<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_27_1949223</id>
	<title>Internet Probably Couldn't Handle a Flu Pandemic</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1256631720000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Several readers including mikael and gclef noted a report from the General Accountability Office suggesting that it should be Homeland Security's job to <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN2620750120091026?sp=true">make sure the nation's business can flow during a pandemic</a>. In particular, if H1N1 sends workers and schoolchildren home in large numbers, GAO thinks it might be a good idea for ISPs to prioritize traffic (favoring commerce over games, say), to reduce network speeds, and possibly to shut down high-traffic Web sites. DHS retorts that not only isn't it their job to control the Internet in this way, but the GAO is naive to believe it's even possible: "An expectation of unlimited Internet access during a pandemic is not realistic." <i>"[DHS] does not even have a plan to start work on the issue, the General Accountability Office said. But the Homeland Security Department accused the GAO of having unrealistic expectations of how the Internet could be managed if millions began to telework from home at the same time as bored or sick schoolchildren were playing online, sucking up valuable bandwidth. Experts have for years pointed to the potential problem of Internet access during a severe pandemic, which would be a unique kind of emergency. It would be global, affecting many areas at once, and would last for weeks or months... Many companies and government offices hope to keep operations going as much as possible with teleworking using the Internet. Among the many problems posed by this idea, however, is the issue of bandwidth..."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Several readers including mikael and gclef noted a report from the General Accountability Office suggesting that it should be Homeland Security 's job to make sure the nation 's business can flow during a pandemic .
In particular , if H1N1 sends workers and schoolchildren home in large numbers , GAO thinks it might be a good idea for ISPs to prioritize traffic ( favoring commerce over games , say ) , to reduce network speeds , and possibly to shut down high-traffic Web sites .
DHS retorts that not only is n't it their job to control the Internet in this way , but the GAO is naive to believe it 's even possible : " An expectation of unlimited Internet access during a pandemic is not realistic .
" " [ DHS ] does not even have a plan to start work on the issue , the General Accountability Office said .
But the Homeland Security Department accused the GAO of having unrealistic expectations of how the Internet could be managed if millions began to telework from home at the same time as bored or sick schoolchildren were playing online , sucking up valuable bandwidth .
Experts have for years pointed to the potential problem of Internet access during a severe pandemic , which would be a unique kind of emergency .
It would be global , affecting many areas at once , and would last for weeks or months... Many companies and government offices hope to keep operations going as much as possible with teleworking using the Internet .
Among the many problems posed by this idea , however , is the issue of bandwidth... "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Several readers including mikael and gclef noted a report from the General Accountability Office suggesting that it should be Homeland Security's job to make sure the nation's business can flow during a pandemic.
In particular, if H1N1 sends workers and schoolchildren home in large numbers, GAO thinks it might be a good idea for ISPs to prioritize traffic (favoring commerce over games, say), to reduce network speeds, and possibly to shut down high-traffic Web sites.
DHS retorts that not only isn't it their job to control the Internet in this way, but the GAO is naive to believe it's even possible: "An expectation of unlimited Internet access during a pandemic is not realistic.
" "[DHS] does not even have a plan to start work on the issue, the General Accountability Office said.
But the Homeland Security Department accused the GAO of having unrealistic expectations of how the Internet could be managed if millions began to telework from home at the same time as bored or sick schoolchildren were playing online, sucking up valuable bandwidth.
Experts have for years pointed to the potential problem of Internet access during a severe pandemic, which would be a unique kind of emergency.
It would be global, affecting many areas at once, and would last for weeks or months... Many companies and government offices hope to keep operations going as much as possible with teleworking using the Internet.
Among the many problems posed by this idea, however, is the issue of bandwidth..."</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888533</id>
	<title>Go to your room and no video games!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256635500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>In event of contagious diseases, we will quarantine everyone to their houses.
Then we will shut off all your ability to play online games.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In event of contagious diseases , we will quarantine everyone to their houses .
Then we will shut off all your ability to play online games .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In event of contagious diseases, we will quarantine everyone to their houses.
Then we will shut off all your ability to play online games.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889715</id>
	<title>Cross over ?</title>
	<author>Zoxed</author>
	<datestamp>1256640000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I first read the title "Internet Probably Couldn't Handle a Flu Pandemic" I thought yikes, I have heard of viruses crossing from animals to humans, but now they can cross from humans to the Internet ?<br>Does that mean I can catch the flu from my Internet connected work PC running Windows ? (I think I am safe at home: *NIX PCs would be still be virus free and so safe to use<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-) And should I disinfect my hands after using that Windows PC ? (although I already do sometimes get that urge anyway<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I first read the title " Internet Probably Could n't Handle a Flu Pandemic " I thought yikes , I have heard of viruses crossing from animals to humans , but now they can cross from humans to the Internet ? Does that mean I can catch the flu from my Internet connected work PC running Windows ?
( I think I am safe at home : * NIX PCs would be still be virus free and so safe to use : - ) And should I disinfect my hands after using that Windows PC ?
( although I already do sometimes get that urge anyway : - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I first read the title "Internet Probably Couldn't Handle a Flu Pandemic" I thought yikes, I have heard of viruses crossing from animals to humans, but now they can cross from humans to the Internet ?Does that mean I can catch the flu from my Internet connected work PC running Windows ?
(I think I am safe at home: *NIX PCs would be still be virus free and so safe to use :-) And should I disinfect my hands after using that Windows PC ?
(although I already do sometimes get that urge anyway :-)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888645</id>
	<title>Oh FFS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256635860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now the flu is going to kill network neutrality? Fuck you. I'm going to build my own Internet and you're not invited.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now the flu is going to kill network neutrality ?
Fuck you .
I 'm going to build my own Internet and you 're not invited .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now the flu is going to kill network neutrality?
Fuck you.
I'm going to build my own Internet and you're not invited.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889227</id>
	<title>Love Letter</title>
	<author>pete-classic</author>
	<datestamp>1256638140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dear Internet,</p><p>Be neutral.  Except when we don't want you to be neutral.</p><p>Love,<br>Congress</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dear Internet,Be neutral .
Except when we do n't want you to be neutral.Love,Congress</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dear Internet,Be neutral.
Except when we don't want you to be neutral.Love,Congress</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889409</id>
	<title>More BS from GAO</title>
	<author>okvol</author>
	<datestamp>1256638920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Internet won't die. Internet sites will die. AT&amp;T's 3G network will certainly die.

For instance, on 9/11, CNN had to drop to a text only site. They survived that way when their graphical version died like a slashdotted site. But, on 9/11, sites unrelated to news were still readily available. Amazon was still up, TV Guide was up, Travelocity was up.

Yes, the bureaucrats at GAO are 1d10ts. They need to crawl back into their hole. This sounds like some document pre-written by AT&amp;T.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Internet wo n't die .
Internet sites will die .
AT&amp;T 's 3G network will certainly die .
For instance , on 9/11 , CNN had to drop to a text only site .
They survived that way when their graphical version died like a slashdotted site .
But , on 9/11 , sites unrelated to news were still readily available .
Amazon was still up , TV Guide was up , Travelocity was up .
Yes , the bureaucrats at GAO are 1d10ts .
They need to crawl back into their hole .
This sounds like some document pre-written by AT&amp;T .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Internet won't die.
Internet sites will die.
AT&amp;T's 3G network will certainly die.
For instance, on 9/11, CNN had to drop to a text only site.
They survived that way when their graphical version died like a slashdotted site.
But, on 9/11, sites unrelated to news were still readily available.
Amazon was still up, TV Guide was up, Travelocity was up.
Yes, the bureaucrats at GAO are 1d10ts.
They need to crawl back into their hole.
This sounds like some document pre-written by AT&amp;T.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888681</id>
	<title>Re:Go to your room and no video games!</title>
	<author>girlintraining</author>
	<datestamp>1256635920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In event of contagious diseases, we will quarantine everyone to their houses. Then we will shut off all your ability to play online games.</p></div><p>If you play online video games, you're supporting terrorism.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In event of contagious diseases , we will quarantine everyone to their houses .
Then we will shut off all your ability to play online games.If you play online video games , you 're supporting terrorism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In event of contagious diseases, we will quarantine everyone to their houses.
Then we will shut off all your ability to play online games.If you play online video games, you're supporting terrorism.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889555</id>
	<title>I can see the future</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256639460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What will happen is this: </p><p>1. They prioritize "commerce and health" traffic over gaming and file sharing to "work though the flu pandemic".<br>2. After the pandemic is over, they will keep the system in place.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What will happen is this : 1 .
They prioritize " commerce and health " traffic over gaming and file sharing to " work though the flu pandemic " .2 .
After the pandemic is over , they will keep the system in place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What will happen is this: 1.
They prioritize "commerce and health" traffic over gaming and file sharing to "work though the flu pandemic".2.
After the pandemic is over, they will keep the system in place.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888727</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>cabjf</author>
	<datestamp>1256636040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is the GAO instigating.  DHS slapped them down saying that not only is it not their job, it's probably not even possible.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is the GAO instigating .
DHS slapped them down saying that not only is it not their job , it 's probably not even possible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is the GAO instigating.
DHS slapped them down saying that not only is it not their job, it's probably not even possible.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889077</id>
	<title>Re:Lets vote</title>
	<author>TarrVetus</author>
	<datestamp>1256637480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>You know you're becoming a control freak when Homeland Security tells you that you're going too far.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You know you 're becoming a control freak when Homeland Security tells you that you 're going too far .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know you're becoming a control freak when Homeland Security tells you that you're going too far.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888575</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889853</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256640480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Considering how fast they shut down Wikileaks when palins email was "hacked", I'm pretty sure they can do whatever they damn well please.  As much as we would like to pretend the internet is not under the control of the government, the bottom line is that when men with guns and (maybe) warrants show up, every business does the same thing.  COMPLY.  It may not be total and complete control, but it doesn't have to be.  They can and HAVE blackholed websites in the past, they WILL do it again.  <br>
&nbsp; <br>TFA talks about fine grain controls that probably don't exist in a universal implementation, but they do exist on various networks and therefore it's theoretically possible to do as described.  However, it doesn't make any sense.  Shutting off, or slowing down online gaming would not give you a particularly significant amount of traffic savings.  Most online games use very little data flow, and instead rely on fast pings and small packets.  I can play EVE or COD4 all day and use less bandwidth than an hour on Hulu or Youtube.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Considering how fast they shut down Wikileaks when palins email was " hacked " , I 'm pretty sure they can do whatever they damn well please .
As much as we would like to pretend the internet is not under the control of the government , the bottom line is that when men with guns and ( maybe ) warrants show up , every business does the same thing .
COMPLY. It may not be total and complete control , but it does n't have to be .
They can and HAVE blackholed websites in the past , they WILL do it again .
  TFA talks about fine grain controls that probably do n't exist in a universal implementation , but they do exist on various networks and therefore it 's theoretically possible to do as described .
However , it does n't make any sense .
Shutting off , or slowing down online gaming would not give you a particularly significant amount of traffic savings .
Most online games use very little data flow , and instead rely on fast pings and small packets .
I can play EVE or COD4 all day and use less bandwidth than an hour on Hulu or Youtube .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Considering how fast they shut down Wikileaks when palins email was "hacked", I'm pretty sure they can do whatever they damn well please.
As much as we would like to pretend the internet is not under the control of the government, the bottom line is that when men with guns and (maybe) warrants show up, every business does the same thing.
COMPLY.  It may not be total and complete control, but it doesn't have to be.
They can and HAVE blackholed websites in the past, they WILL do it again.
  TFA talks about fine grain controls that probably don't exist in a universal implementation, but they do exist on various networks and therefore it's theoretically possible to do as described.
However, it doesn't make any sense.
Shutting off, or slowing down online gaming would not give you a particularly significant amount of traffic savings.
Most online games use very little data flow, and instead rely on fast pings and small packets.
I can play EVE or COD4 all day and use less bandwidth than an hour on Hulu or Youtube.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888727</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889731</id>
	<title>Re:I use more bandwidth at work</title>
	<author>celle</author>
	<datestamp>1256640060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Unless the wife isn't home. Then I burn a hole in my wall downloading porn."</p><p>I thought that's what the wife was for.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Unless the wife is n't home .
Then I burn a hole in my wall downloading porn .
" I thought that 's what the wife was for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Unless the wife isn't home.
Then I burn a hole in my wall downloading porn.
"I thought that's what the wife was for.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888571</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888749</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256636160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hello, did you RTFS?  I'm no fan of DHS, but they ARE the ones saying that the GAO is on crack for even thinking about this idea, and that they aren't planning on doing anything.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hello , did you RTFS ?
I 'm no fan of DHS , but they ARE the ones saying that the GAO is on crack for even thinking about this idea , and that they are n't planning on doing anything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hello, did you RTFS?
I'm no fan of DHS, but they ARE the ones saying that the GAO is on crack for even thinking about this idea, and that they aren't planning on doing anything.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888575</id>
	<title>Lets vote</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256635680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Raise your hand if this sounds like something you WANT the department of homeland security to be worrying about.</p><p>[crickets]</p><p>That's what I thought.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Raise your hand if this sounds like something you WANT the department of homeland security to be worrying about .
[ crickets ] That 's what I thought .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Raise your hand if this sounds like something you WANT the department of homeland security to be worrying about.
[crickets]That's what I thought.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888775</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>jdgeorge</author>
	<datestamp>1256636280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, in this case, they (DHS) are saying it's irrational to expect the government to be able to regulate the internet in the event of a public health emergency, which I happen to agree with.</p><p>As to getting rid of DHS, that's would likely entail just breaking the DHS back into the separate agencies <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United\_States\_Department\_of\_Homeland\_Security#Creation\_of\_DHS" title="wikipedia.org">from which it was formed.</a> [wikipedia.org] There could be some benefit, but based on what I can discern, I'm not sure what would be gained in making that change. Any thoughts?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , in this case , they ( DHS ) are saying it 's irrational to expect the government to be able to regulate the internet in the event of a public health emergency , which I happen to agree with.As to getting rid of DHS , that 's would likely entail just breaking the DHS back into the separate agencies from which it was formed .
[ wikipedia.org ] There could be some benefit , but based on what I can discern , I 'm not sure what would be gained in making that change .
Any thoughts ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, in this case, they (DHS) are saying it's irrational to expect the government to be able to regulate the internet in the event of a public health emergency, which I happen to agree with.As to getting rid of DHS, that's would likely entail just breaking the DHS back into the separate agencies from which it was formed.
[wikipedia.org] There could be some benefit, but based on what I can discern, I'm not sure what would be gained in making that change.
Any thoughts?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888549</id>
	<title>sigh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256635560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Can't we get rid of the DHS yet? I don't think there's one government organization I like less.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ca n't we get rid of the DHS yet ?
I do n't think there 's one government organization I like less .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can't we get rid of the DHS yet?
I don't think there's one government organization I like less.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889643</id>
	<title>They just want to block Twitter and Facebook</title>
	<author>akabigbro</author>
	<datestamp>1256639760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>By high traffic they mean sites that could inform people of the outbreak potential.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>By high traffic they mean sites that could inform people of the outbreak potential .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By high traffic they mean sites that could inform people of the outbreak potential.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29893315</id>
	<title>Re:Bandwidth problems</title>
	<author>Casandro</author>
	<datestamp>1256665800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The point is simply, I'm paying my ISP to provide me bandwidth. I'm paying them to buy whatever is needed to get most of my packets through.If there is any kind of congestion over longer periods of time it's their fault.</p><p>If they have to pay to much to their upstream provider: Well why didn't they peer with their competitors?</p><p>Most of the problems in the debate stem from ISPs beeing run as a business, however it's a public service.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The point is simply , I 'm paying my ISP to provide me bandwidth .
I 'm paying them to buy whatever is needed to get most of my packets through.If there is any kind of congestion over longer periods of time it 's their fault.If they have to pay to much to their upstream provider : Well why did n't they peer with their competitors ? Most of the problems in the debate stem from ISPs beeing run as a business , however it 's a public service .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The point is simply, I'm paying my ISP to provide me bandwidth.
I'm paying them to buy whatever is needed to get most of my packets through.If there is any kind of congestion over longer periods of time it's their fault.If they have to pay to much to their upstream provider: Well why didn't they peer with their competitors?Most of the problems in the debate stem from ISPs beeing run as a business, however it's a public service.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888753</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890933</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256645280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Fucking stoner.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Fucking stoner .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fucking stoner.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888877</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888955</id>
	<title>Re:OK, the solution for this is easy...</title>
	<author>Overzeetop</author>
	<datestamp>1256636940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You have just pissed off everyone who rents business buildings, cleans offices, sells food (prepared and packaged) in convenience shops, and just about anyone who sells anything in a downtown district. The biggest problem with modern society is that it is very efficient (where money changing hands = efficiency) for the status quo. Any major changes will hurt someone, and they're going to cry bloody murder at any attempt to move away from their optimized business cycle.</p><p>It's a great idea - though with some kinks to work out interactions - but there's so much built on centralized business it's mind boggling.  You may as well suggest that everyone move out of silicon valley and New York to the "rest of the US" where cost of living is a small fraction. It's just not going to happen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You have just pissed off everyone who rents business buildings , cleans offices , sells food ( prepared and packaged ) in convenience shops , and just about anyone who sells anything in a downtown district .
The biggest problem with modern society is that it is very efficient ( where money changing hands = efficiency ) for the status quo .
Any major changes will hurt someone , and they 're going to cry bloody murder at any attempt to move away from their optimized business cycle.It 's a great idea - though with some kinks to work out interactions - but there 's so much built on centralized business it 's mind boggling .
You may as well suggest that everyone move out of silicon valley and New York to the " rest of the US " where cost of living is a small fraction .
It 's just not going to happen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have just pissed off everyone who rents business buildings, cleans offices, sells food (prepared and packaged) in convenience shops, and just about anyone who sells anything in a downtown district.
The biggest problem with modern society is that it is very efficient (where money changing hands = efficiency) for the status quo.
Any major changes will hurt someone, and they're going to cry bloody murder at any attempt to move away from their optimized business cycle.It's a great idea - though with some kinks to work out interactions - but there's so much built on centralized business it's mind boggling.
You may as well suggest that everyone move out of silicon valley and New York to the "rest of the US" where cost of living is a small fraction.
It's just not going to happen.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888657</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889137</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Ethanol-fueled</author>
	<datestamp>1256637780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United\_States\_Department\_of\_Homeland\_Security#Criticism" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Criticism.</a> [wikipedia.org] <br> <br>

The size and mission creep of the behemoth comes to mind. Data-mining, bloat, glorified security-guard hiring practices, over-reaching harassment databases. It was created as a knee-jerk reaction to 9/11, 'nuff said.<br> <br>

It's purely business. Consolidate everything, hire cheaply, waste a-plenty. Morale goes through the toilet. I'm from a border town, and there have been articles in the paper spanning a few years describing the scumbags working the borders, to include widespread recent complaints of catcalls and groping crossing women. There is also a high turnover rate, low morale, and excessive overtime described in my hometown paper (sorry, won't tell 'ya). <br> <br>

It seems that the DHS has been created with the same mentality of the proliferation of the ultra-powerful California prison system, and their famous border abuses of detainees are well-known. My personal favorite is forced injections of psychotropic drugs. Those can be found on GOOG, by the way.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Criticism .
[ wikipedia.org ] The size and mission creep of the behemoth comes to mind .
Data-mining , bloat , glorified security-guard hiring practices , over-reaching harassment databases .
It was created as a knee-jerk reaction to 9/11 , 'nuff said .
It 's purely business .
Consolidate everything , hire cheaply , waste a-plenty .
Morale goes through the toilet .
I 'm from a border town , and there have been articles in the paper spanning a few years describing the scumbags working the borders , to include widespread recent complaints of catcalls and groping crossing women .
There is also a high turnover rate , low morale , and excessive overtime described in my hometown paper ( sorry , wo n't tell 'ya ) .
It seems that the DHS has been created with the same mentality of the proliferation of the ultra-powerful California prison system , and their famous border abuses of detainees are well-known .
My personal favorite is forced injections of psychotropic drugs .
Those can be found on GOOG , by the way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Criticism.
[wikipedia.org]  

The size and mission creep of the behemoth comes to mind.
Data-mining, bloat, glorified security-guard hiring practices, over-reaching harassment databases.
It was created as a knee-jerk reaction to 9/11, 'nuff said.
It's purely business.
Consolidate everything, hire cheaply, waste a-plenty.
Morale goes through the toilet.
I'm from a border town, and there have been articles in the paper spanning a few years describing the scumbags working the borders, to include widespread recent complaints of catcalls and groping crossing women.
There is also a high turnover rate, low morale, and excessive overtime described in my hometown paper (sorry, won't tell 'ya).
It seems that the DHS has been created with the same mentality of the proliferation of the ultra-powerful California prison system, and their famous border abuses of detainees are well-known.
My personal favorite is forced injections of psychotropic drugs.
Those can be found on GOOG, by the way.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888775</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29892943</id>
	<title>internet not handle it?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256660460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>this article is supposed to be taken as a joke right? yea america may have some bad networks but relize only reason is greed. and if your money was actually used for your benifit every single house would have fibre. now yes some slower networks may suffer the backbones CERTAINLY DO NOT!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>this article is supposed to be taken as a joke right ?
yea america may have some bad networks but relize only reason is greed .
and if your money was actually used for your benifit every single house would have fibre .
now yes some slower networks may suffer the backbones CERTAINLY DO NOT !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this article is supposed to be taken as a joke right?
yea america may have some bad networks but relize only reason is greed.
and if your money was actually used for your benifit every single house would have fibre.
now yes some slower networks may suffer the backbones CERTAINLY DO NOT!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889587</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256639520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2007/pulpit\_20070810\_002683.html</p><p>Maybe it's the phone companies and the states fault?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2007/pulpit \ _20070810 \ _002683.htmlMaybe it 's the phone companies and the states fault ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2007/pulpit\_20070810\_002683.htmlMaybe it's the phone companies and the states fault?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888727</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890373</id>
	<title>Re:Wow, just Wow</title>
	<author>R3d M3rcury</author>
	<datestamp>1256642640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> If they shut down/slowed access to such sites nationwide it would financially cripple them.</p></div><p>Well, we'd just have to bail them out, then.  Like the airlines after 9/11...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If they shut down/slowed access to such sites nationwide it would financially cripple them.Well , we 'd just have to bail them out , then .
Like the airlines after 9/11.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> If they shut down/slowed access to such sites nationwide it would financially cripple them.Well, we'd just have to bail them out, then.
Like the airlines after 9/11...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888635</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889773</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1256640180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>even more then the tax agencies.</p><p>The only exist to get around protection in place for citizens and they do NOT in any way shape or form address the issues that caused people to miss the clues regarding the  9/11 incident.</p><p>All they need was a better communication channel, even a guy whose sole job is to review note and wak up the head of the CIA or FBI to say "hey, this one is particularly worrisome".</p><p>Seriously, THAT would have stopped 9/11.</p><p>The current agencies weren't needed' and ahving a dept. that controll every other dept means the president doesn't understand WHY agencies are seperated.</p><p>Defund homeland security.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>even more then the tax agencies.The only exist to get around protection in place for citizens and they do NOT in any way shape or form address the issues that caused people to miss the clues regarding the 9/11 incident.All they need was a better communication channel , even a guy whose sole job is to review note and wak up the head of the CIA or FBI to say " hey , this one is particularly worrisome " .Seriously , THAT would have stopped 9/11.The current agencies were n't needed ' and ahving a dept .
that controll every other dept means the president does n't understand WHY agencies are seperated.Defund homeland security .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>even more then the tax agencies.The only exist to get around protection in place for citizens and they do NOT in any way shape or form address the issues that caused people to miss the clues regarding the  9/11 incident.All they need was a better communication channel, even a guy whose sole job is to review note and wak up the head of the CIA or FBI to say "hey, this one is particularly worrisome".Seriously, THAT would have stopped 9/11.The current agencies weren't needed' and ahving a dept.
that controll every other dept means the president doesn't understand WHY agencies are seperated.Defund homeland security.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888677</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888667</id>
	<title>Somewhat optimistic</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256635920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We just need an army of robots to implement all the traffic shaping rules and clear up the messes the inevitably follows.</p><p>Or implement secure remote management, maybe through a safety clearing house of some sort.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We just need an army of robots to implement all the traffic shaping rules and clear up the messes the inevitably follows.Or implement secure remote management , maybe through a safety clearing house of some sort .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We just need an army of robots to implement all the traffic shaping rules and clear up the messes the inevitably follows.Or implement secure remote management, maybe through a safety clearing house of some sort.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889907</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256640720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Hello, did you RTFS?</i></p><p>I'm sorry, are you lost?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hello , did you RTFS ? I 'm sorry , are you lost ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hello, did you RTFS?I'm sorry, are you lost?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888749</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29892731</id>
	<title>He's right the internet can't</title>
	<author>Allnighterking</author>
	<datestamp>1256658660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I mean when your keyboard starts sneezing, and your mouse has the runs, it won't be long until your modem(cable or DSL) is all congested and the packets just won't flow.  Finally, a virus for my Linux box!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean when your keyboard starts sneezing , and your mouse has the runs , it wo n't be long until your modem ( cable or DSL ) is all congested and the packets just wo n't flow .
Finally , a virus for my Linux box !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean when your keyboard starts sneezing, and your mouse has the runs, it won't be long until your modem(cable or DSL) is all congested and the packets just won't flow.
Finally, a virus for my Linux box!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29892473</id>
	<title>Couldn't handle pandemic? It already does....</title>
	<author>sjs132</author>
	<datestamp>1256656440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Idiots.. This is already a pandemic!  H1N1  (or "hini" as I like to call it.. (c) 2009) is ALREADY a PANDEMIC.   There has been cases of the H1N1 on every contentent except for Antartica...</p><p>"A pandemic (from Greek  pan "all" +  demos "people") is an epidemic of infectious disease that is spreading through human populations across a large region; for instance a continent, or even worldwide"</p><p>HIV is a pandemic, the internet didn't crash because of that.   Hini won't crash it either...  people get sick all the time and some will die, an equal # will get well and have to go back to work.</p><p>This whole hini thing reminds me more of chicken little than anything else.   Life happens and people die.  sometimes the people that die are not just old people.  Get over it and move on with your life, stop feeling guilty for being alive in a country that even during a depression is richer than most 3rd world countries that are ruled by dictators and theocrats.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Idiots.. This is already a pandemic !
H1N1 ( or " hini " as I like to call it.. ( c ) 2009 ) is ALREADY a PANDEMIC .
There has been cases of the H1N1 on every contentent except for Antartica... " A pandemic ( from Greek pan " all " + demos " people " ) is an epidemic of infectious disease that is spreading through human populations across a large region ; for instance a continent , or even worldwide " HIV is a pandemic , the internet did n't crash because of that .
Hini wo n't crash it either... people get sick all the time and some will die , an equal # will get well and have to go back to work.This whole hini thing reminds me more of chicken little than anything else .
Life happens and people die .
sometimes the people that die are not just old people .
Get over it and move on with your life , stop feeling guilty for being alive in a country that even during a depression is richer than most 3rd world countries that are ruled by dictators and theocrats .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Idiots.. This is already a pandemic!
H1N1  (or "hini" as I like to call it.. (c) 2009) is ALREADY a PANDEMIC.
There has been cases of the H1N1 on every contentent except for Antartica..."A pandemic (from Greek  pan "all" +  demos "people") is an epidemic of infectious disease that is spreading through human populations across a large region; for instance a continent, or even worldwide"HIV is a pandemic, the internet didn't crash because of that.
Hini won't crash it either...  people get sick all the time and some will die, an equal # will get well and have to go back to work.This whole hini thing reminds me more of chicken little than anything else.
Life happens and people die.
sometimes the people that die are not just old people.
Get over it and move on with your life, stop feeling guilty for being alive in a country that even during a depression is richer than most 3rd world countries that are ruled by dictators and theocrats.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889817</id>
	<title>Some sort of plan seems prudent...</title>
	<author>itmustbeavogadro</author>
	<datestamp>1256640300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>While on the surface, this article seems very Orwellian indeed, there is a strong argument to be made in favor of planning for the effects that a pandemic would have on all forms of infrastructure.  In a pandemic involving a disease with a mortality rate approaching that of the Spanish Flu of 1918 (<a href="http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol12no01/05-0979.htm" title="cdc.gov" rel="nofollow">ONLY 2.5\%</a> [cdc.gov]) or of avian flu, <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/flu/avian/outbreaks/current.htm" title="cdc.gov" rel="nofollow">which is a staggering 60\%</a> [cdc.gov], people would rapidly confine themselves to their homes.  It is perfectly reasonable to expect that, in this situation, the number of people telecommuting would increase drastically, which, coupled with the large increase in bandwidth caused by huge numbers of bored children and adults who are all at home, would a great deal of strain on our current internet infrastructure, especially in the last mile.  Vital government and business functions would absolutely depend on their employee's ability to telecommute in such a situation.

It the ability to respond to an emergency depends on the availability of infrastructure then it is prudent to have a plan in place to preserve the critical function of that infrastructure during an emergency.  The internet would certainly be a vital part of the response to a pandemic, and it would be vital to the continued functioning of society during the the pandemic.  Therefore, it seems profoundly important for the DHS, whose responsibility is, ostensibly, the preservation and protection of our society, to develop plans to preserve the critical functions of the internet.  The ability of an engineer to monitor critical systems at a power plant remotely, or the communications of medical professionals dealing with the emergency would absolutely deserve priority over a connection to an online game or the ability to read the latest headlines.</htmltext>
<tokenext>While on the surface , this article seems very Orwellian indeed , there is a strong argument to be made in favor of planning for the effects that a pandemic would have on all forms of infrastructure .
In a pandemic involving a disease with a mortality rate approaching that of the Spanish Flu of 1918 ( ONLY 2.5 \ % [ cdc.gov ] ) or of avian flu , which is a staggering 60 \ % [ cdc.gov ] , people would rapidly confine themselves to their homes .
It is perfectly reasonable to expect that , in this situation , the number of people telecommuting would increase drastically , which , coupled with the large increase in bandwidth caused by huge numbers of bored children and adults who are all at home , would a great deal of strain on our current internet infrastructure , especially in the last mile .
Vital government and business functions would absolutely depend on their employee 's ability to telecommute in such a situation .
It the ability to respond to an emergency depends on the availability of infrastructure then it is prudent to have a plan in place to preserve the critical function of that infrastructure during an emergency .
The internet would certainly be a vital part of the response to a pandemic , and it would be vital to the continued functioning of society during the the pandemic .
Therefore , it seems profoundly important for the DHS , whose responsibility is , ostensibly , the preservation and protection of our society , to develop plans to preserve the critical functions of the internet .
The ability of an engineer to monitor critical systems at a power plant remotely , or the communications of medical professionals dealing with the emergency would absolutely deserve priority over a connection to an online game or the ability to read the latest headlines .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While on the surface, this article seems very Orwellian indeed, there is a strong argument to be made in favor of planning for the effects that a pandemic would have on all forms of infrastructure.
In a pandemic involving a disease with a mortality rate approaching that of the Spanish Flu of 1918 (ONLY 2.5\% [cdc.gov]) or of avian flu, which is a staggering 60\% [cdc.gov], people would rapidly confine themselves to their homes.
It is perfectly reasonable to expect that, in this situation, the number of people telecommuting would increase drastically, which, coupled with the large increase in bandwidth caused by huge numbers of bored children and adults who are all at home, would a great deal of strain on our current internet infrastructure, especially in the last mile.
Vital government and business functions would absolutely depend on their employee's ability to telecommute in such a situation.
It the ability to respond to an emergency depends on the availability of infrastructure then it is prudent to have a plan in place to preserve the critical function of that infrastructure during an emergency.
The internet would certainly be a vital part of the response to a pandemic, and it would be vital to the continued functioning of society during the the pandemic.
Therefore, it seems profoundly important for the DHS, whose responsibility is, ostensibly, the preservation and protection of our society, to develop plans to preserve the critical functions of the internet.
The ability of an engineer to monitor critical systems at a power plant remotely, or the communications of medical professionals dealing with the emergency would absolutely deserve priority over a connection to an online game or the ability to read the latest headlines.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889099</id>
	<title>Defining priority traffic is not easy</title>
	<author>RichMan</author>
	<datestamp>1256637600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The definition of traffic to give priority to is usually - mine is important. The other guys is not.</p><p>--<br>What about a large bunch of coders working at home who all need to download the latest build. To be nice they have set up a torrent site. Opps that gets downgrade so they decide to ship it all as email attachements because that has higher priority.</p><p>--<br>What about people that play games for a living. Yes the gold farmers. Who says there work is less work than the executive who remote desktops in to read email rather than using a remote email client.</p><p>--<br>What about the movie reviewer who needs to download and review the latest movie.</p><p>--<br>Yes some of these are stretching it but defining work/play and priority vs not priority needs to read the minds of the end user not look at the traffic type.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The definition of traffic to give priority to is usually - mine is important .
The other guys is not.--What about a large bunch of coders working at home who all need to download the latest build .
To be nice they have set up a torrent site .
Opps that gets downgrade so they decide to ship it all as email attachements because that has higher priority.--What about people that play games for a living .
Yes the gold farmers .
Who says there work is less work than the executive who remote desktops in to read email rather than using a remote email client.--What about the movie reviewer who needs to download and review the latest movie.--Yes some of these are stretching it but defining work/play and priority vs not priority needs to read the minds of the end user not look at the traffic type .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The definition of traffic to give priority to is usually - mine is important.
The other guys is not.--What about a large bunch of coders working at home who all need to download the latest build.
To be nice they have set up a torrent site.
Opps that gets downgrade so they decide to ship it all as email attachements because that has higher priority.--What about people that play games for a living.
Yes the gold farmers.
Who says there work is less work than the executive who remote desktops in to read email rather than using a remote email client.--What about the movie reviewer who needs to download and review the latest movie.--Yes some of these are stretching it but defining work/play and priority vs not priority needs to read the minds of the end user not look at the traffic type.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889931</id>
	<title>memory</title>
	<author>celle</author>
	<datestamp>1256640780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Doesn't anyone remember that during the nineties(and later) the federal government gave these infrastructure companies lots of money to expand their networks and they didn't. Why aren't these bastards in prison with the largest sodomizer we can find for defrauding the public? Oh yea, this is the USA.  The same question could asked about last years economic debacle and Obama's top two financial advisors part in creating it, let alone banks and congress. I know OT.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does n't anyone remember that during the nineties ( and later ) the federal government gave these infrastructure companies lots of money to expand their networks and they did n't .
Why are n't these bastards in prison with the largest sodomizer we can find for defrauding the public ?
Oh yea , this is the USA .
The same question could asked about last years economic debacle and Obama 's top two financial advisors part in creating it , let alone banks and congress .
I know OT .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doesn't anyone remember that during the nineties(and later) the federal government gave these infrastructure companies lots of money to expand their networks and they didn't.
Why aren't these bastards in prison with the largest sodomizer we can find for defrauding the public?
Oh yea, this is the USA.
The same question could asked about last years economic debacle and Obama's top two financial advisors part in creating it, let alone banks and congress.
I know OT.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889261</id>
	<title>Another case of the "rights" of business...</title>
	<author>endus</author>
	<datestamp>1256638320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>...triumphing over the rights of citizens.  I don't see any reason why business' commerce should supersede the leisure activities of people who are home sick.  Obviously this recommendation is asinine in the extreme and completely impossible to implement, but I don't think its the government's business to implement it anyway.  If you want to talk about emergency services then, OK, maybe there is an argument there.<br> <br>

I also agree with the comment saying...well what about game companies' commerce?  It's just another case of big business having the money to bribe politicians into prioritizing their interests over citizens'.<br> <br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>...Besides...everyone already surfs the web all day at work.  I don't see where there is any difference.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...triumphing over the rights of citizens .
I do n't see any reason why business ' commerce should supersede the leisure activities of people who are home sick .
Obviously this recommendation is asinine in the extreme and completely impossible to implement , but I do n't think its the government 's business to implement it anyway .
If you want to talk about emergency services then , OK , maybe there is an argument there .
I also agree with the comment saying...well what about game companies ' commerce ?
It 's just another case of big business having the money to bribe politicians into prioritizing their interests over citizens' .
...Besides...everyone already surfs the web all day at work .
I do n't see where there is any difference .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...triumphing over the rights of citizens.
I don't see any reason why business' commerce should supersede the leisure activities of people who are home sick.
Obviously this recommendation is asinine in the extreme and completely impossible to implement, but I don't think its the government's business to implement it anyway.
If you want to talk about emergency services then, OK, maybe there is an argument there.
I also agree with the comment saying...well what about game companies' commerce?
It's just another case of big business having the money to bribe politicians into prioritizing their interests over citizens'.
...Besides...everyone already surfs the web all day at work.
I don't see where there is any difference.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888657</id>
	<title>OK, the solution for this is easy...</title>
	<author>bennomatic</author>
	<datestamp>1256635860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Provide tax incentives to large companies to encourage as many of their workers as possible to telecommute as often as possible.  This would accomplish a number of things:
<ul>
<li> It would alter the bandwidth landscape such that a pandemic would have a less significant sudden effect on the amount of dependency on home Internet connections.</li>
<li> It would reduce vehicle traffic on the roads during peak commute hours.</li>
<li> Per the previous item, it would reduce the amount of carbon emissions going into the air due to tens of thousands of cars sitting idle in traffic jams twice a day.</li>
<li> Per the previous items, it would also cut down on the volume of fossil fuels burned during commute hours and may assist in reducing our dependency on foreign oil sources.</li>
<li> It would reduce the volume of physical interactions between employees, reducing the likelihood of a pandemic spreading throughout an entire organization, and also reducing the flow of such a virus through society at large.</li>
</ul><p>
I am sure there would be negative implications as well, but I think there is a lot to be said for encouraging an environment where there are more people working from home.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Provide tax incentives to large companies to encourage as many of their workers as possible to telecommute as often as possible .
This would accomplish a number of things : It would alter the bandwidth landscape such that a pandemic would have a less significant sudden effect on the amount of dependency on home Internet connections .
It would reduce vehicle traffic on the roads during peak commute hours .
Per the previous item , it would reduce the amount of carbon emissions going into the air due to tens of thousands of cars sitting idle in traffic jams twice a day .
Per the previous items , it would also cut down on the volume of fossil fuels burned during commute hours and may assist in reducing our dependency on foreign oil sources .
It would reduce the volume of physical interactions between employees , reducing the likelihood of a pandemic spreading throughout an entire organization , and also reducing the flow of such a virus through society at large .
I am sure there would be negative implications as well , but I think there is a lot to be said for encouraging an environment where there are more people working from home .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Provide tax incentives to large companies to encourage as many of their workers as possible to telecommute as often as possible.
This would accomplish a number of things:

 It would alter the bandwidth landscape such that a pandemic would have a less significant sudden effect on the amount of dependency on home Internet connections.
It would reduce vehicle traffic on the roads during peak commute hours.
Per the previous item, it would reduce the amount of carbon emissions going into the air due to tens of thousands of cars sitting idle in traffic jams twice a day.
Per the previous items, it would also cut down on the volume of fossil fuels burned during commute hours and may assist in reducing our dependency on foreign oil sources.
It would reduce the volume of physical interactions between employees, reducing the likelihood of a pandemic spreading throughout an entire organization, and also reducing the flow of such a virus through society at large.
I am sure there would be negative implications as well, but I think there is a lot to be said for encouraging an environment where there are more people working from home.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888811</id>
	<title>I'll be too sick to surf</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256636400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'll be too sick to do much more than email my boss, email my family, and go to my doctor's and medical insurer's web sites to get their phone numbers and fill out paperwork.</p><p>I certainly won't have the energy to be playing the latest online game or reading Slashdot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll be too sick to do much more than email my boss , email my family , and go to my doctor 's and medical insurer 's web sites to get their phone numbers and fill out paperwork.I certainly wo n't have the energy to be playing the latest online game or reading Slashdot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll be too sick to do much more than email my boss, email my family, and go to my doctor's and medical insurer's web sites to get their phone numbers and fill out paperwork.I certainly won't have the energy to be playing the latest online game or reading Slashdot.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888601</id>
	<title>Playing games ..</title>
	<author>SlashDev</author>
	<datestamp>1256635740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>.. on the Internet IS commerce. Those telecommuting could very well be employee of game companies. Games is a multi-billion dollar industry that is moving more and more toward the Internet infra-structure.</htmltext>
<tokenext>.. on the Internet IS commerce .
Those telecommuting could very well be employee of game companies .
Games is a multi-billion dollar industry that is moving more and more toward the Internet infra-structure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>.. on the Internet IS commerce.
Those telecommuting could very well be employee of game companies.
Games is a multi-billion dollar industry that is moving more and more toward the Internet infra-structure.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888597</id>
	<title>PDFs are delicious</title>
	<author>Foobar\_</author>
	<datestamp>1256635740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The actual report from the GAO is available here: <a href="http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d108.pdf" title="gao.gov" rel="nofollow">http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d108.pdf</a> [gao.gov]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The actual report from the GAO is available here : http : //www.gao.gov/new.items/d108.pdf [ gao.gov ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The actual report from the GAO is available here: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d108.pdf [gao.gov]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888787</id>
	<title>Conspiracy against network neutrality</title>
	<author>Wireless Joe</author>
	<datestamp>1256636280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>So H1N1 is really a genetically-engineered virus made by Lucent Technologies at the behest of the big telecom/cable cabal to be not quite deadly, but bad enough to send everyone at home for a couple weeks.  When everyone fires up their connections for torrents, MMOs, and "internet research" (porn), it gives the bought-and-paid-for congress the perfect excuse to shoot down FCC network neutrality rules and allow telcom/cable to throttle connections and shape traffic, thus ensuring people can order their fleshlights and <i>Sex and the City</i> box sets at the expense of WOW players and pirates looking for movies to watch while they're laying in bed for days at a time.  It's so simple it's brilliant!</htmltext>
<tokenext>So H1N1 is really a genetically-engineered virus made by Lucent Technologies at the behest of the big telecom/cable cabal to be not quite deadly , but bad enough to send everyone at home for a couple weeks .
When everyone fires up their connections for torrents , MMOs , and " internet research " ( porn ) , it gives the bought-and-paid-for congress the perfect excuse to shoot down FCC network neutrality rules and allow telcom/cable to throttle connections and shape traffic , thus ensuring people can order their fleshlights and Sex and the City box sets at the expense of WOW players and pirates looking for movies to watch while they 're laying in bed for days at a time .
It 's so simple it 's brilliant !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So H1N1 is really a genetically-engineered virus made by Lucent Technologies at the behest of the big telecom/cable cabal to be not quite deadly, but bad enough to send everyone at home for a couple weeks.
When everyone fires up their connections for torrents, MMOs, and "internet research" (porn), it gives the bought-and-paid-for congress the perfect excuse to shoot down FCC network neutrality rules and allow telcom/cable to throttle connections and shape traffic, thus ensuring people can order their fleshlights and Sex and the City box sets at the expense of WOW players and pirates looking for movies to watch while they're laying in bed for days at a time.
It's so simple it's brilliant!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889145</id>
	<title>They'll use whatever is the current hot topic....</title>
	<author>nilbog</author>
	<datestamp>1256637780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The people trying to push anti-net-neutrality agendas will use whatever scare tactic is currently in the media.  In 2001 it would have been "we need to prioritize traffic to aid rescue workers," during Katrina it would have been "We don't have bandwidth to reliably allow everyone free access while still being able to coordinate aid in Lousiana," now it's this, and tomorrow it will be "we can't reliably fight aliens/robot armies unless people are taxed for visiting sites that we don't approve of."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The people trying to push anti-net-neutrality agendas will use whatever scare tactic is currently in the media .
In 2001 it would have been " we need to prioritize traffic to aid rescue workers , " during Katrina it would have been " We do n't have bandwidth to reliably allow everyone free access while still being able to coordinate aid in Lousiana , " now it 's this , and tomorrow it will be " we ca n't reliably fight aliens/robot armies unless people are taxed for visiting sites that we do n't approve of .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The people trying to push anti-net-neutrality agendas will use whatever scare tactic is currently in the media.
In 2001 it would have been "we need to prioritize traffic to aid rescue workers," during Katrina it would have been "We don't have bandwidth to reliably allow everyone free access while still being able to coordinate aid in Lousiana," now it's this, and tomorrow it will be "we can't reliably fight aliens/robot armies unless people are taxed for visiting sites that we don't approve of.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890755</id>
	<title>Re:Go to your room and no video games!</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1256644380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I recommend choosing a very low difficulty level. For realtime games, slowing down time can help just as well. E.g. Quake 4 on 50\% speed, will actually be a pretty fun challenge for a brain that is 50\% impaired.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>It's the lack of balance that makes you not enjoy it.</p><p>Of course, when you're shaking, and barely can move, or open your eyes, the lack of a difficulty level that is low enough, may be the problem.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I recommend choosing a very low difficulty level .
For realtime games , slowing down time can help just as well .
E.g. Quake 4 on 50 \ % speed , will actually be a pretty fun challenge for a brain that is 50 \ % impaired .
: ) It 's the lack of balance that makes you not enjoy it.Of course , when you 're shaking , and barely can move , or open your eyes , the lack of a difficulty level that is low enough , may be the problem .
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I recommend choosing a very low difficulty level.
For realtime games, slowing down time can help just as well.
E.g. Quake 4 on 50\% speed, will actually be a pretty fun challenge for a brain that is 50\% impaired.
:)It's the lack of balance that makes you not enjoy it.Of course, when you're shaking, and barely can move, or open your eyes, the lack of a difficulty level that is low enough, may be the problem.
;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888921</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890041</id>
	<title>Re:Lets vote</title>
	<author>itmustbeavogadro</author>
	<datestamp>1256641200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>While I don't necessarily want the department of homeland security concerned with this, I do think that planning to for such an eventuality is a really good idea.  If the continuation of our society were to rely heavily on critical services being preformed remotely as frequently as possible, then there should be a way to give that traffic priority over regular browsing and gaming.
<br> <br>
While such a system would be very technically challenging to implement, it is not outside of the realm of possibility, given adequate planning, which is exactly why the GAO is criticizing DHS for not at least performing some planning.</htmltext>
<tokenext>While I do n't necessarily want the department of homeland security concerned with this , I do think that planning to for such an eventuality is a really good idea .
If the continuation of our society were to rely heavily on critical services being preformed remotely as frequently as possible , then there should be a way to give that traffic priority over regular browsing and gaming .
While such a system would be very technically challenging to implement , it is not outside of the realm of possibility , given adequate planning , which is exactly why the GAO is criticizing DHS for not at least performing some planning .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While I don't necessarily want the department of homeland security concerned with this, I do think that planning to for such an eventuality is a really good idea.
If the continuation of our society were to rely heavily on critical services being preformed remotely as frequently as possible, then there should be a way to give that traffic priority over regular browsing and gaming.
While such a system would be very technically challenging to implement, it is not outside of the realm of possibility, given adequate planning, which is exactly why the GAO is criticizing DHS for not at least performing some planning.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888575</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29892623</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>pla</author>
	<datestamp>1256657820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>DHS slapped them down saying that not only is it not their job, it's probably not even possible.</i> <br>
<br>
Which, with the DHS' track record, tells us two things...<br>
<br>
One, it counts as possible.  And two, the GAO should do the job.<br>
<br>
And we can probably infer something about a hidden motive of making it easier to enforce
a news blackout over an overloaded unprepared internet, but I'll stick to just the obvious
conclusions, for now.</htmltext>
<tokenext>DHS slapped them down saying that not only is it not their job , it 's probably not even possible .
Which , with the DHS ' track record , tells us two things.. . One , it counts as possible .
And two , the GAO should do the job .
And we can probably infer something about a hidden motive of making it easier to enforce a news blackout over an overloaded unprepared internet , but I 'll stick to just the obvious conclusions , for now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DHS slapped them down saying that not only is it not their job, it's probably not even possible.
Which, with the DHS' track record, tells us two things...

One, it counts as possible.
And two, the GAO should do the job.
And we can probably infer something about a hidden motive of making it easier to enforce
a news blackout over an overloaded unprepared internet, but I'll stick to just the obvious
conclusions, for now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888727</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890469</id>
	<title>Re:Traffic is usually higher during business days</title>
	<author>Eil</author>
	<datestamp>1256643000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Isn't traffic usually higher during business days than during the weekends? If so, during a pandemic I'd expect lower traffic, not higher.</p></div></blockquote><p>Exactly. But as a thought experiment, let's stop and consider what would happen if every single child and adult in the country stayed home for a day and watched TV or surfed the web. In terms of Internet traffic and operations, how exactly would that be any different than <b>every single weeknight</b> between the hours of 8PM and 10PM? How about during the holidays where there is an entire week out of the year where almost no one goes work or school?</p><p>Why do big government agencies never seem to realize that the Internet is really pretty robust as it is? Can we stop already with the wacky <a href="http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2006/04/announcing\_movi.html" title="schneier.com">movie-plot security</a> [schneier.com] theories?</p><p>Whoever in the GAO wasted the American people's taxes on this asinine venture needs to be reported via <a href="https://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/fraudnet.cgi" title="gao.gov">FraudNet</a> [gao.gov].</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't traffic usually higher during business days than during the weekends ?
If so , during a pandemic I 'd expect lower traffic , not higher.Exactly .
But as a thought experiment , let 's stop and consider what would happen if every single child and adult in the country stayed home for a day and watched TV or surfed the web .
In terms of Internet traffic and operations , how exactly would that be any different than every single weeknight between the hours of 8PM and 10PM ?
How about during the holidays where there is an entire week out of the year where almost no one goes work or school ? Why do big government agencies never seem to realize that the Internet is really pretty robust as it is ?
Can we stop already with the wacky movie-plot security [ schneier.com ] theories ? Whoever in the GAO wasted the American people 's taxes on this asinine venture needs to be reported via FraudNet [ gao.gov ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't traffic usually higher during business days than during the weekends?
If so, during a pandemic I'd expect lower traffic, not higher.Exactly.
But as a thought experiment, let's stop and consider what would happen if every single child and adult in the country stayed home for a day and watched TV or surfed the web.
In terms of Internet traffic and operations, how exactly would that be any different than every single weeknight between the hours of 8PM and 10PM?
How about during the holidays where there is an entire week out of the year where almost no one goes work or school?Why do big government agencies never seem to realize that the Internet is really pretty robust as it is?
Can we stop already with the wacky movie-plot security [schneier.com] theories?Whoever in the GAO wasted the American people's taxes on this asinine venture needs to be reported via FraudNet [gao.gov].
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888563</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890413</id>
	<title>Re:Go to your room and no video games!</title>
	<author>petermgreen</author>
	<datestamp>1256642760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe you just haven't reached the relavent stage in your recovery yet.</p><p>I dunno about you but often when I am ill there is a phase of recovery where I don't yet feel well enough to leave the house or do something as intellectually demanding as programming but I want to do something less boring than watching TV.</p><p>With swine flu there is also the possibility of being quarantined under government rules even though you either haven't had it yourself (afaict they quanrantine whole households) or the symptoms have gone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe you just have n't reached the relavent stage in your recovery yet.I dunno about you but often when I am ill there is a phase of recovery where I do n't yet feel well enough to leave the house or do something as intellectually demanding as programming but I want to do something less boring than watching TV.With swine flu there is also the possibility of being quarantined under government rules even though you either have n't had it yourself ( afaict they quanrantine whole households ) or the symptoms have gone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe you just haven't reached the relavent stage in your recovery yet.I dunno about you but often when I am ill there is a phase of recovery where I don't yet feel well enough to leave the house or do something as intellectually demanding as programming but I want to do something less boring than watching TV.With swine flu there is also the possibility of being quarantined under government rules even though you either haven't had it yourself (afaict they quanrantine whole households) or the symptoms have gone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888921</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29892219</id>
	<title>Internet Can't Handle Flu Pandemic [FIX]</title>
	<author>kaoshin</author>
	<datestamp>1256654160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Since <a href="http://www.ipoque.com/resources/internet-studies/internet-study-2008\_2009" title="ipoque.com">"P2P generates most traffic in all regions"</a> [ipoque.com], we could always work with the international community to make software, movies, music, etc. freely available so it is accessible on demand without charge or penalty.  Then people won't have to waste huge amounts of Internet bandwidth and productive hours of their lives redundantly hoarding everything in sight.  Next, block China or other countries where the majority of the population speak in spam.  Lastly, ban all pornography.  Unfortunately, there wouldn't be much remaining interest left in the Internet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Since " P2P generates most traffic in all regions " [ ipoque.com ] , we could always work with the international community to make software , movies , music , etc .
freely available so it is accessible on demand without charge or penalty .
Then people wo n't have to waste huge amounts of Internet bandwidth and productive hours of their lives redundantly hoarding everything in sight .
Next , block China or other countries where the majority of the population speak in spam .
Lastly , ban all pornography .
Unfortunately , there would n't be much remaining interest left in the Internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since "P2P generates most traffic in all regions" [ipoque.com], we could always work with the international community to make software, movies, music, etc.
freely available so it is accessible on demand without charge or penalty.
Then people won't have to waste huge amounts of Internet bandwidth and productive hours of their lives redundantly hoarding everything in sight.
Next, block China or other countries where the majority of the population speak in spam.
Lastly, ban all pornography.
Unfortunately, there wouldn't be much remaining interest left in the Internet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29893595</id>
	<title>Reducing traffic</title>
	<author>Max\_W</author>
	<datestamp>1256669640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While working from home, update OS on you spouse's and kids' computers, install an anti-virus software and scan disks, update browser, Adobe reader and voila traffic generated by the household becomes much less.</p><p>Because a lot of traffic is generated by bot-nets spreading spam. And that is where bot-nets live.</p><p>If the Internet is still congested - do the same things on your parents' PCs then the difference will be visible for sure, because the advanced age generation treat computers as if it were a TV: "switch on and switch off; only the government is authorized to change the machinations inside the box". And that is why these PCs are often the soft target for bot-nets.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While working from home , update OS on you spouse 's and kids ' computers , install an anti-virus software and scan disks , update browser , Adobe reader and voila traffic generated by the household becomes much less.Because a lot of traffic is generated by bot-nets spreading spam .
And that is where bot-nets live.If the Internet is still congested - do the same things on your parents ' PCs then the difference will be visible for sure , because the advanced age generation treat computers as if it were a TV : " switch on and switch off ; only the government is authorized to change the machinations inside the box " .
And that is why these PCs are often the soft target for bot-nets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While working from home, update OS on you spouse's and kids' computers, install an anti-virus software and scan disks, update browser, Adobe reader and voila traffic generated by the household becomes much less.Because a lot of traffic is generated by bot-nets spreading spam.
And that is where bot-nets live.If the Internet is still congested - do the same things on your parents' PCs then the difference will be visible for sure, because the advanced age generation treat computers as if it were a TV: "switch on and switch off; only the government is authorized to change the machinations inside the box".
And that is why these PCs are often the soft target for bot-nets.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889111</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>megamerican</author>
	<datestamp>1256637720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can't we just get rid of all non-Constitutionally mandated agencies (then amend the Constitution to add anything that is truly needed)?</p><p>Oh wait, I forgot that we found "implied powers" secretly weaved into the Constitution and have since found more secret messages left by the founders that allow everything we deem neccesarry, reasonable and proper.</p><p>This seems to be another FUD report by some agency in order to justify taking over, regulating and destroying a free internet. Sadly, as much as I like most of the provisions of net neutrality, it'll be used to justify more rules, regulations, taxes and control over the internet in the future.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ca n't we just get rid of all non-Constitutionally mandated agencies ( then amend the Constitution to add anything that is truly needed ) ? Oh wait , I forgot that we found " implied powers " secretly weaved into the Constitution and have since found more secret messages left by the founders that allow everything we deem neccesarry , reasonable and proper.This seems to be another FUD report by some agency in order to justify taking over , regulating and destroying a free internet .
Sadly , as much as I like most of the provisions of net neutrality , it 'll be used to justify more rules , regulations , taxes and control over the internet in the future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can't we just get rid of all non-Constitutionally mandated agencies (then amend the Constitution to add anything that is truly needed)?Oh wait, I forgot that we found "implied powers" secretly weaved into the Constitution and have since found more secret messages left by the founders that allow everything we deem neccesarry, reasonable and proper.This seems to be another FUD report by some agency in order to justify taking over, regulating and destroying a free internet.
Sadly, as much as I like most of the provisions of net neutrality, it'll be used to justify more rules, regulations, taxes and control over the internet in the future.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888553</id>
	<title>prioritize traffic?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256635620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The internet will work just fine when everyone is home sick: It'll be sunday for a few weeks in a row. Big deal. This is just an excuse to try and tack demands for government control onto the latest media-sponsored thing to fear, and once they have it, "prioritization of traffic" will become code for "override the FCC's mandate on network neutrality". Fortunately, the deluge of flu pandemic stories already out there has desensitized people to the point that this will fizzle and go nowhere because it can't get above the noise of a thousand other demands for government control and funding for other things.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The internet will work just fine when everyone is home sick : It 'll be sunday for a few weeks in a row .
Big deal .
This is just an excuse to try and tack demands for government control onto the latest media-sponsored thing to fear , and once they have it , " prioritization of traffic " will become code for " override the FCC 's mandate on network neutrality " .
Fortunately , the deluge of flu pandemic stories already out there has desensitized people to the point that this will fizzle and go nowhere because it ca n't get above the noise of a thousand other demands for government control and funding for other things .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The internet will work just fine when everyone is home sick: It'll be sunday for a few weeks in a row.
Big deal.
This is just an excuse to try and tack demands for government control onto the latest media-sponsored thing to fear, and once they have it, "prioritization of traffic" will become code for "override the FCC's mandate on network neutrality".
Fortunately, the deluge of flu pandemic stories already out there has desensitized people to the point that this will fizzle and go nowhere because it can't get above the noise of a thousand other demands for government control and funding for other things.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890783</id>
	<title>Quit Being a Third World Country</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256644500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If one tenth of the money was spent on upgrading the Internet bandwidth capabilities of the U.S. as was spent on invading Iraq, even the plastic-tarp homeless camps in every major U.S. city would have 100 Mbit connections.  Why the fuck do I have to pay some shitty for-profit corporation $60 a month for laggy, intermittent, capped and limited and filtered connections?  Why is the U.S. stilla third-world country when it comes to Internet infrastructure?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If one tenth of the money was spent on upgrading the Internet bandwidth capabilities of the U.S. as was spent on invading Iraq , even the plastic-tarp homeless camps in every major U.S. city would have 100 Mbit connections .
Why the fuck do I have to pay some shitty for-profit corporation $ 60 a month for laggy , intermittent , capped and limited and filtered connections ?
Why is the U.S. stilla third-world country when it comes to Internet infrastructure ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If one tenth of the money was spent on upgrading the Internet bandwidth capabilities of the U.S. as was spent on invading Iraq, even the plastic-tarp homeless camps in every major U.S. city would have 100 Mbit connections.
Why the fuck do I have to pay some shitty for-profit corporation $60 a month for laggy, intermittent, capped and limited and filtered connections?
Why is the U.S. stilla third-world country when it comes to Internet infrastructure?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890711</id>
	<title>Re:Traffic is usually higher during business days</title>
	<author>Rennt</author>
	<datestamp>1256644200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The story is about <i>everyone</i> being at home, not just the sick.</p><p>In a real pandemic (not a "media" outbreak) the sensible thing to do would be to get people to telecommute. Public transport and access things like office buildings can be shut down if the situation calls for it. This plan is supposed to reduce the death toll, while preventing the economy going into hibernation.</p><p>In that case I imagine a pretty huge jump in network traffic. Suddenly all that local traffic going over private networks will be pushed on to the internet.</p><p>The thing is the whole the situation sounds to much like bad survival-fiction to be taken seriously. I'm honestly more worried about the inevitable zombie uprising.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The story is about everyone being at home , not just the sick.In a real pandemic ( not a " media " outbreak ) the sensible thing to do would be to get people to telecommute .
Public transport and access things like office buildings can be shut down if the situation calls for it .
This plan is supposed to reduce the death toll , while preventing the economy going into hibernation.In that case I imagine a pretty huge jump in network traffic .
Suddenly all that local traffic going over private networks will be pushed on to the internet.The thing is the whole the situation sounds to much like bad survival-fiction to be taken seriously .
I 'm honestly more worried about the inevitable zombie uprising .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The story is about everyone being at home, not just the sick.In a real pandemic (not a "media" outbreak) the sensible thing to do would be to get people to telecommute.
Public transport and access things like office buildings can be shut down if the situation calls for it.
This plan is supposed to reduce the death toll, while preventing the economy going into hibernation.In that case I imagine a pretty huge jump in network traffic.
Suddenly all that local traffic going over private networks will be pushed on to the internet.The thing is the whole the situation sounds to much like bad survival-fiction to be taken seriously.
I'm honestly more worried about the inevitable zombie uprising.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888563</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889561</id>
	<title>Because regulatory authority is seldom abused...</title>
	<author>gedrin</author>
	<datestamp>1256639460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What we really need to do to prevent this sort of government imposition on the flow of information in a way we don't like is to pass net neutrality legislation that allows the government to impose regulations on the flow of information in a way we do like.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What we really need to do to prevent this sort of government imposition on the flow of information in a way we do n't like is to pass net neutrality legislation that allows the government to impose regulations on the flow of information in a way we do like .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What we really need to do to prevent this sort of government imposition on the flow of information in a way we don't like is to pass net neutrality legislation that allows the government to impose regulations on the flow of information in a way we do like.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888679</id>
	<title>Favor "Commerce" over "Games"?</title>
	<author>mandark1967</author>
	<datestamp>1256635920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>What about companies whose "commerce" <i>is</i> games? I'm sure Blizzard would <b>love</b> to hear that the vast majority of their revenue is specifically targeted for termination should a pandemic occur.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What about companies whose " commerce " is games ?
I 'm sure Blizzard would love to hear that the vast majority of their revenue is specifically targeted for termination should a pandemic occur .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What about companies whose "commerce" is games?
I'm sure Blizzard would love to hear that the vast majority of their revenue is specifically targeted for termination should a pandemic occur.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890293</id>
	<title>Life for WoW players</title>
	<author>Santzes</author>
	<datestamp>1256642340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So.. Because lots of people are going to die, they're going to make that better by giving a life for WoW players?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So.. Because lots of people are going to die , they 're going to make that better by giving a life for WoW players ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So.. Because lots of people are going to die, they're going to make that better by giving a life for WoW players?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889223</id>
	<title>Easy solution.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256638140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If there aren't enough tubes, then build more tubes! That wasn't hard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If there are n't enough tubes , then build more tubes !
That was n't hard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If there aren't enough tubes, then build more tubes!
That wasn't hard.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889815</id>
	<title>What have telecoms done with subsidies?</title>
	<author>Brad Lucier</author>
	<datestamp>1256640300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A rhetorical question.  The telecoms have accepted billions in government subsidies to build out the internet infrastructure, but now when we, the people, need it, it isn't there.  This isn't a game; it's fraud when people take the money from the government for infrastructure and don't provide the it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A rhetorical question .
The telecoms have accepted billions in government subsidies to build out the internet infrastructure , but now when we , the people , need it , it is n't there .
This is n't a game ; it 's fraud when people take the money from the government for infrastructure and do n't provide the it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A rhetorical question.
The telecoms have accepted billions in government subsidies to build out the internet infrastructure, but now when we, the people, need it, it isn't there.
This isn't a game; it's fraud when people take the money from the government for infrastructure and don't provide the it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888691</id>
	<title>Wouldn't happen anyway...</title>
	<author>nweaver</author>
	<datestamp>1256635980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The "Internet" still works remarkably well under load, and there is a self limiting factor: So much of the traffic is youtube etc by volume that if you DID get slowdowns, once those drop below real time people will just turn off anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The " Internet " still works remarkably well under load , and there is a self limiting factor : So much of the traffic is youtube etc by volume that if you DID get slowdowns , once those drop below real time people will just turn off anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The "Internet" still works remarkably well under load, and there is a self limiting factor: So much of the traffic is youtube etc by volume that if you DID get slowdowns, once those drop below real time people will just turn off anyway.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888595</id>
	<title>And Joe Lieberman Is A Democrat</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256635740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"make sure the nation's business can flow during a pandemic" to the company that wrote the report on Chinese  cyberspying:<br><a href="http://it.slashdot.org/story/09/10/22/1333241/China-Expands-Cyberspying-In-US-Report-Says" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow"> Northrup Grumman</a> [slashdot.org].</p><p>Zzzzzzzzzzzz.</p><p>Yours In Yaznogorsk,<br>Kilgore T.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" make sure the nation 's business can flow during a pandemic " to the company that wrote the report on Chinese cyberspying : Northrup Grumman [ slashdot.org ] .Zzzzzzzzzzzz.Yours In Yaznogorsk,Kilgore T .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"make sure the nation's business can flow during a pandemic" to the company that wrote the report on Chinese  cyberspying: Northrup Grumman [slashdot.org].Zzzzzzzzzzzz.Yours In Yaznogorsk,Kilgore T.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888999</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256637120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>really? what about the IRS, or the DEA?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>really ?
what about the IRS , or the DEA ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>really?
what about the IRS, or the DEA?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29901941</id>
	<title>This doesn't apply to the telephone network?</title>
	<author>rbrander</author>
	<datestamp>1256721000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Funny, kids at home have a tendency to make 3-hour phone calls to friends.  And telecommuters do a lot more phone-calling from home as well.  But notice nobody is claiming that "the telephone network will be unable to handle H1N1"?</p><p>Two reasons: 1) the network actually is better, built to be an essential service; the last 10 miles of Internet - whether cable or DSL - is built on a previous network with duct tape to save money, and has never been treated as essential.</p><p>2) Even so, it probably isn't true.  What's so different about half the kids being home from school and half the office workers who can telecommute, from ALL of them being at home on every Saturday, playing games and watching YouTube?   Not much.   "The Internet is Falling" thing stopped being funny after we'd all had good laughs and John Dvorak and Bob Metcalfe, respectively.   (At least Metcalfe had the class to put his column in a blender with some water and literally eat his words, as promised.)</p><p>It's not funny any more, especially when used as a power play.  The right answer even if this WERE true is to tell them to get to work on building fiber-to-the-home... like they were supposed to with all the money they've been making and gargantuan tax breaks they were handed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Funny , kids at home have a tendency to make 3-hour phone calls to friends .
And telecommuters do a lot more phone-calling from home as well .
But notice nobody is claiming that " the telephone network will be unable to handle H1N1 " ? Two reasons : 1 ) the network actually is better , built to be an essential service ; the last 10 miles of Internet - whether cable or DSL - is built on a previous network with duct tape to save money , and has never been treated as essential.2 ) Even so , it probably is n't true .
What 's so different about half the kids being home from school and half the office workers who can telecommute , from ALL of them being at home on every Saturday , playing games and watching YouTube ?
Not much .
" The Internet is Falling " thing stopped being funny after we 'd all had good laughs and John Dvorak and Bob Metcalfe , respectively .
( At least Metcalfe had the class to put his column in a blender with some water and literally eat his words , as promised .
) It 's not funny any more , especially when used as a power play .
The right answer even if this WERE true is to tell them to get to work on building fiber-to-the-home... like they were supposed to with all the money they 've been making and gargantuan tax breaks they were handed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Funny, kids at home have a tendency to make 3-hour phone calls to friends.
And telecommuters do a lot more phone-calling from home as well.
But notice nobody is claiming that "the telephone network will be unable to handle H1N1"?Two reasons: 1) the network actually is better, built to be an essential service; the last 10 miles of Internet - whether cable or DSL - is built on a previous network with duct tape to save money, and has never been treated as essential.2) Even so, it probably isn't true.
What's so different about half the kids being home from school and half the office workers who can telecommute, from ALL of them being at home on every Saturday, playing games and watching YouTube?
Not much.
"The Internet is Falling" thing stopped being funny after we'd all had good laughs and John Dvorak and Bob Metcalfe, respectively.
(At least Metcalfe had the class to put his column in a blender with some water and literally eat his words, as promised.
)It's not funny any more, especially when used as a power play.
The right answer even if this WERE true is to tell them to get to work on building fiber-to-the-home... like they were supposed to with all the money they've been making and gargantuan tax breaks they were handed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888571</id>
	<title>I use more bandwidth at work</title>
	<author>bughunter</author>
	<datestamp>1256635620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Really, I do.  Between flash games, surfing blogs, spamming "random page" on Wikipedia, and actual honest-to-goodness work, I use far more bandwidth at work than I do at home, where I mostly just play WoW and read a few blogs.</p><p>Unless the wife isn't home.  Then I burn a hole in my wall downloading porn.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Really , I do .
Between flash games , surfing blogs , spamming " random page " on Wikipedia , and actual honest-to-goodness work , I use far more bandwidth at work than I do at home , where I mostly just play WoW and read a few blogs.Unless the wife is n't home .
Then I burn a hole in my wall downloading porn .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really, I do.
Between flash games, surfing blogs, spamming "random page" on Wikipedia, and actual honest-to-goodness work, I use far more bandwidth at work than I do at home, where I mostly just play WoW and read a few blogs.Unless the wife isn't home.
Then I burn a hole in my wall downloading porn.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890675</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Dragonslicer</author>
	<datestamp>1256643960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Once the government gains new useful powers like those granted to the DHS, it is extremely difficult to dislodge them.  Once the power is there, there's no reason for them to ever think of giving it up.</p></div><p>That's what nobody considered when stuff like the PATRIOT Act was passed.
<br> <br>
"George Bush needs the authority so he can fight the terrorists!"
<br>
"Okay, what about Hillary Clinton having the same authority?"
<br>
"..."
<br> <br>
Most people don't think about the fact that someone on "their side" won't always be in charge. If you don't want the president you fear the most to have the authority to do something, you can't give it to the president you love the most either.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Once the government gains new useful powers like those granted to the DHS , it is extremely difficult to dislodge them .
Once the power is there , there 's no reason for them to ever think of giving it up.That 's what nobody considered when stuff like the PATRIOT Act was passed .
" George Bush needs the authority so he can fight the terrorists !
" " Okay , what about Hillary Clinton having the same authority ?
" " ... " Most people do n't think about the fact that someone on " their side " wo n't always be in charge .
If you do n't want the president you fear the most to have the authority to do something , you ca n't give it to the president you love the most either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Once the government gains new useful powers like those granted to the DHS, it is extremely difficult to dislodge them.
Once the power is there, there's no reason for them to ever think of giving it up.That's what nobody considered when stuff like the PATRIOT Act was passed.
"George Bush needs the authority so he can fight the terrorists!
"

"Okay, what about Hillary Clinton having the same authority?
"

"..."
 
Most people don't think about the fact that someone on "their side" won't always be in charge.
If you don't want the president you fear the most to have the authority to do something, you can't give it to the president you love the most either.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888739</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888771</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>RY</author>
	<datestamp>1256636220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is the only government agency who's main drive for its survival of the organization is fear.  Once people have nothing to fear then the agency becomes obsolete.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is the only government agency who 's main drive for its survival of the organization is fear .
Once people have nothing to fear then the agency becomes obsolete .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is the only government agency who's main drive for its survival of the organization is fear.
Once people have nothing to fear then the agency becomes obsolete.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888939</id>
	<title>Re:Traffic is usually higher during business days</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256636880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not everyone will be sick, but people will be expected/told to/required to stay home to avoid spreading the flu.  Naturally, businesses whose employees can work from home will expect people who are home but not sick to work while they're home -- and that's what the GAO is worried about.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not everyone will be sick , but people will be expected/told to/required to stay home to avoid spreading the flu .
Naturally , businesses whose employees can work from home will expect people who are home but not sick to work while they 're home -- and that 's what the GAO is worried about .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not everyone will be sick, but people will be expected/told to/required to stay home to avoid spreading the flu.
Naturally, businesses whose employees can work from home will expect people who are home but not sick to work while they're home -- and that's what the GAO is worried about.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888563</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888635</id>
	<title>Wow, just Wow</title>
	<author>Drummergeek0</author>
	<datestamp>1256635860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is such an idiotic idea that whoever came up with it at the GAO should be fired. The idea of what should and should not be allowed would be very arbitrary. Take sites like Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, etc. They make money from traffic to their site. If they shut down/slowed access to such sites nationwide it would financially cripple them. Companies will have to have their own contingencies for such incidents, it is not the government's responsibility to ensure they can keep operating the way they prefer, it is the companies responsibility to ensure they can continue to operate however necessary.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is such an idiotic idea that whoever came up with it at the GAO should be fired .
The idea of what should and should not be allowed would be very arbitrary .
Take sites like Facebook , Twitter , MySpace , etc .
They make money from traffic to their site .
If they shut down/slowed access to such sites nationwide it would financially cripple them .
Companies will have to have their own contingencies for such incidents , it is not the government 's responsibility to ensure they can keep operating the way they prefer , it is the companies responsibility to ensure they can continue to operate however necessary .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is such an idiotic idea that whoever came up with it at the GAO should be fired.
The idea of what should and should not be allowed would be very arbitrary.
Take sites like Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, etc.
They make money from traffic to their site.
If they shut down/slowed access to such sites nationwide it would financially cripple them.
Companies will have to have their own contingencies for such incidents, it is not the government's responsibility to ensure they can keep operating the way they prefer, it is the companies responsibility to ensure they can continue to operate however necessary.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29891247</id>
	<title>Holidays... anyone?</title>
	<author>kminchau</author>
	<datestamp>1256647020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We already have several "mini-pandemic" exercises every year.... they are called "Holidays".<br> <br>

For the whole day millions of people stay at home and have the potential to play games over the Internet etc. (while feeling a whole lot better than if they had H1N1)<br> <br>

From what I have seen.... the Internet seems to be coping pretty good when millions of people take off from work all at the same time...</htmltext>
<tokenext>We already have several " mini-pandemic " exercises every year.... they are called " Holidays " .
For the whole day millions of people stay at home and have the potential to play games over the Internet etc .
( while feeling a whole lot better than if they had H1N1 ) From what I have seen.... the Internet seems to be coping pretty good when millions of people take off from work all at the same time.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We already have several "mini-pandemic" exercises every year.... they are called "Holidays".
For the whole day millions of people stay at home and have the potential to play games over the Internet etc.
(while feeling a whole lot better than if they had H1N1) 

From what I have seen.... the Internet seems to be coping pretty good when millions of people take off from work all at the same time...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889143</id>
	<title>check</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256637780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>read article: check<br>have flu: check<br>blow load: check</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>read article : checkhave flu : checkblow load : check</tokentext>
<sentencetext>read article: checkhave flu: checkblow load: check</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888585</id>
	<title>Regulate trade between the States</title>
	<author>Gothmolly</author>
	<datestamp>1256635680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We gave Congress the power to regulate trade between the States.   If you want to find the guilty party, look in a mirror.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We gave Congress the power to regulate trade between the States .
If you want to find the guilty party , look in a mirror .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We gave Congress the power to regulate trade between the States.
If you want to find the guilty party, look in a mirror.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888851</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256636580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry, having a hard time wrapping my head around this "government organization" phrase.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry , having a hard time wrapping my head around this " government organization " phrase .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry, having a hard time wrapping my head around this "government organization" phrase.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888897</id>
	<title>A Great Excuse For Bad Programmers</title>
	<author>damn\_registrars</author>
	<datestamp>1256636760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Slashdot programmers should now wait until H1N1 really builds up momentum now before they unleash the latest AJAX-ified, Web2.0ish, Javascripted mayhem on us.  Then when the site goes down in a cloud of its own unusability they can instead claim <p><div class="quote"><p>Itz teh guvmint!  Teh POTUS shutz down teh slashdot!  Our code iz setz up teh bomb!</p></div><p>
And then the following day when they go back to the (better, but not really fully) working previous version we might even consider believing them...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Slashdot programmers should now wait until H1N1 really builds up momentum now before they unleash the latest AJAX-ified , Web2.0ish , Javascripted mayhem on us .
Then when the site goes down in a cloud of its own unusability they can instead claim Itz teh guvmint !
Teh POTUS shutz down teh slashdot !
Our code iz setz up teh bomb !
And then the following day when they go back to the ( better , but not really fully ) working previous version we might even consider believing them.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slashdot programmers should now wait until H1N1 really builds up momentum now before they unleash the latest AJAX-ified, Web2.0ish, Javascripted mayhem on us.
Then when the site goes down in a cloud of its own unusability they can instead claim Itz teh guvmint!
Teh POTUS shutz down teh slashdot!
Our code iz setz up teh bomb!
And then the following day when they go back to the (better, but not really fully) working previous version we might even consider believing them...
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889001</id>
	<title>Re:Traffic is usually higher during business days</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256637120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>Especially since people, you know, being sick don't really feel like browsing <b>porn</b><nobr> <wbr></nobr></i>...</p><p>Fixed that for ya...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Especially since people , you know , being sick do n't really feel like browsing porn ...Fixed that for ya.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Especially since people, you know, being sick don't really feel like browsing porn ...Fixed that for ya...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888563</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890809</id>
	<title>Re:I use more bandwidth at work</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256644740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Really, I do.  Between flash games, surfing blogs, spamming "random page" on Wikipedia, and actual honest-to-goodness work, I use far more bandwidth at work than I do at home, where I mostly just play WoW and read a few blogs.</p><p>Unless the wife isn't home.  Then I burn a hole in my wall downloading porn.</p></div><p>Random internet browsing takes more bandwidth than WoW?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Really , I do .
Between flash games , surfing blogs , spamming " random page " on Wikipedia , and actual honest-to-goodness work , I use far more bandwidth at work than I do at home , where I mostly just play WoW and read a few blogs.Unless the wife is n't home .
Then I burn a hole in my wall downloading porn.Random internet browsing takes more bandwidth than WoW ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really, I do.
Between flash games, surfing blogs, spamming "random page" on Wikipedia, and actual honest-to-goodness work, I use far more bandwidth at work than I do at home, where I mostly just play WoW and read a few blogs.Unless the wife isn't home.
Then I burn a hole in my wall downloading porn.Random internet browsing takes more bandwidth than WoW?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888571</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890003</id>
	<title>Re:Go to your room and no video games!</title>
	<author>s2theg</author>
	<datestamp>1256641020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As somebody who claims to be somebody I can make my argument more relevant.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</htmltext>
<tokenext>As somebody who claims to be somebody I can make my argument more relevant .
: P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As somebody who claims to be somebody I can make my argument more relevant.
:P</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888921</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29891185</id>
	<title>Hang on, have we seen this story before?</title>
	<author>thatkid\_2002</author>
	<datestamp>1256646600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wasn't this a story from 6 months ago?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Was n't this a story from 6 months ago ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wasn't this a story from 6 months ago?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888565</id>
	<title>Another crisis casualty</title>
	<author>adolphism</author>
	<datestamp>1256635620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This country is losing itself to a series of crisis expedited statutes and/or policies.  Will H1N1 be the end of the net neutrality debate?  I can hear it now.  "We can't afford NOT to institute traffic shaping in light of this impending crisis!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This country is losing itself to a series of crisis expedited statutes and/or policies .
Will H1N1 be the end of the net neutrality debate ?
I can hear it now .
" We ca n't afford NOT to institute traffic shaping in light of this impending crisis !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This country is losing itself to a series of crisis expedited statutes and/or policies.
Will H1N1 be the end of the net neutrality debate?
I can hear it now.
"We can't afford NOT to institute traffic shaping in light of this impending crisis!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888677</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>plague3106</author>
	<datestamp>1256635920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously?  Not even the IRS?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously ?
Not even the IRS ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously?
Not even the IRS?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888831</id>
	<title>Re:prioritize traffic?</title>
	<author>wizardforce</author>
	<datestamp>1256636460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The FCC's statements on net neutrality clearly leave an exception for government.  It's overriding net neutrality but not the FCC's stance on net neutrality.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The FCC 's statements on net neutrality clearly leave an exception for government .
It 's overriding net neutrality but not the FCC 's stance on net neutrality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The FCC's statements on net neutrality clearly leave an exception for government.
It's overriding net neutrality but not the FCC's stance on net neutrality.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888553</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888877</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256636640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know, the DEA ranks up there. Lets work on getting that abomination gone, as well as the stupid laws that justify its existance. Let the dope tax go to the IRS instead of to Columbia and Mexiso.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know , the DEA ranks up there .
Lets work on getting that abomination gone , as well as the stupid laws that justify its existance .
Let the dope tax go to the IRS instead of to Columbia and Mexiso .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know, the DEA ranks up there.
Lets work on getting that abomination gone, as well as the stupid laws that justify its existance.
Let the dope tax go to the IRS instead of to Columbia and Mexiso.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29891003</id>
	<title>Re:OK, the solution for this is easy...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256645640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Per the previous items, it would also cut down on the volume of fossil fuels burned during commute hours and may assist in reducing our dependency on foreign oil sources.</p><p>Not so fast</p><p>The extra heating or cooling of homes normally empty during the day takes a big bite out of those commuter savings - it can even be worse if the commute was by public transport</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Per the previous items , it would also cut down on the volume of fossil fuels burned during commute hours and may assist in reducing our dependency on foreign oil sources.Not so fastThe extra heating or cooling of homes normally empty during the day takes a big bite out of those commuter savings - it can even be worse if the commute was by public transport</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Per the previous items, it would also cut down on the volume of fossil fuels burned during commute hours and may assist in reducing our dependency on foreign oil sources.Not so fastThe extra heating or cooling of homes normally empty during the day takes a big bite out of those commuter savings - it can even be worse if the commute was by public transport</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888657</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889035</id>
	<title>Re:I use more bandwidth at work</title>
	<author>Nadaka</author>
	<datestamp>1256637240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For shame.<br>Neglecting your relationship like that.<br>You should be downloading porn together!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For shame.Neglecting your relationship like that.You should be downloading porn together !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For shame.Neglecting your relationship like that.You should be downloading porn together!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888571</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890561</id>
	<title>FUD, plain and simple</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256643420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How much traffic is generated by Bittorent again? E-Mail spam?</p><p>And they say, that telecommuting will bring down the internet?</p><p>Yeah, right.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How much traffic is generated by Bittorent again ?
E-Mail spam ? And they say , that telecommuting will bring down the internet ? Yeah , right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How much traffic is generated by Bittorent again?
E-Mail spam?And they say, that telecommuting will bring down the internet?Yeah, right.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890961</id>
	<title>Take your pig flu vaccine, you fucking sheep!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256645460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>BAAAA!  BAAAA!  My TV says I must get the pig flu shot or I will die.  BAAAA!</p><p><a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/10/21/cbsnews\_investigates/main5404829.shtml" title="cbsnews.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/10/21/cbsnews\_investigates/main5404829.shtml</a> [cbsnews.com]</p><p>So if states have been asked to stop counting individual cases of the pig flu, how the hell do we know we have a pig flu pandemic?  This is an experiment to determine if years of public education and pop culture shit have dulled your will and your wits enough to view the government as your supreme authority and savior.  I'd say we're just about there, but not quite.  The vaccine is mandatory - for now...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>BAAAA !
BAAAA ! My TV says I must get the pig flu shot or I will die .
BAAAA ! http : //www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/10/21/cbsnews \ _investigates/main5404829.shtml [ cbsnews.com ] So if states have been asked to stop counting individual cases of the pig flu , how the hell do we know we have a pig flu pandemic ?
This is an experiment to determine if years of public education and pop culture shit have dulled your will and your wits enough to view the government as your supreme authority and savior .
I 'd say we 're just about there , but not quite .
The vaccine is mandatory - for now.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>BAAAA!
BAAAA!  My TV says I must get the pig flu shot or I will die.
BAAAA!http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/10/21/cbsnews\_investigates/main5404829.shtml [cbsnews.com]So if states have been asked to stop counting individual cases of the pig flu, how the hell do we know we have a pig flu pandemic?
This is an experiment to determine if years of public education and pop culture shit have dulled your will and your wits enough to view the government as your supreme authority and savior.
I'd say we're just about there, but not quite.
The vaccine is mandatory - for now...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29893717</id>
	<title>If I'm sick and everyone else is too</title>
	<author>ImNotAtWork</author>
	<datestamp>1256671380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Do I/they really feel like surfing the internet...  How does business operate the day before/after Christmas/Thanksgiving when everyone is at home using the net... this is a non issue.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do I/they really feel like surfing the internet... How does business operate the day before/after Christmas/Thanksgiving when everyone is at home using the net... this is a non issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do I/they really feel like surfing the internet...  How does business operate the day before/after Christmas/Thanksgiving when everyone is at home using the net... this is a non issue.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29891305</id>
	<title>Re:Playing games ..</title>
	<author>greyhueofdoubt</author>
	<datestamp>1256647380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You don't need to be an employee of the game studio for it to be commerce.</p><p>If you pay blizzard for a WoW account, and then you use that account: Commerce.</p><p>You buy games using Steam: Commerce.</p><p>Hell, paying for porn on the internet counts as commerce.</p><p>Who is the gov't to decide that doing a batch upload of tps reports to india is more important than buying music on amazon on my sickday?</p><p>-b</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't need to be an employee of the game studio for it to be commerce.If you pay blizzard for a WoW account , and then you use that account : Commerce.You buy games using Steam : Commerce.Hell , paying for porn on the internet counts as commerce.Who is the gov't to decide that doing a batch upload of tps reports to india is more important than buying music on amazon on my sickday ? -b</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't need to be an employee of the game studio for it to be commerce.If you pay blizzard for a WoW account, and then you use that account: Commerce.You buy games using Steam: Commerce.Hell, paying for porn on the internet counts as commerce.Who is the gov't to decide that doing a batch upload of tps reports to india is more important than buying music on amazon on my sickday?-b</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888601</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888583</id>
	<title>Comcast</title>
	<author>sunderland56</author>
	<datestamp>1256635680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>In other news, Comcast has effectively convinced the GAO that traffic shaping is now a <b>good</b> thing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In other news , Comcast has effectively convinced the GAO that traffic shaping is now a good thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In other news, Comcast has effectively convinced the GAO that traffic shaping is now a good thing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889277</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>aaandre</author>
	<datestamp>1256638440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Can't we get rid of the DHS yet? I don't think there's one government organization I like less.</p></div><p>In Capitalist U.S. of A. DHS get rid of YOU!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ca n't we get rid of the DHS yet ?
I do n't think there 's one government organization I like less.In Capitalist U.S. of A. DHS get rid of YOU !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can't we get rid of the DHS yet?
I don't think there's one government organization I like less.In Capitalist U.S. of A. DHS get rid of YOU!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29943656</id>
	<title>Re:Traffic is usually higher during business days</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257066180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And who do they think will be more put off by internet congestion, people who have to work or gamers?  I could be wrong, but I would imaging gamers would switch to offline games because online ones become unplayable with the congestion, the workers would carry on, but a bit slower than usual.  If this happens I imagine the result will be somewhat self-regulating.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And who do they think will be more put off by internet congestion , people who have to work or gamers ?
I could be wrong , but I would imaging gamers would switch to offline games because online ones become unplayable with the congestion , the workers would carry on , but a bit slower than usual .
If this happens I imagine the result will be somewhat self-regulating .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And who do they think will be more put off by internet congestion, people who have to work or gamers?
I could be wrong, but I would imaging gamers would switch to offline games because online ones become unplayable with the congestion, the workers would carry on, but a bit slower than usual.
If this happens I imagine the result will be somewhat self-regulating.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888939</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29891381</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256647800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> <i>As to getting rid of DHS, that's would likely entail just breaking the DHS back into the separate agencies from which it was formed. [wikipedia.org] There could be some benefit, but based on what I can discern, I'm not sure what would be gained in making that change. Any thoughts?</i></p></div> </blockquote><p>According to my friend in the Coast Guard, the only difference they noticed since getting gobbled up by DHS is it takes three months longer to get their budget approved.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As to getting rid of DHS , that 's would likely entail just breaking the DHS back into the separate agencies from which it was formed .
[ wikipedia.org ] There could be some benefit , but based on what I can discern , I 'm not sure what would be gained in making that change .
Any thoughts ?
According to my friend in the Coast Guard , the only difference they noticed since getting gobbled up by DHS is it takes three months longer to get their budget approved .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> As to getting rid of DHS, that's would likely entail just breaking the DHS back into the separate agencies from which it was formed.
[wikipedia.org] There could be some benefit, but based on what I can discern, I'm not sure what would be gained in making that change.
Any thoughts?
According to my friend in the Coast Guard, the only difference they noticed since getting gobbled up by DHS is it takes three months longer to get their budget approved.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888775</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29892215</id>
	<title>Re:Defining priority traffic is not easy</title>
	<author>zippthorne</author>
	<datestamp>1256654040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>On the other hand, suppose one use just dominates the bandwidth and other "more critical" uses just don't require nearly as much such that even at their peak, they only need 1\% of the total, but the "big use" is greedy and hogs 99.5\%?</p><p>Then doesn't it make sense to throttle them down to 99\% so that the other uses can have enough?  Especially if the "big use" is games that that have stutter-y performance at 99.5\%, and will therefore have slightly more stutter at 99?</p><p>Disclaimer: numbers have been fabricated out of whole cloth for dramatic purposes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>On the other hand , suppose one use just dominates the bandwidth and other " more critical " uses just do n't require nearly as much such that even at their peak , they only need 1 \ % of the total , but the " big use " is greedy and hogs 99.5 \ % ? Then does n't it make sense to throttle them down to 99 \ % so that the other uses can have enough ?
Especially if the " big use " is games that that have stutter-y performance at 99.5 \ % , and will therefore have slightly more stutter at 99 ? Disclaimer : numbers have been fabricated out of whole cloth for dramatic purposes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On the other hand, suppose one use just dominates the bandwidth and other "more critical" uses just don't require nearly as much such that even at their peak, they only need 1\% of the total, but the "big use" is greedy and hogs 99.5\%?Then doesn't it make sense to throttle them down to 99\% so that the other uses can have enough?
Especially if the "big use" is games that that have stutter-y performance at 99.5\%, and will therefore have slightly more stutter at 99?Disclaimer: numbers have been fabricated out of whole cloth for dramatic purposes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889099</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889281</id>
	<title>Blame</title>
	<author>Ardaen</author>
	<datestamp>1256638440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It seems to me this would be much less of a problem if ISPs didn't massively oversell their networks and cheap out on upgrades. I hear complaints about cost and questions of who will pay for the upgrades, then I go look at profit reports...</htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems to me this would be much less of a problem if ISPs did n't massively oversell their networks and cheap out on upgrades .
I hear complaints about cost and questions of who will pay for the upgrades , then I go look at profit reports.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems to me this would be much less of a problem if ISPs didn't massively oversell their networks and cheap out on upgrades.
I hear complaints about cost and questions of who will pay for the upgrades, then I go look at profit reports...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888661</id>
	<title>Internet Probably Couldn't Handle a Flu Pandemic</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256635920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The tubes will become clogged with mucus.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The tubes will become clogged with mucus .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The tubes will become clogged with mucus.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888853</id>
	<title>sinus congestion,network congestion &amp; brain fr</title>
	<author>virchull</author>
	<datestamp>1256636580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Lets hope the GAO's nightmare pandemic does not happen, and this is just a bureaucratic CYA report.  But if it does happen, we will see Congress and the FCC crack the monopoly positions of phone and cable companies and unleash a torrent of competition that will deliver 100 gig bandwidth to users for a few bucks a month.  The rest of the developed world has this already.  It would be truly tragic if it takes a pandemic to get the US over the brain freeze it has about protecting monopolies in the telecom industry.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Lets hope the GAO 's nightmare pandemic does not happen , and this is just a bureaucratic CYA report .
But if it does happen , we will see Congress and the FCC crack the monopoly positions of phone and cable companies and unleash a torrent of competition that will deliver 100 gig bandwidth to users for a few bucks a month .
The rest of the developed world has this already .
It would be truly tragic if it takes a pandemic to get the US over the brain freeze it has about protecting monopolies in the telecom industry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lets hope the GAO's nightmare pandemic does not happen, and this is just a bureaucratic CYA report.
But if it does happen, we will see Congress and the FCC crack the monopoly positions of phone and cable companies and unleash a torrent of competition that will deliver 100 gig bandwidth to users for a few bucks a month.
The rest of the developed world has this already.
It would be truly tragic if it takes a pandemic to get the US over the brain freeze it has about protecting monopolies in the telecom industry.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890471</id>
	<title>Modem times</title>
	<author>ziggr</author>
	<datestamp>1256643000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IT departments used to maintain an array of modems. Employees would dial in from home, using their own modem. No internet required, just plain old telephone service.<br>This could work again.<br>Network applications, web applications, and server applications would rediscover frugality. Folks might rediscover Opera and its Show/Cached/No Images popup menu. Or lynx.<br>People with VoIP lines would be out of luck.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IT departments used to maintain an array of modems .
Employees would dial in from home , using their own modem .
No internet required , just plain old telephone service.This could work again.Network applications , web applications , and server applications would rediscover frugality .
Folks might rediscover Opera and its Show/Cached/No Images popup menu .
Or lynx.People with VoIP lines would be out of luck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IT departments used to maintain an array of modems.
Employees would dial in from home, using their own modem.
No internet required, just plain old telephone service.This could work again.Network applications, web applications, and server applications would rediscover frugality.
Folks might rediscover Opera and its Show/Cached/No Images popup menu.
Or lynx.People with VoIP lines would be out of luck.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29895401</id>
	<title>Bullshit.</title>
	<author>unity100</author>
	<datestamp>1256735520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>while teleworking, its not like they will be using bandwidth. just like you work in your office - you work on your local document or whatever, and THEN send it through email to the recipient party anyway. your instant messenger will be still online, regardless of you are teleworking, or in the office. so there is no goddamn difference in between teleworking and being in the office.</p><p>another hilarious part is 'kids playing online games'. the network demand of the online games are pathetically low compared to many other applications.</p><p>all these concerns seem to be bullshit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>while teleworking , its not like they will be using bandwidth .
just like you work in your office - you work on your local document or whatever , and THEN send it through email to the recipient party anyway .
your instant messenger will be still online , regardless of you are teleworking , or in the office .
so there is no goddamn difference in between teleworking and being in the office.another hilarious part is 'kids playing online games' .
the network demand of the online games are pathetically low compared to many other applications.all these concerns seem to be bullshit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>while teleworking, its not like they will be using bandwidth.
just like you work in your office - you work on your local document or whatever, and THEN send it through email to the recipient party anyway.
your instant messenger will be still online, regardless of you are teleworking, or in the office.
so there is no goddamn difference in between teleworking and being in the office.another hilarious part is 'kids playing online games'.
the network demand of the online games are pathetically low compared to many other applications.all these concerns seem to be bullshit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888563</id>
	<title>Traffic is usually higher during business days</title>
	<author>A beautiful mind</author>
	<datestamp>1256635620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Isn't traffic usually higher during business days than during the weekends? If so, during a pandemic I'd expect lower traffic, not higher. Especially since people, you know, being sick don't really feel like browsing...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't traffic usually higher during business days than during the weekends ?
If so , during a pandemic I 'd expect lower traffic , not higher .
Especially since people , you know , being sick do n't really feel like browsing.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't traffic usually higher during business days than during the weekends?
If so, during a pandemic I'd expect lower traffic, not higher.
Especially since people, you know, being sick don't really feel like browsing...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29894267</id>
	<title>Re:Go to your room and no video games!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256721960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>you're absolutely right, the ones who would turn to the Internet are not those sick with H1N1, but those afraid to get it.</p><p>Now the original post says we should be worried about teenagers playing games while their parents are trying to get some work done over the Internet.</p><p>I'm more worried by the p2p traffic and the youtube-like traffic. But let's not use this as a reason to throttle p2p.</p><p>I expect the h1n1 impact on economy to be no higher than the effect of a long strike in France, And France always recovers from those strikes...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you 're absolutely right , the ones who would turn to the Internet are not those sick with H1N1 , but those afraid to get it.Now the original post says we should be worried about teenagers playing games while their parents are trying to get some work done over the Internet.I 'm more worried by the p2p traffic and the youtube-like traffic .
But let 's not use this as a reason to throttle p2p.I expect the h1n1 impact on economy to be no higher than the effect of a long strike in France , And France always recovers from those strikes.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you're absolutely right, the ones who would turn to the Internet are not those sick with H1N1, but those afraid to get it.Now the original post says we should be worried about teenagers playing games while their parents are trying to get some work done over the Internet.I'm more worried by the p2p traffic and the youtube-like traffic.
But let's not use this as a reason to throttle p2p.I expect the h1n1 impact on economy to be no higher than the effect of a long strike in France, And France always recovers from those strikes...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888921</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888901</id>
	<title>The problem will work itself out</title>
	<author>brian0918</author>
	<datestamp>1256636820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think the problem will work itself out when local ISP IT staff get the flu as well.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the problem will work itself out when local ISP IT staff get the flu as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the problem will work itself out when local ISP IT staff get the flu as well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888651</id>
	<title>WTF</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256635860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is it just me or have people totally lost their sense of the internet truly is?!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is it just me or have people totally lost their sense of the internet truly is ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is it just me or have people totally lost their sense of the internet truly is?
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29898625</id>
	<title>And this generates more traffic how?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256750220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How does schoolchildren and workers being home from school and work generate a worrysome amount of traffic as compared to summer vacation, holidays, weekends, etc?  Working remotely from home generates at most marginally more traffic on average than those same people at their place of work (on average, if you consider that enough sick people at home will be actually sick, not working remotely).</p><p>I just don't see where the scare in this is.  There are plenty of events and days/weeks/months that occur normally that I can only imagine would far exceed the stress averaged by [mostly-sick] people being at home and "bored".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How does schoolchildren and workers being home from school and work generate a worrysome amount of traffic as compared to summer vacation , holidays , weekends , etc ?
Working remotely from home generates at most marginally more traffic on average than those same people at their place of work ( on average , if you consider that enough sick people at home will be actually sick , not working remotely ) .I just do n't see where the scare in this is .
There are plenty of events and days/weeks/months that occur normally that I can only imagine would far exceed the stress averaged by [ mostly-sick ] people being at home and " bored " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How does schoolchildren and workers being home from school and work generate a worrysome amount of traffic as compared to summer vacation, holidays, weekends, etc?
Working remotely from home generates at most marginally more traffic on average than those same people at their place of work (on average, if you consider that enough sick people at home will be actually sick, not working remotely).I just don't see where the scare in this is.
There are plenty of events and days/weeks/months that occur normally that I can only imagine would far exceed the stress averaged by [mostly-sick] people being at home and "bored".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888959</id>
	<title>Is the Internet's main goal commerce?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256636940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To, me the answer is it depends.</p><p>It depends on what the subscribes want to use it for.  When I pay for Internet I do so because it provides some functionality that I value.</p><p>If the functionality that I value the most is playing games then there should be no restrictions on me doing that.  This goes for whatever you value.  If masses of people get sick and go home and start playing WOW (also Internet commerce, just ask Blizzard) so much so that others cannot log into their banks website then the majority has spoken.</p><p>If I ever find out that my ISP is filtering content like this then that's the day I switch to another ISP.  If I wanted my Internet filtered then I might as well move to China.</p><p>The Internet is not a utility and therefore there should not have any governmental control in place whatsoever.  It seems like more and more since 911 that people are willing to hand over their rights to the government in hopes that this false sense of security will help them sleep better at night.  Many people forget that the Internet is a no man's land, as it was designed to be, its only function is to move bits around regardless of the nature of those bits.</p><p>If any government, specifically the US government, wants a data network that is treated like a utility which they can control / police then they should build it.  The Internet is not a single network that anyone owns.  Every ISP that connects to the Internet or specifically adds to it, such as tier-1 Internet providers, owns a piece of the Internet.  As a former ISP I would never provide any information to any 3rd party without a court order to do so nor would I provide any kind of filtering or bandwidth shaping.</p><p>How dare someone think they can control the Internet it is owned by the people!</p><p>Nick Powers</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To , me the answer is it depends.It depends on what the subscribes want to use it for .
When I pay for Internet I do so because it provides some functionality that I value.If the functionality that I value the most is playing games then there should be no restrictions on me doing that .
This goes for whatever you value .
If masses of people get sick and go home and start playing WOW ( also Internet commerce , just ask Blizzard ) so much so that others can not log into their banks website then the majority has spoken.If I ever find out that my ISP is filtering content like this then that 's the day I switch to another ISP .
If I wanted my Internet filtered then I might as well move to China.The Internet is not a utility and therefore there should not have any governmental control in place whatsoever .
It seems like more and more since 911 that people are willing to hand over their rights to the government in hopes that this false sense of security will help them sleep better at night .
Many people forget that the Internet is a no man 's land , as it was designed to be , its only function is to move bits around regardless of the nature of those bits.If any government , specifically the US government , wants a data network that is treated like a utility which they can control / police then they should build it .
The Internet is not a single network that anyone owns .
Every ISP that connects to the Internet or specifically adds to it , such as tier-1 Internet providers , owns a piece of the Internet .
As a former ISP I would never provide any information to any 3rd party without a court order to do so nor would I provide any kind of filtering or bandwidth shaping.How dare someone think they can control the Internet it is owned by the people ! Nick Powers</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To, me the answer is it depends.It depends on what the subscribes want to use it for.
When I pay for Internet I do so because it provides some functionality that I value.If the functionality that I value the most is playing games then there should be no restrictions on me doing that.
This goes for whatever you value.
If masses of people get sick and go home and start playing WOW (also Internet commerce, just ask Blizzard) so much so that others cannot log into their banks website then the majority has spoken.If I ever find out that my ISP is filtering content like this then that's the day I switch to another ISP.
If I wanted my Internet filtered then I might as well move to China.The Internet is not a utility and therefore there should not have any governmental control in place whatsoever.
It seems like more and more since 911 that people are willing to hand over their rights to the government in hopes that this false sense of security will help them sleep better at night.
Many people forget that the Internet is a no man's land, as it was designed to be, its only function is to move bits around regardless of the nature of those bits.If any government, specifically the US government, wants a data network that is treated like a utility which they can control / police then they should build it.
The Internet is not a single network that anyone owns.
Every ISP that connects to the Internet or specifically adds to it, such as tier-1 Internet providers, owns a piece of the Internet.
As a former ISP I would never provide any information to any 3rd party without a court order to do so nor would I provide any kind of filtering or bandwidth shaping.How dare someone think they can control the Internet it is owned by the people!Nick Powers</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29893655</id>
	<title>Re:Go to your room and no video games!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256670420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You probably just had the flu.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>You didn't get the shot, did you?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You probably just had the flu .
: ) You did n't get the shot , did you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You probably just had the flu.
:)You didn't get the shot, did you?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888921</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888659</id>
	<title>Wow</title>
	<author>earnest murderer</author>
	<datestamp>1256635860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I thought everyone learned their lesson about the "tubes" already.</p><p>There is some other bullshit afoot and it has fuck all to do with games, pandemics or teleworking.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought everyone learned their lesson about the " tubes " already.There is some other bullshit afoot and it has fuck all to do with games , pandemics or teleworking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought everyone learned their lesson about the "tubes" already.There is some other bullshit afoot and it has fuck all to do with games, pandemics or teleworking.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888813</id>
	<title>specific web sites</title>
	<author>TheSHAD0W</author>
	<datestamp>1256636400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Shutting down specific high-traffic web sites would IMO not be a good idea; people would simply surf elsewhere.  In fact, when those heavily loaded sites start lagging, many people will wait for them to load rather than jump elsewhere, reducing the total load.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Shutting down specific high-traffic web sites would IMO not be a good idea ; people would simply surf elsewhere .
In fact , when those heavily loaded sites start lagging , many people will wait for them to load rather than jump elsewhere , reducing the total load .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shutting down specific high-traffic web sites would IMO not be a good idea; people would simply surf elsewhere.
In fact, when those heavily loaded sites start lagging, many people will wait for them to load rather than jump elsewhere, reducing the total load.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890181</id>
	<title>Re:I use more bandwidth at work</title>
	<author>Monkeedude1212</author>
	<datestamp>1256641860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Some of those 4chan gifs can get pretty big in size. And you can go through like 10 of those a minute.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Some of those 4chan gifs can get pretty big in size .
And you can go through like 10 of those a minute .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some of those 4chan gifs can get pretty big in size.
And you can go through like 10 of those a minute.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888571</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889275</id>
	<title>Re:Go to your room and no video games!</title>
	<author>AlexBirch</author>
	<datestamp>1256638380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Does anyone else believe this is just an attempt of the General Accountability Office to shutoff slashdot?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does anyone else believe this is just an attempt of the General Accountability Office to shutoff slashdot ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does anyone else believe this is just an attempt of the General Accountability Office to shutoff slashdot?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890195</id>
	<title>Re:prioritize traffic?</title>
	<author>pluther</author>
	<datestamp>1256641920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The internet will work just fine when everyone is home sick: It'll be sunday for a few weeks in a row. </p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Ah-HAH!  You have unwittingly exposed their plan!</p><p>
First, they freeze the internet in September.</p><p>
Then, they narrow it down to Sunday.</p><p>
This is just one more step in their ultimate goal to destroy the Net by squeezing it down to nothing at all!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The internet will work just fine when everyone is home sick : It 'll be sunday for a few weeks in a row .
Ah-HAH ! You have unwittingly exposed their plan !
First , they freeze the internet in September .
Then , they narrow it down to Sunday .
This is just one more step in their ultimate goal to destroy the Net by squeezing it down to nothing at all !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The internet will work just fine when everyone is home sick: It'll be sunday for a few weeks in a row.
Ah-HAH!  You have unwittingly exposed their plan!
First, they freeze the internet in September.
Then, they narrow it down to Sunday.
This is just one more step in their ultimate goal to destroy the Net by squeezing it down to nothing at all!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888553</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888739</id>
	<title>Re:sigh</title>
	<author>wizardforce</author>
	<datestamp>1256636100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Once the government gains new useful powers like those granted to the DHS, it is extremely difficult to dislodge them.  Once the power is there, there's no reason for them to ever think of giving it up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Once the government gains new useful powers like those granted to the DHS , it is extremely difficult to dislodge them .
Once the power is there , there 's no reason for them to ever think of giving it up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Once the government gains new useful powers like those granted to the DHS, it is extremely difficult to dislodge them.
Once the power is there, there's no reason for them to ever think of giving it up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29892553</id>
	<title>Re:Traffic is usually higher during business days</title>
	<author>sponga</author>
	<datestamp>1256657100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am surprised this wasn't published on Slashdot, but I remember reading a couple weeks back that for the first time afternoon(home users) use overtook business traffic, something to do with more people having their own computers now and other things.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am surprised this was n't published on Slashdot , but I remember reading a couple weeks back that for the first time afternoon ( home users ) use overtook business traffic , something to do with more people having their own computers now and other things .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am surprised this wasn't published on Slashdot, but I remember reading a couple weeks back that for the first time afternoon(home users) use overtook business traffic, something to do with more people having their own computers now and other things.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888563</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888683</id>
	<title>Is this how it starts?</title>
	<author>rotide</author>
	<datestamp>1256635920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is this how it starts, or is this just another bad, never to materialize idea that somehow got press?</p><p>Limit all traffic for the sake of national security or at least national commerce?  At what point do you give up said power once you have it?  At what point do you drop all filters and say a situation is no longer present?</p><p>Once you grab power and control, there is no reason to \_want\_ to give it up.</p><p>Then again, this is probably nothing more than a bad idea written on paper.  Hopefully.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is this how it starts , or is this just another bad , never to materialize idea that somehow got press ? Limit all traffic for the sake of national security or at least national commerce ?
At what point do you give up said power once you have it ?
At what point do you drop all filters and say a situation is no longer present ? Once you grab power and control , there is no reason to \ _want \ _ to give it up.Then again , this is probably nothing more than a bad idea written on paper .
Hopefully .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is this how it starts, or is this just another bad, never to materialize idea that somehow got press?Limit all traffic for the sake of national security or at least national commerce?
At what point do you give up said power once you have it?
At what point do you drop all filters and say a situation is no longer present?Once you grab power and control, there is no reason to \_want\_ to give it up.Then again, this is probably nothing more than a bad idea written on paper.
Hopefully.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888729</id>
	<title>This might suck</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256636100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>High-traffic Web sites, online games, and anything that these people apparently don't think are "real" commerce are actually commerce and involve dollars being moved around, usually in advertising. How is it fair to steamroll over certain businesses' sites and reduce their ad revenue to make room for other, apparently more important sites? If the goal is preserving commerce, how do they decide which businesses get choked and which get the bandwidth?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>High-traffic Web sites , online games , and anything that these people apparently do n't think are " real " commerce are actually commerce and involve dollars being moved around , usually in advertising .
How is it fair to steamroll over certain businesses ' sites and reduce their ad revenue to make room for other , apparently more important sites ?
If the goal is preserving commerce , how do they decide which businesses get choked and which get the bandwidth ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>High-traffic Web sites, online games, and anything that these people apparently don't think are "real" commerce are actually commerce and involve dollars being moved around, usually in advertising.
How is it fair to steamroll over certain businesses' sites and reduce their ad revenue to make room for other, apparently more important sites?
If the goal is preserving commerce, how do they decide which businesses get choked and which get the bandwidth?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888561</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256635620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe I'm just selfish, but I can't think of any event that should restrict my internet access.  I fail to see why this is any different from other emergencies that have benefited from the free flow of information concerning problems, rescue efforts, etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe I 'm just selfish , but I ca n't think of any event that should restrict my internet access .
I fail to see why this is any different from other emergencies that have benefited from the free flow of information concerning problems , rescue efforts , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe I'm just selfish, but I can't think of any event that should restrict my internet access.
I fail to see why this is any different from other emergencies that have benefited from the free flow of information concerning problems, rescue efforts, etc.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888501</id>
	<title>This makes no sense</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256635380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They're already jerking around on the internet while at work anyway, what difference will it make?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're already jerking around on the internet while at work anyway , what difference will it make ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're already jerking around on the internet while at work anyway, what difference will it make?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29898057</id>
	<title>Give me a break, again!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256747640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>This who;e episode is another red herring put up by the telecom companies who want to wring the last dollar out of their existing networks. Why are we even having this conversation? Why do we have to wait around to get adequate bandwidth, when the technology is there to give us what we need, and has been for several years? We used be first and best in applying new technology, why not now?</htmltext>
<tokenext>This who ; e episode is another red herring put up by the telecom companies who want to wring the last dollar out of their existing networks .
Why are we even having this conversation ?
Why do we have to wait around to get adequate bandwidth , when the technology is there to give us what we need , and has been for several years ?
We used be first and best in applying new technology , why not now ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This who;e episode is another red herring put up by the telecom companies who want to wring the last dollar out of their existing networks.
Why are we even having this conversation?
Why do we have to wait around to get adequate bandwidth, when the technology is there to give us what we need, and has been for several years?
We used be first and best in applying new technology, why not now?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889449</id>
	<title>Re:Bandwidth problems</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256639100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thanks for assuming all of us bittorrent users deserve to be punished for attempting to make use of the connections we've been {over}sold. Stay classy comcast salesperson!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thanks for assuming all of us bittorrent users deserve to be punished for attempting to make use of the connections we 've been { over } sold .
Stay classy comcast salesperson !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thanks for assuming all of us bittorrent users deserve to be punished for attempting to make use of the connections we've been {over}sold.
Stay classy comcast salesperson!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888753</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888753</id>
	<title>Bandwidth problems</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256636160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe they should look at how telecommunications companies are connecting people as the problem instead of how people are using the Internet.</p><p>Anyway, to my mind, there are a clear set of traffic shaping policies that satisfy net neutrality and make sure the network is still usable by everyone.  And that's to shape by physical connection, not application.  I have an 8 megabit DSL line, but I think my ISP has about 450-600 mbits of bandwidth to the Internet.  The aggregate bandwidth of all of their DSL customers is likely at least 10 times their available bandwidth to the Internet, and that's a perfectly normal and reasonable situation.</p><p>If ever any given connection they have to the Internet becomes saturated, they should prioritize traffic in such a way as to make sure everybody trying to use that connection gets their fair share.  That means customers that only burst traffic and aren't using their max for hours get priority over the people who are using as much bandwidth as they can for hours.  As the bandwidth becomes more constrained, the criteria for what counts as a burst should become shorter and the max burst bandwidth should be lowered.</p><p>Trying to kill off all your bittorrent customers, especially since you think they're competing with your more profitable centralized video distribution business sure seems attractive, but it's evil and all the wrong approach.  Just allocate bandwidth fairly to your customers and the bittorrent people will be punished for using all their bandwidth by having molasses web surfing compared to everybody else.</p><p>If bittorrent customers don't like this, they can agree to start marking the traffic they want to have as low priority and then that traffic will be the first to go when there's a bandwidth crunch.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe they should look at how telecommunications companies are connecting people as the problem instead of how people are using the Internet.Anyway , to my mind , there are a clear set of traffic shaping policies that satisfy net neutrality and make sure the network is still usable by everyone .
And that 's to shape by physical connection , not application .
I have an 8 megabit DSL line , but I think my ISP has about 450-600 mbits of bandwidth to the Internet .
The aggregate bandwidth of all of their DSL customers is likely at least 10 times their available bandwidth to the Internet , and that 's a perfectly normal and reasonable situation.If ever any given connection they have to the Internet becomes saturated , they should prioritize traffic in such a way as to make sure everybody trying to use that connection gets their fair share .
That means customers that only burst traffic and are n't using their max for hours get priority over the people who are using as much bandwidth as they can for hours .
As the bandwidth becomes more constrained , the criteria for what counts as a burst should become shorter and the max burst bandwidth should be lowered.Trying to kill off all your bittorrent customers , especially since you think they 're competing with your more profitable centralized video distribution business sure seems attractive , but it 's evil and all the wrong approach .
Just allocate bandwidth fairly to your customers and the bittorrent people will be punished for using all their bandwidth by having molasses web surfing compared to everybody else.If bittorrent customers do n't like this , they can agree to start marking the traffic they want to have as low priority and then that traffic will be the first to go when there 's a bandwidth crunch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe they should look at how telecommunications companies are connecting people as the problem instead of how people are using the Internet.Anyway, to my mind, there are a clear set of traffic shaping policies that satisfy net neutrality and make sure the network is still usable by everyone.
And that's to shape by physical connection, not application.
I have an 8 megabit DSL line, but I think my ISP has about 450-600 mbits of bandwidth to the Internet.
The aggregate bandwidth of all of their DSL customers is likely at least 10 times their available bandwidth to the Internet, and that's a perfectly normal and reasonable situation.If ever any given connection they have to the Internet becomes saturated, they should prioritize traffic in such a way as to make sure everybody trying to use that connection gets their fair share.
That means customers that only burst traffic and aren't using their max for hours get priority over the people who are using as much bandwidth as they can for hours.
As the bandwidth becomes more constrained, the criteria for what counts as a burst should become shorter and the max burst bandwidth should be lowered.Trying to kill off all your bittorrent customers, especially since you think they're competing with your more profitable centralized video distribution business sure seems attractive, but it's evil and all the wrong approach.
Just allocate bandwidth fairly to your customers and the bittorrent people will be punished for using all their bandwidth by having molasses web surfing compared to everybody else.If bittorrent customers don't like this, they can agree to start marking the traffic they want to have as low priority and then that traffic will be the first to go when there's a bandwidth crunch.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29893317</id>
	<title>These people (HS) have no shame</title>
	<author>Vitriol+Angst</author>
	<datestamp>1256665800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>HS was designed as a huge boondoggle by the Bush administration. A place to stuff cronies to give them jobs, and then absorb many other agencies to spend a lot of money and not get things done. Can anyone point to real Homeland Security success -- what exactly do the DO besides come up with more ways to insert their asses into our lives?</p><p>If they think THEY should protect the Internet -- then I recommend everyone cache IP addresses for places they like to visit, because I can bet an INCIDENT that needs fixing is only a few Oops away.</p><p>How many times do we fall for this crap? There is no enemy. Just a bunch of businesses creating astro-turf movements and the Media freaking out over the phobia of the week so that they can keep eyeballs glued to the TV.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>HS was designed as a huge boondoggle by the Bush administration .
A place to stuff cronies to give them jobs , and then absorb many other agencies to spend a lot of money and not get things done .
Can anyone point to real Homeland Security success -- what exactly do the DO besides come up with more ways to insert their asses into our lives ? If they think THEY should protect the Internet -- then I recommend everyone cache IP addresses for places they like to visit , because I can bet an INCIDENT that needs fixing is only a few Oops away.How many times do we fall for this crap ?
There is no enemy .
Just a bunch of businesses creating astro-turf movements and the Media freaking out over the phobia of the week so that they can keep eyeballs glued to the TV .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>HS was designed as a huge boondoggle by the Bush administration.
A place to stuff cronies to give them jobs, and then absorb many other agencies to spend a lot of money and not get things done.
Can anyone point to real Homeland Security success -- what exactly do the DO besides come up with more ways to insert their asses into our lives?If they think THEY should protect the Internet -- then I recommend everyone cache IP addresses for places they like to visit, because I can bet an INCIDENT that needs fixing is only a few Oops away.How many times do we fall for this crap?
There is no enemy.
Just a bunch of businesses creating astro-turf movements and the Media freaking out over the phobia of the week so that they can keep eyeballs glued to the TV.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890021</id>
	<title>Re:prioritize traffic?</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1256641080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>all they are saying, (you have read it before spouting off, right?) is that if there is a serious pandemic that something should be done to allow online commerce to continue. Interesting the DHS claims that's not what thye do but they presented a similar study of what they should do not to long ago.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>all they are saying , ( you have read it before spouting off , right ?
) is that if there is a serious pandemic that something should be done to allow online commerce to continue .
Interesting the DHS claims that 's not what thye do but they presented a similar study of what they should do not to long ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>all they are saying, (you have read it before spouting off, right?
) is that if there is a serious pandemic that something should be done to allow online commerce to continue.
Interesting the DHS claims that's not what thye do but they presented a similar study of what they should do not to long ago.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888553</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888921</id>
	<title>Re:Go to your room and no video games!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256636820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>As someone who is still recovering from H1N1, I think I can safely say that playing video games was not even on my list of things I had any desire to do.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As someone who is still recovering from H1N1 , I think I can safely say that playing video games was not even on my list of things I had any desire to do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As someone who is still recovering from H1N1, I think I can safely say that playing video games was not even on my list of things I had any desire to do.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29892671</id>
	<title>Re:Bandwidth problems</title>
	<author>mister\_playboy</author>
	<datestamp>1256658120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We don't need more corporate apologists justifying the terrible state of home connections in the USA.  Companies come up with all this complex shaping crap because they refuse to spend the money on upgrading infrastructure.  That is is the real long-term answer to the current network becoming overloaded, not some shell game bullshit of messing with internet traffic.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We do n't need more corporate apologists justifying the terrible state of home connections in the USA .
Companies come up with all this complex shaping crap because they refuse to spend the money on upgrading infrastructure .
That is is the real long-term answer to the current network becoming overloaded , not some shell game bullshit of messing with internet traffic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We don't need more corporate apologists justifying the terrible state of home connections in the USA.
Companies come up with all this complex shaping crap because they refuse to spend the money on upgrading infrastructure.
That is is the real long-term answer to the current network becoming overloaded, not some shell game bullshit of messing with internet traffic.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888753</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889811</id>
	<title>Re:Regulate trade between the States</title>
	<author>Urza9814</author>
	<datestamp>1256640300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Interesting. I wasn't aware that I was alive in 1787. Also, I guess my signature must have faded off the constitution, huh?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Interesting .
I was n't aware that I was alive in 1787 .
Also , I guess my signature must have faded off the constitution , huh ?
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interesting.
I wasn't aware that I was alive in 1787.
Also, I guess my signature must have faded off the constitution, huh?
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888585</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889961</id>
	<title>Re:Bandwidth problems</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256640900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The FCC absolutely should examine the way that telecommunication companies connect people over the "last mile" because their current practices are extremely deceptive.  Cable companies are particularly bad since bandwidth is shared between customers resulting in far lower speeds than those advertised.

Investment in infrastructure by telecommunication companies has, at least in the US, lagged significantly behind the increase in advertised connection speeds.  Rather than relying on traffic shaping to ensure a mediocre experience for all customers, new capacity should be a priority so that actual observed bandwidth is closer to the claimed bandwidth.

However, in an emergency, traffic shaping would absolutely be a necessity to ensure that critical functionality is maintained.  Unfortunately, given our current infrastructure system, this would result in many customers having severely degraded service or none at all.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The FCC absolutely should examine the way that telecommunication companies connect people over the " last mile " because their current practices are extremely deceptive .
Cable companies are particularly bad since bandwidth is shared between customers resulting in far lower speeds than those advertised .
Investment in infrastructure by telecommunication companies has , at least in the US , lagged significantly behind the increase in advertised connection speeds .
Rather than relying on traffic shaping to ensure a mediocre experience for all customers , new capacity should be a priority so that actual observed bandwidth is closer to the claimed bandwidth .
However , in an emergency , traffic shaping would absolutely be a necessity to ensure that critical functionality is maintained .
Unfortunately , given our current infrastructure system , this would result in many customers having severely degraded service or none at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The FCC absolutely should examine the way that telecommunication companies connect people over the "last mile" because their current practices are extremely deceptive.
Cable companies are particularly bad since bandwidth is shared between customers resulting in far lower speeds than those advertised.
Investment in infrastructure by telecommunication companies has, at least in the US, lagged significantly behind the increase in advertised connection speeds.
Rather than relying on traffic shaping to ensure a mediocre experience for all customers, new capacity should be a priority so that actual observed bandwidth is closer to the claimed bandwidth.
However, in an emergency, traffic shaping would absolutely be a necessity to ensure that critical functionality is maintained.
Unfortunately, given our current infrastructure system, this would result in many customers having severely degraded service or none at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888753</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890701</id>
	<title>Uuum, we had flu "pandemics". Nothing happened.</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1256644140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Multiple times every year, a big percentage of the people get some strain of the flu. The normal flu had way bigger "pandemics" than any H1N1. Nothing happened. It's just the flu. We know it. We can handle it. Done.</p><p>What this is really about, is the media, blowing stuff up, creating "contoversies", until any communications medium bursts, shutting themselves off.<br>Well, there's a simple solution for that one: <em>Stop being such greedy bastards!</em> Which means: Stop creating so much drama, just to get more viewers and make more money. Or in other words: Stop stuffing youself over what the mechanism can hold.</p><p>On the other hand, seeing the "traditional" (money4drama) media break completely down, would be a really cool thing to happen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Multiple times every year , a big percentage of the people get some strain of the flu .
The normal flu had way bigger " pandemics " than any H1N1 .
Nothing happened .
It 's just the flu .
We know it .
We can handle it .
Done.What this is really about , is the media , blowing stuff up , creating " contoversies " , until any communications medium bursts , shutting themselves off.Well , there 's a simple solution for that one : Stop being such greedy bastards !
Which means : Stop creating so much drama , just to get more viewers and make more money .
Or in other words : Stop stuffing youself over what the mechanism can hold.On the other hand , seeing the " traditional " ( money4drama ) media break completely down , would be a really cool thing to happen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Multiple times every year, a big percentage of the people get some strain of the flu.
The normal flu had way bigger "pandemics" than any H1N1.
Nothing happened.
It's just the flu.
We know it.
We can handle it.
Done.What this is really about, is the media, blowing stuff up, creating "contoversies", until any communications medium bursts, shutting themselves off.Well, there's a simple solution for that one: Stop being such greedy bastards!
Which means: Stop creating so much drama, just to get more viewers and make more money.
Or in other words: Stop stuffing youself over what the mechanism can hold.On the other hand, seeing the "traditional" (money4drama) media break completely down, would be a really cool thing to happen.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29896525</id>
	<title>little internet?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256741640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So there is only a little internet to go around? We will have to line up and everyone gets 30 seconds of internet? I think I'm going to click a popup</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So there is only a little internet to go around ?
We will have to line up and everyone gets 30 seconds of internet ?
I think I 'm going to click a popup</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So there is only a little internet to go around?
We will have to line up and everyone gets 30 seconds of internet?
I think I'm going to click a popup</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888701</id>
	<title>sigh...</title>
	<author>wizardforce</author>
	<datestamp>1256635980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So much for net neutrality...  Every time something like the Swine flu comes around they'll use it as an excuse to intervene.  Perhaps even use it as an excuse to buy a few billion $$ of equipment to facilitate their meddling.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So much for net neutrality... Every time something like the Swine flu comes around they 'll use it as an excuse to intervene .
Perhaps even use it as an excuse to buy a few billion $ $ of equipment to facilitate their meddling .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So much for net neutrality...  Every time something like the Swine flu comes around they'll use it as an excuse to intervene.
Perhaps even use it as an excuse to buy a few billion $$ of equipment to facilitate their meddling.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888553
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890021
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888549
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888727
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889853
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888563
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890711
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888553
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888831
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889099
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29892215
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889077
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888533
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888921
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29893655
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888533
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888921
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890003
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888549
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888727
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889587
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888549
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889773
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888563
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888939
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29943656
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888753
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29893315
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888553
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890195
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888563
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889001
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888533
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888921
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890755
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888753
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889961
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888635
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890373
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888549
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888727
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29892623
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888549
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888999
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888549
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888851
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888563
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29892553
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888549
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888739
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890675
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888549
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888775
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29891381
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888571
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890809
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888753
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889449
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888571
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889035
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890041
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888549
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888877
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890933
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888601
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29891305
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888533
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890961
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888549
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888749
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889907
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888571
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889731
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888533
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888921
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890413
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888533
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888681
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888585
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889811
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888549
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888775
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889137
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888549
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888771
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888563
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890469
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888549
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889277
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888533
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888921
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29894267
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888753
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29892671
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888571
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890181
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888657
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888955
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888657
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29891003
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888549
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889111
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1949223_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888533
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889275
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1949223.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888635
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890373
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1949223.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888571
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889035
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890809
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889731
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890181
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1949223.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888565
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1949223.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888601
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29891305
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1949223.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888753
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889961
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29892671
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29893315
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889449
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1949223.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890561
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1949223.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890701
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1949223.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888659
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1949223.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888811
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1949223.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888585
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889811
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1949223.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888657
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888955
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29891003
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1949223.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889815
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1949223.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888583
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1949223.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888575
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889077
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890041
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1949223.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888549
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888877
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890933
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888771
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889277
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888739
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890675
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888999
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888749
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889907
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888727
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889587
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889853
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29892623
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889111
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888775
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29891381
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889137
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888677
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889773
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888851
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1949223.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29891185
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1949223.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888959
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1949223.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888679
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1949223.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888533
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888681
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890961
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889275
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888921
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890755
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890413
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29894267
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890003
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29893655
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1949223.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888645
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1949223.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888563
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890469
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889001
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890711
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888939
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29943656
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29892553
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1949223.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29889099
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29892215
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1949223.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888561
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1949223.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888553
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890195
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890021
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888831
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1949223.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29890783
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1949223.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1949223.29888501
</commentlist>
</conversation>
