotation for everything - it saves original thinking .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't get it; doesn't everyone use quotes from songs, literature, or film in their code?
"I always have a quotation for everything - it saves original thinking.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785113</id>
	<title>From what I've discovered...</title>
	<author>dsginter</author>
	<datestamp>1255889400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is no "normal" - everyone seems to have something.  Developers (and geeks, in general) just wear it out there on their sleeve.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no " normal " - everyone seems to have something .
Developers ( and geeks , in general ) just wear it out there on their sleeve .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no "normal" - everyone seems to have something.
Developers (and geeks, in general) just wear it out there on their sleeve.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786449</id>
	<title>Re:Asperger's syndrome.</title>
	<author>delphi125</author>
	<datestamp>1255856940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wouldn't be surprised if I had said syndrome, and I certainly have peeped with discontent often enough, but only at incompetent management.</p><p>But I'm going to disagree with both "maturity" and "creativity", although I'll stick fairly close to the latter.</p><p>Rather than maturity, what is important is the competence to be able to make a good estimate about when something will be finished (including documentation). Unfortunately the vast majority (80\%+) of programmers aren't very good programmers when working in teams. I'll get back to that in a bit.</p><p>And rather than creativity, I find imagination, lateral thinking and problem solving in particular, to be more important. A similar 80\%+ majority of programmers who's work I've had the pleasure to maintain are extremely creative in using the wrong tool for the job, etc. Again, competence is most important.</p><p>I'm going to make it more personal now: I'm unemployed and haven't worked with Delphi for more than 5 years professionally. Unfortunately that's where I put all my eggs. Although after 2020 I'll probably be able to find some maintenance work (just as the COBOL guys did in 1999, hehe), I'd like to be developing new stuff again. I had one agency who I had worked through to mutual profit regularly in the past, only for the incompetent agent to - after saying I couldn't get the job because my French wasn't good enough reversing that when I wrote her in French - then tell me I couldn't get the job because my Delphi experience wasn't recent enough DESPITE the version being asked for (5) being 2 years prior to the end of my professional usage (7), and this being clearly visible on my CV.</p><p>Somewhat ironically, for my very first Delphi job opportunity, when I'd waited for 32-bit Delphi (2), the job agency (a temping one back then) had been asked for someone with 5 years Delphi experience, so I didn't get that job either. My 10 years (at the time) Pascal experience counted for nothing, and I sometimes wonder if they ever found a bullshitter who claimed 5 years experience with a product which had existed for only a year. Competence.</p><p>The reason I stopped developing was stress-related. I was working for a seemingly friendly guy on a niche product (version 5) of which the source to version 4 had been lost. This was at half my usual rate, but with the understanding I might take the company over when he retired. I told him up front that although I am an excellent developer and test my own code, if I were to develop from scratch I needed a tester, and since he was the only other person, that meant him. The first thing I didn't know is that he was supremely competent at the art of fine bullshit, and for the first six months I hammered out functionality at an extremely fast pace, while he supposedly tested it. Actually, he only did so cursorily, and instead spent most of his time fighting the tax man on his evasion and bullshitting customers into upgrading to the new (as yet non-existent) product. But the second thing I didn't know is that he actually had a demo CD of a competing product, which I tested on a lazy day in summer to see what the opposition was up to. And this may be why this post gets moderated funny: the opposition were on version 3.0 of their product, and not only had a development team of about 100 for this product alone (recall we were about 1.1), but their functionality and data were both at least an order of magnitude higher, and similarly the price was an order of magnitude lower. Not only that, but their budget was, on researching, discovered to be 9 figures. Yes, that's a hundred million dollars. The only bright side is that presumably they used their own tools to develop this competing program. The name of their tools probably started with the word "Visual". Yeah. Laugh with me or cry for me<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>But let me return to what is important: competence. I know what I'm competent at. I also know what I'm incompetent at, although I've learned the hard way. Note that competence is unrelated to brilliance: I've met many comp</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would n't be surprised if I had said syndrome , and I certainly have peeped with discontent often enough , but only at incompetent management.But I 'm going to disagree with both " maturity " and " creativity " , although I 'll stick fairly close to the latter.Rather than maturity , what is important is the competence to be able to make a good estimate about when something will be finished ( including documentation ) .
Unfortunately the vast majority ( 80 \ % + ) of programmers are n't very good programmers when working in teams .
I 'll get back to that in a bit.And rather than creativity , I find imagination , lateral thinking and problem solving in particular , to be more important .
A similar 80 \ % + majority of programmers who 's work I 've had the pleasure to maintain are extremely creative in using the wrong tool for the job , etc .
Again , competence is most important.I 'm going to make it more personal now : I 'm unemployed and have n't worked with Delphi for more than 5 years professionally .
Unfortunately that 's where I put all my eggs .
Although after 2020 I 'll probably be able to find some maintenance work ( just as the COBOL guys did in 1999 , hehe ) , I 'd like to be developing new stuff again .
I had one agency who I had worked through to mutual profit regularly in the past , only for the incompetent agent to - after saying I could n't get the job because my French was n't good enough reversing that when I wrote her in French - then tell me I could n't get the job because my Delphi experience was n't recent enough DESPITE the version being asked for ( 5 ) being 2 years prior to the end of my professional usage ( 7 ) , and this being clearly visible on my CV.Somewhat ironically , for my very first Delphi job opportunity , when I 'd waited for 32-bit Delphi ( 2 ) , the job agency ( a temping one back then ) had been asked for someone with 5 years Delphi experience , so I did n't get that job either .
My 10 years ( at the time ) Pascal experience counted for nothing , and I sometimes wonder if they ever found a bullshitter who claimed 5 years experience with a product which had existed for only a year .
Competence.The reason I stopped developing was stress-related .
I was working for a seemingly friendly guy on a niche product ( version 5 ) of which the source to version 4 had been lost .
This was at half my usual rate , but with the understanding I might take the company over when he retired .
I told him up front that although I am an excellent developer and test my own code , if I were to develop from scratch I needed a tester , and since he was the only other person , that meant him .
The first thing I did n't know is that he was supremely competent at the art of fine bullshit , and for the first six months I hammered out functionality at an extremely fast pace , while he supposedly tested it .
Actually , he only did so cursorily , and instead spent most of his time fighting the tax man on his evasion and bullshitting customers into upgrading to the new ( as yet non-existent ) product .
But the second thing I did n't know is that he actually had a demo CD of a competing product , which I tested on a lazy day in summer to see what the opposition was up to .
And this may be why this post gets moderated funny : the opposition were on version 3.0 of their product , and not only had a development team of about 100 for this product alone ( recall we were about 1.1 ) , but their functionality and data were both at least an order of magnitude higher , and similarly the price was an order of magnitude lower .
Not only that , but their budget was , on researching , discovered to be 9 figures .
Yes , that 's a hundred million dollars .
The only bright side is that presumably they used their own tools to develop this competing program .
The name of their tools probably started with the word " Visual " .
Yeah. Laugh with me or cry for me ; ) But let me return to what is important : competence .
I know what I 'm competent at .
I also know what I 'm incompetent at , although I 've learned the hard way .
Note that competence is unrelated to brilliance : I 've met many comp</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wouldn't be surprised if I had said syndrome, and I certainly have peeped with discontent often enough, but only at incompetent management.But I'm going to disagree with both "maturity" and "creativity", although I'll stick fairly close to the latter.Rather than maturity, what is important is the competence to be able to make a good estimate about when something will be finished (including documentation).
Unfortunately the vast majority (80\%+) of programmers aren't very good programmers when working in teams.
I'll get back to that in a bit.And rather than creativity, I find imagination, lateral thinking and problem solving in particular, to be more important.
A similar 80\%+ majority of programmers who's work I've had the pleasure to maintain are extremely creative in using the wrong tool for the job, etc.
Again, competence is most important.I'm going to make it more personal now: I'm unemployed and haven't worked with Delphi for more than 5 years professionally.
Unfortunately that's where I put all my eggs.
Although after 2020 I'll probably be able to find some maintenance work (just as the COBOL guys did in 1999, hehe), I'd like to be developing new stuff again.
I had one agency who I had worked through to mutual profit regularly in the past, only for the incompetent agent to - after saying I couldn't get the job because my French wasn't good enough reversing that when I wrote her in French - then tell me I couldn't get the job because my Delphi experience wasn't recent enough DESPITE the version being asked for (5) being 2 years prior to the end of my professional usage (7), and this being clearly visible on my CV.Somewhat ironically, for my very first Delphi job opportunity, when I'd waited for 32-bit Delphi (2), the job agency (a temping one back then) had been asked for someone with 5 years Delphi experience, so I didn't get that job either.
My 10 years (at the time) Pascal experience counted for nothing, and I sometimes wonder if they ever found a bullshitter who claimed 5 years experience with a product which had existed for only a year.
Competence.The reason I stopped developing was stress-related.
I was working for a seemingly friendly guy on a niche product (version 5) of which the source to version 4 had been lost.
This was at half my usual rate, but with the understanding I might take the company over when he retired.
I told him up front that although I am an excellent developer and test my own code, if I were to develop from scratch I needed a tester, and since he was the only other person, that meant him.
The first thing I didn't know is that he was supremely competent at the art of fine bullshit, and for the first six months I hammered out functionality at an extremely fast pace, while he supposedly tested it.
Actually, he only did so cursorily, and instead spent most of his time fighting the tax man on his evasion and bullshitting customers into upgrading to the new (as yet non-existent) product.
But the second thing I didn't know is that he actually had a demo CD of a competing product, which I tested on a lazy day in summer to see what the opposition was up to.
And this may be why this post gets moderated funny: the opposition were on version 3.0 of their product, and not only had a development team of about 100 for this product alone (recall we were about 1.1), but their functionality and data were both at least an order of magnitude higher, and similarly the price was an order of magnitude lower.
Not only that, but their budget was, on researching, discovered to be 9 figures.
Yes, that's a hundred million dollars.
The only bright side is that presumably they used their own tools to develop this competing program.
The name of their tools probably started with the word "Visual".
Yeah. Laugh with me or cry for me ;)But let me return to what is important: competence.
I know what I'm competent at.
I also know what I'm incompetent at, although I've learned the hard way.
Note that competence is unrelated to brilliance: I've met many comp</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785721</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29793149</id>
	<title>Re:No, there are not</title>
	<author>vegiVamp</author>
	<datestamp>1255962780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Agreed, but the stereotypical view of accountants is "boring", while the stereotypical view of IT guys is "weird". To me, this indicates that IT guys are weirder than most, because otherwise that stereotype would have been assigned to another group.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed , but the stereotypical view of accountants is " boring " , while the stereotypical view of IT guys is " weird " .
To me , this indicates that IT guys are weirder than most , because otherwise that stereotype would have been assigned to another group .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed, but the stereotypical view of accountants is "boring", while the stereotypical view of IT guys is "weird".
To me, this indicates that IT guys are weirder than most, because otherwise that stereotype would have been assigned to another group.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785171</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29846681</id>
	<title>Uhh...</title>
	<author>dschmit1</author>
	<datestamp>1256316240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787859</id>
	<title>Weird, yes. Naturally, no.</title>
	<author>DynaSoar</author>
	<datestamp>1255867740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First, I am sick to death from seeing people try to claim some watered down form of a mental condition that excuses excessive behaviors they mostly wish they had and makes them seem special without having to put much efforts towards it or even understanding much about it. Understand this about autism/Aspergers and pretty much any state considered disordered as compared to the general population: meeting a diagnostic criteria includes having some persistent behavioral anomalies. Having some of the same persistent behavioral anomalies does not qualify one for the diagnosis. Very few of any who actually earn the diagnosis are capable of anything productive. And if one were to go with the behavioral criteria, the vast majority would earn themselves a far less appealing diagnosis or three, and which point they'd rebel against the process and disclaim any association with any disorder.</p><p>Now, we have in fact looked at 'weird' in psychology, but mostly as to what people think it is, rather than an objective state. I've looked at what kinds of people get that label and how. Programmers, or geeks/nerds in the technical literature, earn that label -- literally. They tend to start out more similar than most, and develop a specific quirk or three in order to exert individuality. They themselves keep each other within boundries of weirdness by approving or disapproving of others quirks, as often as not in how they're expressed rather than pure content. The effect is one of most people taking on the task of marking themselves an individual by developing an unusual, hopefully unique set of markings for their clothing. They appear to ignore the fact that the piece of clothing is a jacket collar. They appear to be unable to recognize that the collar is always on a Nehru jacket.</p><p>The defining word is "affectation". The evidence is in the desperation with which the concept is held and in how vehemently it is denied. A close analogy can be drawn with those who have strong anti-authoritarian rebelliousness early in life. It is not that they are anti-authoritarian, but rather than they are overly sensitive to it and dislike the fact that early in their life they are near the bottom of the ladder. They frequently end up at the other extreme. Likewise, the chronically similar act to differentiate themselves as soon as their situation allows, but only within a limited way, the rest remaining a recognizable part of the fairly closed group for which similarity of some sort remains more a badge than the differences. These too tend to evolve to the opposite end of the spectrum, common end states being either comparing swag t-shirts from conferences, or comparing their ties, the only major item of difference they would ever consider sporting having bought into management.</p><p>You may now feel free to mod me down as troll or flamebait just because I've answered the question with my own considered opinion which will no doubt prove unpopular. Refer back to "vehemence".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First , I am sick to death from seeing people try to claim some watered down form of a mental condition that excuses excessive behaviors they mostly wish they had and makes them seem special without having to put much efforts towards it or even understanding much about it .
Understand this about autism/Aspergers and pretty much any state considered disordered as compared to the general population : meeting a diagnostic criteria includes having some persistent behavioral anomalies .
Having some of the same persistent behavioral anomalies does not qualify one for the diagnosis .
Very few of any who actually earn the diagnosis are capable of anything productive .
And if one were to go with the behavioral criteria , the vast majority would earn themselves a far less appealing diagnosis or three , and which point they 'd rebel against the process and disclaim any association with any disorder.Now , we have in fact looked at 'weird ' in psychology , but mostly as to what people think it is , rather than an objective state .
I 've looked at what kinds of people get that label and how .
Programmers , or geeks/nerds in the technical literature , earn that label -- literally .
They tend to start out more similar than most , and develop a specific quirk or three in order to exert individuality .
They themselves keep each other within boundries of weirdness by approving or disapproving of others quirks , as often as not in how they 're expressed rather than pure content .
The effect is one of most people taking on the task of marking themselves an individual by developing an unusual , hopefully unique set of markings for their clothing .
They appear to ignore the fact that the piece of clothing is a jacket collar .
They appear to be unable to recognize that the collar is always on a Nehru jacket.The defining word is " affectation " .
The evidence is in the desperation with which the concept is held and in how vehemently it is denied .
A close analogy can be drawn with those who have strong anti-authoritarian rebelliousness early in life .
It is not that they are anti-authoritarian , but rather than they are overly sensitive to it and dislike the fact that early in their life they are near the bottom of the ladder .
They frequently end up at the other extreme .
Likewise , the chronically similar act to differentiate themselves as soon as their situation allows , but only within a limited way , the rest remaining a recognizable part of the fairly closed group for which similarity of some sort remains more a badge than the differences .
These too tend to evolve to the opposite end of the spectrum , common end states being either comparing swag t-shirts from conferences , or comparing their ties , the only major item of difference they would ever consider sporting having bought into management.You may now feel free to mod me down as troll or flamebait just because I 've answered the question with my own considered opinion which will no doubt prove unpopular .
Refer back to " vehemence " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First, I am sick to death from seeing people try to claim some watered down form of a mental condition that excuses excessive behaviors they mostly wish they had and makes them seem special without having to put much efforts towards it or even understanding much about it.
Understand this about autism/Aspergers and pretty much any state considered disordered as compared to the general population: meeting a diagnostic criteria includes having some persistent behavioral anomalies.
Having some of the same persistent behavioral anomalies does not qualify one for the diagnosis.
Very few of any who actually earn the diagnosis are capable of anything productive.
And if one were to go with the behavioral criteria, the vast majority would earn themselves a far less appealing diagnosis or three, and which point they'd rebel against the process and disclaim any association with any disorder.Now, we have in fact looked at 'weird' in psychology, but mostly as to what people think it is, rather than an objective state.
I've looked at what kinds of people get that label and how.
Programmers, or geeks/nerds in the technical literature, earn that label -- literally.
They tend to start out more similar than most, and develop a specific quirk or three in order to exert individuality.
They themselves keep each other within boundries of weirdness by approving or disapproving of others quirks, as often as not in how they're expressed rather than pure content.
The effect is one of most people taking on the task of marking themselves an individual by developing an unusual, hopefully unique set of markings for their clothing.
They appear to ignore the fact that the piece of clothing is a jacket collar.
They appear to be unable to recognize that the collar is always on a Nehru jacket.The defining word is "affectation".
The evidence is in the desperation with which the concept is held and in how vehemently it is denied.
A close analogy can be drawn with those who have strong anti-authoritarian rebelliousness early in life.
It is not that they are anti-authoritarian, but rather than they are overly sensitive to it and dislike the fact that early in their life they are near the bottom of the ladder.
They frequently end up at the other extreme.
Likewise, the chronically similar act to differentiate themselves as soon as their situation allows, but only within a limited way, the rest remaining a recognizable part of the fairly closed group for which similarity of some sort remains more a badge than the differences.
These too tend to evolve to the opposite end of the spectrum, common end states being either comparing swag t-shirts from conferences, or comparing their ties, the only major item of difference they would ever consider sporting having bought into management.You may now feel free to mod me down as troll or flamebait just because I've answered the question with my own considered opinion which will no doubt prove unpopular.
Refer back to "vehemence".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785147</id>
	<title>Less pressure to conform?</title>
	<author>noidentity</author>
	<datestamp>1255889760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm thinking that different professions have different levels of social pressure to conform to a certain way of behaving and appearing, and the coder profession has less of this pressure, perhaps because good programmers have to constantly question assumptions and think outside the box to come up with good designs. But hell if I know or care.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm thinking that different professions have different levels of social pressure to conform to a certain way of behaving and appearing , and the coder profession has less of this pressure , perhaps because good programmers have to constantly question assumptions and think outside the box to come up with good designs .
But hell if I know or care .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm thinking that different professions have different levels of social pressure to conform to a certain way of behaving and appearing, and the coder profession has less of this pressure, perhaps because good programmers have to constantly question assumptions and think outside the box to come up with good designs.
But hell if I know or care.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786113</id>
	<title>What kind of question is ths?</title>
	<author>oldmeddler</author>
	<datestamp>1255897320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Software developers are normal. It's the rest of the world that's weird.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Software developers are normal .
It 's the rest of the world that 's weird .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Software developers are normal.
It's the rest of the world that's weird.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785677</id>
	<title>Re:Are politicians naturally liars?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255894260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Conforming to or avoiding certain behaviors simply because they are or are not practiced by the majority is a logical fallacy.</p><p>No it isn't. It is a choice that one makes in order to be accepted by the majority. While I could go outside wearing a pink dress, doing so would complicate social interaction with most people I would encounter. For people who like not being ridiculed and/or not having to explain themselves every 5 minutes (pretty much everybody), making at least some effort to conform the the majority is a rational thing to do.</p><p>Whether the behavior of the majority is rational or not I'll leave to an exercise for the reader, but conforming to the majority has NOTHING to do with a logical fallacy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Conforming to or avoiding certain behaviors simply because they are or are not practiced by the majority is a logical fallacy.No it is n't .
It is a choice that one makes in order to be accepted by the majority .
While I could go outside wearing a pink dress , doing so would complicate social interaction with most people I would encounter .
For people who like not being ridiculed and/or not having to explain themselves every 5 minutes ( pretty much everybody ) , making at least some effort to conform the the majority is a rational thing to do.Whether the behavior of the majority is rational or not I 'll leave to an exercise for the reader , but conforming to the majority has NOTHING to do with a logical fallacy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Conforming to or avoiding certain behaviors simply because they are or are not practiced by the majority is a logical fallacy.No it isn't.
It is a choice that one makes in order to be accepted by the majority.
While I could go outside wearing a pink dress, doing so would complicate social interaction with most people I would encounter.
For people who like not being ridiculed and/or not having to explain themselves every 5 minutes (pretty much everybody), making at least some effort to conform the the majority is a rational thing to do.Whether the behavior of the majority is rational or not I'll leave to an exercise for the reader, but conforming to the majority has NOTHING to do with a logical fallacy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785333</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786297</id>
	<title>imagination--deep concentration</title>
	<author>sevenfactorial</author>
	<datestamp>1255899000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not a programmer, I'm a mathematician, but I notice the same thing in my field.</p><p>To those who say there is not a tendency toward weirdness in mathematical disciplines, I suggest the following experiment.  First go to the weekly math colloquium at a local research university.  Then, go to the weekly philosophy colloquium and see if you can discern a difference in the people who come.  I believe you will almost certainly find that the mathematicians are less attractive and charismatic.    You could argue that philosophy simply selects for attractiveness and charisma, but I believe you will have similar findings if many different subjects are substituted for phil.</p><p>To those who say that the strangeness of programmers is somehow reducible to various qualities of "geeks", this is clearly begging the question, as any good geek should know.  The topic for this thread is very similar to asking "why are geeks the way they are?" but phrased differently.</p><p>I have spent large amounts of time wondering why mathematicians are weird, ugly, uncharismatic and so forth.  My answer is that they live largely in their own imaginations, and spend correspondingly less time in the "real world."  Therefore, not surprisingly, their real world appearance, manners etc gives evidence of a lack of attention.  Conversely people in other fields are not selected for an ability to concentrate deeply, spend more time in the here and now, and reap consequent benefits in hygiene, social skills, etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not a programmer , I 'm a mathematician , but I notice the same thing in my field.To those who say there is not a tendency toward weirdness in mathematical disciplines , I suggest the following experiment .
First go to the weekly math colloquium at a local research university .
Then , go to the weekly philosophy colloquium and see if you can discern a difference in the people who come .
I believe you will almost certainly find that the mathematicians are less attractive and charismatic .
You could argue that philosophy simply selects for attractiveness and charisma , but I believe you will have similar findings if many different subjects are substituted for phil.To those who say that the strangeness of programmers is somehow reducible to various qualities of " geeks " , this is clearly begging the question , as any good geek should know .
The topic for this thread is very similar to asking " why are geeks the way they are ?
" but phrased differently.I have spent large amounts of time wondering why mathematicians are weird , ugly , uncharismatic and so forth .
My answer is that they live largely in their own imaginations , and spend correspondingly less time in the " real world .
" Therefore , not surprisingly , their real world appearance , manners etc gives evidence of a lack of attention .
Conversely people in other fields are not selected for an ability to concentrate deeply , spend more time in the here and now , and reap consequent benefits in hygiene , social skills , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not a programmer, I'm a mathematician, but I notice the same thing in my field.To those who say there is not a tendency toward weirdness in mathematical disciplines, I suggest the following experiment.
First go to the weekly math colloquium at a local research university.
Then, go to the weekly philosophy colloquium and see if you can discern a difference in the people who come.
I believe you will almost certainly find that the mathematicians are less attractive and charismatic.
You could argue that philosophy simply selects for attractiveness and charisma, but I believe you will have similar findings if many different subjects are substituted for phil.To those who say that the strangeness of programmers is somehow reducible to various qualities of "geeks", this is clearly begging the question, as any good geek should know.
The topic for this thread is very similar to asking "why are geeks the way they are?
" but phrased differently.I have spent large amounts of time wondering why mathematicians are weird, ugly, uncharismatic and so forth.
My answer is that they live largely in their own imaginations, and spend correspondingly less time in the "real world.
"  Therefore, not surprisingly, their real world appearance, manners etc gives evidence of a lack of attention.
Conversely people in other fields are not selected for an ability to concentrate deeply, spend more time in the here and now, and reap consequent benefits in hygiene, social skills, etc.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785395</id>
	<title>Re:Less pressure to conform?</title>
	<author>nomadic</author>
	<datestamp>1255891860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>perhaps because good programmers have to constantly question assumptions and think outside the box to come up with good designs.</i>
<br>
<br>
I think that's true for a lot of professions, though.</htmltext>
<tokenext>perhaps because good programmers have to constantly question assumptions and think outside the box to come up with good designs .
I think that 's true for a lot of professions , though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>perhaps because good programmers have to constantly question assumptions and think outside the box to come up with good designs.
I think that's true for a lot of professions, though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785147</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786329</id>
	<title>The age of weird programmers is coming to and end</title>
	<author>daodao</author>
	<datestamp>1255899300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The age of weird programmers is coming to and end: as programming languages become less and less arcane and code reuse is increasing in such a pace that it's becoming a crime to write original code, the profession is slowly loosing part of the allure once responsible for attracting those eccentric types. Having worked for a C++ R&amp;D and team and later a JEE team, I can tell the difference in eccentricity is remarkable.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The age of weird programmers is coming to and end : as programming languages become less and less arcane and code reuse is increasing in such a pace that it 's becoming a crime to write original code , the profession is slowly loosing part of the allure once responsible for attracting those eccentric types .
Having worked for a C + + R&amp;D and team and later a JEE team , I can tell the difference in eccentricity is remarkable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The age of weird programmers is coming to and end: as programming languages become less and less arcane and code reuse is increasing in such a pace that it's becoming a crime to write original code, the profession is slowly loosing part of the allure once responsible for attracting those eccentric types.
Having worked for a C++ R&amp;D and team and later a JEE team, I can tell the difference in eccentricity is remarkable.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29809821</id>
	<title>Nope</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256059500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No they are not.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No they are not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No they are not.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785447</id>
	<title>Re:No, not that wierd</title>
	<author>w3woody</author>
	<datestamp>1255892340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Speaking of futures traders, I remember reading a story about how traders were so intent on instant moment-by-moment trading on the floor while drinking tons of coffee that they'd never use the bathroom. At one company the male traders would then go off to the bathroom together and have a contest to see who could stand the farthest from the urinal and still piss into it.</p><p>Computer programmers are not that weird.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Speaking of futures traders , I remember reading a story about how traders were so intent on instant moment-by-moment trading on the floor while drinking tons of coffee that they 'd never use the bathroom .
At one company the male traders would then go off to the bathroom together and have a contest to see who could stand the farthest from the urinal and still piss into it.Computer programmers are not that weird .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Speaking of futures traders, I remember reading a story about how traders were so intent on instant moment-by-moment trading on the floor while drinking tons of coffee that they'd never use the bathroom.
At one company the male traders would then go off to the bathroom together and have a contest to see who could stand the farthest from the urinal and still piss into it.Computer programmers are not that weird.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785273</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786079</id>
	<title>non sequitur</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255897080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I decided several decades ago that everyone is crazy. Given that, it's  only a matter of what you like. Eh.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I decided several decades ago that everyone is crazy .
Given that , it 's only a matter of what you like .
Eh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I decided several decades ago that everyone is crazy.
Given that, it's  only a matter of what you like.
Eh.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787109</id>
	<title>Re:Talk about slow news day</title>
	<author>Kjella</author>
	<datestamp>1255861680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd much rather have a comment tell me something is a WTF and is clearly violating some assumption the developer had rather than lyric comments. Work is work and play is play, I might end up making doodles on meeting notes during PHB moments but not on the final writeup I send out. Somehow I suspect the lyric comments were instead of, not in addition to the comments that ought ot have been there. Take five, grab a cup of coffee and chill out with whatever rather than stuff that kind of things into the product.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd much rather have a comment tell me something is a WTF and is clearly violating some assumption the developer had rather than lyric comments .
Work is work and play is play , I might end up making doodles on meeting notes during PHB moments but not on the final writeup I send out .
Somehow I suspect the lyric comments were instead of , not in addition to the comments that ought ot have been there .
Take five , grab a cup of coffee and chill out with whatever rather than stuff that kind of things into the product .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd much rather have a comment tell me something is a WTF and is clearly violating some assumption the developer had rather than lyric comments.
Work is work and play is play, I might end up making doodles on meeting notes during PHB moments but not on the final writeup I send out.
Somehow I suspect the lyric comments were instead of, not in addition to the comments that ought ot have been there.
Take five, grab a cup of coffee and chill out with whatever rather than stuff that kind of things into the product.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785503</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785333</id>
	<title>Are politicians naturally liars?</title>
	<author>benjamindees</author>
	<datestamp>1255891380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Conforming to or avoiding certain behaviors simply because they are or are not practiced by the majority is a logical fallacy.  Programming requires logical, critical thinking ability.  Ergo, those who succeed at programming may tend to engage in behavior that seems strange to the majority of people.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Conforming to or avoiding certain behaviors simply because they are or are not practiced by the majority is a logical fallacy .
Programming requires logical , critical thinking ability .
Ergo , those who succeed at programming may tend to engage in behavior that seems strange to the majority of people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Conforming to or avoiding certain behaviors simply because they are or are not practiced by the majority is a logical fallacy.
Programming requires logical, critical thinking ability.
Ergo, those who succeed at programming may tend to engage in behavior that seems strange to the majority of people.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785457</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255892400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's something in the water cooler.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's something in the water cooler .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's something in the water cooler.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29795551</id>
	<title>Yes but ...</title>
	<author>guysmilee</author>
	<datestamp>1255973100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>do they run linux?</htmltext>
<tokenext>do they run linux ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>do they run linux?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788791</id>
	<title>Re:No, not that wierd</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255877520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Successful high-end call girls, though, tend to be chillingly sane when not in their work personas.</p></div><p>Are we to assume you've "meet" enough to come to a statistically valid conclusion?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Successful high-end call girls , though , tend to be chillingly sane when not in their work personas.Are we to assume you 've " meet " enough to come to a statistically valid conclusion ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Successful high-end call girls, though, tend to be chillingly sane when not in their work personas.Are we to assume you've "meet" enough to come to a statistically valid conclusion?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785273</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29796083</id>
	<title>Re:Short r&#233;sum&#233;</title>
	<author>etinin</author>
	<datestamp>1255975320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm just a mindless borg drone.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm just a mindless borg drone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm just a mindless borg drone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786099</id>
	<title>Re:Talk about slow news day</title>
	<author>Hotawa Hawk-eye</author>
	<datestamp>1255897200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It could be worse.  Three words:  Jack Thompson, Scientologist.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It could be worse .
Three words : Jack Thompson , Scientologist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It could be worse.
Three words:  Jack Thompson, Scientologist.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785313</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29845535</id>
	<title>Affordable Goods.Christan Audigier skirt ,jean</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256310060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Http://www.tntshoes.com<br>Hi friend, we are a prefession online store, you can see more photos and price in our website which is show in the photos<br>we have large brand new shoes,clothing, handbag,sunglasses,hats etc for sale, 300000\% best quality with the amazing price. please look at the pictures and the price of our product in our website, if interested, please email me by  Http://www.tntshoes.com or place the order directly via our website please see below of the price list of some products,</p><p>
&nbsp; OUR WEBSITE:<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Http://www.tntshoes.com</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; YAHOO:shoppertrade@yahoo.com.cn</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; MSN:shoppertrade@hotmail.com</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Http : //www.tntshoes.comHi friend , we are a prefession online store , you can see more photos and price in our website which is show in the photoswe have large brand new shoes,clothing , handbag,sunglasses,hats etc for sale , 300000 \ % best quality with the amazing price .
please look at the pictures and the price of our product in our website , if interested , please email me by Http : //www.tntshoes.com or place the order directly via our website please see below of the price list of some products ,   OUR WEBSITE :                                                           Http : //www.tntshoes.com                                                         YAHOO : shoppertrade @ yahoo.com.cn                                                                 MSN : shoppertrade @ hotmail.com</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Http://www.tntshoes.comHi friend, we are a prefession online store, you can see more photos and price in our website which is show in the photoswe have large brand new shoes,clothing, handbag,sunglasses,hats etc for sale, 300000\% best quality with the amazing price.
please look at the pictures and the price of our product in our website, if interested, please email me by  Http://www.tntshoes.com or place the order directly via our website please see below of the price list of some products,
  OUR WEBSITE:
                                                          Http://www.tntshoes.com
                                                        YAHOO:shoppertrade@yahoo.com.cn
                                                                MSN:shoppertrade@hotmail.com</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786733</id>
	<title>CEOs &amp; traders</title>
	<author>Kupfernigk</author>
	<datestamp>1255858860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>My personal view, based on several of them, is that CEOs are weird because they are put in an impossible job which rewards a degree of psychopathy, but are expected also to be successful socially. Traders would be expected to be weird for quite a different reason. As Taleb points out, they think that they are making rational decisions which affect the outcome of their bets, when in fact the outcome is more or less random. As a result there is little correlation between their mental processes and reward. This is a recipe for neurosis.<p>Programming involves trying to reproduce the literal mindedness of an autistic person. Maths involves deliberate abstraction from the real world. Surgery involves doing things that may kill someone in order to cure them. It's unsurprising that these occupations too can result in strange mindsets in their practitioners.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My personal view , based on several of them , is that CEOs are weird because they are put in an impossible job which rewards a degree of psychopathy , but are expected also to be successful socially .
Traders would be expected to be weird for quite a different reason .
As Taleb points out , they think that they are making rational decisions which affect the outcome of their bets , when in fact the outcome is more or less random .
As a result there is little correlation between their mental processes and reward .
This is a recipe for neurosis.Programming involves trying to reproduce the literal mindedness of an autistic person .
Maths involves deliberate abstraction from the real world .
Surgery involves doing things that may kill someone in order to cure them .
It 's unsurprising that these occupations too can result in strange mindsets in their practitioners .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My personal view, based on several of them, is that CEOs are weird because they are put in an impossible job which rewards a degree of psychopathy, but are expected also to be successful socially.
Traders would be expected to be weird for quite a different reason.
As Taleb points out, they think that they are making rational decisions which affect the outcome of their bets, when in fact the outcome is more or less random.
As a result there is little correlation between their mental processes and reward.
This is a recipe for neurosis.Programming involves trying to reproduce the literal mindedness of an autistic person.
Maths involves deliberate abstraction from the real world.
Surgery involves doing things that may kill someone in order to cure them.
It's unsurprising that these occupations too can result in strange mindsets in their practitioners.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785273</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788571</id>
	<title>No, they are not..</title>
	<author>Seth Kriticos</author>
	<datestamp>1255875060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>..but everyone else is!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>..but everyone else is !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>..but everyone else is!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785363</id>
	<title>No, but they're naturally narcissistic</title>
	<author>jjohnson</author>
	<datestamp>1255891680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Geeks love to tell themselves self-congratulatory tales about how they're weird, or prone to Aspergers, or otherwise exempt from the normal conventions of human interaction, because they're so smart and talented.  Hey baby, I'm a rockstar!  I don't need to know all that crap about proper hygiene or graceful social interaction--my brain is too full of powerful code that's the next killer app!</p><p>Programming will mature as a discipline when programmers see themselves as not that different from any other skilled, educated professional.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Geeks love to tell themselves self-congratulatory tales about how they 're weird , or prone to Aspergers , or otherwise exempt from the normal conventions of human interaction , because they 're so smart and talented .
Hey baby , I 'm a rockstar !
I do n't need to know all that crap about proper hygiene or graceful social interaction--my brain is too full of powerful code that 's the next killer app ! Programming will mature as a discipline when programmers see themselves as not that different from any other skilled , educated professional .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Geeks love to tell themselves self-congratulatory tales about how they're weird, or prone to Aspergers, or otherwise exempt from the normal conventions of human interaction, because they're so smart and talented.
Hey baby, I'm a rockstar!
I don't need to know all that crap about proper hygiene or graceful social interaction--my brain is too full of powerful code that's the next killer app!Programming will mature as a discipline when programmers see themselves as not that different from any other skilled, educated professional.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785669</id>
	<title>Yes, like garbage men</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255894200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Developers have always struck me as people who have absolutely no desire to think.  They want you to tell them when, where, and how (via email of course).  In a way I guess that makes them weird because they are long-term introverts who have to, now and then, actually talk to people.
<br> <br>
In my view it would be roughly the same situation if you took garbage men and sat them down among professionals to do a dev job.  Very rare is the person who has decided to focus on IT AND has a well developed set of people skills.  So I think it is less that they are weird and more that they are pushed into social situations because dev work can't be 100\% behind a screen.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Developers have always struck me as people who have absolutely no desire to think .
They want you to tell them when , where , and how ( via email of course ) .
In a way I guess that makes them weird because they are long-term introverts who have to , now and then , actually talk to people .
In my view it would be roughly the same situation if you took garbage men and sat them down among professionals to do a dev job .
Very rare is the person who has decided to focus on IT AND has a well developed set of people skills .
So I think it is less that they are weird and more that they are pushed into social situations because dev work ca n't be 100 \ % behind a screen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Developers have always struck me as people who have absolutely no desire to think.
They want you to tell them when, where, and how (via email of course).
In a way I guess that makes them weird because they are long-term introverts who have to, now and then, actually talk to people.
In my view it would be roughly the same situation if you took garbage men and sat them down among professionals to do a dev job.
Very rare is the person who has decided to focus on IT AND has a well developed set of people skills.
So I think it is less that they are weird and more that they are pushed into social situations because dev work can't be 100\% behind a screen.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785553</id>
	<title>Developers...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255893300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't have much respect for developers.</p><p>I am a simple laborer who couldn't afford higher education, but I have my geeky things, specially related to videogame design.<br>One day, I reunited enough will to combine my work with making a game of my own. It's still in early alpha but it's doing alright.<br>Thing is...knowing I have no full education background, I dealed with C and OpenGL and their quirky things (pathetic string support, stupid color handling requiring to learn GLSL to do something worthy, respectively), all by myself. This is not specially impressive, but I didn't do by choice. I had to learn the same way with art/pixel art/animation and sound/music as well as general technique to achieve effects. It wasn't difficult to learn to do the media, but the code is not as straightforward. So I tried looking for help around in order to do some specific things that were hard.</p><p>Every single programming question I deployed on the net was received with an elitist disregard, sending me to read tons of papers and stuff I don't really have an use for, specially because even if I try I can't understand it. They assume you have high education in MIT and you had to start from mainframes like they did or something. This is specially true on the IRC channel #opengl, where everyone seems to be too elite to deal with n00bs and giving incredibly obfuscated replies generally being more of a "don't bother me you fucking ignorant n00b".</p><p>Unfortunately I don't know anyone else who codes around me (this country is not specially literate on IT), since most of my people are laborers like me who'd rather watch TV and get drunk instead of venturing into a coding project. And I can't blame them because unless you reinvent the wheel infinitely you are doomed to be inferior to the top dogs there. They limit knowledge sharing with their arrogant and "I am better than you" attitude, and it's sickening.</p><p>There would be far more indie games and open stuff if they weren't so stubbornly elitist and shared that knowledge because it's going to die when they do otherwise.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't have much respect for developers.I am a simple laborer who could n't afford higher education , but I have my geeky things , specially related to videogame design.One day , I reunited enough will to combine my work with making a game of my own .
It 's still in early alpha but it 's doing alright.Thing is...knowing I have no full education background , I dealed with C and OpenGL and their quirky things ( pathetic string support , stupid color handling requiring to learn GLSL to do something worthy , respectively ) , all by myself .
This is not specially impressive , but I did n't do by choice .
I had to learn the same way with art/pixel art/animation and sound/music as well as general technique to achieve effects .
It was n't difficult to learn to do the media , but the code is not as straightforward .
So I tried looking for help around in order to do some specific things that were hard.Every single programming question I deployed on the net was received with an elitist disregard , sending me to read tons of papers and stuff I do n't really have an use for , specially because even if I try I ca n't understand it .
They assume you have high education in MIT and you had to start from mainframes like they did or something .
This is specially true on the IRC channel # opengl , where everyone seems to be too elite to deal with n00bs and giving incredibly obfuscated replies generally being more of a " do n't bother me you fucking ignorant n00b " .Unfortunately I do n't know anyone else who codes around me ( this country is not specially literate on IT ) , since most of my people are laborers like me who 'd rather watch TV and get drunk instead of venturing into a coding project .
And I ca n't blame them because unless you reinvent the wheel infinitely you are doomed to be inferior to the top dogs there .
They limit knowledge sharing with their arrogant and " I am better than you " attitude , and it 's sickening.There would be far more indie games and open stuff if they were n't so stubbornly elitist and shared that knowledge because it 's going to die when they do otherwise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't have much respect for developers.I am a simple laborer who couldn't afford higher education, but I have my geeky things, specially related to videogame design.One day, I reunited enough will to combine my work with making a game of my own.
It's still in early alpha but it's doing alright.Thing is...knowing I have no full education background, I dealed with C and OpenGL and their quirky things (pathetic string support, stupid color handling requiring to learn GLSL to do something worthy, respectively), all by myself.
This is not specially impressive, but I didn't do by choice.
I had to learn the same way with art/pixel art/animation and sound/music as well as general technique to achieve effects.
It wasn't difficult to learn to do the media, but the code is not as straightforward.
So I tried looking for help around in order to do some specific things that were hard.Every single programming question I deployed on the net was received with an elitist disregard, sending me to read tons of papers and stuff I don't really have an use for, specially because even if I try I can't understand it.
They assume you have high education in MIT and you had to start from mainframes like they did or something.
This is specially true on the IRC channel #opengl, where everyone seems to be too elite to deal with n00bs and giving incredibly obfuscated replies generally being more of a "don't bother me you fucking ignorant n00b".Unfortunately I don't know anyone else who codes around me (this country is not specially literate on IT), since most of my people are laborers like me who'd rather watch TV and get drunk instead of venturing into a coding project.
And I can't blame them because unless you reinvent the wheel infinitely you are doomed to be inferior to the top dogs there.
They limit knowledge sharing with their arrogant and "I am better than you" attitude, and it's sickening.There would be far more indie games and open stuff if they weren't so stubbornly elitist and shared that knowledge because it's going to die when they do otherwise.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29791315</id>
	<title>Re:It's the kind of memory programmers have...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255946100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You have never used Eclipse, have you?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You have never used Eclipse , have you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have never used Eclipse, have you?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786515</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788127</id>
	<title>Re:That's not weird</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1255870500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The one that bothers me is the person who clips their fingernails at work. I dunno why it bugs me, but it bugs me... ugh. (Not specific to engineers, of course, in my case it's a support guy who does it.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The one that bothers me is the person who clips their fingernails at work .
I dunno why it bugs me , but it bugs me... ugh. ( Not specific to engineers , of course , in my case it 's a support guy who does it .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The one that bothers me is the person who clips their fingernails at work.
I dunno why it bugs me, but it bugs me... ugh. (Not specific to engineers, of course, in my case it's a support guy who does it.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785195</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787599</id>
	<title>Re:No, there are not</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255865220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But then why is the stereotype for accountants what it is, versus the stereotype for coders.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But then why is the stereotype for accountants what it is , versus the stereotype for coders .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But then why is the stereotype for accountants what it is, versus the stereotype for coders.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785171</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29793313</id>
	<title>Re:Asperger's syndrome.</title>
	<author>vegiVamp</author>
	<datestamp>1255963620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Manager, are you ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Manager , are you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Manager, are you ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785279</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785895</id>
	<title>Join the military, it can get weirder.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255895820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can not tell you the stories I have heard of from people in other units, but then again, with years of war and lower standards till recently, it is no surprise.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can not tell you the stories I have heard of from people in other units , but then again , with years of war and lower standards till recently , it is no surprise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can not tell you the stories I have heard of from people in other units, but then again, with years of war and lower standards till recently, it is no surprise.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787423</id>
	<title>Re:Developers...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255863780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I never expected a freebie as I said above, I don't get why are you all assuming that. To those out of the circle those people do give that impression. They might be wonderful persons inside but they were way too rude to leave a good impression, and I wasn't demanding anyone to write anything for me. Just trying to find less closed references. And at least all the channels I asked into, there was people shooting questions all the way, getting similar replies from the top dogs and being helped by others who came asking questions as well. I was guided to ask in there actually, but only tried a few times and as last resort. Many times it was the result of out-of-date documentation too, so be sure to know what is being asked. I didn't freaking ask them about the hello world precisely.</p><p>I mentioned the Lua community as exception because they had good resources, good enough you can actually read them as pasttime and not feeling like you have an exam next morning. They didn't throw away pop culture references nor using rude language to deal with a question they deemed unworthy, what gave me the most reasons to think those guys were a bit too closed on their elite stuff.</p><p>The MIT thing was just a hyperbole, FYI, it sounded obvious.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I never expected a freebie as I said above , I do n't get why are you all assuming that .
To those out of the circle those people do give that impression .
They might be wonderful persons inside but they were way too rude to leave a good impression , and I was n't demanding anyone to write anything for me .
Just trying to find less closed references .
And at least all the channels I asked into , there was people shooting questions all the way , getting similar replies from the top dogs and being helped by others who came asking questions as well .
I was guided to ask in there actually , but only tried a few times and as last resort .
Many times it was the result of out-of-date documentation too , so be sure to know what is being asked .
I did n't freaking ask them about the hello world precisely.I mentioned the Lua community as exception because they had good resources , good enough you can actually read them as pasttime and not feeling like you have an exam next morning .
They did n't throw away pop culture references nor using rude language to deal with a question they deemed unworthy , what gave me the most reasons to think those guys were a bit too closed on their elite stuff.The MIT thing was just a hyperbole , FYI , it sounded obvious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I never expected a freebie as I said above, I don't get why are you all assuming that.
To those out of the circle those people do give that impression.
They might be wonderful persons inside but they were way too rude to leave a good impression, and I wasn't demanding anyone to write anything for me.
Just trying to find less closed references.
And at least all the channels I asked into, there was people shooting questions all the way, getting similar replies from the top dogs and being helped by others who came asking questions as well.
I was guided to ask in there actually, but only tried a few times and as last resort.
Many times it was the result of out-of-date documentation too, so be sure to know what is being asked.
I didn't freaking ask them about the hello world precisely.I mentioned the Lua community as exception because they had good resources, good enough you can actually read them as pasttime and not feeling like you have an exam next morning.
They didn't throw away pop culture references nor using rude language to deal with a question they deemed unworthy, what gave me the most reasons to think those guys were a bit too closed on their elite stuff.The MIT thing was just a hyperbole, FYI, it sounded obvious.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786747</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785223</id>
	<title>Short r&eacute;sum&eacute;</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255890180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everybody is unique.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everybody is unique .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everybody is unique.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786377</id>
	<title>Re:Talk about slow news day</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1255856400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, pretty much EVERYONE is normal.  Stop trying to make YOURSELF unique and weird.  You aren't, you are normal, you are not weird.  You are not unique.  You are not special.  All of this will remain true no matter how many times your mommy and teachers tell you otherwise.  Sorry to burst your bubble.</p><p>At best, you are arrogant, but this is pretty common now days.</p><p>And only an idiot thought Tom Cruise was normal before he jumped the couch.  I would like to point out, Katie Holmes most certainly qualifies as an idiot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , pretty much EVERYONE is normal .
Stop trying to make YOURSELF unique and weird .
You are n't , you are normal , you are not weird .
You are not unique .
You are not special .
All of this will remain true no matter how many times your mommy and teachers tell you otherwise .
Sorry to burst your bubble.At best , you are arrogant , but this is pretty common now days.And only an idiot thought Tom Cruise was normal before he jumped the couch .
I would like to point out , Katie Holmes most certainly qualifies as an idiot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, pretty much EVERYONE is normal.
Stop trying to make YOURSELF unique and weird.
You aren't, you are normal, you are not weird.
You are not unique.
You are not special.
All of this will remain true no matter how many times your mommy and teachers tell you otherwise.
Sorry to burst your bubble.At best, you are arrogant, but this is pretty common now days.And only an idiot thought Tom Cruise was normal before he jumped the couch.
I would like to point out, Katie Holmes most certainly qualifies as an idiot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785157</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785503</id>
	<title>Re:Talk about slow news day</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255892820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Here's a tip: everybody loves to think they're unique and "weird." The most conventional, boring, person you know is going to describe how wacky their party was if you ask.</p></div><p>If you read the article, you'll see that this isn't what this is all about.  The "song lyrics developer" placed song lyrics in the comments of his code.  That was apparently "distracting" to QA, so managed had a talk with him.  They asked him why he did it, he said that when he was writing boring code, that made it more exciting, so they came to an "agreement" where he'd stop commenting the code with lyrics and in exchange, he'd be allowed "to pursue more interesting side projects."</p><p>In other words, management thought that they exchanged the extra 15 seconds it takes every time he writes one of those lyrics comments to get him to do more work for them in the form of "interesting side-projects."  Poor dude agreed because he likely felt his job was threatened, and what they actually did was make him less productive because he's no longer as happy in his work.</p><p>Now, it wasn't even a problem of offensive curse words in comments, which is quite common.  He was just peppering the code with random lyrics.  Any company with management that makes things THAT strict is making the work environment a serious pain, and it's not someplace I'd work at.  I suspect that guy also started submitting resumes to other places and just agreed to compromise until he could find a better job.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's a tip : everybody loves to think they 're unique and " weird .
" The most conventional , boring , person you know is going to describe how wacky their party was if you ask.If you read the article , you 'll see that this is n't what this is all about .
The " song lyrics developer " placed song lyrics in the comments of his code .
That was apparently " distracting " to QA , so managed had a talk with him .
They asked him why he did it , he said that when he was writing boring code , that made it more exciting , so they came to an " agreement " where he 'd stop commenting the code with lyrics and in exchange , he 'd be allowed " to pursue more interesting side projects .
" In other words , management thought that they exchanged the extra 15 seconds it takes every time he writes one of those lyrics comments to get him to do more work for them in the form of " interesting side-projects .
" Poor dude agreed because he likely felt his job was threatened , and what they actually did was make him less productive because he 's no longer as happy in his work.Now , it was n't even a problem of offensive curse words in comments , which is quite common .
He was just peppering the code with random lyrics .
Any company with management that makes things THAT strict is making the work environment a serious pain , and it 's not someplace I 'd work at .
I suspect that guy also started submitting resumes to other places and just agreed to compromise until he could find a better job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's a tip: everybody loves to think they're unique and "weird.
" The most conventional, boring, person you know is going to describe how wacky their party was if you ask.If you read the article, you'll see that this isn't what this is all about.
The "song lyrics developer" placed song lyrics in the comments of his code.
That was apparently "distracting" to QA, so managed had a talk with him.
They asked him why he did it, he said that when he was writing boring code, that made it more exciting, so they came to an "agreement" where he'd stop commenting the code with lyrics and in exchange, he'd be allowed "to pursue more interesting side projects.
"In other words, management thought that they exchanged the extra 15 seconds it takes every time he writes one of those lyrics comments to get him to do more work for them in the form of "interesting side-projects.
"  Poor dude agreed because he likely felt his job was threatened, and what they actually did was make him less productive because he's no longer as happy in his work.Now, it wasn't even a problem of offensive curse words in comments, which is quite common.
He was just peppering the code with random lyrics.
Any company with management that makes things THAT strict is making the work environment a serious pain, and it's not someplace I'd work at.
I suspect that guy also started submitting resumes to other places and just agreed to compromise until he could find a better job.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785157</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785325</id>
	<title>Not Me.</title>
	<author>BlueBoxSW.com</author>
	<datestamp>1255891260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not weird. But those OTHER guys... Whew!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-&gt;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not weird .
But those OTHER guys... Whew ! ; - &gt;</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not weird.
But those OTHER guys... Whew! ;-&gt;</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785157</id>
	<title>Talk about slow news day</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1255889760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here's a tip: everybody loves to think they're unique and "weird." The most conventional, boring, person you know is going to describe how wacky their party was if you ask.</p><p>In reality, there's no such thing as "weird" because there's no such thing as "normal." If you encounter somebody you think embodies "normal", well, you just don't know them well-enough. (I bet a lot of people thought Tom Cruise was normal before he started jumping on Oprah's couch.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's a tip : everybody loves to think they 're unique and " weird .
" The most conventional , boring , person you know is going to describe how wacky their party was if you ask.In reality , there 's no such thing as " weird " because there 's no such thing as " normal .
" If you encounter somebody you think embodies " normal " , well , you just do n't know them well-enough .
( I bet a lot of people thought Tom Cruise was normal before he started jumping on Oprah 's couch .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's a tip: everybody loves to think they're unique and "weird.
" The most conventional, boring, person you know is going to describe how wacky their party was if you ask.In reality, there's no such thing as "weird" because there's no such thing as "normal.
" If you encounter somebody you think embodies "normal", well, you just don't know them well-enough.
(I bet a lot of people thought Tom Cruise was normal before he started jumping on Oprah's couch.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788635</id>
	<title>Re:Something else I realised</title>
	<author>wayland</author>
	<datestamp>1255875600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>XML.  Why use it?  Well, for me, the whole thing can be answered by the word "Tree" (well, "Plex" actaully, but that's less self-evident).  Once data gets beyond single items ("scalars" in scripting languages), 1D arrays, and hashes, you're looking at containing your data in two major structures; multidimensional arrays, and trees (yes, I know you can do arrays of arrays, and hashes of hashes, but it's a way of representing the same thing).</p><p>Now, there are a variety of ways of selecting data out of a tree.  The filesystem globbing language is a good example.  LDAP's language is also good, if a bit more verbose.  ACAP seems useful, but I've never gotten into it much.  But to me, the queen of all the major path-selection languages is XPath.  I don't like XML that much as a tree representation, but I can live with it, for the sake of having XPath.</p><p>Anyway, I hope this gives some insight into why at least one person who agrees with you in many ways is now willing to consider XML as a reasonable solution.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>XML .
Why use it ?
Well , for me , the whole thing can be answered by the word " Tree " ( well , " Plex " actaully , but that 's less self-evident ) .
Once data gets beyond single items ( " scalars " in scripting languages ) , 1D arrays , and hashes , you 're looking at containing your data in two major structures ; multidimensional arrays , and trees ( yes , I know you can do arrays of arrays , and hashes of hashes , but it 's a way of representing the same thing ) .Now , there are a variety of ways of selecting data out of a tree .
The filesystem globbing language is a good example .
LDAP 's language is also good , if a bit more verbose .
ACAP seems useful , but I 've never gotten into it much .
But to me , the queen of all the major path-selection languages is XPath .
I do n't like XML that much as a tree representation , but I can live with it , for the sake of having XPath.Anyway , I hope this gives some insight into why at least one person who agrees with you in many ways is now willing to consider XML as a reasonable solution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>XML.
Why use it?
Well, for me, the whole thing can be answered by the word "Tree" (well, "Plex" actaully, but that's less self-evident).
Once data gets beyond single items ("scalars" in scripting languages), 1D arrays, and hashes, you're looking at containing your data in two major structures; multidimensional arrays, and trees (yes, I know you can do arrays of arrays, and hashes of hashes, but it's a way of representing the same thing).Now, there are a variety of ways of selecting data out of a tree.
The filesystem globbing language is a good example.
LDAP's language is also good, if a bit more verbose.
ACAP seems useful, but I've never gotten into it much.
But to me, the queen of all the major path-selection languages is XPath.
I don't like XML that much as a tree representation, but I can live with it, for the sake of having XPath.Anyway, I hope this gives some insight into why at least one person who agrees with you in many ways is now willing to consider XML as a reasonable solution.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787503</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785143</id>
	<title>Asperger's syndrome.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255889640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People with Asperger's syndrome - and left-handed people - make the best programmers.  Ergo, weird comes with the terratory.  I prefer "interesting".   I'm "interesting"...and programming has kept me earning top dollar for 35 years.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People with Asperger 's syndrome - and left-handed people - make the best programmers .
Ergo , weird comes with the terratory .
I prefer " interesting " .
I 'm " interesting " ...and programming has kept me earning top dollar for 35 years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People with Asperger's syndrome - and left-handed people - make the best programmers.
Ergo, weird comes with the terratory.
I prefer "interesting".
I'm "interesting"...and programming has kept me earning top dollar for 35 years.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785243</id>
	<title>Re:Asperger's syndrome.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255890360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>terratory</p></div><p>Sigh. Whenever we have these "we only seem weird to you cretinous neurotypicals because we're geniuses" circle jerks the sloppy spelling and grammar really starts to grate.</p><p>And actually it's completely back to front. We socially lazy people are good at programming because we have lots and lots of free time that the regular folks spend being sociable.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>terratorySigh .
Whenever we have these " we only seem weird to you cretinous neurotypicals because we 're geniuses " circle jerks the sloppy spelling and grammar really starts to grate.And actually it 's completely back to front .
We socially lazy people are good at programming because we have lots and lots of free time that the regular folks spend being sociable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>terratorySigh.
Whenever we have these "we only seem weird to you cretinous neurotypicals because we're geniuses" circle jerks the sloppy spelling and grammar really starts to grate.And actually it's completely back to front.
We socially lazy people are good at programming because we have lots and lots of free time that the regular folks spend being sociable.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785143</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785913</id>
	<title>Re:Pedantic</title>
	<author>Mr. Slippery</author>
	<datestamp>1255895940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Programmers just happen to be more detail oriented than most everyone else. One character in a program with hundreds of thousands is the difference between having something that compiles and something that doesn't. It takes a certain type of personality to accept this as part of the job description.</p></div></blockquote><p>True. But the good programmer must also be creative, on the order of a poet or novelist. Unlike building a bridge or treating a case of strep throat, where only the details vary between one and the next, every significant program is a completely new expression -- if it were not a new problem, you'd simply re-use existing software.

</p><p>It takes an unusual combination of personality traits to combine the "every semicolon it it's place" attitude, with "let's create something that has never before existed".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Programmers just happen to be more detail oriented than most everyone else .
One character in a program with hundreds of thousands is the difference between having something that compiles and something that does n't .
It takes a certain type of personality to accept this as part of the job description.True .
But the good programmer must also be creative , on the order of a poet or novelist .
Unlike building a bridge or treating a case of strep throat , where only the details vary between one and the next , every significant program is a completely new expression -- if it were not a new problem , you 'd simply re-use existing software .
It takes an unusual combination of personality traits to combine the " every semicolon it it 's place " attitude , with " let 's create something that has never before existed " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Programmers just happen to be more detail oriented than most everyone else.
One character in a program with hundreds of thousands is the difference between having something that compiles and something that doesn't.
It takes a certain type of personality to accept this as part of the job description.True.
But the good programmer must also be creative, on the order of a poet or novelist.
Unlike building a bridge or treating a case of strep throat, where only the details vary between one and the next, every significant program is a completely new expression -- if it were not a new problem, you'd simply re-use existing software.
It takes an unusual combination of personality traits to combine the "every semicolon it it's place" attitude, with "let's create something that has never before existed".
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785291</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786301</id>
	<title>No</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1255899000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, programmers aren't weird, its just a field that isn't well enough established yet.</p><p>As such, those who are incapable of surviving in other more well established fields can survive in development for now.  Give it 10 -20 years and programming will be roughly the same as any other desk job, and these quirks that developers currently get by with will no longer be acceptable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , programmers are n't weird , its just a field that is n't well enough established yet.As such , those who are incapable of surviving in other more well established fields can survive in development for now .
Give it 10 -20 years and programming will be roughly the same as any other desk job , and these quirks that developers currently get by with will no longer be acceptable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, programmers aren't weird, its just a field that isn't well enough established yet.As such, those who are incapable of surviving in other more well established fields can survive in development for now.
Give it 10 -20 years and programming will be roughly the same as any other desk job, and these quirks that developers currently get by with will no longer be acceptable.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787797</id>
	<title>Watch out for the fakers</title>
	<author>kramulous</author>
	<datestamp>1255866960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But you cannot deny that some will play it up to appear to be brilliant and conform to what has been stereotyped.  These fakers can be difficult to spot right up until they have to do something.  I've across a few of these.  They are just social misfits and not too bright.  Some, however, are clever at the lie; will sit back and pretend to know the solution and allow others the 'opportunity' to solve it the way the faker would.</p><p>I've found that those people who are genuinely smart are also fine socially (pretty much are good at anything presented to them).  They have a few interesting quirks but nothing debilitating.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But you can not deny that some will play it up to appear to be brilliant and conform to what has been stereotyped .
These fakers can be difficult to spot right up until they have to do something .
I 've across a few of these .
They are just social misfits and not too bright .
Some , however , are clever at the lie ; will sit back and pretend to know the solution and allow others the 'opportunity ' to solve it the way the faker would.I 've found that those people who are genuinely smart are also fine socially ( pretty much are good at anything presented to them ) .
They have a few interesting quirks but nothing debilitating .
   </tokentext>
<sentencetext>But you cannot deny that some will play it up to appear to be brilliant and conform to what has been stereotyped.
These fakers can be difficult to spot right up until they have to do something.
I've across a few of these.
They are just social misfits and not too bright.
Some, however, are clever at the lie; will sit back and pretend to know the solution and allow others the 'opportunity' to solve it the way the faker would.I've found that those people who are genuinely smart are also fine socially (pretty much are good at anything presented to them).
They have a few interesting quirks but nothing debilitating.
   </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785399</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788567</id>
	<title>Re:Something else I realised</title>
	<author>doom</author>
	<datestamp>1255874940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>But what I think you're talking about is a tendency toward "faddishness" rather than a need to be normal.  There's a lot of posing about being professional and rational and all of that, but with the present state-of-the-art we're all essentially blundering around in the dark shouting anecdotes at each other.  We tend to rely on tribal identity for decision-making because we don't have much of anything else to work with.  We're not alone in this, of course, it's pretty much how must people deal with stuff like politics or religion (there are reasons we call them "religious issues", you know?).</htmltext>
<tokenext>But what I think you 're talking about is a tendency toward " faddishness " rather than a need to be normal .
There 's a lot of posing about being professional and rational and all of that , but with the present state-of-the-art we 're all essentially blundering around in the dark shouting anecdotes at each other .
We tend to rely on tribal identity for decision-making because we do n't have much of anything else to work with .
We 're not alone in this , of course , it 's pretty much how must people deal with stuff like politics or religion ( there are reasons we call them " religious issues " , you know ?
) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But what I think you're talking about is a tendency toward "faddishness" rather than a need to be normal.
There's a lot of posing about being professional and rational and all of that, but with the present state-of-the-art we're all essentially blundering around in the dark shouting anecdotes at each other.
We tend to rely on tribal identity for decision-making because we don't have much of anything else to work with.
We're not alone in this, of course, it's pretty much how must people deal with stuff like politics or religion (there are reasons we call them "religious issues", you know?
).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787503</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29796503</id>
	<title>Which came first ...</title>
	<author>Rambo Tribble</author>
	<datestamp>1255976940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>... the stricken or his plague?</htmltext>
<tokenext>... the stricken or his plague ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... the stricken or his plague?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785775</id>
	<title>Re:No, not that wierd</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255895040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What other insights can you share about the personalities of successful high-end call girls?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What other insights can you share about the personalities of successful high-end call girls ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What other insights can you share about the personalities of successful high-end call girls?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785273</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786233</id>
	<title>Not software developers, but geeks.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255898280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have to agree with an earlier post. It's not software developers that are geeks. I've meet lots of government programmers that are just as boring as your standard beaurocrat. It's being a GEEK that makes many software developers interesting. Unfortunately, it's not being a geek that makes you a software developer.</p><p>Although in my books, being a geek is often what makes you a GOOD software developer, but that's a whole 'nother ball of wax.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have to agree with an earlier post .
It 's not software developers that are geeks .
I 've meet lots of government programmers that are just as boring as your standard beaurocrat .
It 's being a GEEK that makes many software developers interesting .
Unfortunately , it 's not being a geek that makes you a software developer.Although in my books , being a geek is often what makes you a GOOD software developer , but that 's a whole 'nother ball of wax .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have to agree with an earlier post.
It's not software developers that are geeks.
I've meet lots of government programmers that are just as boring as your standard beaurocrat.
It's being a GEEK that makes many software developers interesting.
Unfortunately, it's not being a geek that makes you a software developer.Although in my books, being a geek is often what makes you a GOOD software developer, but that's a whole 'nother ball of wax.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786747</id>
	<title>Re:Developers...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255858920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Every single programming question I deployed on the net was received with an elitist disregard, sending me to read tons of papers and stuff I don't really have an use for, specially because even if I try I can't understand it.</p></div></blockquote><p>What, do you think those places exist to stock up experienced developers and have them give out free hand-holding lectures on the basics to every random person who feels like it?</p><blockquote><div><p>They assume you have high education in MIT and you had to start from mainframes like they did or something.</p></div></blockquote><p>Most of the people in these vile, elitist programmer dens do not have MIT educations, and MIT educations are neither necessary nor helpful for the average programming task.</p><blockquote><div><p>This is specially true on the IRC channel #opengl, where everyone seems to be too elite to deal with n00bs and giving incredibly obfuscated replies generally being more of a "don't bother me you fucking ignorant n00b".</p></div></blockquote><p>Sounds more like they were answering your questions and you were too stupid to understand them and interpreted it as the mean elitists refusing to help.</p><p>This seems less of a case of "oh noes, the secretive elitists are hiding their knowledge from the masses and sneering down upon them!" and more of a case of you being a whiny, spoiled little brat who's angry because the people on the Internet don't exist for the sole purpose of being your own personal no-cost tutor. Most programmers did not learn programming through fancy, expensive schools either. The only difference here is that you are a gigantic prick.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Every single programming question I deployed on the net was received with an elitist disregard , sending me to read tons of papers and stuff I do n't really have an use for , specially because even if I try I ca n't understand it.What , do you think those places exist to stock up experienced developers and have them give out free hand-holding lectures on the basics to every random person who feels like it ? They assume you have high education in MIT and you had to start from mainframes like they did or something.Most of the people in these vile , elitist programmer dens do not have MIT educations , and MIT educations are neither necessary nor helpful for the average programming task.This is specially true on the IRC channel # opengl , where everyone seems to be too elite to deal with n00bs and giving incredibly obfuscated replies generally being more of a " do n't bother me you fucking ignorant n00b " .Sounds more like they were answering your questions and you were too stupid to understand them and interpreted it as the mean elitists refusing to help.This seems less of a case of " oh noes , the secretive elitists are hiding their knowledge from the masses and sneering down upon them !
" and more of a case of you being a whiny , spoiled little brat who 's angry because the people on the Internet do n't exist for the sole purpose of being your own personal no-cost tutor .
Most programmers did not learn programming through fancy , expensive schools either .
The only difference here is that you are a gigantic prick .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Every single programming question I deployed on the net was received with an elitist disregard, sending me to read tons of papers and stuff I don't really have an use for, specially because even if I try I can't understand it.What, do you think those places exist to stock up experienced developers and have them give out free hand-holding lectures on the basics to every random person who feels like it?They assume you have high education in MIT and you had to start from mainframes like they did or something.Most of the people in these vile, elitist programmer dens do not have MIT educations, and MIT educations are neither necessary nor helpful for the average programming task.This is specially true on the IRC channel #opengl, where everyone seems to be too elite to deal with n00bs and giving incredibly obfuscated replies generally being more of a "don't bother me you fucking ignorant n00b".Sounds more like they were answering your questions and you were too stupid to understand them and interpreted it as the mean elitists refusing to help.This seems less of a case of "oh noes, the secretive elitists are hiding their knowledge from the masses and sneering down upon them!
" and more of a case of you being a whiny, spoiled little brat who's angry because the people on the Internet don't exist for the sole purpose of being your own personal no-cost tutor.
Most programmers did not learn programming through fancy, expensive schools either.
The only difference here is that you are a gigantic prick.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785553</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786655</id>
	<title>Re:Talk about slow news day</title>
	<author>RevWaldo</author>
	<datestamp>1255858440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>True. If a person describes themselves in a personal ad, online profile, etc. as "a little crazy!", they're anything but.</htmltext>
<tokenext>True .
If a person describes themselves in a personal ad , online profile , etc .
as " a little crazy !
" , they 're anything but .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>True.
If a person describes themselves in a personal ad, online profile, etc.
as "a little crazy!
", they're anything but.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785157</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785277</id>
	<title>be thankful for HR...</title>
	<author>nycguy</author>
	<datestamp>1255890660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>This article reminds me of a couple of incidents earlier in my career:
<br>
<br>
I usually find the HR department to be pain in the ass, but there are times when they are indispensable. When I first started working, I was managing a team of fresh college graduates. They all went out together after work one Friday for "movie night." The next week, one of the women who worked for me came to my office very upset. Turns out that after movie night, she'd gone to a bar with her fellow team members, then taken him back to her place and had sex. She was worried about pregnancy and disease because the sex had been unprotected. She was also upset that he was "being cold to [her]" the first day back in the office. At that point, I just said, "this is a topic for our HR department" and walked her and her "movie night buddy" to the office of the HR rep for our area. The resolution was to have one of them volunteer to be transferred to another area, but there was subsequent drama anyway. Social ineptitude coupled with inexperience and raging hormones is an unusually bad combination.
<br>
<br>
I also worked with a programmer who cursed worse than a sailor and "adjusted himself" more frequently than an entire team of baseball players. We used to take bets on how many times he would grab his crotch during a conversation, and if the meeting was all guys, we'd all adjust ourselves for laughs and to see if he'd pick up on it--he was completely oblivious. For whatever reason it went on for years without anyone ever doing anything about it. On the cursing part, he did eventually get called in to HR and scolded for his language, to which I am told his exact response was "Holy shit, I'm so fucking sorry." He still kept his job, though.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This article reminds me of a couple of incidents earlier in my career : I usually find the HR department to be pain in the ass , but there are times when they are indispensable .
When I first started working , I was managing a team of fresh college graduates .
They all went out together after work one Friday for " movie night .
" The next week , one of the women who worked for me came to my office very upset .
Turns out that after movie night , she 'd gone to a bar with her fellow team members , then taken him back to her place and had sex .
She was worried about pregnancy and disease because the sex had been unprotected .
She was also upset that he was " being cold to [ her ] " the first day back in the office .
At that point , I just said , " this is a topic for our HR department " and walked her and her " movie night buddy " to the office of the HR rep for our area .
The resolution was to have one of them volunteer to be transferred to another area , but there was subsequent drama anyway .
Social ineptitude coupled with inexperience and raging hormones is an unusually bad combination .
I also worked with a programmer who cursed worse than a sailor and " adjusted himself " more frequently than an entire team of baseball players .
We used to take bets on how many times he would grab his crotch during a conversation , and if the meeting was all guys , we 'd all adjust ourselves for laughs and to see if he 'd pick up on it--he was completely oblivious .
For whatever reason it went on for years without anyone ever doing anything about it .
On the cursing part , he did eventually get called in to HR and scolded for his language , to which I am told his exact response was " Holy shit , I 'm so fucking sorry .
" He still kept his job , though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This article reminds me of a couple of incidents earlier in my career:


I usually find the HR department to be pain in the ass, but there are times when they are indispensable.
When I first started working, I was managing a team of fresh college graduates.
They all went out together after work one Friday for "movie night.
" The next week, one of the women who worked for me came to my office very upset.
Turns out that after movie night, she'd gone to a bar with her fellow team members, then taken him back to her place and had sex.
She was worried about pregnancy and disease because the sex had been unprotected.
She was also upset that he was "being cold to [her]" the first day back in the office.
At that point, I just said, "this is a topic for our HR department" and walked her and her "movie night buddy" to the office of the HR rep for our area.
The resolution was to have one of them volunteer to be transferred to another area, but there was subsequent drama anyway.
Social ineptitude coupled with inexperience and raging hormones is an unusually bad combination.
I also worked with a programmer who cursed worse than a sailor and "adjusted himself" more frequently than an entire team of baseball players.
We used to take bets on how many times he would grab his crotch during a conversation, and if the meeting was all guys, we'd all adjust ourselves for laughs and to see if he'd pick up on it--he was completely oblivious.
For whatever reason it went on for years without anyone ever doing anything about it.
On the cursing part, he did eventually get called in to HR and scolded for his language, to which I am told his exact response was "Holy shit, I'm so fucking sorry.
" He still kept his job, though.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786141</id>
	<title>Stereotypes contains a grain of truth</title>
	<author>Nitewing98</author>
	<datestamp>1255897560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thinking over the folks I've worked with, I would have to agree that geeks in general share some common traits.  We hate inaccuracy (sometimes pathologically).  Most of us have at least one toy (maybe more) on or in our desks.  Geeks that do tech support all hate "stupid users" but depend on them for a living (there's a dichotomy).  Programmers usually expect true logic to apply to people and are disappointed in people when they won't be logical.  Most of us come in late and work late.  Once we go home, we get on our computer at home.  We tend to like science fiction and fantasy books/movies (including comic books).  We will easily convince a non-player character to join our dungeon quest but get a "deer in the headlights" look when confronted with asking someone out on a date.</p><p>Not every geek will conform to the stereotype, but stereotypes come about because they are observations about life.  We're not all like the above description, but see if there aren't several of those traits that apply to you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thinking over the folks I 've worked with , I would have to agree that geeks in general share some common traits .
We hate inaccuracy ( sometimes pathologically ) .
Most of us have at least one toy ( maybe more ) on or in our desks .
Geeks that do tech support all hate " stupid users " but depend on them for a living ( there 's a dichotomy ) .
Programmers usually expect true logic to apply to people and are disappointed in people when they wo n't be logical .
Most of us come in late and work late .
Once we go home , we get on our computer at home .
We tend to like science fiction and fantasy books/movies ( including comic books ) .
We will easily convince a non-player character to join our dungeon quest but get a " deer in the headlights " look when confronted with asking someone out on a date.Not every geek will conform to the stereotype , but stereotypes come about because they are observations about life .
We 're not all like the above description , but see if there are n't several of those traits that apply to you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thinking over the folks I've worked with, I would have to agree that geeks in general share some common traits.
We hate inaccuracy (sometimes pathologically).
Most of us have at least one toy (maybe more) on or in our desks.
Geeks that do tech support all hate "stupid users" but depend on them for a living (there's a dichotomy).
Programmers usually expect true logic to apply to people and are disappointed in people when they won't be logical.
Most of us come in late and work late.
Once we go home, we get on our computer at home.
We tend to like science fiction and fantasy books/movies (including comic books).
We will easily convince a non-player character to join our dungeon quest but get a "deer in the headlights" look when confronted with asking someone out on a date.Not every geek will conform to the stereotype, but stereotypes come about because they are observations about life.
We're not all like the above description, but see if there aren't several of those traits that apply to you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29812051</id>
	<title>Misspelled</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256066880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think you misspelled "wired".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you misspelled " wired " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you misspelled "wired".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788083</id>
	<title>Re:Developers...</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1255870140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think you're in the wrong community. Find some DirectX boards/chatrooms, those are the guys making video games. OpenGL engineers are either writing boring CAD programs, or going after PhDs.</p><p>Also, your life in general would be easier if you picked a language that did garbage collection. There are many of those fast-enough for video games now. (Of course, shaders are still a royal PITA-- nothing you can do about that, sadly.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you 're in the wrong community .
Find some DirectX boards/chatrooms , those are the guys making video games .
OpenGL engineers are either writing boring CAD programs , or going after PhDs.Also , your life in general would be easier if you picked a language that did garbage collection .
There are many of those fast-enough for video games now .
( Of course , shaders are still a royal PITA-- nothing you can do about that , sadly .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you're in the wrong community.
Find some DirectX boards/chatrooms, those are the guys making video games.
OpenGL engineers are either writing boring CAD programs, or going after PhDs.Also, your life in general would be easier if you picked a language that did garbage collection.
There are many of those fast-enough for video games now.
(Of course, shaders are still a royal PITA-- nothing you can do about that, sadly.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785553</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785309</id>
	<title>Weird is OK, jerks are not</title>
	<author>cryfreedomlove</author>
	<datestamp>1255891140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I find that often hiring managers tolerate jerks in our profession because a lot of hotshot programmers develop a large ego early in their careers, aided by management teams that enable this disfunction.  The net result is a work place with high turn over of 'normal people'.  There are a lot of hiring managers who read Slashdot.  My message to then is 'Don't hire jerks'.  Great programmers have lots of options about who to work for.  If you have a team where you tolerate jerks then good people will leave and good prospective employees will turn down your job offers after meeting your jerks during the interview process.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I find that often hiring managers tolerate jerks in our profession because a lot of hotshot programmers develop a large ego early in their careers , aided by management teams that enable this disfunction .
The net result is a work place with high turn over of 'normal people' .
There are a lot of hiring managers who read Slashdot .
My message to then is 'Do n't hire jerks' .
Great programmers have lots of options about who to work for .
If you have a team where you tolerate jerks then good people will leave and good prospective employees will turn down your job offers after meeting your jerks during the interview process .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find that often hiring managers tolerate jerks in our profession because a lot of hotshot programmers develop a large ego early in their careers, aided by management teams that enable this disfunction.
The net result is a work place with high turn over of 'normal people'.
There are a lot of hiring managers who read Slashdot.
My message to then is 'Don't hire jerks'.
Great programmers have lots of options about who to work for.
If you have a team where you tolerate jerks then good people will leave and good prospective employees will turn down your job offers after meeting your jerks during the interview process.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786665</id>
	<title>Re:Short r&#233;sum&#233;</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255858440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...which is the same as saying nobody is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...which is the same as saying nobody is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...which is the same as saying nobody is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786151</id>
	<title>Re:It's called autism</title>
	<author>mrjb</author>
	<datestamp>1255897560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Are software developers naturally weird? No, just the good ones. And yes, there is a link with autism. <a href="http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/9.12/aspergers\_pr.html" title="wired.com">In Silicon Valley, there is a disproportionate occurence of children with autism</a> [wired.com] (Aspergers is a disorder in the Autistic Spectrum). Autistic Spectrum Disorders are genetic, although some studies suggest environment (vaccinations) 'pulls the trigger'. Originally thimerosal (containing mercury) was blamed; current theories suggest however that people with ASDs simply have a weak immune system (the stereotypical geek has asthma, allergies...) and the blow dealt by the vaccine is the last straw to 'activate' the autism. A saying goes around that for each autistic child, there's a techie at most 2 generations back.<br> <br>
I'm married and have 2 kids. Although I've never been officially diagnosed with autism, my oldest has, and in retrospective that was an eye opener. I've had treatment for a few things that nowadays are considered 'typically autistic' and have been on some supplements (magnesium, cod liver oil) that are recommended to help relieve some of the issues of autism (though I didn't know at the time).
<br> <br>
I don't agree "women just aren't strong enough to be able to handle [people with autism]"- I think it depends on the lady and on the severity of the autism. Even having a kid with autism can put severe strain on a relationship though; 85\% of couples with an autistic child get divorced. (To put things in a bit more positive light- in this time and age though, about 2/3 of couples *without* autistic children get divorced).
<br> <br>
Now, I've been making some claims here... I know, [citation needed]. I'm too tired to link to all of them right now, but you people know how to use Google, right?
<br> <br>
By the way, 26? That's early.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are software developers naturally weird ?
No , just the good ones .
And yes , there is a link with autism .
In Silicon Valley , there is a disproportionate occurence of children with autism [ wired.com ] ( Aspergers is a disorder in the Autistic Spectrum ) .
Autistic Spectrum Disorders are genetic , although some studies suggest environment ( vaccinations ) 'pulls the trigger' .
Originally thimerosal ( containing mercury ) was blamed ; current theories suggest however that people with ASDs simply have a weak immune system ( the stereotypical geek has asthma , allergies... ) and the blow dealt by the vaccine is the last straw to 'activate ' the autism .
A saying goes around that for each autistic child , there 's a techie at most 2 generations back .
I 'm married and have 2 kids .
Although I 've never been officially diagnosed with autism , my oldest has , and in retrospective that was an eye opener .
I 've had treatment for a few things that nowadays are considered 'typically autistic ' and have been on some supplements ( magnesium , cod liver oil ) that are recommended to help relieve some of the issues of autism ( though I did n't know at the time ) .
I do n't agree " women just are n't strong enough to be able to handle [ people with autism ] " - I think it depends on the lady and on the severity of the autism .
Even having a kid with autism can put severe strain on a relationship though ; 85 \ % of couples with an autistic child get divorced .
( To put things in a bit more positive light- in this time and age though , about 2/3 of couples * without * autistic children get divorced ) .
Now , I 've been making some claims here... I know , [ citation needed ] .
I 'm too tired to link to all of them right now , but you people know how to use Google , right ?
By the way , 26 ?
That 's early .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are software developers naturally weird?
No, just the good ones.
And yes, there is a link with autism.
In Silicon Valley, there is a disproportionate occurence of children with autism [wired.com] (Aspergers is a disorder in the Autistic Spectrum).
Autistic Spectrum Disorders are genetic, although some studies suggest environment (vaccinations) 'pulls the trigger'.
Originally thimerosal (containing mercury) was blamed; current theories suggest however that people with ASDs simply have a weak immune system (the stereotypical geek has asthma, allergies...) and the blow dealt by the vaccine is the last straw to 'activate' the autism.
A saying goes around that for each autistic child, there's a techie at most 2 generations back.
I'm married and have 2 kids.
Although I've never been officially diagnosed with autism, my oldest has, and in retrospective that was an eye opener.
I've had treatment for a few things that nowadays are considered 'typically autistic' and have been on some supplements (magnesium, cod liver oil) that are recommended to help relieve some of the issues of autism (though I didn't know at the time).
I don't agree "women just aren't strong enough to be able to handle [people with autism]"- I think it depends on the lady and on the severity of the autism.
Even having a kid with autism can put severe strain on a relationship though; 85\% of couples with an autistic child get divorced.
(To put things in a bit more positive light- in this time and age though, about 2/3 of couples *without* autistic children get divorced).
Now, I've been making some claims here... I know, [citation needed].
I'm too tired to link to all of them right now, but you people know how to use Google, right?
By the way, 26?
That's early.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785817</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786095</id>
	<title>Subconsciously Intended</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255897200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Being a software developer is kinda like owning Apple products: there are significantly fewer of us than non-developers, so we feel a sense of elitism and thus reflect our internal pride through fitting to the stereotypes of geeks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Being a software developer is kinda like owning Apple products : there are significantly fewer of us than non-developers , so we feel a sense of elitism and thus reflect our internal pride through fitting to the stereotypes of geeks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Being a software developer is kinda like owning Apple products: there are significantly fewer of us than non-developers, so we feel a sense of elitism and thus reflect our internal pride through fitting to the stereotypes of geeks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785171</id>
	<title>No, there are not</title>
	<author>ZouPrime</author>
	<datestamp>1255889880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Strange, weird and unique peoples work in every sphere of society. You only think coders are special because you happen to hang out with coders and not, say, accountants. If you were hanging out with accountants, you would find accountants a weird and diverse bunch too, but instead you have a stereotypical view of how accountants act, just like the rest of the population have a stereotypical view of coders.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Strange , weird and unique peoples work in every sphere of society .
You only think coders are special because you happen to hang out with coders and not , say , accountants .
If you were hanging out with accountants , you would find accountants a weird and diverse bunch too , but instead you have a stereotypical view of how accountants act , just like the rest of the population have a stereotypical view of coders .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Strange, weird and unique peoples work in every sphere of society.
You only think coders are special because you happen to hang out with coders and not, say, accountants.
If you were hanging out with accountants, you would find accountants a weird and diverse bunch too, but instead you have a stereotypical view of how accountants act, just like the rest of the population have a stereotypical view of coders.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785307</id>
	<title>You're invited to a party...</title>
	<author>MindPrison</author>
	<datestamp>1255891140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...your friends are gathered around the very same table, of which you effectively manage to clear within 15 minutes with your endless drivel about Drupal CMS which of course - you really can't for the life of you - understand why isn't the most interesting thing on this planet next to stretchpants!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...your friends are gathered around the very same table , of which you effectively manage to clear within 15 minutes with your endless drivel about Drupal CMS which of course - you really ca n't for the life of you - understand why is n't the most interesting thing on this planet next to stretchpants !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...your friends are gathered around the very same table, of which you effectively manage to clear within 15 minutes with your endless drivel about Drupal CMS which of course - you really can't for the life of you - understand why isn't the most interesting thing on this planet next to stretchpants!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787999</id>
	<title>Re:Short r&#233;sum&#233;</title>
	<author>Nerdfest</author>
	<datestamp>1255869120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm not.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787439</id>
	<title>Re:No, there are not</title>
	<author>Scrameustache</author>
	<datestamp>1255863900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Strange, weird and unique peoples work in every sphere of society. You only think coders are special because you happen to hang out with coders and not, say, accountants. If you were hanging out with accountants, you would find accountants a weird and diverse bunch too,</p></div><p>Accountants are boring, soulless drones. "Weird" to them is wearing a different shade of beige than the rest of the accountants.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Strange , weird and unique peoples work in every sphere of society .
You only think coders are special because you happen to hang out with coders and not , say , accountants .
If you were hanging out with accountants , you would find accountants a weird and diverse bunch too,Accountants are boring , soulless drones .
" Weird " to them is wearing a different shade of beige than the rest of the accountants .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Strange, weird and unique peoples work in every sphere of society.
You only think coders are special because you happen to hang out with coders and not, say, accountants.
If you were hanging out with accountants, you would find accountants a weird and diverse bunch too,Accountants are boring, soulless drones.
"Weird" to them is wearing a different shade of beige than the rest of the accountants.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785171</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29789019</id>
	<title>Creativity</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255879800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Creativity seems to be something that you don't just turn on and off.  You have to do it an practice continuously.  Apparently people in suits have a difficult time understanding that.  However, they should not be surprised.  I know people who wear suits who continuously play blackberry and "lets try to offend people with the Jag" on weekends, so it should be no surprise that creative people (people who take conventional ideas, and carefully twist them sideways, or make jokes about something, pressing the logical conclusion, using a miniature thought experiment to complete and continue the silly joke.  When thinking about something twisted sideways, they gain insights.  People in suits don't get that.  They consider the joke to be just a joke (and stupidly, just a waste of time).  They will even become condescending about the 'waste of time', and berate those who do these things.  The creativity is lost on them.  One particular experiment in the silly involved a man (a university professor) watching a cafeteria food fight.  He did the math regarding a thrown object.  The math took more than a week.  Fellow professors thought it was an interesting.  University officials thought it a waste of time.  Students (business students) thought he was a nut.  They didn't get it till he got the Nobel Prize for the silliness.  Considering the first university lecture he gave was scrutinized by Wolfgang Pauli, John von Neumann and Albert Einstein, you would think he would be nervous.  But he was a creative 'offbeat' genius.  (Richard Feynman).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Creativity seems to be something that you do n't just turn on and off .
You have to do it an practice continuously .
Apparently people in suits have a difficult time understanding that .
However , they should not be surprised .
I know people who wear suits who continuously play blackberry and " lets try to offend people with the Jag " on weekends , so it should be no surprise that creative people ( people who take conventional ideas , and carefully twist them sideways , or make jokes about something , pressing the logical conclusion , using a miniature thought experiment to complete and continue the silly joke .
When thinking about something twisted sideways , they gain insights .
People in suits do n't get that .
They consider the joke to be just a joke ( and stupidly , just a waste of time ) .
They will even become condescending about the 'waste of time ' , and berate those who do these things .
The creativity is lost on them .
One particular experiment in the silly involved a man ( a university professor ) watching a cafeteria food fight .
He did the math regarding a thrown object .
The math took more than a week .
Fellow professors thought it was an interesting .
University officials thought it a waste of time .
Students ( business students ) thought he was a nut .
They did n't get it till he got the Nobel Prize for the silliness .
Considering the first university lecture he gave was scrutinized by Wolfgang Pauli , John von Neumann and Albert Einstein , you would think he would be nervous .
But he was a creative 'offbeat ' genius .
( Richard Feynman ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Creativity seems to be something that you don't just turn on and off.
You have to do it an practice continuously.
Apparently people in suits have a difficult time understanding that.
However, they should not be surprised.
I know people who wear suits who continuously play blackberry and "lets try to offend people with the Jag" on weekends, so it should be no surprise that creative people (people who take conventional ideas, and carefully twist them sideways, or make jokes about something, pressing the logical conclusion, using a miniature thought experiment to complete and continue the silly joke.
When thinking about something twisted sideways, they gain insights.
People in suits don't get that.
They consider the joke to be just a joke (and stupidly, just a waste of time).
They will even become condescending about the 'waste of time', and berate those who do these things.
The creativity is lost on them.
One particular experiment in the silly involved a man (a university professor) watching a cafeteria food fight.
He did the math regarding a thrown object.
The math took more than a week.
Fellow professors thought it was an interesting.
University officials thought it a waste of time.
Students (business students) thought he was a nut.
They didn't get it till he got the Nobel Prize for the silliness.
Considering the first university lecture he gave was scrutinized by Wolfgang Pauli, John von Neumann and Albert Einstein, you would think he would be nervous.
But he was a creative 'offbeat' genius.
(Richard Feynman).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29794367</id>
	<title>as Curly said ...</title>
	<author>akb</author>
	<datestamp>1255968000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... "I resemble that remark!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... " I resemble that remark !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... "I resemble that remark!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787293</id>
	<title>Re:Short r&#233;sum&#233;</title>
	<author>ciaran.mchale</author>
	<datestamp>1255862820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Everybody is unique.</p></div></blockquote><p>

Almost everybody in the large crowd murmers agreement, but then a lone voice at the back replies "I'm not."</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Everybody is unique .
Almost everybody in the large crowd murmers agreement , but then a lone voice at the back replies " I 'm not .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everybody is unique.
Almost everybody in the large crowd murmers agreement, but then a lone voice at the back replies "I'm not.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29791793</id>
	<title>Re:Talk about slow news day</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1255952280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unless, of course, the code was being distributed in source form to third parties.  Song lyrics are, for the most part, copyrighted, and so reproducing them without a license is copyright infringement.  If you put song lyrics in the comments and then distribute the source code, you are committing copyright infringement (although you may be able to justify it as fair use, if you only quoted small snippets of them) and opening the company to legal liability.  It's little different, from a legal standpoint, from copying someone else's code into the company's product without permission.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unless , of course , the code was being distributed in source form to third parties .
Song lyrics are , for the most part , copyrighted , and so reproducing them without a license is copyright infringement .
If you put song lyrics in the comments and then distribute the source code , you are committing copyright infringement ( although you may be able to justify it as fair use , if you only quoted small snippets of them ) and opening the company to legal liability .
It 's little different , from a legal standpoint , from copying someone else 's code into the company 's product without permission .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unless, of course, the code was being distributed in source form to third parties.
Song lyrics are, for the most part, copyrighted, and so reproducing them without a license is copyright infringement.
If you put song lyrics in the comments and then distribute the source code, you are committing copyright infringement (although you may be able to justify it as fair use, if you only quoted small snippets of them) and opening the company to legal liability.
It's little different, from a legal standpoint, from copying someone else's code into the company's product without permission.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785503</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785281</id>
	<title>The OTHER guys are weird</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255890660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Systematic, analytic thinking, a strong desire to automate and a propensity to eliminate exceptions are the way of the future.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Systematic , analytic thinking , a strong desire to automate and a propensity to eliminate exceptions are the way of the future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Systematic, analytic thinking, a strong desire to automate and a propensity to eliminate exceptions are the way of the future.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29789039</id>
	<title>Re:be thankful for HR...</title>
	<author>dbIII</author>
	<datestamp>1255879980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>At that point, I just said, "this is a topic for our HR department" and walked her and her "movie night buddy" to the office of the HR rep for our area.</p></div></blockquote><p>If you did that in any of the places where I worked HR would have gossipped to everyone adding extra juicy details that never happened and the poor girl would be shamed into leaving.  Other places would have dismissed her and given the man a stern talking to (clueless exported US management does this more often than the locals - Telstra was the worst example).  Unless you have very good evidence that the HR people are reliable, professional and have the best interests of both the employees and the company in mind it can be a disaster refering such matters to them (makes sense in the above case if it worked but in the general case it can lead to losing both employees).  Even then external counciling may be better since the person who knows the secrets is not someone they will bump into at work.  It's tough, but management is about managing people and most couldn't farm out such a delicate situation to HR with success and have to deal with it themselves.<br>HR are very rarely chosen with compassion in mind.  Often they see their role as hiring new staff so are happy to disrupt operations by getting rid of people with the least excuse so they can start the exciting task of finding new staff.  In many places you have to protect your people from HR.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>At that point , I just said , " this is a topic for our HR department " and walked her and her " movie night buddy " to the office of the HR rep for our area.If you did that in any of the places where I worked HR would have gossipped to everyone adding extra juicy details that never happened and the poor girl would be shamed into leaving .
Other places would have dismissed her and given the man a stern talking to ( clueless exported US management does this more often than the locals - Telstra was the worst example ) .
Unless you have very good evidence that the HR people are reliable , professional and have the best interests of both the employees and the company in mind it can be a disaster refering such matters to them ( makes sense in the above case if it worked but in the general case it can lead to losing both employees ) .
Even then external counciling may be better since the person who knows the secrets is not someone they will bump into at work .
It 's tough , but management is about managing people and most could n't farm out such a delicate situation to HR with success and have to deal with it themselves.HR are very rarely chosen with compassion in mind .
Often they see their role as hiring new staff so are happy to disrupt operations by getting rid of people with the least excuse so they can start the exciting task of finding new staff .
In many places you have to protect your people from HR .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At that point, I just said, "this is a topic for our HR department" and walked her and her "movie night buddy" to the office of the HR rep for our area.If you did that in any of the places where I worked HR would have gossipped to everyone adding extra juicy details that never happened and the poor girl would be shamed into leaving.
Other places would have dismissed her and given the man a stern talking to (clueless exported US management does this more often than the locals - Telstra was the worst example).
Unless you have very good evidence that the HR people are reliable, professional and have the best interests of both the employees and the company in mind it can be a disaster refering such matters to them (makes sense in the above case if it worked but in the general case it can lead to losing both employees).
Even then external counciling may be better since the person who knows the secrets is not someone they will bump into at work.
It's tough, but management is about managing people and most couldn't farm out such a delicate situation to HR with success and have to deal with it themselves.HR are very rarely chosen with compassion in mind.
Often they see their role as hiring new staff so are happy to disrupt operations by getting rid of people with the least excuse so they can start the exciting task of finding new staff.
In many places you have to protect your people from HR.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785277</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786613</id>
	<title>Re:Short r&#233;sum&#233;</title>
	<author>garompeta</author>
	<datestamp>1255858140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Beauty is something we all have, but something that not everybody can see" (pat on shoulders)</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Beauty is something we all have , but something that not everybody can see " ( pat on shoulders )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Beauty is something we all have, but something that not everybody can see" (pat on shoulders)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29791273</id>
	<title>Re:Developers...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255945560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You do not need education background to use C and OpenGL. None what so ever. You just need time, a lot of time, to spend with it, try it out, do it wrong, and try it again. Everything you need to understand how to do something new are in books, go out buy those books. Go out on forums, follow peoples links to good pages, read them, try again.. etc<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. etc.. It's not uncommon for a developer to do development professionally and then work with code on free hours also.</p><p>If they give you links to pages, be happy, if they tell you to get out of their way, then do so. There are different forums for different questions, apparently #opengl is not one for asking someone to do your homework for you.</p><p>I ones answered a question about what they needed to read, and I got home and counted the books I had at home, I think it was 40-60. And I reed most of them. And I don't think I'm a good programmer, I would say I'm an ok programmer with still lots to learn.</p><p>Having an education is a plus, but no way needed to learn to program. Most great programmers never learned at school, but from countless hours in front of the computer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do not need education background to use C and OpenGL .
None what so ever .
You just need time , a lot of time , to spend with it , try it out , do it wrong , and try it again .
Everything you need to understand how to do something new are in books , go out buy those books .
Go out on forums , follow peoples links to good pages , read them , try again.. etc .. etc.. It 's not uncommon for a developer to do development professionally and then work with code on free hours also.If they give you links to pages , be happy , if they tell you to get out of their way , then do so .
There are different forums for different questions , apparently # opengl is not one for asking someone to do your homework for you.I ones answered a question about what they needed to read , and I got home and counted the books I had at home , I think it was 40-60 .
And I reed most of them .
And I do n't think I 'm a good programmer , I would say I 'm an ok programmer with still lots to learn.Having an education is a plus , but no way needed to learn to program .
Most great programmers never learned at school , but from countless hours in front of the computer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You do not need education background to use C and OpenGL.
None what so ever.
You just need time, a lot of time, to spend with it, try it out, do it wrong, and try it again.
Everything you need to understand how to do something new are in books, go out buy those books.
Go out on forums, follow peoples links to good pages, read them, try again.. etc .. etc.. It's not uncommon for a developer to do development professionally and then work with code on free hours also.If they give you links to pages, be happy, if they tell you to get out of their way, then do so.
There are different forums for different questions, apparently #opengl is not one for asking someone to do your homework for you.I ones answered a question about what they needed to read, and I got home and counted the books I had at home, I think it was 40-60.
And I reed most of them.
And I don't think I'm a good programmer, I would say I'm an ok programmer with still lots to learn.Having an education is a plus, but no way needed to learn to program.
Most great programmers never learned at school, but from countless hours in front of the computer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785553</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29796621</id>
	<title>Societal Norms</title>
	<author>Stregano</author>
	<datestamp>1255977360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Normal is really what society says is normal.</p><p>This goes for many people that are seen as "wierd": there are people that do not care about what the societal norm is for being normal.</p><p>I think it is good.  It is the same situation with dating.  Most people will put on a persona when meeting a person they want to date, and then once you start heavily dating, the other person is surprised at the person they are dating since it is not the same person they met.</p><p>Many programmers are just good examples of people that do not care about the social norm since many of them have been tagged as outcasts for awhile anyway, so they might as well be themselves instead of trying to fit in.</p><p>People that try to fit in are not fully being themselves, which is sad.  Some people will actually convince themselves in their head that they are different that who they are.  Don't worry, it will all come back eventually.</p><p>If you are a nerd, do not be depressed about it, try to become a rockstar in the nerd field.  Hey, Cliffy B did a pretty good job of doing that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Normal is really what society says is normal.This goes for many people that are seen as " wierd " : there are people that do not care about what the societal norm is for being normal.I think it is good .
It is the same situation with dating .
Most people will put on a persona when meeting a person they want to date , and then once you start heavily dating , the other person is surprised at the person they are dating since it is not the same person they met.Many programmers are just good examples of people that do not care about the social norm since many of them have been tagged as outcasts for awhile anyway , so they might as well be themselves instead of trying to fit in.People that try to fit in are not fully being themselves , which is sad .
Some people will actually convince themselves in their head that they are different that who they are .
Do n't worry , it will all come back eventually.If you are a nerd , do not be depressed about it , try to become a rockstar in the nerd field .
Hey , Cliffy B did a pretty good job of doing that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Normal is really what society says is normal.This goes for many people that are seen as "wierd": there are people that do not care about what the societal norm is for being normal.I think it is good.
It is the same situation with dating.
Most people will put on a persona when meeting a person they want to date, and then once you start heavily dating, the other person is surprised at the person they are dating since it is not the same person they met.Many programmers are just good examples of people that do not care about the social norm since many of them have been tagged as outcasts for awhile anyway, so they might as well be themselves instead of trying to fit in.People that try to fit in are not fully being themselves, which is sad.
Some people will actually convince themselves in their head that they are different that who they are.
Don't worry, it will all come back eventually.If you are a nerd, do not be depressed about it, try to become a rockstar in the nerd field.
Hey, Cliffy B did a pretty good job of doing that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786307</id>
	<title>Sample size of 3</title>
	<author>walmass</author>
	<datestamp>1255899060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Robert Johnston, the original singer of Crossroad Blues, died in 1938 before Eric Clapton was even born (1945)
<br> <br>
I don't know who wrote it, so it is entirely possible the song is even older.
<br> <br>
But that is not my main point. Wow--given a sample size of 3, a whole profession is labeled as 'weird'? I have seen my share of weird programmers, but most of them happen to be perfectly normal people (for society's definition of normal). My definition of "normal" also includes people who speak Klingon, eat Ramen and may have questionable hygiene.
<br> <br>
As a response to the original article, here is my generalization of the day: all Earthweb columnist's are weirdo's who look like they are secretly planning to take over the world.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Robert Johnston , the original singer of Crossroad Blues , died in 1938 before Eric Clapton was even born ( 1945 ) I do n't know who wrote it , so it is entirely possible the song is even older .
But that is not my main point .
Wow--given a sample size of 3 , a whole profession is labeled as 'weird ' ?
I have seen my share of weird programmers , but most of them happen to be perfectly normal people ( for society 's definition of normal ) .
My definition of " normal " also includes people who speak Klingon , eat Ramen and may have questionable hygiene .
As a response to the original article , here is my generalization of the day : all Earthweb columnist 's are weirdo 's who look like they are secretly planning to take over the world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Robert Johnston, the original singer of Crossroad Blues, died in 1938 before Eric Clapton was even born (1945)
 
I don't know who wrote it, so it is entirely possible the song is even older.
But that is not my main point.
Wow--given a sample size of 3, a whole profession is labeled as 'weird'?
I have seen my share of weird programmers, but most of them happen to be perfectly normal people (for society's definition of normal).
My definition of "normal" also includes people who speak Klingon, eat Ramen and may have questionable hygiene.
As a response to the original article, here is my generalization of the day: all Earthweb columnist's are weirdo's who look like they are secretly planning to take over the world.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29798753</id>
	<title>That or have good notes</title>
	<author>phorm</author>
	<datestamp>1255984920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good memory is definitely important, but having a good set of organized notes/sources/bookmarks/etc is almost equally so. There are plenty of things that fall into the "sorta remember but don't quite recall the exact syntax/wording" that have come up and then had the good ol' bookmark-to-a-snippet save my bacon.</p><p>Of course, modularizing in many cases happens to help here too... in that case the snippet might be your own. Naming the module something useful is a good idea though<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good memory is definitely important , but having a good set of organized notes/sources/bookmarks/etc is almost equally so .
There are plenty of things that fall into the " sorta remember but do n't quite recall the exact syntax/wording " that have come up and then had the good ol ' bookmark-to-a-snippet save my bacon.Of course , modularizing in many cases happens to help here too... in that case the snippet might be your own .
Naming the module something useful is a good idea though : - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good memory is definitely important, but having a good set of organized notes/sources/bookmarks/etc is almost equally so.
There are plenty of things that fall into the "sorta remember but don't quite recall the exact syntax/wording" that have come up and then had the good ol' bookmark-to-a-snippet save my bacon.Of course, modularizing in many cases happens to help here too... in that case the snippet might be your own.
Naming the module something useful is a good idea though :-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786515</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29799507</id>
	<title>They'd better be</title>
	<author>bodhisattva</author>
	<datestamp>1255944360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because if they're not, they're really weird. Average people are really weird. The average person is really stupid. Half of the of the population are dumber than they are. Find me a normal person and I'll show you someone really strange.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because if they 're not , they 're really weird .
Average people are really weird .
The average person is really stupid .
Half of the of the population are dumber than they are .
Find me a normal person and I 'll show you someone really strange .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because if they're not, they're really weird.
Average people are really weird.
The average person is really stupid.
Half of the of the population are dumber than they are.
Find me a normal person and I'll show you someone really strange.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785291</id>
	<title>Pedantic</title>
	<author>copponex</author>
	<datestamp>1255890900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think most people who are detailed oriented are considered eccentric. Good businesspeople, programmers, chefs, military strategists, and anyone who has to have things a certain way are considered weird.</p><p>Programmers just happen to be more detail oriented than most everyone else. One character in a program with hundreds of thousands is the difference between having something that compiles and something that doesn't. It takes a certain type of personality to accept this as part of the job description.</p><p>There are certain people who have it worse - civil engineers and doctors, for example. Once they have computed a load or prescribed a treatment, there is no way to edit and rebuild.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think most people who are detailed oriented are considered eccentric .
Good businesspeople , programmers , chefs , military strategists , and anyone who has to have things a certain way are considered weird.Programmers just happen to be more detail oriented than most everyone else .
One character in a program with hundreds of thousands is the difference between having something that compiles and something that does n't .
It takes a certain type of personality to accept this as part of the job description.There are certain people who have it worse - civil engineers and doctors , for example .
Once they have computed a load or prescribed a treatment , there is no way to edit and rebuild .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think most people who are detailed oriented are considered eccentric.
Good businesspeople, programmers, chefs, military strategists, and anyone who has to have things a certain way are considered weird.Programmers just happen to be more detail oriented than most everyone else.
One character in a program with hundreds of thousands is the difference between having something that compiles and something that doesn't.
It takes a certain type of personality to accept this as part of the job description.There are certain people who have it worse - civil engineers and doctors, for example.
Once they have computed a load or prescribed a treatment, there is no way to edit and rebuild.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785157</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29789547</id>
	<title>Kind of like poker...</title>
	<author>dtw</author>
	<datestamp>1255883940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you don't know who your co-workers are complaining about, they're probably complaining about you.</p><p>You could at least dress in something other than a polo shirt that predates the dot-com craze and is several sizes too small.</p><p>Chewing your food with your mouth closed also helps. As does bathing and shaving daily, and getting a haircut every 6 weeks.</p><p>The monitor cannot hear you, and is NOT going to be party to your conversations. Neither will it ever offer debugging tips.</p><p>Nobody, and I mean NOBODY, cares to have a conversation of any duration about intellectual property, copyright law, and the RIAA/MPAA.</p><p>Oh, we also don't want to hear about your vintage IBM Model M keyboard with bucking spring action. We already are acutely aware of how clicky the damn keys are.</p><p>You aren't really weird, you are just playing at it. Grow up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you do n't know who your co-workers are complaining about , they 're probably complaining about you.You could at least dress in something other than a polo shirt that predates the dot-com craze and is several sizes too small.Chewing your food with your mouth closed also helps .
As does bathing and shaving daily , and getting a haircut every 6 weeks.The monitor can not hear you , and is NOT going to be party to your conversations .
Neither will it ever offer debugging tips.Nobody , and I mean NOBODY , cares to have a conversation of any duration about intellectual property , copyright law , and the RIAA/MPAA.Oh , we also do n't want to hear about your vintage IBM Model M keyboard with bucking spring action .
We already are acutely aware of how clicky the damn keys are.You are n't really weird , you are just playing at it .
Grow up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you don't know who your co-workers are complaining about, they're probably complaining about you.You could at least dress in something other than a polo shirt that predates the dot-com craze and is several sizes too small.Chewing your food with your mouth closed also helps.
As does bathing and shaving daily, and getting a haircut every 6 weeks.The monitor cannot hear you, and is NOT going to be party to your conversations.
Neither will it ever offer debugging tips.Nobody, and I mean NOBODY, cares to have a conversation of any duration about intellectual property, copyright law, and the RIAA/MPAA.Oh, we also don't want to hear about your vintage IBM Model M keyboard with bucking spring action.
We already are acutely aware of how clicky the damn keys are.You aren't really weird, you are just playing at it.
Grow up.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786455</id>
	<title>Re:It's called autism</title>
	<author>MattXBlack</author>
	<datestamp>1255857000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>This thread gets more self aware as you scroll down, but your comment makes me feel quite sad. Don't give up on pursuing a relationship just because you had a bad experience - what you have said suggests that you are sufficiently mature and emotionally 'in touch' to recognise your own faults, which is the biggest stumbling block in most relationships.

I'd suggest you look for women who you share interests with. Maybe they won't be into coding, but someone with an analytical mind, or with the autistic traits you have identified in yourself (or that others have identified in you). I'd guess you have a lot of good to share with someone, so don't punish yourself for one relationship that didn't work out.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This thread gets more self aware as you scroll down , but your comment makes me feel quite sad .
Do n't give up on pursuing a relationship just because you had a bad experience - what you have said suggests that you are sufficiently mature and emotionally 'in touch ' to recognise your own faults , which is the biggest stumbling block in most relationships .
I 'd suggest you look for women who you share interests with .
Maybe they wo n't be into coding , but someone with an analytical mind , or with the autistic traits you have identified in yourself ( or that others have identified in you ) .
I 'd guess you have a lot of good to share with someone , so do n't punish yourself for one relationship that did n't work out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This thread gets more self aware as you scroll down, but your comment makes me feel quite sad.
Don't give up on pursuing a relationship just because you had a bad experience - what you have said suggests that you are sufficiently mature and emotionally 'in touch' to recognise your own faults, which is the biggest stumbling block in most relationships.
I'd suggest you look for women who you share interests with.
Maybe they won't be into coding, but someone with an analytical mind, or with the autistic traits you have identified in yourself (or that others have identified in you).
I'd guess you have a lot of good to share with someone, so don't punish yourself for one relationship that didn't work out.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785817</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29792021</id>
	<title>Re:Something else I realised</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1255954680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>On C++, you'll generally find that most of the people who like it are unfamiliar with other languages.  I have only met one person who likes C++ and knows more than half a dozen different languages (and I mean actually different, not just 6 ALGOL-family languages).  </p><p>
With XML, I'm surprised you're using the web and haven't come across a good use for it.  That's not to say that it's not massively overused, but it has one big advantage.  You can nest different types of XML documents inside each other and a parser that doesn't understand one can trivially ignore it.  XHTML documents, for example, can contain MathML and SVG.  A browser that supports these will add them both to the DOM tree and JavaScript can modify them.  A browser that doesn't can simply ignore them, without having to be written specifically to understand and ignore them.  XMPP is another good example.  The specification defines a few types of message, but you can embed any XML documents in an XMPP message and have them ignored by clients that don't understand them, but processed by ones that do.  Think of all of the things people have put into XMPP presence stanzas (mood, geolocation, playing song, client capabilities, and so on).  A client can easily ignore any of these, but if it supports them then it can handle them using exactly the same parser it uses for everything else.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>On C + + , you 'll generally find that most of the people who like it are unfamiliar with other languages .
I have only met one person who likes C + + and knows more than half a dozen different languages ( and I mean actually different , not just 6 ALGOL-family languages ) .
With XML , I 'm surprised you 're using the web and have n't come across a good use for it .
That 's not to say that it 's not massively overused , but it has one big advantage .
You can nest different types of XML documents inside each other and a parser that does n't understand one can trivially ignore it .
XHTML documents , for example , can contain MathML and SVG .
A browser that supports these will add them both to the DOM tree and JavaScript can modify them .
A browser that does n't can simply ignore them , without having to be written specifically to understand and ignore them .
XMPP is another good example .
The specification defines a few types of message , but you can embed any XML documents in an XMPP message and have them ignored by clients that do n't understand them , but processed by ones that do .
Think of all of the things people have put into XMPP presence stanzas ( mood , geolocation , playing song , client capabilities , and so on ) .
A client can easily ignore any of these , but if it supports them then it can handle them using exactly the same parser it uses for everything else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On C++, you'll generally find that most of the people who like it are unfamiliar with other languages.
I have only met one person who likes C++ and knows more than half a dozen different languages (and I mean actually different, not just 6 ALGOL-family languages).
With XML, I'm surprised you're using the web and haven't come across a good use for it.
That's not to say that it's not massively overused, but it has one big advantage.
You can nest different types of XML documents inside each other and a parser that doesn't understand one can trivially ignore it.
XHTML documents, for example, can contain MathML and SVG.
A browser that supports these will add them both to the DOM tree and JavaScript can modify them.
A browser that doesn't can simply ignore them, without having to be written specifically to understand and ignore them.
XMPP is another good example.
The specification defines a few types of message, but you can embed any XML documents in an XMPP message and have them ignored by clients that don't understand them, but processed by ones that do.
Think of all of the things people have put into XMPP presence stanzas (mood, geolocation, playing song, client capabilities, and so on).
A client can easily ignore any of these, but if it supports them then it can handle them using exactly the same parser it uses for everything else.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787503</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785311</id>
	<title>Re:Talk about slow news day</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255891140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Exactly! For example, every normal straight laced family values Republican eventually gets busted for trying to get a blow job in a public restroom or for sleeping with hookers. Whenever I see one of those Christian Family Values Clean Cut well dressed suited guys on TV, I just know they're getting it up the ass from Biff.<p>They just act normal for other Family Values folks who are probably have the exact same desires and values. I think if the "Family Values" people just told the truth, they'd find that every one else in their movement is just as sexually "deviant" as the people they profess to be fighting against - in other words, homosexuality and sleeping with hookers is the norm with them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly !
For example , every normal straight laced family values Republican eventually gets busted for trying to get a blow job in a public restroom or for sleeping with hookers .
Whenever I see one of those Christian Family Values Clean Cut well dressed suited guys on TV , I just know they 're getting it up the ass from Biff.They just act normal for other Family Values folks who are probably have the exact same desires and values .
I think if the " Family Values " people just told the truth , they 'd find that every one else in their movement is just as sexually " deviant " as the people they profess to be fighting against - in other words , homosexuality and sleeping with hookers is the norm with them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly!
For example, every normal straight laced family values Republican eventually gets busted for trying to get a blow job in a public restroom or for sleeping with hookers.
Whenever I see one of those Christian Family Values Clean Cut well dressed suited guys on TV, I just know they're getting it up the ass from Biff.They just act normal for other Family Values folks who are probably have the exact same desires and values.
I think if the "Family Values" people just told the truth, they'd find that every one else in their movement is just as sexually "deviant" as the people they profess to be fighting against - in other words, homosexuality and sleeping with hookers is the norm with them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785157</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29798495</id>
	<title>Re:No, not that wierd</title>
	<author>Zayne S Halsall</author>
	<datestamp>1255984140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Soooooooo... just how many high-end call girls do you know?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Soooooooo... just how many high-end call girls do you know ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Soooooooo... just how many high-end call girls do you know?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785273</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785583</id>
	<title>Eccentricity has its limits</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255893660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Many people have quirks - but if it is causing an issue it should be addressed by the manager.</p><p>As much as one might think they are, no one is indispensable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Many people have quirks - but if it is causing an issue it should be addressed by the manager.As much as one might think they are , no one is indispensable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Many people have quirks - but if it is causing an issue it should be addressed by the manager.As much as one might think they are, no one is indispensable.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29790639</id>
	<title>Art vs Science</title>
	<author>VincenzoRomano</author>
	<datestamp>1255892700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>In my opinion real software developers are more like artists than (computer) scientists.<br>
If you look at artists for all the disciplines, you'll find that almost all of them could fit the concept of weirdness.<br>
For the good and the bad.<br>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divergent\_thinking" title="wikipedia.org">Divergent thinkers</a> [wikipedia.org] are very often at the base of new (software) solutions to old problems or for a fresh new breakthrough..<br>
So, yes, very likely developers <b>look</b> weird when compared to anyone else.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In my opinion real software developers are more like artists than ( computer ) scientists .
If you look at artists for all the disciplines , you 'll find that almost all of them could fit the concept of weirdness .
For the good and the bad .
Divergent thinkers [ wikipedia.org ] are very often at the base of new ( software ) solutions to old problems or for a fresh new breakthrough. . So , yes , very likely developers look weird when compared to anyone else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my opinion real software developers are more like artists than (computer) scientists.
If you look at artists for all the disciplines, you'll find that almost all of them could fit the concept of weirdness.
For the good and the bad.
Divergent thinkers [wikipedia.org] are very often at the base of new (software) solutions to old problems or for a fresh new breakthrough..
So, yes, very likely developers look weird when compared to anyone else.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787727</id>
	<title>Re:Yes. Computers are unnatural.</title>
	<author>AbRASiON</author>
	<datestamp>1255866480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Computers have taught me I can find and highlight data quickly and easily anywhere I have it stored on my machine or the internet.<br>I can scour a 500 page article for a single word to find information on what I'm after.<br>The human brain is starting to bug me, I can't control F books, I can't copy and paste a phone number from my computer screen to my hand / phone quickly and easily.<br>I can't recall events in the past with a perfect still (or moving) picture of the moment (at least not all of them) and I can't recall everything that's every hapenned.<br>I'm 31 but grew up a geek with PC's - I think each generation will likely get worse, becoming more and more attached to their 'digital selves'</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Computers have taught me I can find and highlight data quickly and easily anywhere I have it stored on my machine or the internet.I can scour a 500 page article for a single word to find information on what I 'm after.The human brain is starting to bug me , I ca n't control F books , I ca n't copy and paste a phone number from my computer screen to my hand / phone quickly and easily.I ca n't recall events in the past with a perfect still ( or moving ) picture of the moment ( at least not all of them ) and I ca n't recall everything that 's every hapenned.I 'm 31 but grew up a geek with PC 's - I think each generation will likely get worse , becoming more and more attached to their 'digital selves'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Computers have taught me I can find and highlight data quickly and easily anywhere I have it stored on my machine or the internet.I can scour a 500 page article for a single word to find information on what I'm after.The human brain is starting to bug me, I can't control F books, I can't copy and paste a phone number from my computer screen to my hand / phone quickly and easily.I can't recall events in the past with a perfect still (or moving) picture of the moment (at least not all of them) and I can't recall everything that's every hapenned.I'm 31 but grew up a geek with PC's - I think each generation will likely get worse, becoming more and more attached to their 'digital selves'</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785399</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29791053</id>
	<title>What about office staff?!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255984140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You've also got to look at non-techie workers too though.</p><p>I've worked in many places where the secretaries are just plain bimbo's spending most of their day flirting (distracting others) or trying to get men to do their work for them.</p><p>Then there's the Sales guys who are just plain preoccupied with talking about the football results or how drunk they're going to get on pay-day.</p><p>Don't forget the old-timers waiting for retirement who spend most of their day figuring out how their pension scheme is going or how good their shares are.</p><p>If you think a programmer who puts lyrics in his comments is weird, then you've been a PHB too long.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 've also got to look at non-techie workers too though.I 've worked in many places where the secretaries are just plain bimbo 's spending most of their day flirting ( distracting others ) or trying to get men to do their work for them.Then there 's the Sales guys who are just plain preoccupied with talking about the football results or how drunk they 're going to get on pay-day.Do n't forget the old-timers waiting for retirement who spend most of their day figuring out how their pension scheme is going or how good their shares are.If you think a programmer who puts lyrics in his comments is weird , then you 've been a PHB too long .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You've also got to look at non-techie workers too though.I've worked in many places where the secretaries are just plain bimbo's spending most of their day flirting (distracting others) or trying to get men to do their work for them.Then there's the Sales guys who are just plain preoccupied with talking about the football results or how drunk they're going to get on pay-day.Don't forget the old-timers waiting for retirement who spend most of their day figuring out how their pension scheme is going or how good their shares are.If you think a programmer who puts lyrics in his comments is weird, then you've been a PHB too long.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785537</id>
	<title>On weirdness...</title>
	<author>91degrees</author>
	<datestamp>1255893180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Silly" comments in code.  Occasionally acceptable to have a sense of humour but it has to actually be funny because it's relevant rather than because it's random.  But you'll often get the "funny" guy in the office who doesn't realise that he's not.<br> <br>
"Chatty" - Yes, this is more typical of coders.  Not someone who spends a lot of time talking.  More that he doesn't get hints.  There seems to be a borderline aspergers type that has a high correlation with programmers.  You can simply tell them to go away because your busy and they will.<br> <br>
Inappropriate conversations - happens in all sectors.  Some people just don't know what's appropriate.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Silly " comments in code .
Occasionally acceptable to have a sense of humour but it has to actually be funny because it 's relevant rather than because it 's random .
But you 'll often get the " funny " guy in the office who does n't realise that he 's not .
" Chatty " - Yes , this is more typical of coders .
Not someone who spends a lot of time talking .
More that he does n't get hints .
There seems to be a borderline aspergers type that has a high correlation with programmers .
You can simply tell them to go away because your busy and they will .
Inappropriate conversations - happens in all sectors .
Some people just do n't know what 's appropriate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Silly" comments in code.
Occasionally acceptable to have a sense of humour but it has to actually be funny because it's relevant rather than because it's random.
But you'll often get the "funny" guy in the office who doesn't realise that he's not.
"Chatty" - Yes, this is more typical of coders.
Not someone who spends a lot of time talking.
More that he doesn't get hints.
There seems to be a borderline aspergers type that has a high correlation with programmers.
You can simply tell them to go away because your busy and they will.
Inappropriate conversations - happens in all sectors.
Some people just don't know what's appropriate.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785683</id>
	<title>Re:Asperger's syndrome.</title>
	<author>thetoadwarrior</author>
	<datestamp>1255894260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I know that guy, he lives in Imaginary Land.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I know that guy , he lives in Imaginary Land .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know that guy, he lives in Imaginary Land.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785279</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29794461</id>
	<title>Age is a factor</title>
	<author>teh\_commodore</author>
	<datestamp>1255968420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The older ones are, for sure.  But geekiness and intelligence are more chic, sexy, and important today, which is evident in our cultural artifacts (TV shows like Numb3rs, Bones, House, etc all glorify the super-smart).  Developers my age (20-something to 30-something) by and large have seemed a pretty hip and trendy crowd.  Some of the 40-somethings I work with, weird as shit.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The older ones are , for sure .
But geekiness and intelligence are more chic , sexy , and important today , which is evident in our cultural artifacts ( TV shows like Numb3rs , Bones , House , etc all glorify the super-smart ) .
Developers my age ( 20-something to 30-something ) by and large have seemed a pretty hip and trendy crowd .
Some of the 40-somethings I work with , weird as shit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The older ones are, for sure.
But geekiness and intelligence are more chic, sexy, and important today, which is evident in our cultural artifacts (TV shows like Numb3rs, Bones, House, etc all glorify the super-smart).
Developers my age (20-something to 30-something) by and large have seemed a pretty hip and trendy crowd.
Some of the 40-somethings I work with, weird as shit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29793267</id>
	<title>Re:Self-reinforcing stereotypes</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255963320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not to be picky, but I really think you meant anglophone countries, not Anglo-Saxon. Otherwise you would notice the same tendencies in many of your French friends as well.</p><p>To assume the French (or Normans if thats what you think you are?) have managed to stay genetically/culturally isolated for the last 1000 years - or for that matter that such a broad classification of a 1000 year old tribal grouping would have such an effect on cultures that have changed massively since, is incredibly naive.</p><p>Its not a solely French phenomenon for a start. Class divides are considerably more prevalent in stereotypes in the UK, compared to the intellectual/social divides that seem to polarise the US. Possibly has a lot more to do with recent history and perception of such.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not to be picky , but I really think you meant anglophone countries , not Anglo-Saxon .
Otherwise you would notice the same tendencies in many of your French friends as well.To assume the French ( or Normans if thats what you think you are ?
) have managed to stay genetically/culturally isolated for the last 1000 years - or for that matter that such a broad classification of a 1000 year old tribal grouping would have such an effect on cultures that have changed massively since , is incredibly naive.Its not a solely French phenomenon for a start .
Class divides are considerably more prevalent in stereotypes in the UK , compared to the intellectual/social divides that seem to polarise the US .
Possibly has a lot more to do with recent history and perception of such .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not to be picky, but I really think you meant anglophone countries, not Anglo-Saxon.
Otherwise you would notice the same tendencies in many of your French friends as well.To assume the French (or Normans if thats what you think you are?
) have managed to stay genetically/culturally isolated for the last 1000 years - or for that matter that such a broad classification of a 1000 year old tribal grouping would have such an effect on cultures that have changed massively since, is incredibly naive.Its not a solely French phenomenon for a start.
Class divides are considerably more prevalent in stereotypes in the UK, compared to the intellectual/social divides that seem to polarise the US.
Possibly has a lot more to do with recent history and perception of such.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788859</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788257</id>
	<title>I notice they tend to be assholes.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255871760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Mark me down, but most of them are assholes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Mark me down , but most of them are assholes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mark me down, but most of them are assholes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785177</id>
	<title>huh?</title>
	<author>maxwells daemon</author>
	<datestamp>1255889880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My mistake<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I thought it said WIRED.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My mistake ... I thought it said WIRED .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My mistake ... I thought it said WIRED.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29793207</id>
	<title>Re:Developers...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255963080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I like you, so I'm going to give you some genuine advice. You might not enjoy it all though.</p><p>Firstly, your comment <i>unless you reinvent the wheel infinitely you are doomed</i> is unfortunately the way of things in advanced tech like computer programming. Everybody who can do it got there by re-inventing the wheel as you put it over and over again until they really "got" the techniques. Only then could they begin to do the "value-added" new stuff that you want to do.</p><p>You've already seen that graphic design etc are easier. You've managed to learn them on the job which is great. But actual programming, beyond textbook examples, needs more substantial training - this is why it pays more!</p><p>Sometimes it can seem that young people seem to have an intrinisic talent. But usually they simply did their learning while children. Starting ages for good geeks are often 6 to 10 years old. I didn't get my hands on a real computer until I was 12 - so I had to fill my time playing with 74-series and 4000-series digital ICs from 8 to 12.</p><p>You've already proved you have a good brain and lots of determination, so here's what you have to do. Put your current project on hold for 1 to 2 years (make sure everything is well ducumented, make lots of backup copies!) and study computer science as though you were at university. Make a syllabus for yourself so you can pace your work. Read books, papers and online courses (but get the very best books in physical paper form). Go on forums, but restrict yourself to asking only the very most advanced questions, and see the n00b abuse go down over time. Do practice projects that are throwaway - and actually plan on throwing them away once the lessons have been learned.</p><p>Deal with the math and science stuff without whining about how they have no relevence - it's best to learn these out of context, when a real situation arives they will help (but only if you already understand them).</p><p>Deal with the project management angle. Read Mythical Man Month. Don't transfer bricklaying project management methods to software, if you ever want to finish anything.</p><p>I could go on, no doubt. The main thing is, don't whine about elitists - they spent valuable time on hard, boring theory. Join them - then beat them<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>Good luck.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I like you , so I 'm going to give you some genuine advice .
You might not enjoy it all though.Firstly , your comment unless you reinvent the wheel infinitely you are doomed is unfortunately the way of things in advanced tech like computer programming .
Everybody who can do it got there by re-inventing the wheel as you put it over and over again until they really " got " the techniques .
Only then could they begin to do the " value-added " new stuff that you want to do.You 've already seen that graphic design etc are easier .
You 've managed to learn them on the job which is great .
But actual programming , beyond textbook examples , needs more substantial training - this is why it pays more ! Sometimes it can seem that young people seem to have an intrinisic talent .
But usually they simply did their learning while children .
Starting ages for good geeks are often 6 to 10 years old .
I did n't get my hands on a real computer until I was 12 - so I had to fill my time playing with 74-series and 4000-series digital ICs from 8 to 12.You 've already proved you have a good brain and lots of determination , so here 's what you have to do .
Put your current project on hold for 1 to 2 years ( make sure everything is well ducumented , make lots of backup copies !
) and study computer science as though you were at university .
Make a syllabus for yourself so you can pace your work .
Read books , papers and online courses ( but get the very best books in physical paper form ) .
Go on forums , but restrict yourself to asking only the very most advanced questions , and see the n00b abuse go down over time .
Do practice projects that are throwaway - and actually plan on throwing them away once the lessons have been learned.Deal with the math and science stuff without whining about how they have no relevence - it 's best to learn these out of context , when a real situation arives they will help ( but only if you already understand them ) .Deal with the project management angle .
Read Mythical Man Month .
Do n't transfer bricklaying project management methods to software , if you ever want to finish anything.I could go on , no doubt .
The main thing is , do n't whine about elitists - they spent valuable time on hard , boring theory .
Join them - then beat them : ) Good luck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like you, so I'm going to give you some genuine advice.
You might not enjoy it all though.Firstly, your comment unless you reinvent the wheel infinitely you are doomed is unfortunately the way of things in advanced tech like computer programming.
Everybody who can do it got there by re-inventing the wheel as you put it over and over again until they really "got" the techniques.
Only then could they begin to do the "value-added" new stuff that you want to do.You've already seen that graphic design etc are easier.
You've managed to learn them on the job which is great.
But actual programming, beyond textbook examples, needs more substantial training - this is why it pays more!Sometimes it can seem that young people seem to have an intrinisic talent.
But usually they simply did their learning while children.
Starting ages for good geeks are often 6 to 10 years old.
I didn't get my hands on a real computer until I was 12 - so I had to fill my time playing with 74-series and 4000-series digital ICs from 8 to 12.You've already proved you have a good brain and lots of determination, so here's what you have to do.
Put your current project on hold for 1 to 2 years (make sure everything is well ducumented, make lots of backup copies!
) and study computer science as though you were at university.
Make a syllabus for yourself so you can pace your work.
Read books, papers and online courses (but get the very best books in physical paper form).
Go on forums, but restrict yourself to asking only the very most advanced questions, and see the n00b abuse go down over time.
Do practice projects that are throwaway - and actually plan on throwing them away once the lessons have been learned.Deal with the math and science stuff without whining about how they have no relevence - it's best to learn these out of context, when a real situation arives they will help (but only if you already understand them).Deal with the project management angle.
Read Mythical Man Month.
Don't transfer bricklaying project management methods to software, if you ever want to finish anything.I could go on, no doubt.
The main thing is, don't whine about elitists - they spent valuable time on hard, boring theory.
Join them - then beat them :)Good luck.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785553</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785365</id>
	<title>So true</title>
	<author>oldhack</author>
	<datestamp>1255891740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm normal, but all the people in my group, batshit crazy - makes sysadmins look sane.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm normal , but all the people in my group , batshit crazy - makes sysadmins look sane .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm normal, but all the people in my group, batshit crazy - makes sysadmins look sane.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785273</id>
	<title>No, not that wierd</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255890660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
If you think software developers are weird, you're not getting out enough.
</p><p>
Commission salespeople and futures traders are much weirder.  Some CEOs are weird.  Low-end rock musicians are weird. (Above the "club band" level, some sanity tends to emerge, or at least the self-destructive ones are filtered out.) Strippers are weird.  Successful high-end call girls, though, tend to be chillingly sane when not in their work personas.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you think software developers are weird , you 're not getting out enough .
Commission salespeople and futures traders are much weirder .
Some CEOs are weird .
Low-end rock musicians are weird .
( Above the " club band " level , some sanity tends to emerge , or at least the self-destructive ones are filtered out .
) Strippers are weird .
Successful high-end call girls , though , tend to be chillingly sane when not in their work personas .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
If you think software developers are weird, you're not getting out enough.
Commission salespeople and futures traders are much weirder.
Some CEOs are weird.
Low-end rock musicians are weird.
(Above the "club band" level, some sanity tends to emerge, or at least the self-destructive ones are filtered out.
) Strippers are weird.
Successful high-end call girls, though, tend to be chillingly sane when not in their work personas.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29792007</id>
	<title>Re:No, but they're naturally narcissistic</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255954560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, the common things between geeks, at least older ones, aren't poor hygiene and inability to be social.</p><p>The single most common uniting factor is fairly different set of interests compared to most people.  Look at slashdot articles and their topics; how many of those interest "normal" people?</p><p>I don't want to talk about sports.  I'm just not interested in anything mainstream enough to have any common ground with most people.  I want to discuss things that interest me.  The people I have most common ground for this in are fellow geeks and musicians mostly.  That I have very little in common with a random person on the street doesn't make me narcissistic, it just makes me different.</p><p>Not everyone who shares interests and can be interesting company for me needs to be a geek.  My girlfriend definitely isn't, and her usual social circles are very normal people.  I can talk with her just fine, and she says that talking with me is an entirely different and more satisfying experience than talking with her "normal" friends.  But I simply can't hang around her friends for an extended period of time because we have so little in common; it usually ends up with me just being rather quiet.  I'm pretty sure I don't come off as a jerk, I'm normally polite around strangers (it's people who are close friends I like to argue with), just a tad aloof.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , the common things between geeks , at least older ones , are n't poor hygiene and inability to be social.The single most common uniting factor is fairly different set of interests compared to most people .
Look at slashdot articles and their topics ; how many of those interest " normal " people ? I do n't want to talk about sports .
I 'm just not interested in anything mainstream enough to have any common ground with most people .
I want to discuss things that interest me .
The people I have most common ground for this in are fellow geeks and musicians mostly .
That I have very little in common with a random person on the street does n't make me narcissistic , it just makes me different.Not everyone who shares interests and can be interesting company for me needs to be a geek .
My girlfriend definitely is n't , and her usual social circles are very normal people .
I can talk with her just fine , and she says that talking with me is an entirely different and more satisfying experience than talking with her " normal " friends .
But I simply ca n't hang around her friends for an extended period of time because we have so little in common ; it usually ends up with me just being rather quiet .
I 'm pretty sure I do n't come off as a jerk , I 'm normally polite around strangers ( it 's people who are close friends I like to argue with ) , just a tad aloof .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, the common things between geeks, at least older ones, aren't poor hygiene and inability to be social.The single most common uniting factor is fairly different set of interests compared to most people.
Look at slashdot articles and their topics; how many of those interest "normal" people?I don't want to talk about sports.
I'm just not interested in anything mainstream enough to have any common ground with most people.
I want to discuss things that interest me.
The people I have most common ground for this in are fellow geeks and musicians mostly.
That I have very little in common with a random person on the street doesn't make me narcissistic, it just makes me different.Not everyone who shares interests and can be interesting company for me needs to be a geek.
My girlfriend definitely isn't, and her usual social circles are very normal people.
I can talk with her just fine, and she says that talking with me is an entirely different and more satisfying experience than talking with her "normal" friends.
But I simply can't hang around her friends for an extended period of time because we have so little in common; it usually ends up with me just being rather quiet.
I'm pretty sure I don't come off as a jerk, I'm normally polite around strangers (it's people who are close friends I like to argue with), just a tad aloof.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785363</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29793181</id>
	<title>Re:No, not that wierd</title>
	<author>vegiVamp</author>
	<datestamp>1255962960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You know many successful high-end call girls personally ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>You know many successful high-end call girls personally ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know many successful high-end call girls personally ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785273</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788171</id>
	<title>Re:It's called autism</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1255870980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>On the other hand, there's a lot of socially-awkward people who like to pretend they're autistic, as it gives them an excuse to stop trying. You may actually be autistic, but you also have to realize that there are thousands of "self-diagnosed" autistic people in the field, the vast majority of whom are liars.</p><p>Now when I hear "autistic" I think "liar." Sorry.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>On the other hand , there 's a lot of socially-awkward people who like to pretend they 're autistic , as it gives them an excuse to stop trying .
You may actually be autistic , but you also have to realize that there are thousands of " self-diagnosed " autistic people in the field , the vast majority of whom are liars.Now when I hear " autistic " I think " liar .
" Sorry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On the other hand, there's a lot of socially-awkward people who like to pretend they're autistic, as it gives them an excuse to stop trying.
You may actually be autistic, but you also have to realize that there are thousands of "self-diagnosed" autistic people in the field, the vast majority of whom are liars.Now when I hear "autistic" I think "liar.
" Sorry.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785817</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785195</id>
	<title>That's not weird</title>
	<author>Sponge Bath</author>
	<datestamp>1255890000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr><i>...calling her ex-boyfriends to let them know she may have exposed them to an STD.</i></p><p>That's just nasty. That should really be part of an article titled: "Are Coworkers Sometimes Unpleasant?"<br>I put it in the same category as a nose picking coworker who occasionally digs into underwear to scratch their bung and then use a common keyboard. It's just nasty.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...calling her ex-boyfriends to let them know she may have exposed them to an STD.That 's just nasty .
That should really be part of an article titled : " Are Coworkers Sometimes Unpleasant ?
" I put it in the same category as a nose picking coworker who occasionally digs into underwear to scratch their bung and then use a common keyboard .
It 's just nasty .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...calling her ex-boyfriends to let them know she may have exposed them to an STD.That's just nasty.
That should really be part of an article titled: "Are Coworkers Sometimes Unpleasant?
"I put it in the same category as a nose picking coworker who occasionally digs into underwear to scratch their bung and then use a common keyboard.
It's just nasty.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785297</id>
	<title>Re:Talk about slow news day</title>
	<author>tonycheese</author>
	<datestamp>1255890960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While I do think this is a big part of the story - that people just think they themselves are weirder than other people, it would make sense that software developers are weirder than other professions. My impression of coders are that the people who get sucked into that field or that profession tend to dislike regular, non-internet social interaction than other people. Compound that with a profession that requires less social interaction than other professions and people will start acting how they want. I get the feeling that if you apply for a job in sales or human resources with most companies, they don't want to hear about the giant kit-kat bar you made last weekend.<br>That said, the three examples the article gave aren't very weird at all. The first person just seems to have a sense of humor, the second guy liked to talk, and the third person... well she was just stupid. There are a lot of stupid people in the world, in any profession.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While I do think this is a big part of the story - that people just think they themselves are weirder than other people , it would make sense that software developers are weirder than other professions .
My impression of coders are that the people who get sucked into that field or that profession tend to dislike regular , non-internet social interaction than other people .
Compound that with a profession that requires less social interaction than other professions and people will start acting how they want .
I get the feeling that if you apply for a job in sales or human resources with most companies , they do n't want to hear about the giant kit-kat bar you made last weekend.That said , the three examples the article gave are n't very weird at all .
The first person just seems to have a sense of humor , the second guy liked to talk , and the third person... well she was just stupid .
There are a lot of stupid people in the world , in any profession .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While I do think this is a big part of the story - that people just think they themselves are weirder than other people, it would make sense that software developers are weirder than other professions.
My impression of coders are that the people who get sucked into that field or that profession tend to dislike regular, non-internet social interaction than other people.
Compound that with a profession that requires less social interaction than other professions and people will start acting how they want.
I get the feeling that if you apply for a job in sales or human resources with most companies, they don't want to hear about the giant kit-kat bar you made last weekend.That said, the three examples the article gave aren't very weird at all.
The first person just seems to have a sense of humor, the second guy liked to talk, and the third person... well she was just stupid.
There are a lot of stupid people in the world, in any profession.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785157</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786685</id>
	<title>Wired?</title>
	<author>agrif</author>
	<datestamp>1255858560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For some reason, I read the headline as "Are Software Developers Naturally Wired?"</p><p>On an unrelated note, do you want to try some <a href="http://bit.ly/4ejewj" title="bit.ly" rel="nofollow">Snow Crash</a> [bit.ly]? Free sample!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For some reason , I read the headline as " Are Software Developers Naturally Wired ?
" On an unrelated note , do you want to try some Snow Crash [ bit.ly ] ?
Free sample !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For some reason, I read the headline as "Are Software Developers Naturally Wired?
"On an unrelated note, do you want to try some Snow Crash [bit.ly]?
Free sample!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785473</id>
	<title>Two different kinds of weird</title>
	<author>93 Escort Wagon</author>
	<datestamp>1255892580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Song lyric comment guy" sounds like the stereotypical no-social-skills IT guy - it sounds like the sort of thing a person would do to try to make themselves interesting to other people if that person didn't really understand basic human interaction.</p><p>"Inappropriate phone call girl" just sounds trailer-trashy - I (unfortunately) hear people on the train airing their dirty laundry in public all the time. I've also worked with people (not just IT people) who had phone issues like this. Some people just don't seem to get the idea that some things  are better kept private. It doesn't seem to be a "tech thing" - it's not really similar to "song lyric comment guy" IMO.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Song lyric comment guy " sounds like the stereotypical no-social-skills IT guy - it sounds like the sort of thing a person would do to try to make themselves interesting to other people if that person did n't really understand basic human interaction .
" Inappropriate phone call girl " just sounds trailer-trashy - I ( unfortunately ) hear people on the train airing their dirty laundry in public all the time .
I 've also worked with people ( not just IT people ) who had phone issues like this .
Some people just do n't seem to get the idea that some things are better kept private .
It does n't seem to be a " tech thing " - it 's not really similar to " song lyric comment guy " IMO .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Song lyric comment guy" sounds like the stereotypical no-social-skills IT guy - it sounds like the sort of thing a person would do to try to make themselves interesting to other people if that person didn't really understand basic human interaction.
"Inappropriate phone call girl" just sounds trailer-trashy - I (unfortunately) hear people on the train airing their dirty laundry in public all the time.
I've also worked with people (not just IT people) who had phone issues like this.
Some people just don't seem to get the idea that some things  are better kept private.
It doesn't seem to be a "tech thing" - it's not really similar to "song lyric comment guy" IMO.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786955</id>
	<title>Men are Genetic Experiments.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255860480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The 24th chromosome of the human genome has XX for the female and XY for the male.  Humans ingest all kinds of toxins and poisons from plants and animals; some affect psychological developement such as soy and other affect organ developement like alcohol or tobacco.</p><p>The Y chromosome is more prone to deformation and defect from toxins interfering with it; as a result, male intelligence has a greater spread on an IQ chart.  The X chromosome on the other hand, is far more stable and less affected by things such as foreign substances, thus it has a far denser spread.  Females are less prone to genetic mutation than men, and their bodies are also designed to get rid of toxic substances such as lead, arsenic, and toxins through lactation and menstruation which is part of the reason why they survive longer.  Men on the other hand can build these things up; this deforms their genetic structure more and as they age their sperm introduce more problems into their children.  They're also the ones who are in charge of figuring out which man is suitable for mating and it just so happens that there's a fine balance to this.</p><p>What does this mean?  This means if you're a man of average intelligence you're going to look good and have fewer defects.  If you're a man of very high intelligence you're very likely to have one or more defects such as aspengers, schitzophrenia, or bodily deformation.  It also means if you're of extremly low intelligence you're more likely to have the same defects.  There's a lot more spread in men than there are in women.</p><p>Women, by contrast, even if highly intelligent or downright retarded are more likely to be good looking.</p><p>It also means you're more likely to have a lifetime of dealing with general fuckery as the men of average intelligence need to position themselves as alpha males so they don't feel completly useless.  If you happen to be at the height of the IQ spectrum AND possess few/no defects, it means men are going to tear you down and undermine you in EVERY effort and may even kill you outright.  This is why some of the best, most intelligent people are bums; nobody wants them working for them because they make them look bad.  I watch others talk to each other and do nothing useful for 3-4 hours of their day picking and packing boxes while I work my ass off fixing electronics.  Part of the reason I still have my job is because I ensure my employer thinks I'm unstable and will come in with a gun if I'm fired.  Of course, one doesn't have to say as such, they just have to talk about inevitable rioting and show them pictures of you in bodyarmor and firearms for them to think bad things.</p><p>Another interesting thing about women is they have more senses then men; from quadchromatic vision to better sense of smell, touch, and taste.  Part of this is men are there to hunt and kill so their thought process is visual spacial and contextual whereas women are more gatherers and nurterers, thus their senses are more based in diagnostics and athletics.  Some monkies are colorblind as are some men; imagine trying to pick tomato's and not knowing when they are ripe.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The 24th chromosome of the human genome has XX for the female and XY for the male .
Humans ingest all kinds of toxins and poisons from plants and animals ; some affect psychological developement such as soy and other affect organ developement like alcohol or tobacco.The Y chromosome is more prone to deformation and defect from toxins interfering with it ; as a result , male intelligence has a greater spread on an IQ chart .
The X chromosome on the other hand , is far more stable and less affected by things such as foreign substances , thus it has a far denser spread .
Females are less prone to genetic mutation than men , and their bodies are also designed to get rid of toxic substances such as lead , arsenic , and toxins through lactation and menstruation which is part of the reason why they survive longer .
Men on the other hand can build these things up ; this deforms their genetic structure more and as they age their sperm introduce more problems into their children .
They 're also the ones who are in charge of figuring out which man is suitable for mating and it just so happens that there 's a fine balance to this.What does this mean ?
This means if you 're a man of average intelligence you 're going to look good and have fewer defects .
If you 're a man of very high intelligence you 're very likely to have one or more defects such as aspengers , schitzophrenia , or bodily deformation .
It also means if you 're of extremly low intelligence you 're more likely to have the same defects .
There 's a lot more spread in men than there are in women.Women , by contrast , even if highly intelligent or downright retarded are more likely to be good looking.It also means you 're more likely to have a lifetime of dealing with general fuckery as the men of average intelligence need to position themselves as alpha males so they do n't feel completly useless .
If you happen to be at the height of the IQ spectrum AND possess few/no defects , it means men are going to tear you down and undermine you in EVERY effort and may even kill you outright .
This is why some of the best , most intelligent people are bums ; nobody wants them working for them because they make them look bad .
I watch others talk to each other and do nothing useful for 3-4 hours of their day picking and packing boxes while I work my ass off fixing electronics .
Part of the reason I still have my job is because I ensure my employer thinks I 'm unstable and will come in with a gun if I 'm fired .
Of course , one does n't have to say as such , they just have to talk about inevitable rioting and show them pictures of you in bodyarmor and firearms for them to think bad things.Another interesting thing about women is they have more senses then men ; from quadchromatic vision to better sense of smell , touch , and taste .
Part of this is men are there to hunt and kill so their thought process is visual spacial and contextual whereas women are more gatherers and nurterers , thus their senses are more based in diagnostics and athletics .
Some monkies are colorblind as are some men ; imagine trying to pick tomato 's and not knowing when they are ripe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The 24th chromosome of the human genome has XX for the female and XY for the male.
Humans ingest all kinds of toxins and poisons from plants and animals; some affect psychological developement such as soy and other affect organ developement like alcohol or tobacco.The Y chromosome is more prone to deformation and defect from toxins interfering with it; as a result, male intelligence has a greater spread on an IQ chart.
The X chromosome on the other hand, is far more stable and less affected by things such as foreign substances, thus it has a far denser spread.
Females are less prone to genetic mutation than men, and their bodies are also designed to get rid of toxic substances such as lead, arsenic, and toxins through lactation and menstruation which is part of the reason why they survive longer.
Men on the other hand can build these things up; this deforms their genetic structure more and as they age their sperm introduce more problems into their children.
They're also the ones who are in charge of figuring out which man is suitable for mating and it just so happens that there's a fine balance to this.What does this mean?
This means if you're a man of average intelligence you're going to look good and have fewer defects.
If you're a man of very high intelligence you're very likely to have one or more defects such as aspengers, schitzophrenia, or bodily deformation.
It also means if you're of extremly low intelligence you're more likely to have the same defects.
There's a lot more spread in men than there are in women.Women, by contrast, even if highly intelligent or downright retarded are more likely to be good looking.It also means you're more likely to have a lifetime of dealing with general fuckery as the men of average intelligence need to position themselves as alpha males so they don't feel completly useless.
If you happen to be at the height of the IQ spectrum AND possess few/no defects, it means men are going to tear you down and undermine you in EVERY effort and may even kill you outright.
This is why some of the best, most intelligent people are bums; nobody wants them working for them because they make them look bad.
I watch others talk to each other and do nothing useful for 3-4 hours of their day picking and packing boxes while I work my ass off fixing electronics.
Part of the reason I still have my job is because I ensure my employer thinks I'm unstable and will come in with a gun if I'm fired.
Of course, one doesn't have to say as such, they just have to talk about inevitable rioting and show them pictures of you in bodyarmor and firearms for them to think bad things.Another interesting thing about women is they have more senses then men; from quadchromatic vision to better sense of smell, touch, and taste.
Part of this is men are there to hunt and kill so their thought process is visual spacial and contextual whereas women are more gatherers and nurterers, thus their senses are more based in diagnostics and athletics.
Some monkies are colorblind as are some men; imagine trying to pick tomato's and not knowing when they are ripe.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787503</id>
	<title>Something else I realised</title>
	<author>petrus4</author>
	<datestamp>1255864500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Programmers are actually becoming very normal and conventional.</p><p>I like using awk and shell for doing a lot of different things, and I also use ed at times as well.  (Although I'd never use it full time, and it sucks for starting new files in particular)</p><p>I also prefer using flat text to XML, and enormously value late 70s to late 80s vintage, UNIX thinking in general.</p><p>I get derided by other programmers who insist on using languages and methods which to me, are horrible.  C++ is a great example; I can find any number of rants written (some of them by fairly high profile people) on how thoroughly evil and what a mess generally it is, and yet anyone I talk to on forums insist that it is what all the cool kids use, and there must be something wrong with me if I don't like it.</p><p>XML, same.  I've never seen a single application for XML, where it actually justifiably needed to be used.  Do you people honestly find parsing it easier than you would plain text?  Or let me guess, you've fallen for the suit-spawned "richness," argument.  WTF does richness mean, anywayz?  It sounds like a subjective attempt to justify complexity, to me.</p><p>Another thing I don't get; why do flat text databases get crapped on so much?  Sure, I know SQL can be nice, especially when you need things like hard concurrency locking, arithmetic functions and such, but I find delimited flatfiles to be an absolute joy to work with, with awk.  Writing awk parsers for my own flatfile formats is actually fun.  Maybe I'm just diseased in the head.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>(Anonymous Cowards, I have left you the perfect opening with that last sentence.  I expect you to make abundant use of it.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;))</p><p>There needs to be a renaissance of real programming, according to the older UNIX philosophy.  We need a scenario again where people appreciate using awk, and systems programming, and actually writing your own code.  The reason why I often disagree with the concept of code re-use, is because with the kids these days, generally speaking it was written badly to begin with.  So someone writes crap initially, and then we're all expected to re-use it, rather than rewriting it like we should.</p><p>That was the definition of true weirdness, though, and we're losing it.  The genuine UNIX way is dying.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Programmers are actually becoming very normal and conventional.I like using awk and shell for doing a lot of different things , and I also use ed at times as well .
( Although I 'd never use it full time , and it sucks for starting new files in particular ) I also prefer using flat text to XML , and enormously value late 70s to late 80s vintage , UNIX thinking in general.I get derided by other programmers who insist on using languages and methods which to me , are horrible .
C + + is a great example ; I can find any number of rants written ( some of them by fairly high profile people ) on how thoroughly evil and what a mess generally it is , and yet anyone I talk to on forums insist that it is what all the cool kids use , and there must be something wrong with me if I do n't like it.XML , same .
I 've never seen a single application for XML , where it actually justifiably needed to be used .
Do you people honestly find parsing it easier than you would plain text ?
Or let me guess , you 've fallen for the suit-spawned " richness , " argument .
WTF does richness mean , anywayz ?
It sounds like a subjective attempt to justify complexity , to me.Another thing I do n't get ; why do flat text databases get crapped on so much ?
Sure , I know SQL can be nice , especially when you need things like hard concurrency locking , arithmetic functions and such , but I find delimited flatfiles to be an absolute joy to work with , with awk .
Writing awk parsers for my own flatfile formats is actually fun .
Maybe I 'm just diseased in the head .
; ) ( Anonymous Cowards , I have left you the perfect opening with that last sentence .
I expect you to make abundant use of it .
; ) ) There needs to be a renaissance of real programming , according to the older UNIX philosophy .
We need a scenario again where people appreciate using awk , and systems programming , and actually writing your own code .
The reason why I often disagree with the concept of code re-use , is because with the kids these days , generally speaking it was written badly to begin with .
So someone writes crap initially , and then we 're all expected to re-use it , rather than rewriting it like we should.That was the definition of true weirdness , though , and we 're losing it .
The genuine UNIX way is dying .
: (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Programmers are actually becoming very normal and conventional.I like using awk and shell for doing a lot of different things, and I also use ed at times as well.
(Although I'd never use it full time, and it sucks for starting new files in particular)I also prefer using flat text to XML, and enormously value late 70s to late 80s vintage, UNIX thinking in general.I get derided by other programmers who insist on using languages and methods which to me, are horrible.
C++ is a great example; I can find any number of rants written (some of them by fairly high profile people) on how thoroughly evil and what a mess generally it is, and yet anyone I talk to on forums insist that it is what all the cool kids use, and there must be something wrong with me if I don't like it.XML, same.
I've never seen a single application for XML, where it actually justifiably needed to be used.
Do you people honestly find parsing it easier than you would plain text?
Or let me guess, you've fallen for the suit-spawned "richness," argument.
WTF does richness mean, anywayz?
It sounds like a subjective attempt to justify complexity, to me.Another thing I don't get; why do flat text databases get crapped on so much?
Sure, I know SQL can be nice, especially when you need things like hard concurrency locking, arithmetic functions and such, but I find delimited flatfiles to be an absolute joy to work with, with awk.
Writing awk parsers for my own flatfile formats is actually fun.
Maybe I'm just diseased in the head.
;)(Anonymous Cowards, I have left you the perfect opening with that last sentence.
I expect you to make abundant use of it.
;))There needs to be a renaissance of real programming, according to the older UNIX philosophy.
We need a scenario again where people appreciate using awk, and systems programming, and actually writing your own code.
The reason why I often disagree with the concept of code re-use, is because with the kids these days, generally speaking it was written badly to begin with.
So someone writes crap initially, and then we're all expected to re-use it, rather than rewriting it like we should.That was the definition of true weirdness, though, and we're losing it.
The genuine UNIX way is dying.
:(</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29794697</id>
	<title>Re:Yes. Computers are unnatural.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255969620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People are weird. I try to think of people more like computers to understand them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People are weird .
I try to think of people more like computers to understand them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People are weird.
I try to think of people more like computers to understand them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785399</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29791815</id>
	<title>Re:No, there are not</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1255952520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's an easy generalisation to make, but a lot of accountants do it because it pays well and gives them the time and money to pursue interesting (and expensive) hobbies.  It's also worth noting that accountancy is not so distantly related to programming.  For any nontrivial set of accounts, particularly anything connected to the tax system, you have a complex optimisation problem where applying subtly different algorithms can make significant differences.  There isn't much difference between tweaking an algorithm so that the program runs faster, or tweaking a balance sheet so that the net profit is larger.  And, just as most programmers work on dull in-house business software, most accountants work on dull corporate accounts.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's an easy generalisation to make , but a lot of accountants do it because it pays well and gives them the time and money to pursue interesting ( and expensive ) hobbies .
It 's also worth noting that accountancy is not so distantly related to programming .
For any nontrivial set of accounts , particularly anything connected to the tax system , you have a complex optimisation problem where applying subtly different algorithms can make significant differences .
There is n't much difference between tweaking an algorithm so that the program runs faster , or tweaking a balance sheet so that the net profit is larger .
And , just as most programmers work on dull in-house business software , most accountants work on dull corporate accounts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's an easy generalisation to make, but a lot of accountants do it because it pays well and gives them the time and money to pursue interesting (and expensive) hobbies.
It's also worth noting that accountancy is not so distantly related to programming.
For any nontrivial set of accounts, particularly anything connected to the tax system, you have a complex optimisation problem where applying subtly different algorithms can make significant differences.
There isn't much difference between tweaking an algorithm so that the program runs faster, or tweaking a balance sheet so that the net profit is larger.
And, just as most programmers work on dull in-house business software, most accountants work on dull corporate accounts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787439</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29792529</id>
	<title>Its the increased brain activity and inspiration</title>
	<author>unity100</author>
	<datestamp>1255959180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>with increased brain activity and inspiration your inner world becomes more active. and it naturally reflects to outside. and there are a lot of musings coming from the inspiration.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>with increased brain activity and inspiration your inner world becomes more active .
and it naturally reflects to outside .
and there are a lot of musings coming from the inspiration .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>with increased brain activity and inspiration your inner world becomes more active.
and it naturally reflects to outside.
and there are a lot of musings coming from the inspiration.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29800133</id>
	<title>Re:That's not weird</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255946880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's worse is getting a call from said girl at work...really hard to remain composed and professional under those circumstances.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's worse is getting a call from said girl at work...really hard to remain composed and professional under those circumstances .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's worse is getting a call from said girl at work...really hard to remain composed and professional under those circumstances.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785195</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787981</id>
	<title>Re:Yes. Computers are unnatural.</title>
	<author>Monsuco</author>
	<datestamp>1255868940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's well known that people anthropomorphize computers in order to deal with them in our own frame of reference,</p> </div><p><div class="quote"><p>It'll only get worse as technology progresses.</p></div><p>In WWII pilots would often nickname their aircraft and paint pictures on them (the infamous "nose art"). I wonder if someday companies will tolerate us doing more to customize our computers than just changing the background. Probably not, but it would be cool.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's well known that people anthropomorphize computers in order to deal with them in our own frame of reference , It 'll only get worse as technology progresses.In WWII pilots would often nickname their aircraft and paint pictures on them ( the infamous " nose art " ) .
I wonder if someday companies will tolerate us doing more to customize our computers than just changing the background .
Probably not , but it would be cool .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's well known that people anthropomorphize computers in order to deal with them in our own frame of reference, It'll only get worse as technology progresses.In WWII pilots would often nickname their aircraft and paint pictures on them (the infamous "nose art").
I wonder if someday companies will tolerate us doing more to customize our computers than just changing the background.
Probably not, but it would be cool.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785399</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29801057</id>
	<title>Re:Weird, yes. Naturally, no.</title>
	<author>Saxophonist</author>
	<datestamp>1255951320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Understand this about autism/Aspergers and pretty much any state considered disordered as compared to the general population: meeting a diagnostic criteria includes having some persistent behavioral anomalies. Having some of the same persistent behavioral anomalies does not qualify one for the diagnosis.</p></div><p>True.  We have the DSM-IV for a reason, and too often, it seems that people do not understand that there are hard criteria for making a diagnosis of any mental disorder.  But:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Very few of any who actually earn the diagnosis are capable of anything productive.</p></div><p>Um... how so?  I don't know how many people are diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome or high-functioning autism, but I don't know of a reason that such people cannot be gainfully and meaningfully employed.  (My bias here is that I have been diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome.  I doubt most people around me know, even though it isn't a gigantic secret.)  Further, I see nothing in the DSM-IV criteria for Asperger's Syndrome that would automatically preclude productivity.  Of course, it is entirely possible that the criteria themselves are not a satisfactory definition of the disorder, but at least in my case, I have had little trouble finding work in one of my two favored career lines at any given time.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>And if one were to go with the behavioral criteria, the vast majority would earn themselves a far less appealing diagnosis or three, and which point they'd rebel against the process and disclaim any association with any disorder.</p></div><p>Please substantiate.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Understand this about autism/Aspergers and pretty much any state considered disordered as compared to the general population : meeting a diagnostic criteria includes having some persistent behavioral anomalies .
Having some of the same persistent behavioral anomalies does not qualify one for the diagnosis.True .
We have the DSM-IV for a reason , and too often , it seems that people do not understand that there are hard criteria for making a diagnosis of any mental disorder .
But : Very few of any who actually earn the diagnosis are capable of anything productive.Um... how so ?
I do n't know how many people are diagnosed with Asperger 's Syndrome or high-functioning autism , but I do n't know of a reason that such people can not be gainfully and meaningfully employed .
( My bias here is that I have been diagnosed with Asperger 's Syndrome .
I doubt most people around me know , even though it is n't a gigantic secret .
) Further , I see nothing in the DSM-IV criteria for Asperger 's Syndrome that would automatically preclude productivity .
Of course , it is entirely possible that the criteria themselves are not a satisfactory definition of the disorder , but at least in my case , I have had little trouble finding work in one of my two favored career lines at any given time.And if one were to go with the behavioral criteria , the vast majority would earn themselves a far less appealing diagnosis or three , and which point they 'd rebel against the process and disclaim any association with any disorder.Please substantiate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Understand this about autism/Aspergers and pretty much any state considered disordered as compared to the general population: meeting a diagnostic criteria includes having some persistent behavioral anomalies.
Having some of the same persistent behavioral anomalies does not qualify one for the diagnosis.True.
We have the DSM-IV for a reason, and too often, it seems that people do not understand that there are hard criteria for making a diagnosis of any mental disorder.
But:Very few of any who actually earn the diagnosis are capable of anything productive.Um... how so?
I don't know how many people are diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome or high-functioning autism, but I don't know of a reason that such people cannot be gainfully and meaningfully employed.
(My bias here is that I have been diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome.
I doubt most people around me know, even though it isn't a gigantic secret.
)  Further, I see nothing in the DSM-IV criteria for Asperger's Syndrome that would automatically preclude productivity.
Of course, it is entirely possible that the criteria themselves are not a satisfactory definition of the disorder, but at least in my case, I have had little trouble finding work in one of my two favored career lines at any given time.And if one were to go with the behavioral criteria, the vast majority would earn themselves a far less appealing diagnosis or three, and which point they'd rebel against the process and disclaim any association with any disorder.Please substantiate.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787859</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29804941</id>
	<title>Re:Talk about slow news day</title>
	<author>foqn1bo</author>
	<datestamp>1256071560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You are you, and unimaginative is unimaginative.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You are you , and unimaginative is unimaginative .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are you, and unimaginative is unimaginative.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787109</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29793655</id>
	<title>Re:Talk about slow news day</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255965120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>He was just peppering the code with random lyrics.</i></p><p>I wouldn't work for anyone that allowed that to take place. Code is often hard enough to follow as it is, let alone if some moron decides he needs to spray it with random distracting comments. If he can't code without those comments, then good riddance if he decides to leave.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He was just peppering the code with random lyrics.I would n't work for anyone that allowed that to take place .
Code is often hard enough to follow as it is , let alone if some moron decides he needs to spray it with random distracting comments .
If he ca n't code without those comments , then good riddance if he decides to leave .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He was just peppering the code with random lyrics.I wouldn't work for anyone that allowed that to take place.
Code is often hard enough to follow as it is, let alone if some moron decides he needs to spray it with random distracting comments.
If he can't code without those comments, then good riddance if he decides to leave.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785503</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29796925</id>
	<title>Well.....</title>
	<author>AthleteMusicianNerd</author>
	<datestamp>1255978500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So corporate tools in sales who ask the same dumb questions over and over are normal?

The ditsy hot front desk girl is normal?

The talking head reporter who asks dumb questions like "Is this a jobless recovery?" is normal?

The basketball player who answers a reporter's question "You gotta go out and give 110\%" (mumbled) no matter what the question is normal?

The douchebag who hangs out at the night club with a tight button up shirt is normal?

Ok, this is getting old...</htmltext>
<tokenext>So corporate tools in sales who ask the same dumb questions over and over are normal ?
The ditsy hot front desk girl is normal ?
The talking head reporter who asks dumb questions like " Is this a jobless recovery ?
" is normal ?
The basketball player who answers a reporter 's question " You got ta go out and give 110 \ % " ( mumbled ) no matter what the question is normal ?
The douchebag who hangs out at the night club with a tight button up shirt is normal ?
Ok , this is getting old.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So corporate tools in sales who ask the same dumb questions over and over are normal?
The ditsy hot front desk girl is normal?
The talking head reporter who asks dumb questions like "Is this a jobless recovery?
" is normal?
The basketball player who answers a reporter's question "You gotta go out and give 110\%" (mumbled) no matter what the question is normal?
The douchebag who hangs out at the night club with a tight button up shirt is normal?
Ok, this is getting old...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785917</id>
	<title>Re:No, not that wierd</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255896000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Please, do elaborate about your knowledge of call girls.</p><p>What are call girls?  Actually, what are girls?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Please , do elaborate about your knowledge of call girls.What are call girls ?
Actually , what are girls ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please, do elaborate about your knowledge of call girls.What are call girls?
Actually, what are girls?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785273</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785169</id>
	<title>Oblig. Monkeybagel</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255889880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.monkeybagel.com/sysadmin.html" title="monkeybagel.com" rel="nofollow">Origins of Sysadmins</a> [monkeybagel.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Origins of Sysadmins [ monkeybagel.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Origins of Sysadmins [monkeybagel.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786815</id>
	<title>Re:It's called autism</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255859460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I call BS.</p><p>Many "hackish types" might be on the spectrum, but don't say most.</p><p>We are naturally drawn to areas such as computing.<br>Communication over the internet concentrates on the meaning of your words not on external behavior (body language), so we are not disadvantaged like we are in face to face communication. Working with code also requires extensive attention to detail and patience (usually we have an excess of both).</p><p>You say you have had one "serious" relationship with a woman but it caused you pain to see her in tears, so you let her go. While I do sympathize with what you must have gone through, judging all women as incapable of dealing with someone with aspergers is just wrong.</p><p>"Women just aren't strong enough to be able to handle us."<br>"In that film 'Adam,' the guy who tried to tell the woman not to get into a relationship with Adam was right."<br>"If you're an autistic person, you have a moral responsibility to stay away from neurotypicals, particularly from women. They need to be protected from us."</p><p>What a bunch of BS.<br>This is what makes me think you're more of an "NT Troll" rather than someone with AS.</p><p>Very few NT women will accept an aspie the way they are, for them relationships with NT men are much easier.<br>In the movie "Adam", Adam made significant progress and then "HE" decided to leave for CA by himself. In an "AS" and "NT" relationship, both people must find common ground. The person with AS must learn that the "NT" will need to be hugged, talked to, etc. and learn when the right time to do so(and not to do so) is. The NT must learn to tolerate and understand the quirks and behaviors that the aspie has (or doesn't have).</p><p>They must meet half-way.</p><p>If your ex could not accept that being in a relationship with you requires an understanding of your condition then the relationship was over before it began. Likewise, if you did not put in an effort to understand her and "LEARN" those behaviors that other men are born with then the relationship was over. But don't make it seem like such a relationship is impossible just because of your limited experience.</p><p>BTW This post was proofread by my NT wife.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I call BS.Many " hackish types " might be on the spectrum , but do n't say most.We are naturally drawn to areas such as computing.Communication over the internet concentrates on the meaning of your words not on external behavior ( body language ) , so we are not disadvantaged like we are in face to face communication .
Working with code also requires extensive attention to detail and patience ( usually we have an excess of both ) .You say you have had one " serious " relationship with a woman but it caused you pain to see her in tears , so you let her go .
While I do sympathize with what you must have gone through , judging all women as incapable of dealing with someone with aspergers is just wrong .
" Women just are n't strong enough to be able to handle us .
" " In that film 'Adam, ' the guy who tried to tell the woman not to get into a relationship with Adam was right .
" " If you 're an autistic person , you have a moral responsibility to stay away from neurotypicals , particularly from women .
They need to be protected from us .
" What a bunch of BS.This is what makes me think you 're more of an " NT Troll " rather than someone with AS.Very few NT women will accept an aspie the way they are , for them relationships with NT men are much easier.In the movie " Adam " , Adam made significant progress and then " HE " decided to leave for CA by himself .
In an " AS " and " NT " relationship , both people must find common ground .
The person with AS must learn that the " NT " will need to be hugged , talked to , etc .
and learn when the right time to do so ( and not to do so ) is .
The NT must learn to tolerate and understand the quirks and behaviors that the aspie has ( or does n't have ) .They must meet half-way.If your ex could not accept that being in a relationship with you requires an understanding of your condition then the relationship was over before it began .
Likewise , if you did not put in an effort to understand her and " LEARN " those behaviors that other men are born with then the relationship was over .
But do n't make it seem like such a relationship is impossible just because of your limited experience.BTW This post was proofread by my NT wife .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I call BS.Many "hackish types" might be on the spectrum, but don't say most.We are naturally drawn to areas such as computing.Communication over the internet concentrates on the meaning of your words not on external behavior (body language), so we are not disadvantaged like we are in face to face communication.
Working with code also requires extensive attention to detail and patience (usually we have an excess of both).You say you have had one "serious" relationship with a woman but it caused you pain to see her in tears, so you let her go.
While I do sympathize with what you must have gone through, judging all women as incapable of dealing with someone with aspergers is just wrong.
"Women just aren't strong enough to be able to handle us.
""In that film 'Adam,' the guy who tried to tell the woman not to get into a relationship with Adam was right.
""If you're an autistic person, you have a moral responsibility to stay away from neurotypicals, particularly from women.
They need to be protected from us.
"What a bunch of BS.This is what makes me think you're more of an "NT Troll" rather than someone with AS.Very few NT women will accept an aspie the way they are, for them relationships with NT men are much easier.In the movie "Adam", Adam made significant progress and then "HE" decided to leave for CA by himself.
In an "AS" and "NT" relationship, both people must find common ground.
The person with AS must learn that the "NT" will need to be hugged, talked to, etc.
and learn when the right time to do so(and not to do so) is.
The NT must learn to tolerate and understand the quirks and behaviors that the aspie has (or doesn't have).They must meet half-way.If your ex could not accept that being in a relationship with you requires an understanding of your condition then the relationship was over before it began.
Likewise, if you did not put in an effort to understand her and "LEARN" those behaviors that other men are born with then the relationship was over.
But don't make it seem like such a relationship is impossible just because of your limited experience.BTW This post was proofread by my NT wife.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785817</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29795163</id>
	<title>Re:No, not that wierd</title>
	<author>sorak</author>
	<datestamp>1255971720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you think software developers are weird, you're not getting out enough.</p><p>Commission salespeople and futures traders are much weirder.  Some CEOs are weird.  Low-end rock musicians are weird. (Above the "club band" level, some sanity tends to emerge, or at least the self-destructive ones are filtered out.) Strippers are weird.  Successful high-end call girls, though, tend to be chillingly sane when not in their work personas.</p></div><p>You have obviously had a more interesting life than I have.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you think software developers are weird , you 're not getting out enough.Commission salespeople and futures traders are much weirder .
Some CEOs are weird .
Low-end rock musicians are weird .
( Above the " club band " level , some sanity tends to emerge , or at least the self-destructive ones are filtered out .
) Strippers are weird .
Successful high-end call girls , though , tend to be chillingly sane when not in their work personas.You have obviously had a more interesting life than I have .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you think software developers are weird, you're not getting out enough.Commission salespeople and futures traders are much weirder.
Some CEOs are weird.
Low-end rock musicians are weird.
(Above the "club band" level, some sanity tends to emerge, or at least the self-destructive ones are filtered out.
) Strippers are weird.
Successful high-end call girls, though, tend to be chillingly sane when not in their work personas.You have obviously had a more interesting life than I have.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785273</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786303</id>
	<title>I disagree.</title>
	<author>OrangeTide</author>
	<datestamp>1255899060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I strongly believe that I am normal. It's everyone else that is weird.</p><p>So what if I think news about particle physics, astrophysics and space exploration is conversation-worthy. It beats talking about American Idol!</p><p>(for the record I'm a software developer because my family is weird enough to have bought a home computer in the 80s, then put me in front of it for many hours.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I strongly believe that I am normal .
It 's everyone else that is weird.So what if I think news about particle physics , astrophysics and space exploration is conversation-worthy .
It beats talking about American Idol !
( for the record I 'm a software developer because my family is weird enough to have bought a home computer in the 80s , then put me in front of it for many hours .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I strongly believe that I am normal.
It's everyone else that is weird.So what if I think news about particle physics, astrophysics and space exploration is conversation-worthy.
It beats talking about American Idol!
(for the record I'm a software developer because my family is weird enough to have bought a home computer in the 80s, then put me in front of it for many hours.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786211</id>
	<title>Ok.</title>
	<author>wonderboss</author>
	<datestamp>1255898100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Successful high-end call girls, though, tend to be chillingly sane when not in their work personas."</p><p>

Please explain how you know this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Successful high-end call girls , though , tend to be chillingly sane when not in their work personas .
" Please explain how you know this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Successful high-end call girls, though, tend to be chillingly sane when not in their work personas.
"

Please explain how you know this.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785273</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787637</id>
	<title>The only normal people...</title>
	<author>Organic Brain Damage</author>
	<datestamp>1255865580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...are the ones you don't know well enough.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...are the ones you do n't know well enough .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...are the ones you don't know well enough.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785763</id>
	<title>Nope!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255894920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In my limited experience of Software Development (I wrote my first program in 1972 on an ICL 1901A in Fortran using Punched Cards), no they are not weird.<br>Since thme I have written everything from device controller microcode to O/S Device Drivers(VMS &amp; Unix) to financial applications.</p><p>So from my experience,</p><p>The BEST Programmers are those who can say NO. No and Thrice No for function creep and ill thoughout changes to the spec.</p><p>The WORST ones are those who say 'No problem' without thinking through the request first (yes nerds I mean you)</p><p>The BEST programmers are those who can produce a project that can run for more than a year without any bugs! Yep I know this might be an issue for some. Yes I mean you! Error Handling? Yes that too. 'Unexpected Error' is not an acceptable output when you app goest tits up. Nor is a BOSD!</p><p>Properly designed &amp; coded software requres disciplien and createive thinking. In too many of my colleagues over the years, the have one or the other but never both.</p><p>Oh, I'm left handed and have run my own Software Company for the last 10 years with a turnover in excess of $400K in the last year and I still code stuff.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In my limited experience of Software Development ( I wrote my first program in 1972 on an ICL 1901A in Fortran using Punched Cards ) , no they are not weird.Since thme I have written everything from device controller microcode to O/S Device Drivers ( VMS &amp; Unix ) to financial applications.So from my experience,The BEST Programmers are those who can say NO .
No and Thrice No for function creep and ill thoughout changes to the spec.The WORST ones are those who say 'No problem ' without thinking through the request first ( yes nerds I mean you ) The BEST programmers are those who can produce a project that can run for more than a year without any bugs !
Yep I know this might be an issue for some .
Yes I mean you !
Error Handling ?
Yes that too .
'Unexpected Error ' is not an acceptable output when you app goest tits up .
Nor is a BOSD ! Properly designed &amp; coded software requres disciplien and createive thinking .
In too many of my colleagues over the years , the have one or the other but never both.Oh , I 'm left handed and have run my own Software Company for the last 10 years with a turnover in excess of $ 400K in the last year and I still code stuff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my limited experience of Software Development (I wrote my first program in 1972 on an ICL 1901A in Fortran using Punched Cards), no they are not weird.Since thme I have written everything from device controller microcode to O/S Device Drivers(VMS &amp; Unix) to financial applications.So from my experience,The BEST Programmers are those who can say NO.
No and Thrice No for function creep and ill thoughout changes to the spec.The WORST ones are those who say 'No problem' without thinking through the request first (yes nerds I mean you)The BEST programmers are those who can produce a project that can run for more than a year without any bugs!
Yep I know this might be an issue for some.
Yes I mean you!
Error Handling?
Yes that too.
'Unexpected Error' is not an acceptable output when you app goest tits up.
Nor is a BOSD!Properly designed &amp; coded software requres disciplien and createive thinking.
In too many of my colleagues over the years, the have one or the other but never both.Oh, I'm left handed and have run my own Software Company for the last 10 years with a turnover in excess of $400K in the last year and I still code stuff.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785431</id>
	<title>Re:Asperger's syndrome.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255892160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>hehe, Exhibit 10243597 above.</htmltext>
<tokenext>hehe , Exhibit 10243597 above .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>hehe, Exhibit 10243597 above.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785143</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785279</id>
	<title>Re:Asperger's syndrome.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255890660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I find the best programmers are the ones with the maturity to complete a task when they said they would. Who can perform an exhaustive session of testing without complaining (even though it's boring, but necessary work). Who will produce the required documentation to a high standard and will play nice with the other members of the team they are in.
<p>
In that respect, neither handedness nor syndromes seems to have any relevance.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I find the best programmers are the ones with the maturity to complete a task when they said they would .
Who can perform an exhaustive session of testing without complaining ( even though it 's boring , but necessary work ) .
Who will produce the required documentation to a high standard and will play nice with the other members of the team they are in .
In that respect , neither handedness nor syndromes seems to have any relevance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find the best programmers are the ones with the maturity to complete a task when they said they would.
Who can perform an exhaustive session of testing without complaining (even though it's boring, but necessary work).
Who will produce the required documentation to a high standard and will play nice with the other members of the team they are in.
In that respect, neither handedness nor syndromes seems to have any relevance.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785143</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786245</id>
	<title>Experts everywhere are bound to be weird...</title>
	<author>evilviper</author>
	<datestamp>1255898460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are "weird" if some narrow pursuit makes up the majority of your life.  Be it programming, stamp collecting, keeping up with fashion, or memorizing baseball statistics.  It naturally makes your interests rather narrow and much too extreme for average people to understand.</p><p>The non-weird people are those with a well-rounded life, and (generally) moderate or mediocre marketable skills (if any).  I know plenty of normal people who make minimum wage...  Very few (though some) who are in the top 5\%.</p><p>And besides, we sysadmins are much more normal than you programmers (freaks!).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are " weird " if some narrow pursuit makes up the majority of your life .
Be it programming , stamp collecting , keeping up with fashion , or memorizing baseball statistics .
It naturally makes your interests rather narrow and much too extreme for average people to understand.The non-weird people are those with a well-rounded life , and ( generally ) moderate or mediocre marketable skills ( if any ) .
I know plenty of normal people who make minimum wage... Very few ( though some ) who are in the top 5 \ % .And besides , we sysadmins are much more normal than you programmers ( freaks !
) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are "weird" if some narrow pursuit makes up the majority of your life.
Be it programming, stamp collecting, keeping up with fashion, or memorizing baseball statistics.
It naturally makes your interests rather narrow and much too extreme for average people to understand.The non-weird people are those with a well-rounded life, and (generally) moderate or mediocre marketable skills (if any).
I know plenty of normal people who make minimum wage...  Very few (though some) who are in the top 5\%.And besides, we sysadmins are much more normal than you programmers (freaks!
).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785469</id>
	<title>Re:Talk about slow news day</title>
	<author>bertoelcon</author>
	<datestamp>1255892520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is off-topic, but Tom Cruise is a damn good posterboy for Scientology.<p>(Interpret that how you will)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is off-topic , but Tom Cruise is a damn good posterboy for Scientology .
( Interpret that how you will )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is off-topic, but Tom Cruise is a damn good posterboy for Scientology.
(Interpret that how you will)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785313</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785717</id>
	<title>Article author is an idiot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255894560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>The first is from an Eric Clapton song &ldquo;Crossroads&rdquo;</i> Everybody knows Robert Johnson wrote "Crossroads Blues". The Tommy Johnson character in <i>Brother Where Art Thou?</i> is based on this song. The song was written in 1936, so it predates Clapton by just a bit...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The first is from an Eric Clapton song    Crossroads    Everybody knows Robert Johnson wrote " Crossroads Blues " .
The Tommy Johnson character in Brother Where Art Thou ?
is based on this song .
The song was written in 1936 , so it predates Clapton by just a bit.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The first is from an Eric Clapton song “Crossroads” Everybody knows Robert Johnson wrote "Crossroads Blues".
The Tommy Johnson character in Brother Where Art Thou?
is based on this song.
The song was written in 1936, so it predates Clapton by just a bit...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786667</id>
	<title>Re:Asperger's syndrome.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255858440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i> But in my experience, the folks who grind through exhaustive &amp; tedious tasks with nary a peep of discontent, rarely have good creative skills.</i></p><p>They also tend to have a habit of bringing shotguns into the office after they get laid-off.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But in my experience , the folks who grind through exhaustive &amp; tedious tasks with nary a peep of discontent , rarely have good creative skills.They also tend to have a habit of bringing shotguns into the office after they get laid-off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> But in my experience, the folks who grind through exhaustive &amp; tedious tasks with nary a peep of discontent, rarely have good creative skills.They also tend to have a habit of bringing shotguns into the office after they get laid-off.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785721</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785187</id>
	<title>Everyone ELSE is weird</title>
	<author>Skapare</author>
	<datestamp>1255889940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We're just better suited to the task.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We 're just better suited to the task .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We're just better suited to the task.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785479</id>
	<title>IT &amp; Weirdness...</title>
	<author>trelamenos</author>
	<datestamp>1255892580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Here is my story...

when i was a kid in my neiborhood there werent many kids that was interesting in computers, software development and such as i was... so i havent really someone to talk about my experiences... my creations and so on.... now that i grew up and i am in a public university of computer science and everyone talks about computer all the time i really feel kinda weird when i have to conversate with someone about my work... i have been really strange to "third" people(i mean except me and some guys i meat during my youth....)

so this... weirdeness....</htmltext>
<tokenext>Here is my story.. . when i was a kid in my neiborhood there werent many kids that was interesting in computers , software development and such as i was... so i havent really someone to talk about my experiences... my creations and so on.... now that i grew up and i am in a public university of computer science and everyone talks about computer all the time i really feel kinda weird when i have to conversate with someone about my work... i have been really strange to " third " people ( i mean except me and some guys i meat during my youth.... ) so this... weirdeness... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here is my story...

when i was a kid in my neiborhood there werent many kids that was interesting in computers, software development and such as i was... so i havent really someone to talk about my experiences... my creations and so on.... now that i grew up and i am in a public university of computer science and everyone talks about computer all the time i really feel kinda weird when i have to conversate with someone about my work... i have been really strange to "third" people(i mean except me and some guys i meat during my youth....)

so this... weirdeness....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29791531</id>
	<title>Re:Talk about slow news day</title>
	<author>master\_p</author>
	<datestamp>1255948740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I was the manager and the programmer messed up the comments because he was bored, I would fire him as soon as possible for showing total disrespect to the company, co-workers and clients.</p><p>He could easily write the song lyrics elsewhere, not inside the comments!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I was the manager and the programmer messed up the comments because he was bored , I would fire him as soon as possible for showing total disrespect to the company , co-workers and clients.He could easily write the song lyrics elsewhere , not inside the comments ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I was the manager and the programmer messed up the comments because he was bored, I would fire him as soon as possible for showing total disrespect to the company, co-workers and clients.He could easily write the song lyrics elsewhere, not inside the comments!!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785503</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785173</id>
	<title>Not unique to software development</title>
	<author>mpoulton</author>
	<datestamp>1255889880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The stories in the article don't seem unique to software at all.  That type and degree of weirdness shows up in every type of work, techie or not.  People are just strange!  We all know our families are strange - we've either adapted and become oblivious, or moved on.  With coworkers, however, we are forced to interact daily with a group of random people we don't get to choose individually.  That exposes us to a broad cross-section of societal weirdness that we aren't used to, and we notice it.  I think everyone has had this experience to some extent.  That's one reason The Office is such a popular show; we can all identify the Michael Scotts and Dwight Schrutes in our lives.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The stories in the article do n't seem unique to software at all .
That type and degree of weirdness shows up in every type of work , techie or not .
People are just strange !
We all know our families are strange - we 've either adapted and become oblivious , or moved on .
With coworkers , however , we are forced to interact daily with a group of random people we do n't get to choose individually .
That exposes us to a broad cross-section of societal weirdness that we are n't used to , and we notice it .
I think everyone has had this experience to some extent .
That 's one reason The Office is such a popular show ; we can all identify the Michael Scotts and Dwight Schrutes in our lives .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The stories in the article don't seem unique to software at all.
That type and degree of weirdness shows up in every type of work, techie or not.
People are just strange!
We all know our families are strange - we've either adapted and become oblivious, or moved on.
With coworkers, however, we are forced to interact daily with a group of random people we don't get to choose individually.
That exposes us to a broad cross-section of societal weirdness that we aren't used to, and we notice it.
I think everyone has had this experience to some extent.
That's one reason The Office is such a popular show; we can all identify the Michael Scotts and Dwight Schrutes in our lives.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29798469</id>
	<title>Fact?</title>
	<author>mactimes</author>
	<datestamp>1255984080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Are people who ask this kind of stuff, making us spend a lot of time to read this kind of bullshit, naturally stupid and have nothing really useful to do with their free time?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are people who ask this kind of stuff , making us spend a lot of time to read this kind of bullshit , naturally stupid and have nothing really useful to do with their free time ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are people who ask this kind of stuff, making us spend a lot of time to read this kind of bullshit, naturally stupid and have nothing really useful to do with their free time?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787565</id>
	<title>Re:Yes. Computers are unnatural.</title>
	<author>The\_mad\_linguist</author>
	<datestamp>1255864920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nah, Galileo faced persecution because he was being a dick.</p><p>And his astronomical ideas were a bit of a crapshoot (see his thoughts on comets).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nah , Galileo faced persecution because he was being a dick.And his astronomical ideas were a bit of a crapshoot ( see his thoughts on comets ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nah, Galileo faced persecution because he was being a dick.And his astronomical ideas were a bit of a crapshoot (see his thoughts on comets).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785399</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785273
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785775
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785817
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788171
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785157
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785503
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787421
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786665
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785363
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788221
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785157
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785297
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29800133
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787503
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788635
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785171
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787439
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29791815
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785273
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29798495
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787859
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29798807
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785143
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785243
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786067
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785333
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785677
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785171
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29793149
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785157
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785313
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785469
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785817
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786455
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29790109
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787859
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29820285
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785143
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785279
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785721
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786667
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785157
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785913
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785399
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787365
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787503
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29792021
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785817
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786151
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785399
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787981
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785273
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785447
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786737
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788709
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787999
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785277
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29789039
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785143
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785279
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785683
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785157
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785313
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786099
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785273
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29793181
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785157
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786377
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785147
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785395
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785553
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788083
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785273
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29795163
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785157
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785503
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29791793
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786613
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785273
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786733
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785553
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29791175
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785143
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785431
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785399
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29794697
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785273
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788791
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785157
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785503
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787109
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29804941
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785553
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29793207
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785399
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787565
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785143
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785279
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785721
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786449
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785157
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785503
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29791531
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785399
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787797
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785157
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785503
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29793655
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785273
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788259
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785143
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785279
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29793313
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785367
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29791659
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785363
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29792007
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785157
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785311
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785143
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785279
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785823
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29789549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788859
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29793267
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785553
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786747
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787423
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787293
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787389
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785273
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785917
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788127
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786515
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29798753
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785171
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787599
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785157
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786655
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787859
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29801057
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785309
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29791913
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785273
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786211
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785399
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787727
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785553
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29791273
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785817
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29794741
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29796083
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786515
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29791315
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787503
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785817
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786815
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_18_1557210_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785143
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785279
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786713
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1557210.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788859
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29793267
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1557210.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785817
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29794741
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786815
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786151
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788171
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786455
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1557210.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786831
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1557210.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785143
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785431
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785243
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786067
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785279
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785721
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786667
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786449
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29793313
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785823
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785683
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786713
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1557210.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785147
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785395
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1557210.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785553
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786747
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787423
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29791175
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29791273
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29793207
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788083
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1557210.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785333
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785677
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1557210.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785277
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29789039
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1557210.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787503
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788635
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788567
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29792021
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1557210.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785457
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1557210.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786001
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1557210.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785363
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29792007
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788221
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1557210.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785157
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785291
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785913
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785313
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785469
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786099
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786655
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785503
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29793655
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29791793
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29791531
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787109
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29804941
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787421
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785311
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786377
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785297
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1557210.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785273
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785775
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788259
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786733
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785447
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786737
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786211
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788791
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29793181
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29798495
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29795163
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785917
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1557210.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785605
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1557210.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785367
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29791659
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1557210.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785173
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1557210.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786515
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29798753
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29791315
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1557210.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786245
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1557210.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785187
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1557210.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786297
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1557210.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785223
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787389
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29790109
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786613
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29786665
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29796083
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787293
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788709
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29789549
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787999
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1557210.29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785309
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29791913
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1557210.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785399
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787365
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787981
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29794697
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787565
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787797
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787727
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1557210.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785195
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29800133
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29788127
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1557210.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787859
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29820285
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29801057
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29798807
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1557210.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785113
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1557210.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29789199
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1557210.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785171
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29793149
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787599
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29787439
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29791815
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_18_1557210.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_18_1557210.29785669
</commentlist>
</conversation>
