<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_22_2127213</id>
	<title>NCSU's Fingernail-Size Chip Can Hold 1TB</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1256203800000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>CWmike writes <i>"Engineers from North Carolina State University <a href="http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9139716/Engineers\_create\_fingernail\_size\_chip\_that\_holds\_1TB\_of\_data">have created a new fingernail-size chip that can hold 1 trillion bytes (a terabyte) of data</a>. They said their nanostructured <a href="http://news.ncsu.edu/releases/degraffnarayan09/">Ni-MgO system</a> can store up to 20 high-definition DVDs or 250 million pages of text, 'far exceeding the storage capacities of today's computer memory systems.' Using the process of selective doping, in which an impurity is added to a material whose properties consequently change, the engineers worked at nanoscale and added metal nickel to magnesium oxide, a ceramic. The resulting material contained clusters of nickel atoms no bigger than 10 square nanometers &mdash; a pinhead has a diameter of 1 million nanometers. The discovery represents a 90\% size reduction compared with today's techniques, and an advancement that could boost computer storage capacity. 'Instead of making a chip that stores 20 gigabytes, you have one that can handle one terabyte, or 50 times more data,' said the team's leader, Jagdish 'Jay' Narayan, director of the <a href="http://www.mse.ncsu.edu/CAMSS/nano">National Science Foundation Center for Advanced Materials and Smart Structures</a> at the university."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>CWmike writes " Engineers from North Carolina State University have created a new fingernail-size chip that can hold 1 trillion bytes ( a terabyte ) of data .
They said their nanostructured Ni-MgO system can store up to 20 high-definition DVDs or 250 million pages of text , 'far exceeding the storage capacities of today 's computer memory systems .
' Using the process of selective doping , in which an impurity is added to a material whose properties consequently change , the engineers worked at nanoscale and added metal nickel to magnesium oxide , a ceramic .
The resulting material contained clusters of nickel atoms no bigger than 10 square nanometers    a pinhead has a diameter of 1 million nanometers .
The discovery represents a 90 \ % size reduction compared with today 's techniques , and an advancement that could boost computer storage capacity .
'Instead of making a chip that stores 20 gigabytes , you have one that can handle one terabyte , or 50 times more data, ' said the team 's leader , Jagdish 'Jay ' Narayan , director of the National Science Foundation Center for Advanced Materials and Smart Structures at the university .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>CWmike writes "Engineers from North Carolina State University have created a new fingernail-size chip that can hold 1 trillion bytes (a terabyte) of data.
They said their nanostructured Ni-MgO system can store up to 20 high-definition DVDs or 250 million pages of text, 'far exceeding the storage capacities of today's computer memory systems.
' Using the process of selective doping, in which an impurity is added to a material whose properties consequently change, the engineers worked at nanoscale and added metal nickel to magnesium oxide, a ceramic.
The resulting material contained clusters of nickel atoms no bigger than 10 square nanometers — a pinhead has a diameter of 1 million nanometers.
The discovery represents a 90\% size reduction compared with today's techniques, and an advancement that could boost computer storage capacity.
'Instead of making a chip that stores 20 gigabytes, you have one that can handle one terabyte, or 50 times more data,' said the team's leader, Jagdish 'Jay' Narayan, director of the National Science Foundation Center for Advanced Materials and Smart Structures at the university.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840665</id>
	<title>Re:damn</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1256208780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If that had been available earlier this year, I wouldv had it implanted<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D</p></div><p>Until we hit the Moore's Law wall, implanting anything will result in multiple surgeries for upgrades or useless tech stuck in your body.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If that had been available earlier this year , I wouldv had it implanted : DUntil we hit the Moore 's Law wall , implanting anything will result in multiple surgeries for upgrades or useless tech stuck in your body .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If that had been available earlier this year, I wouldv had it implanted :DUntil we hit the Moore's Law wall, implanting anything will result in multiple surgeries for upgrades or useless tech stuck in your body.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840431</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841603</id>
	<title>Re:Trollin'.</title>
	<author>sexconker</author>
	<datestamp>1256215440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wrong.<br>TB: 1,099,511,627,776 bytes.<br>TiB:  Made up bullshit.</p><p>TB is not stepping on the toes of any sacred "standard" prefix.  There is no confusion.</p><p>If there's a B, b, or a reference to bits or bytes, then it's in powers of 2.  It's its own unit.  Completely separate, though similar in scale, to the "classical" scalar prefixes.</p><p>It is IMPERATIVE to measure bits in (base 2) exponential terms because bits are quantum logical units.  We count them, and we are concerned with possible comibnations in a given number of bits.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wrong.TB : 1,099,511,627,776 bytes.TiB : Made up bullshit.TB is not stepping on the toes of any sacred " standard " prefix .
There is no confusion.If there 's a B , b , or a reference to bits or bytes , then it 's in powers of 2 .
It 's its own unit .
Completely separate , though similar in scale , to the " classical " scalar prefixes.It is IMPERATIVE to measure bits in ( base 2 ) exponential terms because bits are quantum logical units .
We count them , and we are concerned with possible comibnations in a given number of bits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wrong.TB: 1,099,511,627,776 bytes.TiB:  Made up bullshit.TB is not stepping on the toes of any sacred "standard" prefix.
There is no confusion.If there's a B, b, or a reference to bits or bytes, then it's in powers of 2.
It's its own unit.
Completely separate, though similar in scale, to the "classical" scalar prefixes.It is IMPERATIVE to measure bits in (base 2) exponential terms because bits are quantum logical units.
We count them, and we are concerned with possible comibnations in a given number of bits.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29843853</id>
	<title>Re:There is no chip.</title>
	<author>SharpFang</author>
	<datestamp>1256294040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It isn't entirely true. It just requires chips with partially programmable logic to switch features off.<br>Lots of modern GPUs have around 50\% yield per one vertex/pixel shader unit. Then they get sold as "LE", standard and "GT" versions, depending on how many shader units work - the silicon is the same, but the firmware disables failed units and the cheap version has 4 of them, the medium has 8 and the deluxe has 12 working units.</p><p>Simply use redundancy and disable failed parts of the chip.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is n't entirely true .
It just requires chips with partially programmable logic to switch features off.Lots of modern GPUs have around 50 \ % yield per one vertex/pixel shader unit .
Then they get sold as " LE " , standard and " GT " versions , depending on how many shader units work - the silicon is the same , but the firmware disables failed units and the cheap version has 4 of them , the medium has 8 and the deluxe has 12 working units.Simply use redundancy and disable failed parts of the chip .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It isn't entirely true.
It just requires chips with partially programmable logic to switch features off.Lots of modern GPUs have around 50\% yield per one vertex/pixel shader unit.
Then they get sold as "LE", standard and "GT" versions, depending on how many shader units work - the silicon is the same, but the firmware disables failed units and the cheap version has 4 of them, the medium has 8 and the deluxe has 12 working units.Simply use redundancy and disable failed parts of the chip.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841093</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841063</id>
	<title>Another bogus materials-science article</title>
	<author>Animats</author>
	<datestamp>1256211540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
This is yet another of those articles where <a href="http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009JOM....61f..76N" title="harvard.edu">somebody did something vaguely promising in materials science</a> [harvard.edu], and it's immediately being touted as if it were a product.
</p><p>
They're not talking about a "chip" at all.  The material they've produced sounds more like something that might work as a disk surface. "Under these conditions the Ni-MgO system behaves as a perfect paramagnet." It's not clear what you'd use as a read/write head, even if they can create a surface of "nanodots".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is yet another of those articles where somebody did something vaguely promising in materials science [ harvard.edu ] , and it 's immediately being touted as if it were a product .
They 're not talking about a " chip " at all .
The material they 've produced sounds more like something that might work as a disk surface .
" Under these conditions the Ni-MgO system behaves as a perfect paramagnet .
" It 's not clear what you 'd use as a read/write head , even if they can create a surface of " nanodots " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
This is yet another of those articles where somebody did something vaguely promising in materials science [harvard.edu], and it's immediately being touted as if it were a product.
They're not talking about a "chip" at all.
The material they've produced sounds more like something that might work as a disk surface.
"Under these conditions the Ni-MgO system behaves as a perfect paramagnet.
" It's not clear what you'd use as a read/write head, even if they can create a surface of "nanodots".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29850057</id>
	<title>Reminds me of the old joke...</title>
	<author>sherpajohn</author>
	<datestamp>1256329440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IBM invented a storage device with infinite capacity, problem was seek times were forever!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IBM invented a storage device with infinite capacity , problem was seek times were forever !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IBM invented a storage device with infinite capacity, problem was seek times were forever!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840641</id>
	<title>Selective doping works well...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256208660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...athletes have been making millions that way for years!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...athletes have been making millions that way for years !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...athletes have been making millions that way for years!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840431</id>
	<title>damn</title>
	<author>LiquidCoooled</author>
	<datestamp>1256207640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>that is tiny.<br>If that had been available earlier this year, I wouldv had it implanted<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>that is tiny.If that had been available earlier this year , I wouldv had it implanted : D</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that is tiny.If that had been available earlier this year, I wouldv had it implanted :D</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29843765</id>
	<title>Re:Trollin'.</title>
	<author>bigdaisy</author>
	<datestamp>1256292540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Thats 99 Gigs of difference.</p></div><p>Thanks for muddying that up for us. Are those 99 decimal "Gigs" or 99 binary "Gigs"? Your comment doesn't say.</p><p>More importantly, by rounding off using normal conventions the difference is 100 GB or 93 GiB.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Thats 99 Gigs of difference.Thanks for muddying that up for us .
Are those 99 decimal " Gigs " or 99 binary " Gigs " ?
Your comment does n't say.More importantly , by rounding off using normal conventions the difference is 100 GB or 93 GiB .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thats 99 Gigs of difference.Thanks for muddying that up for us.
Are those 99 decimal "Gigs" or 99 binary "Gigs"?
Your comment doesn't say.More importantly, by rounding off using normal conventions the difference is 100 GB or 93 GiB.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841189</id>
	<title>Re:The good news</title>
	<author>maharb</author>
	<datestamp>1256212320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Parent is modded informative, rofl.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Parent is modded informative , rofl .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Parent is modded informative, rofl.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840663</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842373</id>
	<title>Re:There is no chip.</title>
	<author>MistarOblivion</author>
	<datestamp>1256225700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Though your suggestion is obviously tongue in cheek, I just thought it might be good to point out that there are pretty intractable problems with using DNA as a storage medium.

It is VERY SLOW  to copy (it takes several hours for human cells w/ ~3 billion letters to divide) and is prone to errors during copying.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Though your suggestion is obviously tongue in cheek , I just thought it might be good to point out that there are pretty intractable problems with using DNA as a storage medium .
It is VERY SLOW to copy ( it takes several hours for human cells w/ ~ 3 billion letters to divide ) and is prone to errors during copying .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Though your suggestion is obviously tongue in cheek, I just thought it might be good to point out that there are pretty intractable problems with using DNA as a storage medium.
It is VERY SLOW  to copy (it takes several hours for human cells w/ ~3 billion letters to divide) and is prone to errors during copying.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840915</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841455</id>
	<title>Re:Finger nail-sized chip?</title>
	<author>OrangeTide</author>
	<datestamp>1256214300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Men have short wide fingernails on large hands. And women have long dainty fingernails on small hands. I wonder if statistically the area works out to be about the same.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Men have short wide fingernails on large hands .
And women have long dainty fingernails on small hands .
I wonder if statistically the area works out to be about the same .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Men have short wide fingernails on large hands.
And women have long dainty fingernails on small hands.
I wonder if statistically the area works out to be about the same.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840533</id>
	<title>I wonder...</title>
	<author>allknowingfrog</author>
	<datestamp>1256208060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wonder when personal computers will catch up with cell phones and mp3 players - any smaller, and we'll just lose them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder when personal computers will catch up with cell phones and mp3 players - any smaller , and we 'll just lose them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder when personal computers will catch up with cell phones and mp3 players - any smaller, and we'll just lose them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842099</id>
	<title>Re:Trollin'.</title>
	<author>BikeHelmet</author>
	<datestamp>1256222100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You should clarify usage scenarios with your amounts.</p><p>Metric:<br>TB: 1,000,000,000,000<br>TiB: 1,099,511,627,776</p><p>OSX:<br>TB: 1,000,000,000,000<br>TiB: 1,099,511,627,776</p><p>Ubuntu/Linux:<br>TB: 1,000,000,000,000<br>TiB: 1,099,511,627,776</p><p>BSD: (last I checked)<br>TB: 1,000,000,000,000<br>TiB: 1,099,511,627,776</p><p>HDD Manufacturers: (Since before it became a problem)<br>TB: 1,000,000,000,000<br>TiB: 1,099,511,627,776</p><p>Windows:<br>TB: 1,099,511,627,776<br>TiB: WTF LOL</p><p>And of course, there are specific scenarios like RAM and cache where the incorrect suffixes are used to this day. When you have "3 MB" of L2 cache, you know it's 3072KiB, which is 3,145,728 bytes. It should be labelled "3 MiB", but it isn't.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You should clarify usage scenarios with your amounts.Metric : TB : 1,000,000,000,000TiB : 1,099,511,627,776OSX : TB : 1,000,000,000,000TiB : 1,099,511,627,776Ubuntu/Linux : TB : 1,000,000,000,000TiB : 1,099,511,627,776BSD : ( last I checked ) TB : 1,000,000,000,000TiB : 1,099,511,627,776HDD Manufacturers : ( Since before it became a problem ) TB : 1,000,000,000,000TiB : 1,099,511,627,776Windows : TB : 1,099,511,627,776TiB : WTF LOLAnd of course , there are specific scenarios like RAM and cache where the incorrect suffixes are used to this day .
When you have " 3 MB " of L2 cache , you know it 's 3072KiB , which is 3,145,728 bytes .
It should be labelled " 3 MiB " , but it is n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You should clarify usage scenarios with your amounts.Metric:TB: 1,000,000,000,000TiB: 1,099,511,627,776OSX:TB: 1,000,000,000,000TiB: 1,099,511,627,776Ubuntu/Linux:TB: 1,000,000,000,000TiB: 1,099,511,627,776BSD: (last I checked)TB: 1,000,000,000,000TiB: 1,099,511,627,776HDD Manufacturers: (Since before it became a problem)TB: 1,000,000,000,000TiB: 1,099,511,627,776Windows:TB: 1,099,511,627,776TiB: WTF LOLAnd of course, there are specific scenarios like RAM and cache where the incorrect suffixes are used to this day.
When you have "3 MB" of L2 cache, you know it's 3072KiB, which is 3,145,728 bytes.
It should be labelled "3 MiB", but it isn't.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840527</id>
	<title>Re:What is the ETA?</title>
	<author>Tablizer</author>
	<datestamp>1256208000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Sounds promising, but how many months/years/decades before we can reasonably expect to see this used on a wide scale?</p></div></blockquote><p>Don't worry, all flying cars will have at least one. Further, the next version of Duke Nukem will ship on such a chip.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds promising , but how many months/years/decades before we can reasonably expect to see this used on a wide scale ? Do n't worry , all flying cars will have at least one .
Further , the next version of Duke Nukem will ship on such a chip .
     </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds promising, but how many months/years/decades before we can reasonably expect to see this used on a wide scale?Don't worry, all flying cars will have at least one.
Further, the next version of Duke Nukem will ship on such a chip.
     
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840451</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840687</id>
	<title>Re:What is the ETA?</title>
	<author>TheKidWho</author>
	<datestamp>1256208900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Probably when existing techniques can not be scaled down anymore economically.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Probably when existing techniques can not be scaled down anymore economically .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Probably when existing techniques can not be scaled down anymore economically.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840451</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842037</id>
	<title>Re:There is no chip.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256221140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sadly, it wouldn't be the first (or even the 100th) time for Timothy.  If slashdotters could grade the folks that do the article posting, Timothy would be flipping burgers by now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sadly , it would n't be the first ( or even the 100th ) time for Timothy .
If slashdotters could grade the folks that do the article posting , Timothy would be flipping burgers by now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sadly, it wouldn't be the first (or even the 100th) time for Timothy.
If slashdotters could grade the folks that do the article posting, Timothy would be flipping burgers by now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840475</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840663</id>
	<title>The good news</title>
	<author>spun</author>
	<datestamp>1256208780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It will be commercially available by January. The bad news is, this is a write only memory device.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It will be commercially available by January .
The bad news is , this is a write only memory device .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It will be commercially available by January.
The bad news is, this is a write only memory device.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840451</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29846277</id>
	<title>Beowulf.pt</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256314020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>About time I can finally have a decent stash of portable pr0n on my wallet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>About time I can finally have a decent stash of portable pr0n on my wallet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>About time I can finally have a decent stash of portable pr0n on my wallet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840499</id>
	<title>Re:damn</title>
	<author>wjh31</author>
	<datestamp>1256207880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>you only got 1TB in your chip? man you should see all the HD 4D holo video i can fit on my Exabyte implant.

<br> <br>
Signed:<br>
Time Traveler from 2030</htmltext>
<tokenext>you only got 1TB in your chip ?
man you should see all the HD 4D holo video i can fit on my Exabyte implant .
Signed : Time Traveler from 2030</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you only got 1TB in your chip?
man you should see all the HD 4D holo video i can fit on my Exabyte implant.
Signed:
Time Traveler from 2030</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840431</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842661</id>
	<title>Base 2...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256229600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>However, we would expect 2^40 bytes (1099511627776). 10^12 bytes is a little more than 92 GB (using 2^30 bytes = 1 GB) short of a TB, or 99 GB short if you insist on using GB of only 10^9 bytes. Or in marketingspeak, that's like 10 movies less than promised. And this is presumably RAM, which really really should be measured in base 2 instead of base 10. This is one of the reasons computer scientists bitch about the dueling numbering systems; back when every byte counted, base 10 was a few bytes short, and now when bulk counts, base 10 is pushing 10\% short.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>However , we would expect 2 ^ 40 bytes ( 1099511627776 ) .
10 ^ 12 bytes is a little more than 92 GB ( using 2 ^ 30 bytes = 1 GB ) short of a TB , or 99 GB short if you insist on using GB of only 10 ^ 9 bytes .
Or in marketingspeak , that 's like 10 movies less than promised .
And this is presumably RAM , which really really should be measured in base 2 instead of base 10 .
This is one of the reasons computer scientists bitch about the dueling numbering systems ; back when every byte counted , base 10 was a few bytes short , and now when bulk counts , base 10 is pushing 10 \ % short .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>However, we would expect 2^40 bytes (1099511627776).
10^12 bytes is a little more than 92 GB (using 2^30 bytes = 1 GB) short of a TB, or 99 GB short if you insist on using GB of only 10^9 bytes.
Or in marketingspeak, that's like 10 movies less than promised.
And this is presumably RAM, which really really should be measured in base 2 instead of base 10.
This is one of the reasons computer scientists bitch about the dueling numbering systems; back when every byte counted, base 10 was a few bytes short, and now when bulk counts, base 10 is pushing 10\% short.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29844739</id>
	<title>Re:Trollin'.</title>
	<author>Uzik2</author>
	<datestamp>1256304840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I read it. They didn't actually implement memory, They don't have read or write hardware. It's just something that might be used for memory some day.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I read it .
They did n't actually implement memory , They do n't have read or write hardware .
It 's just something that might be used for memory some day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I read it.
They didn't actually implement memory, They don't have read or write hardware.
It's just something that might be used for memory some day.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840475</id>
	<title>There is no chip.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256207820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They have made a material which <em>could</em> if you designed a suitable chip and associated circuitry, and figured out how to manufacture it at large scale, would let you store a terabyte of data on a fingernail sized chip.</p><p>The whoever wrote the article title should be embarrassed, as should timothy for propagating it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They have made a material which could if you designed a suitable chip and associated circuitry , and figured out how to manufacture it at large scale , would let you store a terabyte of data on a fingernail sized chip.The whoever wrote the article title should be embarrassed , as should timothy for propagating it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They have made a material which could if you designed a suitable chip and associated circuitry, and figured out how to manufacture it at large scale, would let you store a terabyte of data on a fingernail sized chip.The whoever wrote the article title should be embarrassed, as should timothy for propagating it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29844243</id>
	<title>I just want to know...</title>
	<author>nut</author>
	<datestamp>1256299980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How stable is it,</p><p>and how fast is it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How stable is it,and how fast is it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How stable is it,and how fast is it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841051</id>
	<title>Re:The good news</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256211420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So, is this some sort of Schrodinger's box? You write the data, but you just don't know if is there or not?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , is this some sort of Schrodinger 's box ?
You write the data , but you just do n't know if is there or not ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, is this some sort of Schrodinger's box?
You write the data, but you just don't know if is there or not?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840663</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842999</id>
	<title>Re:There is no chip.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256235360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're slightly off.</p><p>A terabyte == 1024*1024*1024*1024*8 bits, 8796093022208 to be exact. That's 8.796E+12, nowhere near +15.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're slightly off.A terabyte = = 1024 * 1024 * 1024 * 1024 * 8 bits , 8796093022208 to be exact .
That 's 8.796E + 12 , nowhere near + 15 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're slightly off.A terabyte == 1024*1024*1024*1024*8 bits, 8796093022208 to be exact.
That's 8.796E+12, nowhere near +15.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840915</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840451</id>
	<title>What is the ETA?</title>
	<author>mr\_stinky\_britches</author>
	<datestamp>1256207700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds promising, but how many months/years/decades before we can reasonably expect to see this used on a wide scale?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds promising , but how many months/years/decades before we can reasonably expect to see this used on a wide scale ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds promising, but how many months/years/decades before we can reasonably expect to see this used on a wide scale?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840541</id>
	<title>Re:damn</title>
	<author>Tablizer</author>
	<datestamp>1256208120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>that is tiny. If that had been available earlier this year, I wouldv had it implanted</p></div></blockquote><p>Do you by chance drive a flying saucer?<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>that is tiny .
If that had been available earlier this year , I wouldv had it implantedDo you by chance drive a flying saucer ?
     </tokentext>
<sentencetext>that is tiny.
If that had been available earlier this year, I wouldv had it implantedDo you by chance drive a flying saucer?
     
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840431</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29843035</id>
	<title>And here is the data sheet for it</title>
	<author>Concerned Onlooker</author>
	<datestamp>1256236260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.national.com/rap/files/datasheet.pdf" title="national.com">http://www.national.com/rap/files/datasheet.pdf</a> [national.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.national.com/rap/files/datasheet.pdf [ national.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.national.com/rap/files/datasheet.pdf [national.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840663</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841249</id>
	<title>Re:The good news</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256212800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thank goodness.  I've needed a new<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/null for a while now.  The old one was getting full.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thank goodness .
I 've needed a new /dev/null for a while now .
The old one was getting full .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thank goodness.
I've needed a new /dev/null for a while now.
The old one was getting full.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840663</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29843309</id>
	<title>This makes for a remake of the greatest movie ever</title>
	<author>marqs</author>
	<datestamp>1256241000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Finaly I can look forward to Johnny Mnemonic 2. Only this time he stores the information in his nails.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Finaly I can look forward to Johnny Mnemonic 2 .
Only this time he stores the information in his nails .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Finaly I can look forward to Johnny Mnemonic 2.
Only this time he stores the information in his nails.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29843399</id>
	<title>Re:Trollin'.</title>
	<author>Snospar</author>
	<datestamp>1256329380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Almost right, except that bandwidth is <b>always</b> expressed in terms of bits rather than bytes (i.e. Mbps - &quot;Mega Bits Per Second&quot; where Mega = 1,000,000). In general, due to overheads from error correction, signalling and control protocols the actual <b>throughput</b> of a circuit does <b>not</b> equal the Mbps value divided by eight.</p><p>Just my tuppence worth<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Almost right , except that bandwidth is always expressed in terms of bits rather than bytes ( i.e .
Mbps - " Mega Bits Per Second " where Mega = 1,000,000 ) .
In general , due to overheads from error correction , signalling and control protocols the actual throughput of a circuit does not equal the Mbps value divided by eight.Just my tuppence worth ; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Almost right, except that bandwidth is always expressed in terms of bits rather than bytes (i.e.
Mbps - "Mega Bits Per Second" where Mega = 1,000,000).
In general, due to overheads from error correction, signalling and control protocols the actual throughput of a circuit does not equal the Mbps value divided by eight.Just my tuppence worth ;-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842277</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842633</id>
	<title>ROM or EEPROM/flash?</title>
	<author>peter</author>
	<datestamp>1256229240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wasn't sure at first if they were setting the data by doping the material, but on closer reading<br>"The engineers manipulated the nanomaterial so the electrons' spin within the material could be controlled,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..."<br>makes it sound electrically re-writeable.  Which is probably the only thing anyone's really interested in,<br>unless it was super-cheap.  (i.e. cheap enough to replace pressed optical discs with ROM USB-storage.)</p><p>As bobjr94 hopes, it would be nice if it is that cheap, though, and optical discs are replaced by a standard flash storage standard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was n't sure at first if they were setting the data by doping the material , but on closer reading " The engineers manipulated the nanomaterial so the electrons ' spin within the material could be controlled , ... " makes it sound electrically re-writeable .
Which is probably the only thing anyone 's really interested in,unless it was super-cheap .
( i.e. cheap enough to replace pressed optical discs with ROM USB-storage .
) As bobjr94 hopes , it would be nice if it is that cheap , though , and optical discs are replaced by a standard flash storage standard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wasn't sure at first if they were setting the data by doping the material, but on closer reading"The engineers manipulated the nanomaterial so the electrons' spin within the material could be controlled, ..."makes it sound electrically re-writeable.
Which is probably the only thing anyone's really interested in,unless it was super-cheap.
(i.e. cheap enough to replace pressed optical discs with ROM USB-storage.
)As bobjr94 hopes, it would be nice if it is that cheap, though, and optical discs are replaced by a standard flash storage standard.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29846939</id>
	<title>"Could hold"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256317500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>no chip has been created, this is still lab science</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>no chip has been created , this is still lab science</tokentext>
<sentencetext>no chip has been created, this is still lab science</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841669</id>
	<title>Re:There is no chip.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256215920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Each base of DNA can be AGT or C, so that's 2 bits worth of data per base pair.</p></div><p>Hair or nail splitting, which is nearly the same, I believe this is incorrect since IIRC A pairs with T and G with C, but A cannot pair with G or C... or something like that.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Each base of DNA can be AGT or C , so that 's 2 bits worth of data per base pair.Hair or nail splitting , which is nearly the same , I believe this is incorrect since IIRC A pairs with T and G with C , but A can not pair with G or C... or something like that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Each base of DNA can be AGT or C, so that's 2 bits worth of data per base pair.Hair or nail splitting, which is nearly the same, I believe this is incorrect since IIRC A pairs with T and G with C, but A cannot pair with G or C... or something like that.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840915</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29846193</id>
	<title>Ni-MgO</title>
	<author>Torodung</author>
	<datestamp>1256313600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ni-MgO.</p><p>Yeah. I read that as Mi-go. Go figure. I guess I just want my brain cylinder to be full of these chips.</p><p>Back to sleep, for now.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;^)</p><p>--<br>Toro</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ni-MgO.Yeah .
I read that as Mi-go .
Go figure .
I guess I just want my brain cylinder to be full of these chips.Back to sleep , for now .
; ^ ) --Toro</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ni-MgO.Yeah.
I read that as Mi-go.
Go figure.
I guess I just want my brain cylinder to be full of these chips.Back to sleep, for now.
;^)--Toro</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842871</id>
	<title>Anyone know what type of memory this is?</title>
	<author>frovingslosh</author>
	<datestamp>1256233200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>OK, I've done the RTFM, and I've read most of the posted comments here too. But I can't find the answer to the most basic question of all, just what type of memory is this? Is it some sore of flash memory? Is it volatile RAM, and if RAM is it Static or Dynamic and what is it's access speed (also worth knowing if it is some sort of flash RAM). And of course that includes all of the other related technical data, like how how many read/write cycles it can survive.  I can't get too excited about thinking this might show up in a computer in my lifetime unless there is some technical discussion about what kind of hardware this really is.</htmltext>
<tokenext>OK , I 've done the RTFM , and I 've read most of the posted comments here too .
But I ca n't find the answer to the most basic question of all , just what type of memory is this ?
Is it some sore of flash memory ?
Is it volatile RAM , and if RAM is it Static or Dynamic and what is it 's access speed ( also worth knowing if it is some sort of flash RAM ) .
And of course that includes all of the other related technical data , like how how many read/write cycles it can survive .
I ca n't get too excited about thinking this might show up in a computer in my lifetime unless there is some technical discussion about what kind of hardware this really is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OK, I've done the RTFM, and I've read most of the posted comments here too.
But I can't find the answer to the most basic question of all, just what type of memory is this?
Is it some sore of flash memory?
Is it volatile RAM, and if RAM is it Static or Dynamic and what is it's access speed (also worth knowing if it is some sort of flash RAM).
And of course that includes all of the other related technical data, like how how many read/write cycles it can survive.
I can't get too excited about thinking this might show up in a computer in my lifetime unless there is some technical discussion about what kind of hardware this really is.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840661</id>
	<title>Wait!!!</title>
	<author>Dunbal</author>
	<datestamp>1256208780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>can store up to 20 high-definition DVDs or 250 million pages of text</i></p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Wait, how many Libraries of Congress is that??? Now I'm totally confused, you keep switching the units on me!</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; On second thoughts, it can probably store 1 copy of Windows 8.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>can store up to 20 high-definition DVDs or 250 million pages of text       Wait , how many Libraries of Congress is that ? ? ?
Now I 'm totally confused , you keep switching the units on me !
      On second thoughts , it can probably store 1 copy of Windows 8 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>can store up to 20 high-definition DVDs or 250 million pages of text
      Wait, how many Libraries of Congress is that???
Now I'm totally confused, you keep switching the units on me!
      On second thoughts, it can probably store 1 copy of Windows 8.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841005</id>
	<title>Re:The good news</title>
	<author>TheLostSamurai</author>
	<datestamp>1256211060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It will be commercially available by January. The bad news is, this is a write only memory device.</p></div><p>Wow, that sucks.  I was hoping I could read the data after I wrote it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It will be commercially available by January .
The bad news is , this is a write only memory device.Wow , that sucks .
I was hoping I could read the data after I wrote it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It will be commercially available by January.
The bad news is, this is a write only memory device.Wow, that sucks.
I was hoping I could read the data after I wrote it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840663</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841195</id>
	<title>Re:The good news</title>
	<author>eyepeepackets</author>
	<datestamp>1256212380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, I thought that was pretty damn funny: The guy who marked you informative must be having a very sarcastic day.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , I thought that was pretty damn funny : The guy who marked you informative must be having a very sarcastic day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, I thought that was pretty damn funny: The guy who marked you informative must be having a very sarcastic day.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840663</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29849753</id>
	<title>Do not try to purchase the chip...</title>
	<author>sourICE</author>
	<datestamp>1256328120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do not try to purchase the chip. That's impossible. Instead only try to realize the truth...</p><p> <i>What truth?</i> </p><p>There is no chip.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do not try to purchase the chip .
That 's impossible .
Instead only try to realize the truth... What truth ?
There is no chip .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do not try to purchase the chip.
That's impossible.
Instead only try to realize the truth... What truth?
There is no chip.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840475</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840949</id>
	<title>awesome news</title>
	<author>Icegryphon</author>
	<datestamp>1256210760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Now I will be one step closer to having a complete backup of the internet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now I will be one step closer to having a complete backup of the internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now I will be one step closer to having a complete backup of the internet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29844219</id>
	<title>Re:Finger nail-sized chip?</title>
	<author>RivenAleem</author>
	<datestamp>1256299680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWfpohPmRD0<br><br>I'm not impressed by this chip size.</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = MWfpohPmRD0I 'm not impressed by this chip size .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWfpohPmRD0I'm not impressed by this chip size.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842147</id>
	<title>Re:Finger nail-sized chip?</title>
	<author>mattack2</author>
	<datestamp>1256222820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and "fingernail-sized" is variable:<br><a href="http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/records/human\_body/body\_parts/longest\_fingernails\_-\_female.aspx" title="guinnessworldrecords.com">http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/records/human\_body/body\_parts/longest\_fingernails\_-\_female.aspx</a> [guinnessworldrecords.com]</p><p>(just kidding)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and " fingernail-sized " is variable : http : //www.guinnessworldrecords.com/records/human \ _body/body \ _parts/longest \ _fingernails \ _- \ _female.aspx [ guinnessworldrecords.com ] ( just kidding )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and "fingernail-sized" is variable:http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/records/human\_body/body\_parts/longest\_fingernails\_-\_female.aspx [guinnessworldrecords.com](just kidding)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840623</id>
	<title>nanotech on its way</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256208540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While they are light on details, the article implies this is a long term storage system (IE a flash chip replacement)</p><p>One would think creating RAM with a similar density would be possible as well.</p><p>I've used a super computer that had 74 TB of main memory, but clearly is something one can not afford nor fit in the home, to put it mildly.  In a few years, will we have 1tb dimms at home?  That would be sweet.</p><p>Even lacking that, a 1tb flash-like chip (not as in technology, but as in purpose/use) is still a huge improvement.</p><p>Let's just hope it doesn't go the way of the 100tb optical discs that are 'going into production within a year' for the last 10 years.</p><p>On a happier note, just imagine the reactions the RIAA/MPAA lawyers would have to such a thing existing!<br>"Now all of your 'IP' fits on a nine finger-nail-sized set!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While they are light on details , the article implies this is a long term storage system ( IE a flash chip replacement ) One would think creating RAM with a similar density would be possible as well.I 've used a super computer that had 74 TB of main memory , but clearly is something one can not afford nor fit in the home , to put it mildly .
In a few years , will we have 1tb dimms at home ?
That would be sweet.Even lacking that , a 1tb flash-like chip ( not as in technology , but as in purpose/use ) is still a huge improvement.Let 's just hope it does n't go the way of the 100tb optical discs that are 'going into production within a year ' for the last 10 years.On a happier note , just imagine the reactions the RIAA/MPAA lawyers would have to such a thing existing !
" Now all of your 'IP ' fits on a nine finger-nail-sized set !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While they are light on details, the article implies this is a long term storage system (IE a flash chip replacement)One would think creating RAM with a similar density would be possible as well.I've used a super computer that had 74 TB of main memory, but clearly is something one can not afford nor fit in the home, to put it mildly.
In a few years, will we have 1tb dimms at home?
That would be sweet.Even lacking that, a 1tb flash-like chip (not as in technology, but as in purpose/use) is still a huge improvement.Let's just hope it doesn't go the way of the 100tb optical discs that are 'going into production within a year' for the last 10 years.On a happier note, just imagine the reactions the RIAA/MPAA lawyers would have to such a thing existing!
"Now all of your 'IP' fits on a nine finger-nail-sized set!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841317</id>
	<title>Re:Finger nail-sized chip?</title>
	<author>jesperhh</author>
	<datestamp>1256213280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Are we talking in units of man hands or lady hands?</p></div><p>This is clearly going to be the new kibi vs. kilobyte</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are we talking in units of man hands or lady hands ? This is clearly going to be the new kibi vs. kilobyte</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are we talking in units of man hands or lady hands?This is clearly going to be the new kibi vs. kilobyte
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841471</id>
	<title>Re:damn</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256214480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's a generation stamp. If you act quickly, you'll be a proud member of the terabyte generation. The sooner you do the op, the sooner you can start telling kids to get off your lawn.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a generation stamp .
If you act quickly , you 'll be a proud member of the terabyte generation .
The sooner you do the op , the sooner you can start telling kids to get off your lawn .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a generation stamp.
If you act quickly, you'll be a proud member of the terabyte generation.
The sooner you do the op, the sooner you can start telling kids to get off your lawn.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840665</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841793</id>
	<title>Bad linux jokes for 1000</title>
	<author>cosm</author>
	<datestamp>1256217180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Alex: "Two geeks penetrating a system backdoor?" <br> <br>
Contestant: "What is DDRASSRAM?, Alex."
<br> <br>
Alex: Painfully correct sir, painfully correct.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Alex : " Two geeks penetrating a system backdoor ?
" Contestant : " What is DDRASSRAM ? , Alex .
" Alex : Painfully correct sir , painfully correct .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Alex: "Two geeks penetrating a system backdoor?
"  
Contestant: "What is DDRASSRAM?, Alex.
"
 
Alex: Painfully correct sir, painfully correct.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29844601</id>
	<title>Re:The good news</title>
	<author>crtreece</author>
	<datestamp>1256303880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>write only?  or write once?<br> <br>
Seems like reading is a pretty important feature, but what do I know.</htmltext>
<tokenext>write only ?
or write once ?
Seems like reading is a pretty important feature , but what do I know .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>write only?
or write once?
Seems like reading is a pretty important feature, but what do I know.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840663</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840503</id>
	<title>Moore's Law meets Bohr's Atom</title>
	<author>Nefarious Wheel</author>
	<datestamp>1256207940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It had to happen eventually.  Whether or not this is the actual limit, deponent answereth not.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It had to happen eventually .
Whether or not this is the actual limit , deponent answereth not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It had to happen eventually.
Whether or not this is the actual limit, deponent answereth not.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840907</id>
	<title>Re:Trollin'.</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1256210460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No. Because if they were any serious, they would be consistent in their meaning anyway, and, as it is standard in the storage industry, and as a SI unit, use TiB, if they meant TiB. And else TB. Period. No need to discuss it. Because that is all and everything.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No .
Because if they were any serious , they would be consistent in their meaning anyway , and , as it is standard in the storage industry , and as a SI unit , use TiB , if they meant TiB .
And else TB .
Period. No need to discuss it .
Because that is all and everything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.
Because if they were any serious, they would be consistent in their meaning anyway, and, as it is standard in the storage industry, and as a SI unit, use TiB, if they meant TiB.
And else TB.
Period. No need to discuss it.
Because that is all and everything.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840577</id>
	<title>This is progress?</title>
	<author>countertrolling</author>
	<datestamp>1256208300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.eglobe1.com/word/wp-content/images/photos/longestnails.jpg" title="eglobe1.com" rel="nofollow">I don't think so</a> [eglobe1.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think so [ eglobe1.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think so [eglobe1.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842301</id>
	<title>LOL</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256224860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is not the same Jagdish from Animal House is it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is not the same Jagdish from Animal House is it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is not the same Jagdish from Animal House is it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840553</id>
	<title>Re:Trollin'.</title>
	<author>Triela</author>
	<datestamp>1256208180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>A trillion bytes?
<br> <br>
1000000000000 b / 640 kb
<br> <br>
That's enough for over 1.5 million people!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>A trillion bytes ?
1000000000000 b / 640 kb That 's enough for over 1.5 million people !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A trillion bytes?
1000000000000 b / 640 kb
 
That's enough for over 1.5 million people!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840423</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842173</id>
	<title>Re:Wait!!!</title>
	<author>dbIII</author>
	<datestamp>1256223420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Wait, how many Libraries of Congress is that???</p></div></blockquote><p>Enough Libraries of Congress to fill a line of Volkswagens parked end to end on a football field.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait , how many Libraries of Congress is that ? ?
? Enough Libraries of Congress to fill a line of Volkswagens parked end to end on a football field .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait, how many Libraries of Congress is that??
?Enough Libraries of Congress to fill a line of Volkswagens parked end to end on a football field.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840661</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29844707</id>
	<title>Re:damn</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1256304600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People might choose it, but as long as it's good enough for its purpose, there isn't a need for that. Consider, is space flight with computers unfeasible, because we can't recall the probes back to upgrade the computers?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People might choose it , but as long as it 's good enough for its purpose , there is n't a need for that .
Consider , is space flight with computers unfeasible , because we ca n't recall the probes back to upgrade the computers ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People might choose it, but as long as it's good enough for its purpose, there isn't a need for that.
Consider, is space flight with computers unfeasible, because we can't recall the probes back to upgrade the computers?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840665</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842277</id>
	<title>Re:Trollin'.</title>
	<author>Waffle Iron</author>
	<datestamp>1256224620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If there's a B, b, or a reference to bits or bytes, then it's in powers of 2.</p> </div><p>Not for bandwidth. Base-2 units have <b>never</b> been used to describe bandwidth. (If you have a 1MB per second connection, that's exactly 1,000,000 bytes per second.)</p><p>Not for hard drive capacity at any time later than ancient history.</p><p>Not for floppy disks, which were always in ridiculous mixed units of 1024*1000.</p><p>Not for optical media, which come in sizes like 4,700,000,000 bytes.</p><p>Not for file sizes reported in any non-braindead application.</p><p>In fact, not for anything other than solid state RAM.</p><p>So your assertion that "there is no confusion" is 100\% false. The explicit distinction between TB and TiB should be strictly enforced in all contexts due to the historical abuse of SI terminology by people like you.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>It is IMPERATIVE to measure bits in (base 2) exponential terms because bits are quantum logical units. We count them, and we are concerned with possible comibnations in a given number of bits.</p></div><p>This statement makes zero sense. You're confusing the number of permutations that "n" bits can denote with the number "n" itself. Just because the number of permutations of n bits happens to be 2**n, that property in no way constrains us to denote measurements of the number <b>n</b> itself in some strange hybrid derivative of base 2 and base 10. (Which is only slightly more convenient to do arithmetic with than Roman numerals. Quick: how many 100 MiB files fit onto a 4.377 GiB DVD?)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If there 's a B , b , or a reference to bits or bytes , then it 's in powers of 2 .
Not for bandwidth .
Base-2 units have never been used to describe bandwidth .
( If you have a 1MB per second connection , that 's exactly 1,000,000 bytes per second .
) Not for hard drive capacity at any time later than ancient history.Not for floppy disks , which were always in ridiculous mixed units of 1024 * 1000.Not for optical media , which come in sizes like 4,700,000,000 bytes.Not for file sizes reported in any non-braindead application.In fact , not for anything other than solid state RAM.So your assertion that " there is no confusion " is 100 \ % false .
The explicit distinction between TB and TiB should be strictly enforced in all contexts due to the historical abuse of SI terminology by people like you.It is IMPERATIVE to measure bits in ( base 2 ) exponential terms because bits are quantum logical units .
We count them , and we are concerned with possible comibnations in a given number of bits.This statement makes zero sense .
You 're confusing the number of permutations that " n " bits can denote with the number " n " itself .
Just because the number of permutations of n bits happens to be 2 * * n , that property in no way constrains us to denote measurements of the number n itself in some strange hybrid derivative of base 2 and base 10 .
( Which is only slightly more convenient to do arithmetic with than Roman numerals .
Quick : how many 100 MiB files fit onto a 4.377 GiB DVD ?
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If there's a B, b, or a reference to bits or bytes, then it's in powers of 2.
Not for bandwidth.
Base-2 units have never been used to describe bandwidth.
(If you have a 1MB per second connection, that's exactly 1,000,000 bytes per second.
)Not for hard drive capacity at any time later than ancient history.Not for floppy disks, which were always in ridiculous mixed units of 1024*1000.Not for optical media, which come in sizes like 4,700,000,000 bytes.Not for file sizes reported in any non-braindead application.In fact, not for anything other than solid state RAM.So your assertion that "there is no confusion" is 100\% false.
The explicit distinction between TB and TiB should be strictly enforced in all contexts due to the historical abuse of SI terminology by people like you.It is IMPERATIVE to measure bits in (base 2) exponential terms because bits are quantum logical units.
We count them, and we are concerned with possible comibnations in a given number of bits.This statement makes zero sense.
You're confusing the number of permutations that "n" bits can denote with the number "n" itself.
Just because the number of permutations of n bits happens to be 2**n, that property in no way constrains us to denote measurements of the number n itself in some strange hybrid derivative of base 2 and base 10.
(Which is only slightly more convenient to do arithmetic with than Roman numerals.
Quick: how many 100 MiB files fit onto a 4.377 GiB DVD?
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841603</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842103</id>
	<title>Re:There is no chip.</title>
	<author>adaviel</author>
	<datestamp>1256222160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's still interesting, but yeah, the title's misleading.
See <a href="http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=1174" title="phdcomics.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=1174</a> [phdcomics.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's still interesting , but yeah , the title 's misleading .
See http : //www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php ? comicid = 1174 [ phdcomics.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's still interesting, but yeah, the title's misleading.
See http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=1174 [phdcomics.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840475</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29845229</id>
	<title>Re:Can someone explain to me...</title>
	<author>u38cg</author>
	<datestamp>1256308380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Gawd knows where the numbers came from, but the point seems sound enough: they can create a substrate and magnetise it arbitrarily, so you have something that can in theory serve as a data storage medium.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Gawd knows where the numbers came from , but the point seems sound enough : they can create a substrate and magnetise it arbitrarily , so you have something that can in theory serve as a data storage medium .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gawd knows where the numbers came from, but the point seems sound enough: they can create a substrate and magnetise it arbitrarily, so you have something that can in theory serve as a data storage medium.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840741</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842923</id>
	<title>Re:Wait!!!</title>
	<author>oddaddresstrap</author>
	<datestamp>1256234100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Wait, how many Libraries of Congress is that??? Now I'm totally confused, you keep switching the units on me!</i></p><p>You're still using the wrong units. It's about 1.5 Alamodomes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait , how many Libraries of Congress is that ? ? ?
Now I 'm totally confused , you keep switching the units on me ! You 're still using the wrong units .
It 's about 1.5 Alamodomes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait, how many Libraries of Congress is that???
Now I'm totally confused, you keep switching the units on me!You're still using the wrong units.
It's about 1.5 Alamodomes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840661</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840899</id>
	<title>Re:Wait!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256210400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>DVD's store 20 GB now?</htmltext>
<tokenext>DVD 's store 20 GB now ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DVD's store 20 GB now?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840661</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841059</id>
	<title>Re:The good news</title>
	<author>Therefore I am</author>
	<datestamp>1256211480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's not bad news at all. The entire world is waiting for a reliable way of storing massive amounts of data on a permanent basis. If the report is based on truth then it might well be the answer to the vexing problems of lost data.... Counter-intuitively,if they make it too small it will be easy to lose the chip - back to square one!</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's not bad news at all .
The entire world is waiting for a reliable way of storing massive amounts of data on a permanent basis .
If the report is based on truth then it might well be the answer to the vexing problems of lost data.... Counter-intuitively,if they make it too small it will be easy to lose the chip - back to square one !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's not bad news at all.
The entire world is waiting for a reliable way of storing massive amounts of data on a permanent basis.
If the report is based on truth then it might well be the answer to the vexing problems of lost data.... Counter-intuitively,if they make it too small it will be easy to lose the chip - back to square one!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840663</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840413</id>
	<title>Finger nail-sized chip?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256207520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are we talking in units of man hands or lady hands?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are we talking in units of man hands or lady hands ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are we talking in units of man hands or lady hands?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841611</id>
	<title>Re:There is no chip.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256215560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>SUre you can interface it with a PC - you just did in typing that comment!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>SUre you can interface it with a PC - you just did in typing that comment !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SUre you can interface it with a PC - you just did in typing that comment!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840915</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841017</id>
	<title>Can we change the title of this post?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256211180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can we change the title of this post to...</p><p>NCSU's <b>THEORETICAL</b> Fingernail-Size Chip Can Hold 1TB</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can we change the title of this post to...NCSU 's THEORETICAL Fingernail-Size Chip Can Hold 1TB</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can we change the title of this post to...NCSU's THEORETICAL Fingernail-Size Chip Can Hold 1TB</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842247</id>
	<title>Re:There is no chip.</title>
	<author>catmistake</author>
	<datestamp>1256224320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>They have made a material which <em>could</em> if you designed a suitable... and figured out how to manufacture it at large scale, would let you....</p><p>The whoever wrote the article title should be embarrassed, as should timothy for propagating it.</p></div><p>


Unless the article is a sham, they already have mass manufactured this memerrific material &mdash; and it's also comprised of some mimetic polyalloy that's already replaced them. Then won't you be embarrassed.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They have made a material which could if you designed a suitable... and figured out how to manufacture it at large scale , would let you....The whoever wrote the article title should be embarrassed , as should timothy for propagating it .
Unless the article is a sham , they already have mass manufactured this memerrific material    and it 's also comprised of some mimetic polyalloy that 's already replaced them .
Then wo n't you be embarrassed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They have made a material which could if you designed a suitable... and figured out how to manufacture it at large scale, would let you....The whoever wrote the article title should be embarrassed, as should timothy for propagating it.
Unless the article is a sham, they already have mass manufactured this memerrific material — and it's also comprised of some mimetic polyalloy that's already replaced them.
Then won't you be embarrassed.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840475</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840427</id>
	<title>Dang it!</title>
	<author>mhajicek</author>
	<datestamp>1256207580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm going to have to buy The White Album again!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm going to have to buy The White Album again !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm going to have to buy The White Album again!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840743</id>
	<title>Re:Finger nail-sized chip?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256209260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the real question is:</p><p>are we talking about european hands or african hands?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the real question is : are we talking about european hands or african hands ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the real question is:are we talking about european hands or african hands?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29845055</id>
	<title>Re:There is no chip.</title>
	<author>belthize</author>
	<datestamp>1256306880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The resulting storage of 1,000,000 people typing away on slashdot will eventually encode a monkey.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The resulting storage of 1,000,000 people typing away on slashdot will eventually encode a monkey .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The resulting storage of 1,000,000 people typing away on slashdot will eventually encode a monkey.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840915</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840471</id>
	<title>Re:Finger nail-sized chip?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256207820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Are we talking in units of man hands or lady hands?</p></div></blockquote><p>I asked a female co-worker to help me compare, and she obliged......by flipping me off. At least I got a good look at her nail. The things we nerds endure for science.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are we talking in units of man hands or lady hands ? I asked a female co-worker to help me compare , and she obliged......by flipping me off .
At least I got a good look at her nail .
The things we nerds endure for science .
     </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are we talking in units of man hands or lady hands?I asked a female co-worker to help me compare, and she obliged......by flipping me off.
At least I got a good look at her nail.
The things we nerds endure for science.
     
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840525</id>
	<title>Good</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256208000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Now I can store more porn which is the reason you need a new hard disk.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now I can store more porn which is the reason you need a new hard disk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now I can store more porn which is the reason you need a new hard disk.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841391</id>
	<title>Re:There is no chip.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256213880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i> <strong>In fact, my actual fingernail already contains maybe a petabyte of storage.<br>
&nbsp;</strong> </i> </p><p>You need to wash your hands more often</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In fact , my actual fingernail already contains maybe a petabyte of storage .
  You need to wash your hands more often</tokentext>
<sentencetext> In fact, my actual fingernail already contains maybe a petabyte of storage.
   You need to wash your hands more often</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840915</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840485</id>
	<title>Great , Now The N.S.A. Data Mining Project</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256207820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>of Google's <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/10/20/1731228" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">10 million servers</a> [slashdot.org] can be<br>carried around in a cell phone.</p><p>Yours In Novorossiysk,<br>Kilgore T.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>of Google 's 10 million servers [ slashdot.org ] can becarried around in a cell phone.Yours In Novorossiysk,Kilgore T .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>of Google's 10 million servers [slashdot.org] can becarried around in a cell phone.Yours In Novorossiysk,Kilgore T.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29844911</id>
	<title>fun spec sheets</title>
	<author>reiisi</author>
	<datestamp>1256305980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The one I'n still looking for (lost my copy) is the darkness emitting arsenic diode.<br>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The one I'n still looking for ( lost my copy ) is the darkness emitting arsenic diode .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>The one I'n still looking for (lost my copy) is the darkness emitting arsenic diode.
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840663</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840501</id>
	<title>Re:What is the ETA?</title>
	<author>Viper23</author>
	<datestamp>1256207880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not to mention, this a lab chip.  How long before it can survive being in a consumer environment?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not to mention , this a lab chip .
How long before it can survive being in a consumer environment ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not to mention, this a lab chip.
How long before it can survive being in a consumer environment?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840451</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29875777</id>
	<title>Re:Trollin'.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256587860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do you know what computers are really good at?  Doing basic arithmetic.  Just because computers use binary internally there is no reason for them to expose that to users.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you know what computers are really good at ?
Doing basic arithmetic .
Just because computers use binary internally there is no reason for them to expose that to users .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you know what computers are really good at?
Doing basic arithmetic.
Just because computers use binary internally there is no reason for them to expose that to users.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29843831</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840905</id>
	<title>Re:Trollin'.</title>
	<author>maxfresh</author>
	<datestamp>1256210400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>The confusion probably arises because not all countries and languages use the same terminology for large numbers.<br> <br>There are two naming conventions in general use, short-scale, and long-scale. In the short-scale countries such as the US, UK, etc, Trillion = 10^12, but in the long-scale countries, Trillion = 10^18. Obviously, if you are in a long-scale country, a Trillion (10^18) bytes is a (10^6) times more than a Terabyte (10^12 bytes). You can see this article for more on short and long scale: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long\_and\_short\_scales" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long\_and\_short\_scales</a> [wikipedia.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>The confusion probably arises because not all countries and languages use the same terminology for large numbers .
There are two naming conventions in general use , short-scale , and long-scale .
In the short-scale countries such as the US , UK , etc , Trillion = 10 ^ 12 , but in the long-scale countries , Trillion = 10 ^ 18 .
Obviously , if you are in a long-scale country , a Trillion ( 10 ^ 18 ) bytes is a ( 10 ^ 6 ) times more than a Terabyte ( 10 ^ 12 bytes ) .
You can see this article for more on short and long scale : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long \ _and \ _short \ _scales [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The confusion probably arises because not all countries and languages use the same terminology for large numbers.
There are two naming conventions in general use, short-scale, and long-scale.
In the short-scale countries such as the US, UK, etc, Trillion = 10^12, but in the long-scale countries, Trillion = 10^18.
Obviously, if you are in a long-scale country, a Trillion (10^18) bytes is a (10^6) times more than a Terabyte (10^12 bytes).
You can see this article for more on short and long scale: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long\_and\_short\_scales [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840551</id>
	<title>I understand we're geeks and all</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256208180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>but:</p><p><i> The process would allow them to develop a new generation of ceramic engines able to withstand twice the temperatures of normal engines. The engines could potentially achieve fuel economy of 80 miles per gallon, Narayan said.</i></p><p>Could we at least have mentioned that this technology could potentially double the fuel efficiency of car engines???</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>but : The process would allow them to develop a new generation of ceramic engines able to withstand twice the temperatures of normal engines .
The engines could potentially achieve fuel economy of 80 miles per gallon , Narayan said.Could we at least have mentioned that this technology could potentially double the fuel efficiency of car engines ? ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but: The process would allow them to develop a new generation of ceramic engines able to withstand twice the temperatures of normal engines.
The engines could potentially achieve fuel economy of 80 miles per gallon, Narayan said.Could we at least have mentioned that this technology could potentially double the fuel efficiency of car engines??
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840597</id>
	<title>Performance?</title>
	<author>saleenS281</author>
	<datestamp>1256208420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's great that you can store 1TB on it, but what does the performance look like?  If it takes me 4 hours to pull a gig of data off of it, it's nearly useless.  I could see some very, very corner cases where you need to store data indefinitely, and would be able to recover it with no timeline attached, but that's awfully rare nowadays.

I want to see IOPS and access time<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)  I'm also wondering how you would even read and write data.  They seem to have left that detail out.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's great that you can store 1TB on it , but what does the performance look like ?
If it takes me 4 hours to pull a gig of data off of it , it 's nearly useless .
I could see some very , very corner cases where you need to store data indefinitely , and would be able to recover it with no timeline attached , but that 's awfully rare nowadays .
I want to see IOPS and access time ; ) I 'm also wondering how you would even read and write data .
They seem to have left that detail out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's great that you can store 1TB on it, but what does the performance look like?
If it takes me 4 hours to pull a gig of data off of it, it's nearly useless.
I could see some very, very corner cases where you need to store data indefinitely, and would be able to recover it with no timeline attached, but that's awfully rare nowadays.
I want to see IOPS and access time ;)  I'm also wondering how you would even read and write data.
They seem to have left that detail out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842313</id>
	<title>Re:There is no chip.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256225040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't forget all the compression you could achieve by storing redundant data on the paired strand!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't forget all the compression you could achieve by storing redundant data on the paired strand !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't forget all the compression you could achieve by storing redundant data on the paired strand!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840915</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841935</id>
	<title>How many angels comprise a megabyte?</title>
	<author>mi</author>
	<datestamp>1256219640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The resulting material contained clusters of nickel atoms no bigger than 10 square nanometers -- a pinhead has a diameter of 1 million nanometers</p></div></blockquote><p>We are so close to answering the ancient question &mdash; <strong>how many angels would fit on a pinhead?</strong> The <a href="http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How\_many\_angels\_can\_stand\_on\_a\_pinhead" title="answers.com">prevailing opinion</a> [answers.com] is, angels are ethereal beings, and thus <em>infinite</em> number of them would fit anywhere. But information is not tangible either (some even refuse to accept, that it can be <em>owned</em>), and yet obvious &mdash; if ever shrinking &mdash; limits exist to information concentration...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The resulting material contained clusters of nickel atoms no bigger than 10 square nanometers -- a pinhead has a diameter of 1 million nanometersWe are so close to answering the ancient question    how many angels would fit on a pinhead ?
The prevailing opinion [ answers.com ] is , angels are ethereal beings , and thus infinite number of them would fit anywhere .
But information is not tangible either ( some even refuse to accept , that it can be owned ) , and yet obvious    if ever shrinking    limits exist to information concentration.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The resulting material contained clusters of nickel atoms no bigger than 10 square nanometers -- a pinhead has a diameter of 1 million nanometersWe are so close to answering the ancient question — how many angels would fit on a pinhead?
The prevailing opinion [answers.com] is, angels are ethereal beings, and thus infinite number of them would fit anywhere.
But information is not tangible either (some even refuse to accept, that it can be owned), and yet obvious — if ever shrinking — limits exist to information concentration...
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29844673</id>
	<title>Re:Trollin'.</title>
	<author>swilver</author>
	<datestamp>1256304300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is wrong.  It's:</p><p>TB:1,099,511,627,776<br>TiB: Does not compute</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is wrong .
It 's : TB : 1,099,511,627,776TiB : Does not compute</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is wrong.
It's:TB:1,099,511,627,776TiB: Does not compute</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841489</id>
	<title>Re:I understand we're geeks and all</title>
	<author>zoloto</author>
	<datestamp>1256214540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You're probably the only person to read the actual article.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're probably the only person to read the actual article .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're probably the only person to read the actual article.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840551</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841707</id>
	<title>that reminds me of...</title>
	<author>cosm</author>
	<datestamp>1256216220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>CREEPROM!</htmltext>
<tokenext>CREEPROM !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>CREEPROM!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29843119</id>
	<title>Jonny Mnemonic II</title>
	<author>Boawk</author>
	<datestamp>1256237760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In other news today scriptwriters working on the sequel of the wildly successful Jonny Mnemonic scrambled to incorporate the technical advance into the sequel's script.  Now, Jonny's nail polish is sacrificed to accomodate the large amount of valuable data.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In other news today scriptwriters working on the sequel of the wildly successful Jonny Mnemonic scrambled to incorporate the technical advance into the sequel 's script .
Now , Jonny 's nail polish is sacrificed to accomodate the large amount of valuable data .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In other news today scriptwriters working on the sequel of the wildly successful Jonny Mnemonic scrambled to incorporate the technical advance into the sequel's script.
Now, Jonny's nail polish is sacrificed to accomodate the large amount of valuable data.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29998036</id>
	<title>Re:Dang it!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257451740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't worry, they already announced that they'll be re-releasing it on a USB drive shaped like an apple.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't worry , they already announced that they 'll be re-releasing it on a USB drive shaped like an apple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't worry, they already announced that they'll be re-releasing it on a USB drive shaped like an apple.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840427</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29845353</id>
	<title>Re:nanotech on its way</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256309160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"Now all of your 'IP' fits on a nine finger-nail-sized set!"</p></div><p>Or say 1 Nine-Inch-Nail? Oh... Wait... I don't think you can say "Nine-Inch-Nail" with out the RIAA/MPAA all over your ass.</p><p>Nathan</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Now all of your 'IP ' fits on a nine finger-nail-sized set !
" Or say 1 Nine-Inch-Nail ?
Oh... Wait... I do n't think you can say " Nine-Inch-Nail " with out the RIAA/MPAA all over your ass.Nathan</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Now all of your 'IP' fits on a nine finger-nail-sized set!
"Or say 1 Nine-Inch-Nail?
Oh... Wait... I don't think you can say "Nine-Inch-Nail" with out the RIAA/MPAA all over your ass.Nathan
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841011</id>
	<title>Re:The good news</title>
	<author>riskeetee</author>
	<datestamp>1256211120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm not sure which is funnier, the parent post or that it got modded "informative."

LOL</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure which is funnier , the parent post or that it got modded " informative .
" LOL</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure which is funnier, the parent post or that it got modded "informative.
"

LOL</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840663</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840897</id>
	<title>Comparison sucks</title>
	<author>the person standing</author>
	<datestamp>1256210400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>no bigger than 10 square nanometers &mdash; a pinhead has a diameter of 1 million nanometers</p></div><p>Why not compare area to area:
A diameter of 1 million nanometers is 1000000 ^ 2 * pi = about 3140000000000 square nanometers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>no bigger than 10 square nanometers    a pinhead has a diameter of 1 million nanometersWhy not compare area to area : A diameter of 1 million nanometers is 1000000 ^ 2 * pi = about 3140000000000 square nanometers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>no bigger than 10 square nanometers — a pinhead has a diameter of 1 million nanometersWhy not compare area to area:
A diameter of 1 million nanometers is 1000000 ^ 2 * pi = about 3140000000000 square nanometers.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841093</id>
	<title>Re:There is no chip.</title>
	<author>shadowofwind</author>
	<datestamp>1256211720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Years ago I worked a product that had an IC feature that could be manufactured reliably 99.99\% of the time.  For a real device with millions of such features that averages to almost zero yield, and this problem was not overcome.  For some technologies the manufacturing yield hurdle can be overcome, for others it can't be.  So although seeing a small number of memory cells work correctly is interesting and worthwhile, by itself that doesn't tell us whether we will ever see this technology in an actual product.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Years ago I worked a product that had an IC feature that could be manufactured reliably 99.99 \ % of the time .
For a real device with millions of such features that averages to almost zero yield , and this problem was not overcome .
For some technologies the manufacturing yield hurdle can be overcome , for others it ca n't be .
So although seeing a small number of memory cells work correctly is interesting and worthwhile , by itself that does n't tell us whether we will ever see this technology in an actual product .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Years ago I worked a product that had an IC feature that could be manufactured reliably 99.99\% of the time.
For a real device with millions of such features that averages to almost zero yield, and this problem was not overcome.
For some technologies the manufacturing yield hurdle can be overcome, for others it can't be.
So although seeing a small number of memory cells work correctly is interesting and worthwhile, by itself that doesn't tell us whether we will ever see this technology in an actual product.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840475</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840457</id>
	<title>But..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256207760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How many Libraries of Congress can it store?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How many Libraries of Congress can it store ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many Libraries of Congress can it store?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841731</id>
	<title>Can we finally loose CDs &amp; DVD's then ?</title>
	<author>bobjr94</author>
	<datestamp>1256216460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just goto walmart, buy your HD movie, music, PS4 game, etc...on a flash card ? Plug it into your mp3 player, car deck, TV, Xbox, PC.....Well, probably not PS4 since its from sony it would use its own special sony only format.

But everyone else just use a universal flash media format, and it wouldnt get ruined by a scratch from dust either.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just goto walmart , buy your HD movie , music , PS4 game , etc...on a flash card ?
Plug it into your mp3 player , car deck , TV , Xbox , PC.....Well , probably not PS4 since its from sony it would use its own special sony only format .
But everyone else just use a universal flash media format , and it wouldnt get ruined by a scratch from dust either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just goto walmart, buy your HD movie, music, PS4 game, etc...on a flash card ?
Plug it into your mp3 player, car deck, TV, Xbox, PC.....Well, probably not PS4 since its from sony it would use its own special sony only format.
But everyone else just use a universal flash media format, and it wouldnt get ruined by a scratch from dust either.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841015</id>
	<title>The Abstract.</title>
	<author>Jason Pollock</author>
	<datestamp>1256211180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here is the paper's abstract:</p><blockquote><div><p>Abstract: We have investigated the magnetic properties of the Ni-MgO system with an Ni concentration of 0.5 at.\%. In as-grown crystals, Ni ions occupy substitutional Mg sites. Under these conditions the Ni-MgO system behaves as a perfect paramagnet. By using a controlled annealing treatment in a reducing atmosphere, we were able to induce clustering and form pure Ni precipitates in the nanometer size range. The size distribution of precipitates or nanodots is varied by changing annealing time and temperature. Magnetic properties of specimens ranging from perfect paramagnetic to ferromagnetic characteristics have been studied systematically to establish structure-property correlations. The spontaneous magnetization data for the samples, where Ni was precipitated randomly in MgO host, fits well to Bloch&rsquo;s T3/2-law and has been explained within the framework of spin wave theory predictions.</p></div></blockquote><p>Now, my question is, how do you store information in that?  If the material is <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paramagnetic#Examples\_of\_paramagnets" title="wikipedia.org">paramagnetic</a> [wikipedia.org], that implies it isn't stored like a disk (read/write using a magnetic field)?  How are they planning on storing information in a clump of nickel atoms?  (Note: I know absolutely nothing about this stuff)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Here is the paper 's abstract : Abstract : We have investigated the magnetic properties of the Ni-MgO system with an Ni concentration of 0.5 at. \ % .
In as-grown crystals , Ni ions occupy substitutional Mg sites .
Under these conditions the Ni-MgO system behaves as a perfect paramagnet .
By using a controlled annealing treatment in a reducing atmosphere , we were able to induce clustering and form pure Ni precipitates in the nanometer size range .
The size distribution of precipitates or nanodots is varied by changing annealing time and temperature .
Magnetic properties of specimens ranging from perfect paramagnetic to ferromagnetic characteristics have been studied systematically to establish structure-property correlations .
The spontaneous magnetization data for the samples , where Ni was precipitated randomly in MgO host , fits well to Bloch    s T3/2-law and has been explained within the framework of spin wave theory predictions.Now , my question is , how do you store information in that ?
If the material is paramagnetic [ wikipedia.org ] , that implies it is n't stored like a disk ( read/write using a magnetic field ) ?
How are they planning on storing information in a clump of nickel atoms ?
( Note : I know absolutely nothing about this stuff )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here is the paper's abstract:Abstract: We have investigated the magnetic properties of the Ni-MgO system with an Ni concentration of 0.5 at.\%.
In as-grown crystals, Ni ions occupy substitutional Mg sites.
Under these conditions the Ni-MgO system behaves as a perfect paramagnet.
By using a controlled annealing treatment in a reducing atmosphere, we were able to induce clustering and form pure Ni precipitates in the nanometer size range.
The size distribution of precipitates or nanodots is varied by changing annealing time and temperature.
Magnetic properties of specimens ranging from perfect paramagnetic to ferromagnetic characteristics have been studied systematically to establish structure-property correlations.
The spontaneous magnetization data for the samples, where Ni was precipitated randomly in MgO host, fits well to Bloch’s T3/2-law and has been explained within the framework of spin wave theory predictions.Now, my question is, how do you store information in that?
If the material is paramagnetic [wikipedia.org], that implies it isn't stored like a disk (read/write using a magnetic field)?
How are they planning on storing information in a clump of nickel atoms?
(Note: I know absolutely nothing about this stuff)
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29849009</id>
	<title>Re:Trollin'.</title>
	<author>killjoy966</author>
	<datestamp>1256325300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's actually only a 92 GB difference.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's actually only a 92 GB difference .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's actually only a 92 GB difference.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840741</id>
	<title>Can someone explain to me...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256209200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>how we go from the below scientific journal abstract to the Slashdot headline: "NCSU's Fingernail-Size Chip Can Hold 1TB"?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>We have investigated the magnetic properties of the Ni-MgO system with an Ni concentration of 0.5 at.\%. In as-grown crystals, Ni ions occupy substitutional Mg sites. Under these conditions the Ni-MgO system behaves as a perfect paramagnet. By using a controlled annealing treatment in a reducing atmosphere, we were able to induce clustering and form pure Ni precipitates in the nanometer size range. The size distribution of precipitates or nanodots is varied by changing annealing time and temperature. Magnetic properties of specimens ranging from perfect paramagnetic to ferromagnetic characteristics have been studied systematically to establish structure-property correlations. The spontaneous magnetization data for the samples, where Ni was precipitated randomly in MgO host, fits well to Bloch's T3/2-law and has been explained within the framework of spin wave theory predictions.</p></div><p>Seriously, do you see anything about a chip in there? Anyone? Bueller?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>how we go from the below scientific journal abstract to the Slashdot headline : " NCSU 's Fingernail-Size Chip Can Hold 1TB " ? We have investigated the magnetic properties of the Ni-MgO system with an Ni concentration of 0.5 at. \ % .
In as-grown crystals , Ni ions occupy substitutional Mg sites .
Under these conditions the Ni-MgO system behaves as a perfect paramagnet .
By using a controlled annealing treatment in a reducing atmosphere , we were able to induce clustering and form pure Ni precipitates in the nanometer size range .
The size distribution of precipitates or nanodots is varied by changing annealing time and temperature .
Magnetic properties of specimens ranging from perfect paramagnetic to ferromagnetic characteristics have been studied systematically to establish structure-property correlations .
The spontaneous magnetization data for the samples , where Ni was precipitated randomly in MgO host , fits well to Bloch 's T3/2-law and has been explained within the framework of spin wave theory predictions.Seriously , do you see anything about a chip in there ?
Anyone ? Bueller ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>how we go from the below scientific journal abstract to the Slashdot headline: "NCSU's Fingernail-Size Chip Can Hold 1TB"?We have investigated the magnetic properties of the Ni-MgO system with an Ni concentration of 0.5 at.\%.
In as-grown crystals, Ni ions occupy substitutional Mg sites.
Under these conditions the Ni-MgO system behaves as a perfect paramagnet.
By using a controlled annealing treatment in a reducing atmosphere, we were able to induce clustering and form pure Ni precipitates in the nanometer size range.
The size distribution of precipitates or nanodots is varied by changing annealing time and temperature.
Magnetic properties of specimens ranging from perfect paramagnetic to ferromagnetic characteristics have been studied systematically to establish structure-property correlations.
The spontaneous magnetization data for the samples, where Ni was precipitated randomly in MgO host, fits well to Bloch's T3/2-law and has been explained within the framework of spin wave theory predictions.Seriously, do you see anything about a chip in there?
Anyone? Bueller?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840581</id>
	<title>Re:Trollin'.</title>
	<author>Monkeedude1212</author>
	<datestamp>1256208360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>TB:1,000,000,000,000<br>TiB:1,099,511,627,776</p><p>Different notations as to whats a Terabyte, the second one being the binary notation.</p><p>But more importantly, the summary* doesn't say which notation they're using, but because they say trillion we can assume the former. Why is that important? Look at the numbers.Thats 99 Gigs of difference.</p><p>*(Because I wouldn't read the full article)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>TB : 1,000,000,000,000TiB : 1,099,511,627,776Different notations as to whats a Terabyte , the second one being the binary notation.But more importantly , the summary * does n't say which notation they 're using , but because they say trillion we can assume the former .
Why is that important ?
Look at the numbers.Thats 99 Gigs of difference .
* ( Because I would n't read the full article )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>TB:1,000,000,000,000TiB:1,099,511,627,776Different notations as to whats a Terabyte, the second one being the binary notation.But more importantly, the summary* doesn't say which notation they're using, but because they say trillion we can assume the former.
Why is that important?
Look at the numbers.Thats 99 Gigs of difference.
*(Because I wouldn't read the full article)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840423</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29844185</id>
	<title>Re:Trollin'.</title>
	<author>sanosuke001</author>
	<datestamp>1256299200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually,

CD-Rs are 700MiB (well, ~702MiB) where DVD-R's are 4.7GB. Why one is set in base-2 and the other in base-10 I never understood...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , CD-Rs are 700MiB ( well , ~ 702MiB ) where DVD-R 's are 4.7GB .
Why one is set in base-2 and the other in base-10 I never understood.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually,

CD-Rs are 700MiB (well, ~702MiB) where DVD-R's are 4.7GB.
Why one is set in base-2 and the other in base-10 I never understood...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842277</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842219</id>
	<title>Fun with units!</title>
	<author>Interoperable</author>
	<datestamp>1256224020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>a pinhead has a diameter of 1 million nanometers</i> </p><p>Also, 1 millimeter, a giga-picometer, a tera-femtometer, a....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>a pinhead has a diameter of 1 million nanometers Also , 1 millimeter , a giga-picometer , a tera-femtometer , a... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> a pinhead has a diameter of 1 million nanometers Also, 1 millimeter, a giga-picometer, a tera-femtometer, a....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840739</id>
	<title>With this chip Windows 8 will be ready to roll out</title>
	<author>moxsam</author>
	<datestamp>1256209200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah, I know that's humour from the age of floppy disks and Zee-Dee-Roms.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , I know that 's humour from the age of floppy disks and Zee-Dee-Roms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, I know that's humour from the age of floppy disks and Zee-Dee-Roms.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841155</id>
	<title>Wait...whos fingernails????</title>
	<author>pablo\_max</author>
	<datestamp>1256212140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I mean...they could be going by these:<br><a href="http://thechive.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/longest-fingernails-world.jpg" title="thechive.com">http://thechive.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/longest-fingernails-world.jpg</a> [thechive.com]</p><p>Which, to be honest..would not be too impressive to stick 1TB on a fingernail like that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean...they could be going by these : http : //thechive.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/longest-fingernails-world.jpg [ thechive.com ] Which , to be honest..would not be too impressive to stick 1TB on a fingernail like that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean...they could be going by these:http://thechive.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/longest-fingernails-world.jpg [thechive.com]Which, to be honest..would not be too impressive to stick 1TB on a fingernail like that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841973</id>
	<title>Re:There is no chip.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256220180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>DNA, double-ha!</p><p>All of God's unique creations are his storage medium, not yours. Also, priests throughout history obviously learned of lossy-interpretive compression schemes from the almighty. That's why there's so many new codes being discovered in religious texts, the compression ratio is almost infinite. Unfortunately, their ad-hoc approach to decompression still leaves something to be desired.</p><p>P.S. You can tell where God stores its porn, too. Just look at the duck billed platypus. Look at it!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>DNA , double-ha ! All of God 's unique creations are his storage medium , not yours .
Also , priests throughout history obviously learned of lossy-interpretive compression schemes from the almighty .
That 's why there 's so many new codes being discovered in religious texts , the compression ratio is almost infinite .
Unfortunately , their ad-hoc approach to decompression still leaves something to be desired.P.S .
You can tell where God stores its porn , too .
Just look at the duck billed platypus .
Look at it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DNA, double-ha!All of God's unique creations are his storage medium, not yours.
Also, priests throughout history obviously learned of lossy-interpretive compression schemes from the almighty.
That's why there's so many new codes being discovered in religious texts, the compression ratio is almost infinite.
Unfortunately, their ad-hoc approach to decompression still leaves something to be desired.P.S.
You can tell where God stores its porn, too.
Just look at the duck billed platypus.
Look at it!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840915</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841033</id>
	<title>Modded 'informative'???</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256211300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Moderators, something just went 'whoosh' over your heads.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Moderators , something just went 'whoosh ' over your heads .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Moderators, something just went 'whoosh' over your heads.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840663</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29843831</id>
	<title>Re:Trollin'.</title>
	<author>master\_p</author>
	<datestamp>1256293560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since we are talking about digital computers based on the binary numerical system, using base 2 makes a lot more sense than using base 10.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since we are talking about digital computers based on the binary numerical system , using base 2 makes a lot more sense than using base 10 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since we are talking about digital computers based on the binary numerical system, using base 2 makes a lot more sense than using base 10.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842277</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840423</id>
	<title>Trollin'.</title>
	<author>Z34107</author>
	<datestamp>1256207580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i><nobr> <wbr></nobr>...have created a new fingernail-size chip that can hold 1 trillion bytes (a terabyte) of data.</i> </p><p>A trillion bytes is a terabyte?  You best be trollin', summary.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...have created a new fingernail-size chip that can hold 1 trillion bytes ( a terabyte ) of data .
A trillion bytes is a terabyte ?
You best be trollin ' , summary .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>  ...have created a new fingernail-size chip that can hold 1 trillion bytes (a terabyte) of data.
A trillion bytes is a terabyte?
You best be trollin', summary.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841135</id>
	<title>Re:damn</title>
	<author>mhajicek</author>
	<datestamp>1256212020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The thing to do would be to just implant an interface device.  The hardware you interface with will be much easier to replace that way.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The thing to do would be to just implant an interface device .
The hardware you interface with will be much easier to replace that way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The thing to do would be to just implant an interface device.
The hardware you interface with will be much easier to replace that way.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840665</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29847253</id>
	<title>Re:Finger nail-sized chip?</title>
	<author>iamhassi</author>
	<datestamp>1256319060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"Are we talking in units of man hands or lady hands?"</i>
<br> <br>
<a href="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.stylelist.com/blog/media/2009/09/lee-redmond-longest-fingernails-240tp090309.jpg" title="blogcdn.com">her fingernails</a> [blogcdn.com], so roughly 1/4" x 36".</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Are we talking in units of man hands or lady hands ?
" her fingernails [ blogcdn.com ] , so roughly 1/4 " x 36 " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Are we talking in units of man hands or lady hands?
"
 
her fingernails [blogcdn.com], so roughly 1/4" x 36".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841911</id>
	<title>Re:The good news</title>
	<author>jmknsd</author>
	<datestamp>1256219400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have one of those already, mounted on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/null.<br>I'm not sure how big it is, but I have been writing stuff to it for years and it is still not full.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have one of those already , mounted on /dev/null.I 'm not sure how big it is , but I have been writing stuff to it for years and it is still not full .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have one of those already, mounted on /dev/null.I'm not sure how big it is, but I have been writing stuff to it for years and it is still not full.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840663</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840521</id>
	<title>Is this a real writable chip?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256208000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or just a demonstration of an artificial structure with resolution / density that'd permit 1 TB in whatever their size is?</p><p>I didn't see anything in the article that leads me to believe it's an actual storage device. Come to think of it, I'm not sure it's even necessarily a "fingernail-sized" chip they made, just that if you scaled their research to that size it'd hold 1 TB.</p><p>Any information other than this incredibly vague article? (I swear, more and more frequently we're seeing useless articles that say even less than the press release they're drawn from. And aren't the press releases often DESIGNED to be vague and over-promising, possibly to attract more research dollars?)  Be nice if we'd just see their actual research, or a rough draft of a paper, or even just a frank interview with the geeks involved.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or just a demonstration of an artificial structure with resolution / density that 'd permit 1 TB in whatever their size is ? I did n't see anything in the article that leads me to believe it 's an actual storage device .
Come to think of it , I 'm not sure it 's even necessarily a " fingernail-sized " chip they made , just that if you scaled their research to that size it 'd hold 1 TB.Any information other than this incredibly vague article ?
( I swear , more and more frequently we 're seeing useless articles that say even less than the press release they 're drawn from .
And are n't the press releases often DESIGNED to be vague and over-promising , possibly to attract more research dollars ?
) Be nice if we 'd just see their actual research , or a rough draft of a paper , or even just a frank interview with the geeks involved .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or just a demonstration of an artificial structure with resolution / density that'd permit 1 TB in whatever their size is?I didn't see anything in the article that leads me to believe it's an actual storage device.
Come to think of it, I'm not sure it's even necessarily a "fingernail-sized" chip they made, just that if you scaled their research to that size it'd hold 1 TB.Any information other than this incredibly vague article?
(I swear, more and more frequently we're seeing useless articles that say even less than the press release they're drawn from.
And aren't the press releases often DESIGNED to be vague and over-promising, possibly to attract more research dollars?
)  Be nice if we'd just see their actual research, or a rough draft of a paper, or even just a frank interview with the geeks involved.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29843097</id>
	<title>Re:damn</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256237340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Soooo John Titor, at last we meet again, IPv4 connection to IPv4 connection. I am Borg Gates, I killed your father. You have no chance to survive make your time. Prepare to be assimilated. One thousand nations of the software empire descend upon you!</p><p>And so, my..."friend", my CAPTCHA is "combats". Oh yes, the God of Tech has with no ambiguity surely smiled upon me. I shall as well facilely smile with graciousness once thy pitiful organic self is succumbed to mine incogitable powers beyond mortal existence. May the nefarious demigod BAAL-MUUR smite thee with His most grandiose application of impulse upon a mobile accommodation for positioning the posterior.<br>Mwohohohohohoho!!!!!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Soooo John Titor , at last we meet again , IPv4 connection to IPv4 connection .
I am Borg Gates , I killed your father .
You have no chance to survive make your time .
Prepare to be assimilated .
One thousand nations of the software empire descend upon you ! And so , my... " friend " , my CAPTCHA is " combats " .
Oh yes , the God of Tech has with no ambiguity surely smiled upon me .
I shall as well facilely smile with graciousness once thy pitiful organic self is succumbed to mine incogitable powers beyond mortal existence .
May the nefarious demigod BAAL-MUUR smite thee with His most grandiose application of impulse upon a mobile accommodation for positioning the posterior.Mwohohohohohoho ! ! ! ! ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Soooo John Titor, at last we meet again, IPv4 connection to IPv4 connection.
I am Borg Gates, I killed your father.
You have no chance to survive make your time.
Prepare to be assimilated.
One thousand nations of the software empire descend upon you!And so, my..."friend", my CAPTCHA is "combats".
Oh yes, the God of Tech has with no ambiguity surely smiled upon me.
I shall as well facilely smile with graciousness once thy pitiful organic self is succumbed to mine incogitable powers beyond mortal existence.
May the nefarious demigod BAAL-MUUR smite thee with His most grandiose application of impulse upon a mobile accommodation for positioning the posterior.Mwohohohohohoho!!!!!!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840499</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840535</id>
	<title>"A man with a tape recorder up his nose" . . .</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256208060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> . . . so now I know how the Monty Python crew pulled off that trick . . . this music was stored on his fingernail!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>.
. .
so now I know how the Monty Python crew pulled off that trick .
. .
this music was stored on his fingernail !</tokentext>
<sentencetext> .
. .
so now I know how the Monty Python crew pulled off that trick .
. .
this music was stored on his fingernail!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29843905</id>
	<title>Porn</title>
	<author>Fengpost</author>
	<datestamp>1256294940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It is weird that I have not seen a post about p0rn yet!</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is weird that I have not seen a post about p0rn yet !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is weird that I have not seen a post about p0rn yet!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840571</id>
	<title>Terabyte problem</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256208300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Gotta have ten bytes I have stored in a short two secs time in that terabyte of data.  What do I do to get to it if it isn't super-fast recalled?  Like speed...there is a limit to storage cap with speed..............</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Got ta have ten bytes I have stored in a short two secs time in that terabyte of data .
What do I do to get to it if it is n't super-fast recalled ?
Like speed...there is a limit to storage cap with speed............. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gotta have ten bytes I have stored in a short two secs time in that terabyte of data.
What do I do to get to it if it isn't super-fast recalled?
Like speed...there is a limit to storage cap with speed..............</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29846757</id>
	<title>Re:Trollin'.</title>
	<author>sexconker</author>
	<datestamp>1256316540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Base 10 moran is wrong again.</p><p>Bits/bytes have NEVER been used to measure bandwidth.  Baud has.</p><p>Anyone using bits/bytes for bandwidth is an idiot.</p><p>Bits/bytes are for throughput.</p><p>And yes - people still lie in this measurement to make it look bigger.</p><p>Hard drive capacity is driven by the same bullshit marketing.</p><p>Optical media is the same.  Hell, they even include a lot of overhead and unusable space - DVD-5 and DVD-9.</p><p>File sizes are reported PROPERLY, using 1024, in any competent program/OS.</p><p>The only people who are confused are the idiots who insist on 1000.</p><p>No, I'm not confusing anything.  And you've got it wrong - we don't measure bits, we count them.  This is where you and all other SI proponents fail.  Bits are quantum and are counted - they are not measured classically.  Hybrid derivative?  1024 is a power of two that is a convenient size to work with.  1000 is a power of 10 that is a convenient size to work with.</p><p>The explicit distinction was made after decades of work and science had been done using 1024.  Changing the fucking meaning to 1000 CAUSES confusion when you look at any work done before the change.</p><p>1024 is correct, and always has been.<br>1000 is wrong, and always will be.<br>It's not an SI unit, it's not meant to be.<br>It doesn't step on the toes of any SI units.  If there's a b or B, it's using 1024, and for good reason.</p><p>If you're confused, don't work with computers.</p><p>Quick, how many 100 MB files fit onto a 4.377 GB DVD?</p><p>Man you just proved that you don't get it.<br>What were you trying to prove with that?  That the ibi bullshit is easier to work with?  But it means the exact same thing as the correct scalar prefixes do.</p><p>And even in your magical land of KB = 1000 B and KiB meaning 1024 B, the question is just as quickly answered because you have the same base (1000 vs 1024) on either side.</p><p>QUICK!  How many 22 ButtLoad morans fit into a 52 ShitLoad box!?</p><p>Duh, 52 / 22 * ShitLoad / ButtLoad<br>= 2.36... AssLoad morans</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Base 10 moran is wrong again.Bits/bytes have NEVER been used to measure bandwidth .
Baud has.Anyone using bits/bytes for bandwidth is an idiot.Bits/bytes are for throughput.And yes - people still lie in this measurement to make it look bigger.Hard drive capacity is driven by the same bullshit marketing.Optical media is the same .
Hell , they even include a lot of overhead and unusable space - DVD-5 and DVD-9.File sizes are reported PROPERLY , using 1024 , in any competent program/OS.The only people who are confused are the idiots who insist on 1000.No , I 'm not confusing anything .
And you 've got it wrong - we do n't measure bits , we count them .
This is where you and all other SI proponents fail .
Bits are quantum and are counted - they are not measured classically .
Hybrid derivative ?
1024 is a power of two that is a convenient size to work with .
1000 is a power of 10 that is a convenient size to work with.The explicit distinction was made after decades of work and science had been done using 1024 .
Changing the fucking meaning to 1000 CAUSES confusion when you look at any work done before the change.1024 is correct , and always has been.1000 is wrong , and always will be.It 's not an SI unit , it 's not meant to be.It does n't step on the toes of any SI units .
If there 's a b or B , it 's using 1024 , and for good reason.If you 're confused , do n't work with computers.Quick , how many 100 MB files fit onto a 4.377 GB DVD ? Man you just proved that you do n't get it.What were you trying to prove with that ?
That the ibi bullshit is easier to work with ?
But it means the exact same thing as the correct scalar prefixes do.And even in your magical land of KB = 1000 B and KiB meaning 1024 B , the question is just as quickly answered because you have the same base ( 1000 vs 1024 ) on either side.QUICK !
How many 22 ButtLoad morans fit into a 52 ShitLoad box !
? Duh , 52 / 22 * ShitLoad / ButtLoad = 2.36... AssLoad morans</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Base 10 moran is wrong again.Bits/bytes have NEVER been used to measure bandwidth.
Baud has.Anyone using bits/bytes for bandwidth is an idiot.Bits/bytes are for throughput.And yes - people still lie in this measurement to make it look bigger.Hard drive capacity is driven by the same bullshit marketing.Optical media is the same.
Hell, they even include a lot of overhead and unusable space - DVD-5 and DVD-9.File sizes are reported PROPERLY, using 1024, in any competent program/OS.The only people who are confused are the idiots who insist on 1000.No, I'm not confusing anything.
And you've got it wrong - we don't measure bits, we count them.
This is where you and all other SI proponents fail.
Bits are quantum and are counted - they are not measured classically.
Hybrid derivative?
1024 is a power of two that is a convenient size to work with.
1000 is a power of 10 that is a convenient size to work with.The explicit distinction was made after decades of work and science had been done using 1024.
Changing the fucking meaning to 1000 CAUSES confusion when you look at any work done before the change.1024 is correct, and always has been.1000 is wrong, and always will be.It's not an SI unit, it's not meant to be.It doesn't step on the toes of any SI units.
If there's a b or B, it's using 1024, and for good reason.If you're confused, don't work with computers.Quick, how many 100 MB files fit onto a 4.377 GB DVD?Man you just proved that you don't get it.What were you trying to prove with that?
That the ibi bullshit is easier to work with?
But it means the exact same thing as the correct scalar prefixes do.And even in your magical land of KB = 1000 B and KiB meaning 1024 B, the question is just as quickly answered because you have the same base (1000 vs 1024) on either side.QUICK!
How many 22 ButtLoad morans fit into a 52 ShitLoad box!
?Duh, 52 / 22 * ShitLoad / ButtLoad= 2.36... AssLoad morans</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842277</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29843617</id>
	<title>Re:The good news</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256290200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's the point of storing data if you can't read it again later?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's the point of storing data if you ca n't read it again later ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's the point of storing data if you can't read it again later?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840663</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840915</id>
	<title>Re:There is no chip.</title>
	<author>Phat\_Tony</author>
	<datestamp>1256210520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I found an even more impressive material, and I can already manufacture it myself in bulk.<br> <br>

Each base of DNA can be AGT or C, so that's 2 bits worth of data per base pair.<br> <br>

A terabyte = 1.1259E+15 bits, so a terabyte of DNA is 5.6295E+14 base pairs.<br> <br>

For mass, [5.6295E+14 base pairs] x [660 daltons per base pair] = [3.71547E+17 daltons] = 6.169686786411827E-7 grams =<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.62 micrograms per terabyte.<br> <br>

That's smaller than my fingernail by a pretty good margin. In fact, my actual fingernail already contains maybe a petabyte of storage.<br> <br>

Unlike their new super material, I've already developed (well, OK, discovered. Well, no, read about other people discovering) techniques for reading, writing, and copying data with this storage medium.<br> <br>

However, like them, I haven't worked out any computer interface yet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I found an even more impressive material , and I can already manufacture it myself in bulk .
Each base of DNA can be AGT or C , so that 's 2 bits worth of data per base pair .
A terabyte = 1.1259E + 15 bits , so a terabyte of DNA is 5.6295E + 14 base pairs .
For mass , [ 5.6295E + 14 base pairs ] x [ 660 daltons per base pair ] = [ 3.71547E + 17 daltons ] = 6.169686786411827E-7 grams = .62 micrograms per terabyte .
That 's smaller than my fingernail by a pretty good margin .
In fact , my actual fingernail already contains maybe a petabyte of storage .
Unlike their new super material , I 've already developed ( well , OK , discovered .
Well , no , read about other people discovering ) techniques for reading , writing , and copying data with this storage medium .
However , like them , I have n't worked out any computer interface yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I found an even more impressive material, and I can already manufacture it myself in bulk.
Each base of DNA can be AGT or C, so that's 2 bits worth of data per base pair.
A terabyte = 1.1259E+15 bits, so a terabyte of DNA is 5.6295E+14 base pairs.
For mass, [5.6295E+14 base pairs] x [660 daltons per base pair] = [3.71547E+17 daltons] = 6.169686786411827E-7 grams = .62 micrograms per terabyte.
That's smaller than my fingernail by a pretty good margin.
In fact, my actual fingernail already contains maybe a petabyte of storage.
Unlike their new super material, I've already developed (well, OK, discovered.
Well, no, read about other people discovering) techniques for reading, writing, and copying data with this storage medium.
However, like them, I haven't worked out any computer interface yet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840475</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842637</id>
	<title>Re:Finger nail-sized chip?</title>
	<author>rrohbeck</author>
	<datestamp>1256229360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And how much is that in football fields? After all that's the canonical unit of area in the press.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And how much is that in football fields ?
After all that 's the canonical unit of area in the press .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And how much is that in football fields?
After all that's the canonical unit of area in the press.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840981</id>
	<title>Re:Trollin'.</title>
	<author>644bd346996</author>
	<datestamp>1256210940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The difference between one ISO terabyte and 1 TiB is relatively smaller than the variance among normal fingernails.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The difference between one ISO terabyte and 1 TiB is relatively smaller than the variance among normal fingernails .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The difference between one ISO terabyte and 1 TiB is relatively smaller than the variance among normal fingernails.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840581</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840451
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840501
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840431
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840665
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29844707
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840741
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29845229
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840451
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840663
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841195
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840451
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840663
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29844911
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840423
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840581
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840981
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841455
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840427
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29998036
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840451
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840663
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841189
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840451
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840527
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840451
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840663
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29843035
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840743
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840661
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840899
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840423
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840581
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29849009
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840431
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840665
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841471
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840475
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840915
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841391
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840451
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840663
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841011
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29847253
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840475
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842037
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840475
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840915
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842999
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840551
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841489
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840451
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840687
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840471
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840423
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840581
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841603
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842277
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29844185
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840661
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842923
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840475
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29849753
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840431
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840541
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840451
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840663
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841051
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841707
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840661
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842173
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840451
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840663
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841033
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840475
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840915
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842373
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840475
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840915
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841611
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840475
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841093
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29843853
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840423
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840581
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841603
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842277
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29846757
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840451
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840663
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841911
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840475
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842247
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840423
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840581
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29843765
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840475
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840915
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841973
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840423
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840581
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841603
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842277
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29843399
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840475
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840915
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842313
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840423
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840581
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842099
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840475
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842103
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840451
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840663
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841249
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841317
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840475
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840915
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29845055
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840451
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840663
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841059
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840423
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840581
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29844673
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840451
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840663
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29844601
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840475
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840915
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841669
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840431
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840665
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841135
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842147
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840423
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840553
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29845353
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840431
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29843097
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840423
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840581
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841603
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842277
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29843831
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29875777
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840451
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840663
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29843617
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840423
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840581
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840905
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840451
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840663
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841005
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840423
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840581
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840907
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840423
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840581
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29844739
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2127213_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29844219
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_2127213.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840623
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29845353
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_2127213.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840551
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841489
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_2127213.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840451
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840501
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840687
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840663
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841033
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841249
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29843617
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841051
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841005
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841011
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841189
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29843035
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29844911
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841059
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29844601
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841911
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841195
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840527
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_2127213.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840741
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29845229
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_2127213.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840897
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_2127213.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840431
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840541
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840499
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29843097
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840665
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841471
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29844707
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841135
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_2127213.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840413
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29847253
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841455
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840743
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842637
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842147
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841707
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840471
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29844219
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841317
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_2127213.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840475
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840915
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841611
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842313
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841391
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29845055
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842999
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841973
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842373
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841669
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842103
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842037
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29849753
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842247
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841093
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29843853
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_2127213.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840457
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_2127213.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840423
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840581
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842099
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840907
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29841603
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842277
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29846757
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29843831
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29875777
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29843399
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29844185
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840905
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840981
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29844739
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29849009
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29843765
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29844673
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840553
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_2127213.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29846939
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_2127213.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840535
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_2127213.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840427
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29998036
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_2127213.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840949
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_2127213.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840661
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842923
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29842173
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840899
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_2127213.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840597
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_2127213.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840641
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_2127213.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2127213.29840521
</commentlist>
</conversation>
