<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_28_1613237</id>
	<title>China Debuts the World's Fastest Train</title>
	<author>ScuttleMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1262029920000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"China unveiled their <a href="http://www.inhabitat.com/2009/12/28/china-unveils-the-worlds-fastest-high-speed-train/">new high speed train</a> that clocks in at an average of 217 mph. China's new rail service travels through 20 cities along its route, connecting central China and less developed regions to the larger and more industrial Pearl River Delhi. Seimens, Bombardier and Alstom worked together to design and build this feat of modern transportation, which topped out at a whopping 245mph (394km/h) during trial runs earlier in December."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " China unveiled their new high speed train that clocks in at an average of 217 mph .
China 's new rail service travels through 20 cities along its route , connecting central China and less developed regions to the larger and more industrial Pearl River Delhi .
Seimens , Bombardier and Alstom worked together to design and build this feat of modern transportation , which topped out at a whopping 245mph ( 394km/h ) during trial runs earlier in December .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "China unveiled their new high speed train that clocks in at an average of 217 mph.
China's new rail service travels through 20 cities along its route, connecting central China and less developed regions to the larger and more industrial Pearl River Delhi.
Seimens, Bombardier and Alstom worked together to design and build this feat of modern transportation, which topped out at a whopping 245mph (394km/h) during trial runs earlier in December.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576232</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it to have something like this in U</title>
	<author>Lumpy</author>
	<datestamp>1261997460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is already an express train from Chicago to Detroit.  It's just not a high speed train but standard light rail on a heavy rail run.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is already an express train from Chicago to Detroit .
It 's just not a high speed train but standard light rail on a heavy rail run .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is already an express train from Chicago to Detroit.
It's just not a high speed train but standard light rail on a heavy rail run.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575012</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578586</id>
	<title>Re:Pearl River Delta??</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262015220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For Now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For Now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For Now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577032</id>
	<title>Re:Fuel efficiency of this train vs airplane?</title>
	<author>GrumblyStuff</author>
	<datestamp>1262002980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would certainly hope they get new tracks so the tech could be used to it's full potential and so that passenger trains aren't stuck for a dozen of minutes to dozens of minutes waiting for freight trains to pass by.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would certainly hope they get new tracks so the tech could be used to it 's full potential and so that passenger trains are n't stuck for a dozen of minutes to dozens of minutes waiting for freight trains to pass by .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would certainly hope they get new tracks so the tech could be used to it's full potential and so that passenger trains aren't stuck for a dozen of minutes to dozens of minutes waiting for freight trains to pass by.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575748</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575704</id>
	<title>Delta not "Delhi"</title>
	<author>Greg Hullender</author>
	<datestamp>1261995120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>He means "Pearl River Delta" not "Delhi" of course. Roughly, that means "Greater Hong Kong." So the train connects rural regions in China with the manufacturing powerhouse that surrounds Hong Kong.
<div><p>
--Greg</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He means " Pearl River Delta " not " Delhi " of course .
Roughly , that means " Greater Hong Kong .
" So the train connects rural regions in China with the manufacturing powerhouse that surrounds Hong Kong .
--Greg</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He means "Pearl River Delta" not "Delhi" of course.
Roughly, that means "Greater Hong Kong.
" So the train connects rural regions in China with the manufacturing powerhouse that surrounds Hong Kong.
--Greg</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30579384</id>
	<title>Re:Many bothans died to bring us this transformati</title>
	<author>mjwx</author>
	<datestamp>1262024100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The Soviet Union's great technological leaps looked mind blowing at the time as well, and look where they are today.</p></div></blockquote><p>

First point, the Soviet Union's advances weren't that great, at their height they were equal to the west and this didn't last long at all. The reason the Soviets equalled the west in tech is because they stole most of it from the west, the Stalinist purges killed most scientists back in the 30's and almost all the rest fled. What the Stalinist regime created was a massive intelligence network so inserting spies into the west presented them with little difficulty. This is how the Soviet's got the bomb, they simply took the research they needed from Los Alamos. By the time the 1960's rolled around the west had tightened up our internal security.<br> <br>

Secondly the Soviet economy collapsed because after the end of the second world war, Stalin decided that all possible production will go into the military not civilian infrastructure. The west did the opposite, despite the amount spent on the military the US and western allies sunk millions into rebuilding civilian infrastructure, industry, transportation and so on. In the 1950's the Soviet Union had the biggest military but fast forward 40 years the west enjoyed economic stability that was built on roads, ports and power lines made in the 50's and 60's whilst the Soviet Union had bread lines.<br> <br>

China is a different kettle of fish to the old Soviet Union.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Soviet Union 's great technological leaps looked mind blowing at the time as well , and look where they are today .
First point , the Soviet Union 's advances were n't that great , at their height they were equal to the west and this did n't last long at all .
The reason the Soviets equalled the west in tech is because they stole most of it from the west , the Stalinist purges killed most scientists back in the 30 's and almost all the rest fled .
What the Stalinist regime created was a massive intelligence network so inserting spies into the west presented them with little difficulty .
This is how the Soviet 's got the bomb , they simply took the research they needed from Los Alamos .
By the time the 1960 's rolled around the west had tightened up our internal security .
Secondly the Soviet economy collapsed because after the end of the second world war , Stalin decided that all possible production will go into the military not civilian infrastructure .
The west did the opposite , despite the amount spent on the military the US and western allies sunk millions into rebuilding civilian infrastructure , industry , transportation and so on .
In the 1950 's the Soviet Union had the biggest military but fast forward 40 years the west enjoyed economic stability that was built on roads , ports and power lines made in the 50 's and 60 's whilst the Soviet Union had bread lines .
China is a different kettle of fish to the old Soviet Union .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Soviet Union's great technological leaps looked mind blowing at the time as well, and look where they are today.
First point, the Soviet Union's advances weren't that great, at their height they were equal to the west and this didn't last long at all.
The reason the Soviets equalled the west in tech is because they stole most of it from the west, the Stalinist purges killed most scientists back in the 30's and almost all the rest fled.
What the Stalinist regime created was a massive intelligence network so inserting spies into the west presented them with little difficulty.
This is how the Soviet's got the bomb, they simply took the research they needed from Los Alamos.
By the time the 1960's rolled around the west had tightened up our internal security.
Secondly the Soviet economy collapsed because after the end of the second world war, Stalin decided that all possible production will go into the military not civilian infrastructure.
The west did the opposite, despite the amount spent on the military the US and western allies sunk millions into rebuilding civilian infrastructure, industry, transportation and so on.
In the 1950's the Soviet Union had the biggest military but fast forward 40 years the west enjoyed economic stability that was built on roads, ports and power lines made in the 50's and 60's whilst the Soviet Union had bread lines.
China is a different kettle of fish to the old Soviet Union.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575788</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578196</id>
	<title>Re:China's Achievements</title>
	<author>dbIII</author>
	<datestamp>1262012160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Because we don't have 300 million unskilled laborers who will work their ass off for a few bucks a day</p></div></blockquote><p>At the last count you do have 50 million people on food stamps.  That's a lot of people that could be working in such jobs.<br>You do have governments that like to blame others instead of act - for instance the idiots that are blaming the California state governments economic problems on prison officers demanding more pay when it's a tiny fraction of even the prison budget.  It is likely that given a completely free workforce they would not be able to build anything, but it doesn't have to be that way.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because we do n't have 300 million unskilled laborers who will work their ass off for a few bucks a dayAt the last count you do have 50 million people on food stamps .
That 's a lot of people that could be working in such jobs.You do have governments that like to blame others instead of act - for instance the idiots that are blaming the California state governments economic problems on prison officers demanding more pay when it 's a tiny fraction of even the prison budget .
It is likely that given a completely free workforce they would not be able to build anything , but it does n't have to be that way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because we don't have 300 million unskilled laborers who will work their ass off for a few bucks a dayAt the last count you do have 50 million people on food stamps.
That's a lot of people that could be working in such jobs.You do have governments that like to blame others instead of act - for instance the idiots that are blaming the California state governments economic problems on prison officers demanding more pay when it's a tiny fraction of even the prison budget.
It is likely that given a completely free workforce they would not be able to build anything, but it doesn't have to be that way.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578102</id>
	<title>Re:Fuel efficiency of this train vs airplane?</title>
	<author>DerekLyons</author>
	<datestamp>1262011440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The US had a high speed passenger network - which collapsed when the incomes sources that the network's owners depended on to subsidize the network themselves all but collapsed.</p><p>Now, we certainly could build a several tens of billions of dollars worth of rail line between NYC and Atlanta, but shall we charge the passengers full price for the line or make it affordable and find someone to subsidize it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The US had a high speed passenger network - which collapsed when the incomes sources that the network 's owners depended on to subsidize the network themselves all but collapsed.Now , we certainly could build a several tens of billions of dollars worth of rail line between NYC and Atlanta , but shall we charge the passengers full price for the line or make it affordable and find someone to subsidize it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The US had a high speed passenger network - which collapsed when the incomes sources that the network's owners depended on to subsidize the network themselves all but collapsed.Now, we certainly could build a several tens of billions of dollars worth of rail line between NYC and Atlanta, but shall we charge the passengers full price for the line or make it affordable and find someone to subsidize it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575710</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it to have something like this in U</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1261995120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>How "hard" is it is mainly a matter of spending money and ramming through the environmental permits, eminent domain seizures, and other such hurdles.</i></p><p>Or they could use the existing railroad rights of way, or even interstate highway rights of way.</p><p><i>We do have flat areas, like Chicago-Detroit and Chicago-StLouis, but they don't have quite that volume of travel, and no strong push.</i></p><p>They're working on a Chicago-St Louis "high speed" rail right now. Springfield's city government wants it to go down the 10th street railroad corridor, the railroads want it to go through the 3rd street railroad corridor, blemishing a tourist city and blocking local businesses off from streets.</p><p>It looks like the railroads are going to have their way. I wish they'd nationalize the railroads! And our "high speed" rail service won't be nearly as fast as Europe's high speed rail.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How " hard " is it is mainly a matter of spending money and ramming through the environmental permits , eminent domain seizures , and other such hurdles.Or they could use the existing railroad rights of way , or even interstate highway rights of way.We do have flat areas , like Chicago-Detroit and Chicago-StLouis , but they do n't have quite that volume of travel , and no strong push.They 're working on a Chicago-St Louis " high speed " rail right now .
Springfield 's city government wants it to go down the 10th street railroad corridor , the railroads want it to go through the 3rd street railroad corridor , blemishing a tourist city and blocking local businesses off from streets.It looks like the railroads are going to have their way .
I wish they 'd nationalize the railroads !
And our " high speed " rail service wo n't be nearly as fast as Europe 's high speed rail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How "hard" is it is mainly a matter of spending money and ramming through the environmental permits, eminent domain seizures, and other such hurdles.Or they could use the existing railroad rights of way, or even interstate highway rights of way.We do have flat areas, like Chicago-Detroit and Chicago-StLouis, but they don't have quite that volume of travel, and no strong push.They're working on a Chicago-St Louis "high speed" rail right now.
Springfield's city government wants it to go down the 10th street railroad corridor, the railroads want it to go through the 3rd street railroad corridor, blemishing a tourist city and blocking local businesses off from streets.It looks like the railroads are going to have their way.
I wish they'd nationalize the railroads!
And our "high speed" rail service won't be nearly as fast as Europe's high speed rail.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575012</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576490</id>
	<title>Re:Nice</title>
	<author>copponex</author>
	<datestamp>1261999080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>One picky point with TFA... it suggests that the fast travel times of a high-speed rail network would not come with the security overhead of air travel. I'm not so sure about that.</p></div><p>Airplanes a little more than aluminum pressurized tubes with fins on them that are tens of thousands of feet in the air. Trains are a much better place to have armed guards with hollow points patrolling the cars. Also, trains cannot be used as weapons, since they are on tracks.</p><p>I used the train system in France several years ago. I was totally amazed that I could walk on a train, pay the ticketing agent on board (though prepaying is cheaper) and enjoy a cup of coffee while it took me 300 miles in 3 hours - including stops. Once the auto and road construction lobbyists lose their death grip on our infrastructure funding, we could have the same thing.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>One picky point with TFA... it suggests that the fast travel times of a high-speed rail network would not come with the security overhead of air travel .
I 'm not so sure about that.Airplanes a little more than aluminum pressurized tubes with fins on them that are tens of thousands of feet in the air .
Trains are a much better place to have armed guards with hollow points patrolling the cars .
Also , trains can not be used as weapons , since they are on tracks.I used the train system in France several years ago .
I was totally amazed that I could walk on a train , pay the ticketing agent on board ( though prepaying is cheaper ) and enjoy a cup of coffee while it took me 300 miles in 3 hours - including stops .
Once the auto and road construction lobbyists lose their death grip on our infrastructure funding , we could have the same thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One picky point with TFA... it suggests that the fast travel times of a high-speed rail network would not come with the security overhead of air travel.
I'm not so sure about that.Airplanes a little more than aluminum pressurized tubes with fins on them that are tens of thousands of feet in the air.
Trains are a much better place to have armed guards with hollow points patrolling the cars.
Also, trains cannot be used as weapons, since they are on tracks.I used the train system in France several years ago.
I was totally amazed that I could walk on a train, pay the ticketing agent on board (though prepaying is cheaper) and enjoy a cup of coffee while it took me 300 miles in 3 hours - including stops.
Once the auto and road construction lobbyists lose their death grip on our infrastructure funding, we could have the same thing.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574912</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30586216</id>
	<title>Re:56 trains a day</title>
	<author>steelfood</author>
	<datestamp>1262079600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And they've been playing nice with the less developed countries, creating no animosity between them. Of course, the local people may suffer if the local government is bad (e.g. Iran), but if things really are <i>that</i> bad, the locals usually end up handling it without external interference. And if the wealth of the local government translates into the populace's wealth, however few, then there's no cause to be angry towards anybody doing business with the local government.</p><p>It's a much cleaner system than the pseudo-imperialism practiced in the west, where big companies just want to rape other nations for their natural resources, and lobby their respective governments to do so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And they 've been playing nice with the less developed countries , creating no animosity between them .
Of course , the local people may suffer if the local government is bad ( e.g .
Iran ) , but if things really are that bad , the locals usually end up handling it without external interference .
And if the wealth of the local government translates into the populace 's wealth , however few , then there 's no cause to be angry towards anybody doing business with the local government.It 's a much cleaner system than the pseudo-imperialism practiced in the west , where big companies just want to rape other nations for their natural resources , and lobby their respective governments to do so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And they've been playing nice with the less developed countries, creating no animosity between them.
Of course, the local people may suffer if the local government is bad (e.g.
Iran), but if things really are that bad, the locals usually end up handling it without external interference.
And if the wealth of the local government translates into the populace's wealth, however few, then there's no cause to be angry towards anybody doing business with the local government.It's a much cleaner system than the pseudo-imperialism practiced in the west, where big companies just want to rape other nations for their natural resources, and lobby their respective governments to do so.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575056</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576050</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it to have something like this in U</title>
	<author>sledge\_hmmer</author>
	<datestamp>1261996680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Although they did also put it mainly on flat land. Some of our most promising city pairs with high traffic and strong local support for such a project are unfortunately in or separated by mountainous areas: LA-SF, Seattle-Portland, Atlanta-DC, etc.</p></div></blockquote><p>From the <a href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/bbdb6d5a-f304-11de-a888-00144feab49a.html?nclick\_check=1" title="ft.com" rel="nofollow">FT article</a> [ft.com]  posted elsewhere in this discussion:</p><blockquote><div><p>According to state media reports, the government spent $17bn (&euro;12bn, &pound;11bn) on the Harmony express line&rsquo;s construction over 4&#189; years. Wuhan invested $2.4bn in a new French-designed train station, which boasts 20 tracks and 11 platforms. Officials this weekend declined to confirm project costs.</p><p>One reason for the enormous construction outlay for the Harmony express was difficult terrain, especially in the poor mountainous areas of Guangdong and Hunan provinces. The train travels along 713km of elevated tracks and tunnels, accounting for about 70 per cent of its length.</p></div></blockquote><p>So you're argument may not really hold water.  I think the big reason for this not happening in the US, is capital costs, the lobbying efforts of airline and other affected industries and NIMBY mentality.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Although they did also put it mainly on flat land .
Some of our most promising city pairs with high traffic and strong local support for such a project are unfortunately in or separated by mountainous areas : LA-SF , Seattle-Portland , Atlanta-DC , etc.From the FT article [ ft.com ] posted elsewhere in this discussion : According to state media reports , the government spent $ 17bn (    12bn ,   11bn ) on the Harmony express line    s construction over 4   years .
Wuhan invested $ 2.4bn in a new French-designed train station , which boasts 20 tracks and 11 platforms .
Officials this weekend declined to confirm project costs.One reason for the enormous construction outlay for the Harmony express was difficult terrain , especially in the poor mountainous areas of Guangdong and Hunan provinces .
The train travels along 713km of elevated tracks and tunnels , accounting for about 70 per cent of its length.So you 're argument may not really hold water .
I think the big reason for this not happening in the US , is capital costs , the lobbying efforts of airline and other affected industries and NIMBY mentality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Although they did also put it mainly on flat land.
Some of our most promising city pairs with high traffic and strong local support for such a project are unfortunately in or separated by mountainous areas: LA-SF, Seattle-Portland, Atlanta-DC, etc.From the FT article [ft.com]  posted elsewhere in this discussion:According to state media reports, the government spent $17bn (€12bn, £11bn) on the Harmony express line’s construction over 4½ years.
Wuhan invested $2.4bn in a new French-designed train station, which boasts 20 tracks and 11 platforms.
Officials this weekend declined to confirm project costs.One reason for the enormous construction outlay for the Harmony express was difficult terrain, especially in the poor mountainous areas of Guangdong and Hunan provinces.
The train travels along 713km of elevated tracks and tunnels, accounting for about 70 per cent of its length.So you're argument may not really hold water.
I think the big reason for this not happening in the US, is capital costs, the lobbying efforts of airline and other affected industries and NIMBY mentality.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575012</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574914</id>
	<title>Re:245mph max speed? Not so impressive</title>
	<author>DeadPixels</author>
	<datestamp>1261991040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>BBC article is <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6521295.stm" title="bbc.co.uk">here</a> [bbc.co.uk]. Unfortunately, the article doesn't discuss whether or not this sort of train would actually be useful for passenger service or if the technology still needed some work. I would wager that the Chinese train is probably the fastest commercial (conventional rail) train.</htmltext>
<tokenext>BBC article is here [ bbc.co.uk ] .
Unfortunately , the article does n't discuss whether or not this sort of train would actually be useful for passenger service or if the technology still needed some work .
I would wager that the Chinese train is probably the fastest commercial ( conventional rail ) train .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>BBC article is here [bbc.co.uk].
Unfortunately, the article doesn't discuss whether or not this sort of train would actually be useful for passenger service or if the technology still needed some work.
I would wager that the Chinese train is probably the fastest commercial (conventional rail) train.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30581174</id>
	<title>Re:Is the Siemens train still using</title>
	<author>Alioth</author>
	<datestamp>1262095320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One interesting thing I found out about the TGV is the rolling stock technology is actually Spanish (a Talgo design - i.e. the one axle shared between two lightweight cars). The latest Talgo rolling stock also automatically tilts in corners without the need for gyros or hydraulics - an ingeniously simple system. Renfe has been running Talgo stock since the 1950s (the railway museum in Madrid has an example of one of the original Talgo-II sets)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One interesting thing I found out about the TGV is the rolling stock technology is actually Spanish ( a Talgo design - i.e .
the one axle shared between two lightweight cars ) .
The latest Talgo rolling stock also automatically tilts in corners without the need for gyros or hydraulics - an ingeniously simple system .
Renfe has been running Talgo stock since the 1950s ( the railway museum in Madrid has an example of one of the original Talgo-II sets )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One interesting thing I found out about the TGV is the rolling stock technology is actually Spanish (a Talgo design - i.e.
the one axle shared between two lightweight cars).
The latest Talgo rolling stock also automatically tilts in corners without the need for gyros or hydraulics - an ingeniously simple system.
Renfe has been running Talgo stock since the 1950s (the railway museum in Madrid has an example of one of the original Talgo-II sets)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575056</id>
	<title>56 trains a day</title>
	<author>Animats</author>
	<datestamp>1261991700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Here's a <a href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/bbdb6d5a-f304-11de-a888-00144feab49a.html" title="ft.com">better version of the story.</a> [ft.com]  This is a big deal.  They're running <i>56 trains a day</i> on that route.  They're also the longest high speed trains running.  So this is a high-volume people mover.  Plans call for another 11,000 Km of high speed rail by 2012.  That's only two years away.
</p><p>
Some of this is a consequence of the financial troubles and low interest rates in the US.  The government of China had been putting excess cash into U.S. Treasury bills, but about a year ago they stopped buying more US debt and started spending on infrastructure and resources.  China has been buying up mines and farms around the world to secure supplies of raw materials and food, while beefing up their infrastructure at home.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's a better version of the story .
[ ft.com ] This is a big deal .
They 're running 56 trains a day on that route .
They 're also the longest high speed trains running .
So this is a high-volume people mover .
Plans call for another 11,000 Km of high speed rail by 2012 .
That 's only two years away .
Some of this is a consequence of the financial troubles and low interest rates in the US .
The government of China had been putting excess cash into U.S. Treasury bills , but about a year ago they stopped buying more US debt and started spending on infrastructure and resources .
China has been buying up mines and farms around the world to secure supplies of raw materials and food , while beefing up their infrastructure at home .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Here's a better version of the story.
[ft.com]  This is a big deal.
They're running 56 trains a day on that route.
They're also the longest high speed trains running.
So this is a high-volume people mover.
Plans call for another 11,000 Km of high speed rail by 2012.
That's only two years away.
Some of this is a consequence of the financial troubles and low interest rates in the US.
The government of China had been putting excess cash into U.S. Treasury bills, but about a year ago they stopped buying more US debt and started spending on infrastructure and resources.
China has been buying up mines and farms around the world to secure supplies of raw materials and food, while beefing up their infrastructure at home.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575656</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it to have something like this in U</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261994820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>as for long distance rail, Amtrak is already unreliable. there is no reason to think that a new high speed train will be reliable and there is no benefit over flying. airports already have the infrastructure like rent a cars and public transportation that will have to be duplicated at a new high speed rail station.</p></div></blockquote><p>Let's subsidize rail transport at the same rate we subsidize road and air transport, and then we can compare reliability figures.<br> <br>NJ is probably a poor example, since we have the highest road density in the country, but we spend BILLIONS annually on road transport, and less than 1\% of that on rail transport (though the building of the new tunnel across the Hudson will bridge some of the funding gap, pardon the pun).<br> <br>And as for rental cars, public transportation at airports... that is easily solvable.  You can run light rail from the high-speed rail stations to the airports (which would make a lot of sense anyway, to connect all your transport systems).  You can even place your high-speed rail station adjacent to your airports.</p><blockquote><div><p>i also know someone that used to take the Acela from NYC to Boston for work years ago and it took like 3 hours each way. The Delta Shuttle was 1 hour. 90 minutes if you count getting to the airport early. back when we bought a competitor we used to fly to Boston in the morning and come back for dinner. if we took the train it would mean extra expenses in staying at a hotel</p></div></blockquote><p>Poor example.  The Acela is not a high-speed train (maybe in comparison to regular commuter rail service -- but nothing like what is possible if we were willing to build the infrastructure -- a real high-speed train from NY to Boston would be about 60 minutes tops).  And NY-to-Boston is not a 90-min trip time via plane (how long to get to the airport instead of getting to Penn Station via mass transit?  Do you still plan on arriving only 30 mins before departure time?  Good luck in today's airports... 30 mins is almost never enough time when flying out of any of NYC's three major airports.  <br> <br>I don't know why you use old examples for flight times, and examples of existing rail (instead of the high-speed rail being discussed) to make your anecdotal analysis.  But I think your blanket negativity on rail transport needs a good looking-over... you might be surprised.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>as for long distance rail , Amtrak is already unreliable .
there is no reason to think that a new high speed train will be reliable and there is no benefit over flying .
airports already have the infrastructure like rent a cars and public transportation that will have to be duplicated at a new high speed rail station.Let 's subsidize rail transport at the same rate we subsidize road and air transport , and then we can compare reliability figures .
NJ is probably a poor example , since we have the highest road density in the country , but we spend BILLIONS annually on road transport , and less than 1 \ % of that on rail transport ( though the building of the new tunnel across the Hudson will bridge some of the funding gap , pardon the pun ) .
And as for rental cars , public transportation at airports... that is easily solvable .
You can run light rail from the high-speed rail stations to the airports ( which would make a lot of sense anyway , to connect all your transport systems ) .
You can even place your high-speed rail station adjacent to your airports.i also know someone that used to take the Acela from NYC to Boston for work years ago and it took like 3 hours each way .
The Delta Shuttle was 1 hour .
90 minutes if you count getting to the airport early .
back when we bought a competitor we used to fly to Boston in the morning and come back for dinner .
if we took the train it would mean extra expenses in staying at a hotelPoor example .
The Acela is not a high-speed train ( maybe in comparison to regular commuter rail service -- but nothing like what is possible if we were willing to build the infrastructure -- a real high-speed train from NY to Boston would be about 60 minutes tops ) .
And NY-to-Boston is not a 90-min trip time via plane ( how long to get to the airport instead of getting to Penn Station via mass transit ?
Do you still plan on arriving only 30 mins before departure time ?
Good luck in today 's airports... 30 mins is almost never enough time when flying out of any of NYC 's three major airports .
I do n't know why you use old examples for flight times , and examples of existing rail ( instead of the high-speed rail being discussed ) to make your anecdotal analysis .
But I think your blanket negativity on rail transport needs a good looking-over... you might be surprised .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>as for long distance rail, Amtrak is already unreliable.
there is no reason to think that a new high speed train will be reliable and there is no benefit over flying.
airports already have the infrastructure like rent a cars and public transportation that will have to be duplicated at a new high speed rail station.Let's subsidize rail transport at the same rate we subsidize road and air transport, and then we can compare reliability figures.
NJ is probably a poor example, since we have the highest road density in the country, but we spend BILLIONS annually on road transport, and less than 1\% of that on rail transport (though the building of the new tunnel across the Hudson will bridge some of the funding gap, pardon the pun).
And as for rental cars, public transportation at airports... that is easily solvable.
You can run light rail from the high-speed rail stations to the airports (which would make a lot of sense anyway, to connect all your transport systems).
You can even place your high-speed rail station adjacent to your airports.i also know someone that used to take the Acela from NYC to Boston for work years ago and it took like 3 hours each way.
The Delta Shuttle was 1 hour.
90 minutes if you count getting to the airport early.
back when we bought a competitor we used to fly to Boston in the morning and come back for dinner.
if we took the train it would mean extra expenses in staying at a hotelPoor example.
The Acela is not a high-speed train (maybe in comparison to regular commuter rail service -- but nothing like what is possible if we were willing to build the infrastructure -- a real high-speed train from NY to Boston would be about 60 minutes tops).
And NY-to-Boston is not a 90-min trip time via plane (how long to get to the airport instead of getting to Penn Station via mass transit?
Do you still plan on arriving only 30 mins before departure time?
Good luck in today's airports... 30 mins is almost never enough time when flying out of any of NYC's three major airports.
I don't know why you use old examples for flight times, and examples of existing rail (instead of the high-speed rail being discussed) to make your anecdotal analysis.
But I think your blanket negativity on rail transport needs a good looking-over... you might be surprised.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575090</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30582890</id>
	<title>Re:Nice</title>
	<author>stdarg</author>
	<datestamp>1262107380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Awesome idea, but wouldn't it increase the cost of small stations quite a bit?</p><p>Even if it decelerates to 50\% of normal speed, that's still 100mph so to have a 1 minute boarding/unboarding time each small station would need over 1.5 miles of parallel track. I guess the parallel vehicle doesn't need to be a train and doesn't need a track, but in any case it needs 1.5 miles of *something*.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Awesome idea , but would n't it increase the cost of small stations quite a bit ? Even if it decelerates to 50 \ % of normal speed , that 's still 100mph so to have a 1 minute boarding/unboarding time each small station would need over 1.5 miles of parallel track .
I guess the parallel vehicle does n't need to be a train and does n't need a track , but in any case it needs 1.5 miles of * something * .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Awesome idea, but wouldn't it increase the cost of small stations quite a bit?Even if it decelerates to 50\% of normal speed, that's still 100mph so to have a 1 minute boarding/unboarding time each small station would need over 1.5 miles of parallel track.
I guess the parallel vehicle doesn't need to be a train and doesn't need a track, but in any case it needs 1.5 miles of *something*.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576538</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577762</id>
	<title>ROW is not a huge problem</title>
	<author>dj245</author>
	<datestamp>1262008740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I hear the Right of Way complaint every time rail projects come up.  I don't think its a big problem, just people aren't serious about rail.

We have thousands of miles of interstate highway in this country.  Most of those highways have a big strip of median in between the two directions.  Most of those highways go somewhere interesting (eventually), otherwise they wouldn't have been built/maintained.  The right of way is there, waiting.  Nobody needs to be moved at great expense, the noise argument is minimized (since highways are already noisy), and the land is currently unused.

Chicago has figured this out.  Lots of highways in the Chicago area have a pair of tracks in the median.  I'm not saying their train system is great, just that they have solved the right of way / NIMBY problem.  That's the first hurdle for rail, the others are not insignificant, but can be solved also.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hear the Right of Way complaint every time rail projects come up .
I do n't think its a big problem , just people are n't serious about rail .
We have thousands of miles of interstate highway in this country .
Most of those highways have a big strip of median in between the two directions .
Most of those highways go somewhere interesting ( eventually ) , otherwise they would n't have been built/maintained .
The right of way is there , waiting .
Nobody needs to be moved at great expense , the noise argument is minimized ( since highways are already noisy ) , and the land is currently unused .
Chicago has figured this out .
Lots of highways in the Chicago area have a pair of tracks in the median .
I 'm not saying their train system is great , just that they have solved the right of way / NIMBY problem .
That 's the first hurdle for rail , the others are not insignificant , but can be solved also .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hear the Right of Way complaint every time rail projects come up.
I don't think its a big problem, just people aren't serious about rail.
We have thousands of miles of interstate highway in this country.
Most of those highways have a big strip of median in between the two directions.
Most of those highways go somewhere interesting (eventually), otherwise they wouldn't have been built/maintained.
The right of way is there, waiting.
Nobody needs to be moved at great expense, the noise argument is minimized (since highways are already noisy), and the land is currently unused.
Chicago has figured this out.
Lots of highways in the Chicago area have a pair of tracks in the median.
I'm not saying their train system is great, just that they have solved the right of way / NIMBY problem.
That's the first hurdle for rail, the others are not insignificant, but can be solved also.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575878</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575296</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it to have something like this in U</title>
	<author>amRadioHed</author>
	<datestamp>1261992840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>as for long distance rail, Amtrak is already unreliable. there is no reason to think that a new high speed train will be reliable and there is no benefit over flying.</p></div><p>I think there is some reason to think high-speed rail would be more reliable. One of Amtrak's major problems right now is that they don't own the rails they use, they share them with freight companies. A new high-speed rail line, however, would be built specifically for passenger service and would not have this problem.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>as for long distance rail , Amtrak is already unreliable .
there is no reason to think that a new high speed train will be reliable and there is no benefit over flying.I think there is some reason to think high-speed rail would be more reliable .
One of Amtrak 's major problems right now is that they do n't own the rails they use , they share them with freight companies .
A new high-speed rail line , however , would be built specifically for passenger service and would not have this problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>as for long distance rail, Amtrak is already unreliable.
there is no reason to think that a new high speed train will be reliable and there is no benefit over flying.I think there is some reason to think high-speed rail would be more reliable.
One of Amtrak's major problems right now is that they don't own the rails they use, they share them with freight companies.
A new high-speed rail line, however, would be built specifically for passenger service and would not have this problem.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575090</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578130</id>
	<title>Re:Why not in the US?</title>
	<author>DerekLyons</author>
	<datestamp>1262011740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>It's a bit like the transcontinental railroad was in the middle of the 19th century here. Nobody really wanted to go to any of the whistle stops between Sacramento and Chicago, but since the train went there, communities sprung up. But when the railroad was built, there was nothing there.</p></div></blockquote><p>Actually, that's not quite right.  Many of those communities 'sprung up' because either a) the railroad built maintenance infrastructure there and the workers had to live somewhere and a town grew up to support them, or b) the railroad planted colonies on land they owned on the theory that the population thus planted was connected to the outside world only via the railroad and would generate passenger and cargo traffic.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a bit like the transcontinental railroad was in the middle of the 19th century here .
Nobody really wanted to go to any of the whistle stops between Sacramento and Chicago , but since the train went there , communities sprung up .
But when the railroad was built , there was nothing there.Actually , that 's not quite right .
Many of those communities 'sprung up ' because either a ) the railroad built maintenance infrastructure there and the workers had to live somewhere and a town grew up to support them , or b ) the railroad planted colonies on land they owned on the theory that the population thus planted was connected to the outside world only via the railroad and would generate passenger and cargo traffic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a bit like the transcontinental railroad was in the middle of the 19th century here.
Nobody really wanted to go to any of the whistle stops between Sacramento and Chicago, but since the train went there, communities sprung up.
But when the railroad was built, there was nothing there.Actually, that's not quite right.
Many of those communities 'sprung up' because either a) the railroad built maintenance infrastructure there and the workers had to live somewhere and a town grew up to support them, or b) the railroad planted colonies on land they owned on the theory that the population thus planted was connected to the outside world only via the railroad and would generate passenger and cargo traffic.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575878</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30579080</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it to have something like this in U</title>
	<author>Mana Mana</author>
	<datestamp>1262020860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> but we spend BILLIONS annually on road transport, and less than 1\% of that on rail transport</p></div><p>Yeah, but can I park one in my garage.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>but we spend BILLIONS annually on road transport , and less than 1 \ % of that on rail transportYeah , but can I park one in my garage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> but we spend BILLIONS annually on road transport, and less than 1\% of that on rail transportYeah, but can I park one in my garage.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575656</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574948</id>
	<title>Re:245mph max speed? Not so impressive</title>
	<author>jonbryce</author>
	<datestamp>1261991160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was about to accuse you of being a NASA employee, but it appears you are right.<br><a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/04/03/fastest\_train\_attempt/" title="theregister.co.uk">http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/04/03/fastest\_train\_attempt/</a> [theregister.co.uk]</p><p>I think this means the fastest regular timetabled train service rather than the fastest a train has ever travelled, because quite a few trains have broken the 400 km/h barrier in test runs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was about to accuse you of being a NASA employee , but it appears you are right.http : //www.theregister.co.uk/2007/04/03/fastest \ _train \ _attempt/ [ theregister.co.uk ] I think this means the fastest regular timetabled train service rather than the fastest a train has ever travelled , because quite a few trains have broken the 400 km/h barrier in test runs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was about to accuse you of being a NASA employee, but it appears you are right.http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/04/03/fastest\_train\_attempt/ [theregister.co.uk]I think this means the fastest regular timetabled train service rather than the fastest a train has ever travelled, because quite a few trains have broken the 400 km/h barrier in test runs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576952</id>
	<title>A few details</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262002380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Someone in my family works for Siemens as a senior member of the China High-Speed Rail project (not to be confused with the China Maglev project, for which Siemens is also a partner). We've talked about it quite often - and fairly extensively yesterday. Here are a few details:</p><p>The technologies of all four major high-speed rail system in the world - Germany's ICE, Japan's Sinkansen, France's TGV and Canada's Bombardier (in order of overall technological advancement) - have come together in China, though rather reluctantly. When the Chinese started the project years ago, they did something very clever: Instead of picking one of the four systems (which is what people normally do), they gave all four a pilot contract each. The one showing the best result in its pilot would then be chosen as the main partner, they said, making all four competing like crazy - routinely investing more resources than they've originally planed. The Chinese are not concerned about significant waste due to incompatibility between the pilot products, since all four are building to the specs written by the Chinese.</p><p>Now, years later, the Canadians and the French are practically washed out, even though some of their technologies have contributed to the new Chinese system. The Germans and the Japanese remain - as initially expected - the main competitors - or, reluctant partners for the Chinese. The vast majority of heavy lifting on the technological front is done by the Germans (which was also expected, since even the Japanese system was originally based on German designs), but the Japanese have the advantage that their pilot has started earlier (the Chinese intentionally delayed the German pilot in order to ransom a below-value price).</p><p>The record speed, for example, was achieved using two joined trains - of four sections each - built by Siemens in Germany and put together in China. Those are the only two German trains current available for this route. All the other trains are Japanese, and they're what people see on most new footages. But the top speed the Japanese trains (on the same route) can reach are significantly lower - about 350 km/h, or &gt;10\% less than the German record. Plus, while the German rains got to 395 km/h in standard configuration - with two tracking (active) and two tracked (passive) sections in each train - the Japanese had to cheat - using three tracking and only one tracked section in each train - in order to reach their 350 km/h.</p><p>As someone has mentioned above, there exist a TGV speed record that's much higher still, but that's a record nobody in the industry takes seriously, because it was achieved with a totally crazy, not nearly practical configuration of train sections. It's a fake number, period.</p><p>The bottom line is, for the original cost of one project, China has managed to get more than twice the amount worth of know-how (all legally via proper technology transfer contracts), and is now itself among the leading players of the industry. For the upcoming US high-speed rail system, the Chinese has offered a bid with a price tag 1/3 lower than anybody else...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Someone in my family works for Siemens as a senior member of the China High-Speed Rail project ( not to be confused with the China Maglev project , for which Siemens is also a partner ) .
We 've talked about it quite often - and fairly extensively yesterday .
Here are a few details : The technologies of all four major high-speed rail system in the world - Germany 's ICE , Japan 's Sinkansen , France 's TGV and Canada 's Bombardier ( in order of overall technological advancement ) - have come together in China , though rather reluctantly .
When the Chinese started the project years ago , they did something very clever : Instead of picking one of the four systems ( which is what people normally do ) , they gave all four a pilot contract each .
The one showing the best result in its pilot would then be chosen as the main partner , they said , making all four competing like crazy - routinely investing more resources than they 've originally planed .
The Chinese are not concerned about significant waste due to incompatibility between the pilot products , since all four are building to the specs written by the Chinese.Now , years later , the Canadians and the French are practically washed out , even though some of their technologies have contributed to the new Chinese system .
The Germans and the Japanese remain - as initially expected - the main competitors - or , reluctant partners for the Chinese .
The vast majority of heavy lifting on the technological front is done by the Germans ( which was also expected , since even the Japanese system was originally based on German designs ) , but the Japanese have the advantage that their pilot has started earlier ( the Chinese intentionally delayed the German pilot in order to ransom a below-value price ) .The record speed , for example , was achieved using two joined trains - of four sections each - built by Siemens in Germany and put together in China .
Those are the only two German trains current available for this route .
All the other trains are Japanese , and they 're what people see on most new footages .
But the top speed the Japanese trains ( on the same route ) can reach are significantly lower - about 350 km/h , or &gt; 10 \ % less than the German record .
Plus , while the German rains got to 395 km/h in standard configuration - with two tracking ( active ) and two tracked ( passive ) sections in each train - the Japanese had to cheat - using three tracking and only one tracked section in each train - in order to reach their 350 km/h.As someone has mentioned above , there exist a TGV speed record that 's much higher still , but that 's a record nobody in the industry takes seriously , because it was achieved with a totally crazy , not nearly practical configuration of train sections .
It 's a fake number , period.The bottom line is , for the original cost of one project , China has managed to get more than twice the amount worth of know-how ( all legally via proper technology transfer contracts ) , and is now itself among the leading players of the industry .
For the upcoming US high-speed rail system , the Chinese has offered a bid with a price tag 1/3 lower than anybody else.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Someone in my family works for Siemens as a senior member of the China High-Speed Rail project (not to be confused with the China Maglev project, for which Siemens is also a partner).
We've talked about it quite often - and fairly extensively yesterday.
Here are a few details:The technologies of all four major high-speed rail system in the world - Germany's ICE, Japan's Sinkansen, France's TGV and Canada's Bombardier (in order of overall technological advancement) - have come together in China, though rather reluctantly.
When the Chinese started the project years ago, they did something very clever: Instead of picking one of the four systems (which is what people normally do), they gave all four a pilot contract each.
The one showing the best result in its pilot would then be chosen as the main partner, they said, making all four competing like crazy - routinely investing more resources than they've originally planed.
The Chinese are not concerned about significant waste due to incompatibility between the pilot products, since all four are building to the specs written by the Chinese.Now, years later, the Canadians and the French are practically washed out, even though some of their technologies have contributed to the new Chinese system.
The Germans and the Japanese remain - as initially expected - the main competitors - or, reluctant partners for the Chinese.
The vast majority of heavy lifting on the technological front is done by the Germans (which was also expected, since even the Japanese system was originally based on German designs), but the Japanese have the advantage that their pilot has started earlier (the Chinese intentionally delayed the German pilot in order to ransom a below-value price).The record speed, for example, was achieved using two joined trains - of four sections each - built by Siemens in Germany and put together in China.
Those are the only two German trains current available for this route.
All the other trains are Japanese, and they're what people see on most new footages.
But the top speed the Japanese trains (on the same route) can reach are significantly lower - about 350 km/h, or &gt;10\% less than the German record.
Plus, while the German rains got to 395 km/h in standard configuration - with two tracking (active) and two tracked (passive) sections in each train - the Japanese had to cheat - using three tracking and only one tracked section in each train - in order to reach their 350 km/h.As someone has mentioned above, there exist a TGV speed record that's much higher still, but that's a record nobody in the industry takes seriously, because it was achieved with a totally crazy, not nearly practical configuration of train sections.
It's a fake number, period.The bottom line is, for the original cost of one project, China has managed to get more than twice the amount worth of know-how (all legally via proper technology transfer contracts), and is now itself among the leading players of the industry.
For the upcoming US high-speed rail system, the Chinese has offered a bid with a price tag 1/3 lower than anybody else...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575890</id>
	<title>Re:Comparisons</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261995900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>over representation of afro-americans in the us prison system. At some point you have to accept that it is systematic oppression.</p></div><p>While that likely is a factor, and a much higher factor the farther back in time you look, factually we know it doesn't account for the whole picture. Any economically disadvantaged segment is going to suffer higher crime rates. This has even been re-affirmed following various disaster forced relocations. Higher crime rates directly translates into larger numbers in jail. I'm unaware of any study (not specifically looked either) which suggests otherwise.</p><p>In other words, if blacks did not make up the majority of the US prison system, it would hint something is amiss because that would be contrary to the human condition.</p><p>As for general oppression, I suggest you go listen to some kids speak in inner city public schools. In many of these cases, the most significant disadvantage these kids have are themselves. In addition to ensuring they'll never be able to succeed because of inability to effectively communicate, ignorance is often held in high regard. And in these cases, the only oppression is that which is enforced by peers of their own community. In other words, smart people are purposely shunned and/or punished.</p><p>Its really not as cut and dry as you seem to imply. At some point in time, many of these people are going to have to stop blaming other races for all their misfortune and work together (meaning everyone, not just blacks) to succeed.</p><p>Hell, I can't tell you how many conversations I've had with non-American blacks who very much look down on black Americans for being the largest factor in their own woe. In all the conversations I've had, none of them wanted anything to do with American blacks. And despite English not being their native language, almost all of them could speak English better than many of those inner city school children I previously referred you to; despite having heavy accents.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>over representation of afro-americans in the us prison system .
At some point you have to accept that it is systematic oppression.While that likely is a factor , and a much higher factor the farther back in time you look , factually we know it does n't account for the whole picture .
Any economically disadvantaged segment is going to suffer higher crime rates .
This has even been re-affirmed following various disaster forced relocations .
Higher crime rates directly translates into larger numbers in jail .
I 'm unaware of any study ( not specifically looked either ) which suggests otherwise.In other words , if blacks did not make up the majority of the US prison system , it would hint something is amiss because that would be contrary to the human condition.As for general oppression , I suggest you go listen to some kids speak in inner city public schools .
In many of these cases , the most significant disadvantage these kids have are themselves .
In addition to ensuring they 'll never be able to succeed because of inability to effectively communicate , ignorance is often held in high regard .
And in these cases , the only oppression is that which is enforced by peers of their own community .
In other words , smart people are purposely shunned and/or punished.Its really not as cut and dry as you seem to imply .
At some point in time , many of these people are going to have to stop blaming other races for all their misfortune and work together ( meaning everyone , not just blacks ) to succeed.Hell , I ca n't tell you how many conversations I 've had with non-American blacks who very much look down on black Americans for being the largest factor in their own woe .
In all the conversations I 've had , none of them wanted anything to do with American blacks .
And despite English not being their native language , almost all of them could speak English better than many of those inner city school children I previously referred you to ; despite having heavy accents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>over representation of afro-americans in the us prison system.
At some point you have to accept that it is systematic oppression.While that likely is a factor, and a much higher factor the farther back in time you look, factually we know it doesn't account for the whole picture.
Any economically disadvantaged segment is going to suffer higher crime rates.
This has even been re-affirmed following various disaster forced relocations.
Higher crime rates directly translates into larger numbers in jail.
I'm unaware of any study (not specifically looked either) which suggests otherwise.In other words, if blacks did not make up the majority of the US prison system, it would hint something is amiss because that would be contrary to the human condition.As for general oppression, I suggest you go listen to some kids speak in inner city public schools.
In many of these cases, the most significant disadvantage these kids have are themselves.
In addition to ensuring they'll never be able to succeed because of inability to effectively communicate, ignorance is often held in high regard.
And in these cases, the only oppression is that which is enforced by peers of their own community.
In other words, smart people are purposely shunned and/or punished.Its really not as cut and dry as you seem to imply.
At some point in time, many of these people are going to have to stop blaming other races for all their misfortune and work together (meaning everyone, not just blacks) to succeed.Hell, I can't tell you how many conversations I've had with non-American blacks who very much look down on black Americans for being the largest factor in their own woe.
In all the conversations I've had, none of them wanted anything to do with American blacks.
And despite English not being their native language, almost all of them could speak English better than many of those inner city school children I previously referred you to; despite having heavy accents.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574984</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30580354</id>
	<title>Re:Pearl River Delta??</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262083140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pearl River Delta</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pearl River Delta</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pearl River Delta</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575152</id>
	<title>Re:245mph max speed? Not so impressive</title>
	<author>WinPimp2K</author>
	<datestamp>1261992180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But the real questions is:</p><p>how fast will it run Ruby (on rails)?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But the real questions is : how fast will it run Ruby ( on rails ) ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But the real questions is:how fast will it run Ruby (on rails)?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577586</id>
	<title>Re:Big Picture: this is no surprise at all</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262007540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Same here; I have made a small hobby out of collecting things that say "Made in U.S.A.". Not surprisingly, I don't have much. I generally scavenge around used item stores (thrift shops and such). Some interesting objects are a Kodak camera  and a Royal typewriter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Same here ; I have made a small hobby out of collecting things that say " Made in U.S.A. " .
Not surprisingly , I do n't have much .
I generally scavenge around used item stores ( thrift shops and such ) .
Some interesting objects are a Kodak camera and a Royal typewriter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Same here; I have made a small hobby out of collecting things that say "Made in U.S.A.".
Not surprisingly, I don't have much.
I generally scavenge around used item stores (thrift shops and such).
Some interesting objects are a Kodak camera  and a Royal typewriter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574868</id>
	<title>How hard is it to have something like this in US?</title>
	<author>parallel\_prankster</author>
	<datestamp>1262033940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I mean, we could something that connect the high traffic areas in the East Coast and California. This has 2 benefits. Reducing pollution from all the cars that it takes out of the roads and lesser dependence on the  airlines that seem to have become so unreliable. Atleast we wont have so many baggage payments to make.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean , we could something that connect the high traffic areas in the East Coast and California .
This has 2 benefits .
Reducing pollution from all the cars that it takes out of the roads and lesser dependence on the airlines that seem to have become so unreliable .
Atleast we wont have so many baggage payments to make .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean, we could something that connect the high traffic areas in the East Coast and California.
This has 2 benefits.
Reducing pollution from all the cars that it takes out of the roads and lesser dependence on the  airlines that seem to have become so unreliable.
Atleast we wont have so many baggage payments to make.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30580524</id>
	<title>Re:A few details</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262086380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As far as I know the japanese verbosely decided not to develop wheeled train tech beyond 320km/h speed, based on two factors:</p><p>Noise: Japan is a crowded oval of thin seashore, around a large mountain range, which occupies most of their island. People are dense like fish in the tin can in Japan. Their Fastech-360 experiments suggest enough noise supression cannot be achived at 320+ km/h speeds in such an environment. The chinese and german probably don't care that much about noise pollution alongside the tracks, because they have more space, plus the chinese residents don't dare to complain anyhow.</p><p>Safety: a german super-express fault already killed 100+ people. Japan's Shinkansen has perfect safety record for almost 50 years now. Both China and Japan has many big earthquakes and it is suicidal to put 395km/h trains on track there! The japanese refused to field even the Fastech-360 train, even with its manga-like cat ear airbrakes, because of excessive emergency stop lenght. Germany and France has little experience with earthquakes. Only Italy and Greece truly know about big earthquakes in Europe.</p><p>China probaby does not care about earthquake victims, because life is cheap there. In 1976 almost half a million people were killed in the big Tangshan earthquake and the communist party didn't blink an eye. In contrast, some 55,000 died in the 1988 armenian earthquake and the USSR fell apart three years later.</p><p>I very much doubt the japanese shinkansen is based on german tech. In 1964 the 210km/h speed bullet train service was running in time for the Tokyo Olympics, meanwhile the west german were designing the type V43 electric locomotive for the hungarian MAV railways, with 130km/h max speed. It has a perfectly rectangular box shape and looks totally dated, even though it is still in service and quite good for low speed haul.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As far as I know the japanese verbosely decided not to develop wheeled train tech beyond 320km/h speed , based on two factors : Noise : Japan is a crowded oval of thin seashore , around a large mountain range , which occupies most of their island .
People are dense like fish in the tin can in Japan .
Their Fastech-360 experiments suggest enough noise supression can not be achived at 320 + km/h speeds in such an environment .
The chinese and german probably do n't care that much about noise pollution alongside the tracks , because they have more space , plus the chinese residents do n't dare to complain anyhow.Safety : a german super-express fault already killed 100 + people .
Japan 's Shinkansen has perfect safety record for almost 50 years now .
Both China and Japan has many big earthquakes and it is suicidal to put 395km/h trains on track there !
The japanese refused to field even the Fastech-360 train , even with its manga-like cat ear airbrakes , because of excessive emergency stop lenght .
Germany and France has little experience with earthquakes .
Only Italy and Greece truly know about big earthquakes in Europe.China probaby does not care about earthquake victims , because life is cheap there .
In 1976 almost half a million people were killed in the big Tangshan earthquake and the communist party did n't blink an eye .
In contrast , some 55,000 died in the 1988 armenian earthquake and the USSR fell apart three years later.I very much doubt the japanese shinkansen is based on german tech .
In 1964 the 210km/h speed bullet train service was running in time for the Tokyo Olympics , meanwhile the west german were designing the type V43 electric locomotive for the hungarian MAV railways , with 130km/h max speed .
It has a perfectly rectangular box shape and looks totally dated , even though it is still in service and quite good for low speed haul .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As far as I know the japanese verbosely decided not to develop wheeled train tech beyond 320km/h speed, based on two factors:Noise: Japan is a crowded oval of thin seashore, around a large mountain range, which occupies most of their island.
People are dense like fish in the tin can in Japan.
Their Fastech-360 experiments suggest enough noise supression cannot be achived at 320+ km/h speeds in such an environment.
The chinese and german probably don't care that much about noise pollution alongside the tracks, because they have more space, plus the chinese residents don't dare to complain anyhow.Safety: a german super-express fault already killed 100+ people.
Japan's Shinkansen has perfect safety record for almost 50 years now.
Both China and Japan has many big earthquakes and it is suicidal to put 395km/h trains on track there!
The japanese refused to field even the Fastech-360 train, even with its manga-like cat ear airbrakes, because of excessive emergency stop lenght.
Germany and France has little experience with earthquakes.
Only Italy and Greece truly know about big earthquakes in Europe.China probaby does not care about earthquake victims, because life is cheap there.
In 1976 almost half a million people were killed in the big Tangshan earthquake and the communist party didn't blink an eye.
In contrast, some 55,000 died in the 1988 armenian earthquake and the USSR fell apart three years later.I very much doubt the japanese shinkansen is based on german tech.
In 1964 the 210km/h speed bullet train service was running in time for the Tokyo Olympics, meanwhile the west german were designing the type V43 electric locomotive for the hungarian MAV railways, with 130km/h max speed.
It has a perfectly rectangular box shape and looks totally dated, even though it is still in service and quite good for low speed haul.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576952</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574864</id>
	<title>Siemens, not Seimens...</title>
	<author>the\_g\_cat</author>
	<datestamp>1262033880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Siemens, not Seimens...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Siemens , not Seimens.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Siemens, not Seimens...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575392</id>
	<title>Very fast</title>
	<author>palmerj3</author>
	<datestamp>1261993320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This train can go from Wuhan to Guangzhou faster than the Chinese government can block this po.... [no signal]</htmltext>
<tokenext>This train can go from Wuhan to Guangzhou faster than the Chinese government can block this po.... [ no signal ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This train can go from Wuhan to Guangzhou faster than the Chinese government can block this po.... [no signal]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578528</id>
	<title>Re:China debuts human rights abuses</title>
	<author>MrPloppy</author>
	<datestamp>1262014680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What about your countries human rights abuses ? The US is involved in the rendition (kidnapping) and robust interrogation (torture) of people it hasn't charged (because there isnt enough evidence) in a place outside the US in order to deprive those people of US human rights laws. The US has invaded 2 countries resulting in the deaths of over a million people, what about their human rights? Like China the US executes the mentally ill and the list goes on.

Do you protest in the same way about the US ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What about your countries human rights abuses ?
The US is involved in the rendition ( kidnapping ) and robust interrogation ( torture ) of people it has n't charged ( because there isnt enough evidence ) in a place outside the US in order to deprive those people of US human rights laws .
The US has invaded 2 countries resulting in the deaths of over a million people , what about their human rights ?
Like China the US executes the mentally ill and the list goes on .
Do you protest in the same way about the US ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What about your countries human rights abuses ?
The US is involved in the rendition (kidnapping) and robust interrogation (torture) of people it hasn't charged (because there isnt enough evidence) in a place outside the US in order to deprive those people of US human rights laws.
The US has invaded 2 countries resulting in the deaths of over a million people, what about their human rights?
Like China the US executes the mentally ill and the list goes on.
Do you protest in the same way about the US ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574802</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578188</id>
	<title>Re:China's Achievements</title>
	<author>hamburgler007</author>
	<datestamp>1262012100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why can infrastructure like this not be built in the U.S.? Because we don't have 300 million unskilled laborers who will work their ass off for a few bucks a day. We don't have a government that has the authority to just displace hundreds of people in order to build a subway station without going through a lot of red tape. In order to keep up with China in this area, we'd have to give up a lot of the values we treasure for the sake of progress, which is something most of us here on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>./. wouldn't do.</p></div><p>We may not have 300 million, but there is a whole country just to the south of us with many unskilled laborers perfectly willing and able to work cheaper than the minimum wage.  Of course those horrible people are just out to take our jobs...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why can infrastructure like this not be built in the U.S. ?
Because we do n't have 300 million unskilled laborers who will work their ass off for a few bucks a day .
We do n't have a government that has the authority to just displace hundreds of people in order to build a subway station without going through a lot of red tape .
In order to keep up with China in this area , we 'd have to give up a lot of the values we treasure for the sake of progress , which is something most of us here on ./ .
would n't do.We may not have 300 million , but there is a whole country just to the south of us with many unskilled laborers perfectly willing and able to work cheaper than the minimum wage .
Of course those horrible people are just out to take our jobs.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why can infrastructure like this not be built in the U.S.?
Because we don't have 300 million unskilled laborers who will work their ass off for a few bucks a day.
We don't have a government that has the authority to just displace hundreds of people in order to build a subway station without going through a lot of red tape.
In order to keep up with China in this area, we'd have to give up a lot of the values we treasure for the sake of progress, which is something most of us here on ./.
wouldn't do.We may not have 300 million, but there is a whole country just to the south of us with many unskilled laborers perfectly willing and able to work cheaper than the minimum wage.
Of course those horrible people are just out to take our jobs...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577826</id>
	<title>Re:China's Achievements</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262009220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Building bullet trains, skyscrapers and subways can not be done with 'unskilled laborers'. Throwing manpower at such project won't help either.</p><p>As a tradesman (which pays better than my physics degree could), I can say that most people have no appreciation of how much skill is needed to coordinate these projects. If you threw a bunch of moderately skilled men at these projects, say 4 years (barely journeyman) they would still royally fail. Construction requires a lot of skilled workers, guys with 20+ years of experience. These guys can only manage so many grunts before the situation collapses.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Building bullet trains , skyscrapers and subways can not be done with 'unskilled laborers' .
Throwing manpower at such project wo n't help either.As a tradesman ( which pays better than my physics degree could ) , I can say that most people have no appreciation of how much skill is needed to coordinate these projects .
If you threw a bunch of moderately skilled men at these projects , say 4 years ( barely journeyman ) they would still royally fail .
Construction requires a lot of skilled workers , guys with 20 + years of experience .
These guys can only manage so many grunts before the situation collapses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Building bullet trains, skyscrapers and subways can not be done with 'unskilled laborers'.
Throwing manpower at such project won't help either.As a tradesman (which pays better than my physics degree could), I can say that most people have no appreciation of how much skill is needed to coordinate these projects.
If you threw a bunch of moderately skilled men at these projects, say 4 years (barely journeyman) they would still royally fail.
Construction requires a lot of skilled workers, guys with 20+ years of experience.
These guys can only manage so many grunts before the situation collapses.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575878</id>
	<title>Why not in the US?</title>
	<author>nsayer</author>
	<datestamp>1261995840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The most likely prospect for a bullet train in the United States is the vaunted California high speed rail project. And even that is going to be a tough row to hoe.</p><p>Federal rail regulations being what they are, the only prospect for high speed rail is if the entire system is grade separated - that is, there are no at-grade crossings. Existing rights-of-way can be used, but every where out in the middle of Modesto or Coalinga where a gravel road crosses the tracks the road will either need to be cut or a bridge or tunnel built. Next, the route between Bakersfield and Los Angeles, as well as the route between Modesto and San Jose will need to be redone, because existing ROWs are not flat or straight enough for high speeds. Even existing ROWs elsewhere, such as the Caltrain ROW up the San Francisco Peninsula, may be inadequate. Caltrain runs enough trains up and down that the extra headway for high speed trains may make it necessary to quad-track that entire route - which may mean bulldozing houses and/or businesses along the line in some spots.</p><p>All of that is bad enough, but before you can even begin thinking about turning over dirt, you need not only to write EIRs, but then have them stand up to Luddite court challenges. And then, whatever land you wind up using for the new ROW needs to be acquired - meaning that whoever owns it now needs to be paid fair market value for it (see also, 5th amendment). The Chinese government has a big advantage here - If anyone actually asks about the environmental impact of a train route, they get reeducated.</p><p>All of this is mainly because we want high speed rail to go between places where there is demand. If you read TFA, this line is being constructed at least partially to <i>create</i> demand - that is, they are taking trips to nowhere in order for nowhere to wind up being a desirable destination. It's a bit like the transcontinental railroad was in the middle of the 19th century here. Nobody really wanted to go to any of the whistle stops between Sacramento and Chicago, but since the train went there, communities sprung up. But when the railroad was built, there was nothing there. Nowadays, building high speed rail from San Francisco to San Diego is a gigantic pain in the ass because the destinations are already filled in.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The most likely prospect for a bullet train in the United States is the vaunted California high speed rail project .
And even that is going to be a tough row to hoe.Federal rail regulations being what they are , the only prospect for high speed rail is if the entire system is grade separated - that is , there are no at-grade crossings .
Existing rights-of-way can be used , but every where out in the middle of Modesto or Coalinga where a gravel road crosses the tracks the road will either need to be cut or a bridge or tunnel built .
Next , the route between Bakersfield and Los Angeles , as well as the route between Modesto and San Jose will need to be redone , because existing ROWs are not flat or straight enough for high speeds .
Even existing ROWs elsewhere , such as the Caltrain ROW up the San Francisco Peninsula , may be inadequate .
Caltrain runs enough trains up and down that the extra headway for high speed trains may make it necessary to quad-track that entire route - which may mean bulldozing houses and/or businesses along the line in some spots.All of that is bad enough , but before you can even begin thinking about turning over dirt , you need not only to write EIRs , but then have them stand up to Luddite court challenges .
And then , whatever land you wind up using for the new ROW needs to be acquired - meaning that whoever owns it now needs to be paid fair market value for it ( see also , 5th amendment ) .
The Chinese government has a big advantage here - If anyone actually asks about the environmental impact of a train route , they get reeducated.All of this is mainly because we want high speed rail to go between places where there is demand .
If you read TFA , this line is being constructed at least partially to create demand - that is , they are taking trips to nowhere in order for nowhere to wind up being a desirable destination .
It 's a bit like the transcontinental railroad was in the middle of the 19th century here .
Nobody really wanted to go to any of the whistle stops between Sacramento and Chicago , but since the train went there , communities sprung up .
But when the railroad was built , there was nothing there .
Nowadays , building high speed rail from San Francisco to San Diego is a gigantic pain in the ass because the destinations are already filled in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The most likely prospect for a bullet train in the United States is the vaunted California high speed rail project.
And even that is going to be a tough row to hoe.Federal rail regulations being what they are, the only prospect for high speed rail is if the entire system is grade separated - that is, there are no at-grade crossings.
Existing rights-of-way can be used, but every where out in the middle of Modesto or Coalinga where a gravel road crosses the tracks the road will either need to be cut or a bridge or tunnel built.
Next, the route between Bakersfield and Los Angeles, as well as the route between Modesto and San Jose will need to be redone, because existing ROWs are not flat or straight enough for high speeds.
Even existing ROWs elsewhere, such as the Caltrain ROW up the San Francisco Peninsula, may be inadequate.
Caltrain runs enough trains up and down that the extra headway for high speed trains may make it necessary to quad-track that entire route - which may mean bulldozing houses and/or businesses along the line in some spots.All of that is bad enough, but before you can even begin thinking about turning over dirt, you need not only to write EIRs, but then have them stand up to Luddite court challenges.
And then, whatever land you wind up using for the new ROW needs to be acquired - meaning that whoever owns it now needs to be paid fair market value for it (see also, 5th amendment).
The Chinese government has a big advantage here - If anyone actually asks about the environmental impact of a train route, they get reeducated.All of this is mainly because we want high speed rail to go between places where there is demand.
If you read TFA, this line is being constructed at least partially to create demand - that is, they are taking trips to nowhere in order for nowhere to wind up being a desirable destination.
It's a bit like the transcontinental railroad was in the middle of the 19th century here.
Nobody really wanted to go to any of the whistle stops between Sacramento and Chicago, but since the train went there, communities sprung up.
But when the railroad was built, there was nothing there.
Nowadays, building high speed rail from San Francisco to San Diego is a gigantic pain in the ass because the destinations are already filled in.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577790</id>
	<title>Re:Many bothans died to bring us this transformati</title>
	<author>admiralex</author>
	<datestamp>1262008980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>An "advantage" of their government? Advantage? LOL. I've never heard totalitarianism described that way before. By this description, the U.S. was wrong to abandon slavery in the 19th century. All it did was throw away a large, obedient workforce.</p><p>You forget that rail drove American expansion across North America and built the economic engine that saved the world from the Nazis and the Japanese in the middle of the 20th century. Why was the transcontinental railroad built? Because it was profitable. No one currently has a financial incentive to build high speed rail in the U.S. because there aren't enough paying customers to make it profitable. I'm pretty sure the Obama administration is very willing to build high speed rail to every state in the union, but the republicans would jump up screaming BIG GOVERNMENT and the plan would go nowhere. If the government can't build it and private industry is not willing to invest in it, who's going to pay for it?</p><p>China can get away with this because 1.) they don't have laws/regulations in place that protect the environment, 2.) they don't have to deal with private property, 3.) they've got money to burn, and 4.) they have a political structure that won't get in the way. China is not a democracy, and it's not especially capitalist though it looks like it is through the eyes of someone who doesn't really understand capitalism or democracy. A totalitarian regime can do whatever it wants and spin the result however it wants. It's the responsibility of those of us in the outside world who can see those "accomplishments" for what they are to call it like it is.</p><p>How many habitats were destroyed / communities displaced / people driven from ancestral homes / workers' lives lost to build this high speed railway? We'll never know. Because that's how totalitarianism works. As an aside, the transcontinental railroad did the same thing. It was built on the back of chinese laborers and destroyed countless native american civilizations. One can only imagine the impact this has had inside China.</p><p>Something else in terms of perspective. Yeah France can build high speed rail. That, in the U.S., is about the equivalent of building high speed rail from San Francisco to Los Angeles. It's all in one state handled by one state government and can be routed through land that would make private property/environmental issues far less of a concern. To build something like that across STATES in the U.S. would be the equivalent of trying to build rail across COUNTRIES in Europe. Try to extend that rail from Paris to Moscow and see how quickly that gets done. When you compare the U.S. to another European country, remember that you're talking about a country that spans an entire CONTINENT. More legal issues, far more expensive, and far more time required to do that. If we were doing this on a state level, of course it could be done ten times faster. France can do it, and so can California. Could the EU?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>An " advantage " of their government ?
Advantage ? LOL .
I 've never heard totalitarianism described that way before .
By this description , the U.S. was wrong to abandon slavery in the 19th century .
All it did was throw away a large , obedient workforce.You forget that rail drove American expansion across North America and built the economic engine that saved the world from the Nazis and the Japanese in the middle of the 20th century .
Why was the transcontinental railroad built ?
Because it was profitable .
No one currently has a financial incentive to build high speed rail in the U.S. because there are n't enough paying customers to make it profitable .
I 'm pretty sure the Obama administration is very willing to build high speed rail to every state in the union , but the republicans would jump up screaming BIG GOVERNMENT and the plan would go nowhere .
If the government ca n't build it and private industry is not willing to invest in it , who 's going to pay for it ? China can get away with this because 1 .
) they do n't have laws/regulations in place that protect the environment , 2 .
) they do n't have to deal with private property , 3 .
) they 've got money to burn , and 4 .
) they have a political structure that wo n't get in the way .
China is not a democracy , and it 's not especially capitalist though it looks like it is through the eyes of someone who does n't really understand capitalism or democracy .
A totalitarian regime can do whatever it wants and spin the result however it wants .
It 's the responsibility of those of us in the outside world who can see those " accomplishments " for what they are to call it like it is.How many habitats were destroyed / communities displaced / people driven from ancestral homes / workers ' lives lost to build this high speed railway ?
We 'll never know .
Because that 's how totalitarianism works .
As an aside , the transcontinental railroad did the same thing .
It was built on the back of chinese laborers and destroyed countless native american civilizations .
One can only imagine the impact this has had inside China.Something else in terms of perspective .
Yeah France can build high speed rail .
That , in the U.S. , is about the equivalent of building high speed rail from San Francisco to Los Angeles .
It 's all in one state handled by one state government and can be routed through land that would make private property/environmental issues far less of a concern .
To build something like that across STATES in the U.S. would be the equivalent of trying to build rail across COUNTRIES in Europe .
Try to extend that rail from Paris to Moscow and see how quickly that gets done .
When you compare the U.S. to another European country , remember that you 're talking about a country that spans an entire CONTINENT .
More legal issues , far more expensive , and far more time required to do that .
If we were doing this on a state level , of course it could be done ten times faster .
France can do it , and so can California .
Could the EU ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An "advantage" of their government?
Advantage? LOL.
I've never heard totalitarianism described that way before.
By this description, the U.S. was wrong to abandon slavery in the 19th century.
All it did was throw away a large, obedient workforce.You forget that rail drove American expansion across North America and built the economic engine that saved the world from the Nazis and the Japanese in the middle of the 20th century.
Why was the transcontinental railroad built?
Because it was profitable.
No one currently has a financial incentive to build high speed rail in the U.S. because there aren't enough paying customers to make it profitable.
I'm pretty sure the Obama administration is very willing to build high speed rail to every state in the union, but the republicans would jump up screaming BIG GOVERNMENT and the plan would go nowhere.
If the government can't build it and private industry is not willing to invest in it, who's going to pay for it?China can get away with this because 1.
) they don't have laws/regulations in place that protect the environment, 2.
) they don't have to deal with private property, 3.
) they've got money to burn, and 4.
) they have a political structure that won't get in the way.
China is not a democracy, and it's not especially capitalist though it looks like it is through the eyes of someone who doesn't really understand capitalism or democracy.
A totalitarian regime can do whatever it wants and spin the result however it wants.
It's the responsibility of those of us in the outside world who can see those "accomplishments" for what they are to call it like it is.How many habitats were destroyed / communities displaced / people driven from ancestral homes / workers' lives lost to build this high speed railway?
We'll never know.
Because that's how totalitarianism works.
As an aside, the transcontinental railroad did the same thing.
It was built on the back of chinese laborers and destroyed countless native american civilizations.
One can only imagine the impact this has had inside China.Something else in terms of perspective.
Yeah France can build high speed rail.
That, in the U.S., is about the equivalent of building high speed rail from San Francisco to Los Angeles.
It's all in one state handled by one state government and can be routed through land that would make private property/environmental issues far less of a concern.
To build something like that across STATES in the U.S. would be the equivalent of trying to build rail across COUNTRIES in Europe.
Try to extend that rail from Paris to Moscow and see how quickly that gets done.
When you compare the U.S. to another European country, remember that you're talking about a country that spans an entire CONTINENT.
More legal issues, far more expensive, and far more time required to do that.
If we were doing this on a state level, of course it could be done ten times faster.
France can do it, and so can California.
Could the EU?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575788</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575670</id>
	<title>Re:Nice</title>
	<author>californication</author>
	<datestamp>1261994940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You might be able to blow up a train just like an airplane, but planes being blown up, killing a hundred or so in the process was a problem well before 9/11.  The difference is that you can't crash a high speed train into a skyscraper, causing it to collapse resulting in thousands of deaths and hundreds of billions of dollars in property damage.  A train moves but its path is restricted to railways.  A bus is much more dangerous because, if you managed to carry a bomb on board, you could crash the bus into a target and blow it up, damaging the target and killing everyone aboard the bus.  Considering that, a train is no more dangerous, in terms of being a target for terrorism, than any other densely packed but static location, like a sports stadium.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You might be able to blow up a train just like an airplane , but planes being blown up , killing a hundred or so in the process was a problem well before 9/11 .
The difference is that you ca n't crash a high speed train into a skyscraper , causing it to collapse resulting in thousands of deaths and hundreds of billions of dollars in property damage .
A train moves but its path is restricted to railways .
A bus is much more dangerous because , if you managed to carry a bomb on board , you could crash the bus into a target and blow it up , damaging the target and killing everyone aboard the bus .
Considering that , a train is no more dangerous , in terms of being a target for terrorism , than any other densely packed but static location , like a sports stadium .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You might be able to blow up a train just like an airplane, but planes being blown up, killing a hundred or so in the process was a problem well before 9/11.
The difference is that you can't crash a high speed train into a skyscraper, causing it to collapse resulting in thousands of deaths and hundreds of billions of dollars in property damage.
A train moves but its path is restricted to railways.
A bus is much more dangerous because, if you managed to carry a bomb on board, you could crash the bus into a target and blow it up, damaging the target and killing everyone aboard the bus.
Considering that, a train is no more dangerous, in terms of being a target for terrorism, than any other densely packed but static location, like a sports stadium.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574912</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30579630</id>
	<title>Re:Big Picture: this is no surprise at all</title>
	<author>LostInTaiwan</author>
	<datestamp>1262027280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In our pursuit of ever cheaper crap most of us forgot that freedom is not free. . . .  C'mon people. . . wake up!</p><p>China is not Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, or even Singapore.    It's not a free and democratic country and the last 10 years proved that we don't have a snowball chance in hell of either luring China toward democracy or contain China's brand of authoritarian capitalism.    Combine our insatiable desire for imports and China's currency manipulation and we created our current financial meltdown.  Sadly, the extraordinary efforts we made to save our economy ultimately benefited our biggest creditor, China.  More bullet trains for China.</p><p>So here we are facing a downward financial and technological spiral and instead of looking to Germany or Japan for inspiration, our politicians want to frame every single political debate around religion or what they think the bible says. . . sad. . damn sad. .  </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In our pursuit of ever cheaper crap most of us forgot that freedom is not free .
. .
. C'mon people .
. .
wake up ! China is not Japan , South Korea , Taiwan , or even Singapore .
It 's not a free and democratic country and the last 10 years proved that we do n't have a snowball chance in hell of either luring China toward democracy or contain China 's brand of authoritarian capitalism .
Combine our insatiable desire for imports and China 's currency manipulation and we created our current financial meltdown .
Sadly , the extraordinary efforts we made to save our economy ultimately benefited our biggest creditor , China .
More bullet trains for China.So here we are facing a downward financial and technological spiral and instead of looking to Germany or Japan for inspiration , our politicians want to frame every single political debate around religion or what they think the bible says .
. .
sad. .
damn sad .
.</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In our pursuit of ever cheaper crap most of us forgot that freedom is not free.
. .
.  C'mon people.
. .
wake up!China is not Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, or even Singapore.
It's not a free and democratic country and the last 10 years proved that we don't have a snowball chance in hell of either luring China toward democracy or contain China's brand of authoritarian capitalism.
Combine our insatiable desire for imports and China's currency manipulation and we created our current financial meltdown.
Sadly, the extraordinary efforts we made to save our economy ultimately benefited our biggest creditor, China.
More bullet trains for China.So here we are facing a downward financial and technological spiral and instead of looking to Germany or Japan for inspiration, our politicians want to frame every single political debate around religion or what they think the bible says.
. .
sad. .
damn sad.
.  </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575954</id>
	<title>Re:Big Picture: this is no surprise at all</title>
	<author>hackingbear</author>
	<datestamp>1261996200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The Chinese aren't idiots; they learn and are about to surpass the west in many technological areas.</p></div><p>Well... they learn how to lie about their technical accomplishment to the public faster than anything. The design of this train, like the government-sponsored commercial jets and supercomputers they are making, are from foreign companies and key components are imported; only the end products are assembled in China, much like your iPhone. These are publicly acknowledged facts in the news even in China. Yet they claim to "own the IP" in the headline, because the officials want to use such catchy phrases to get promotion. What you fear may be true one day, but it will be long long time, not before they can develop a culture of trust.
</p><p>Our competitive advantages are not in making cheap stuff, but in that we have an overall higher trust and integrity.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Chinese are n't idiots ; they learn and are about to surpass the west in many technological areas.Well... they learn how to lie about their technical accomplishment to the public faster than anything .
The design of this train , like the government-sponsored commercial jets and supercomputers they are making , are from foreign companies and key components are imported ; only the end products are assembled in China , much like your iPhone .
These are publicly acknowledged facts in the news even in China .
Yet they claim to " own the IP " in the headline , because the officials want to use such catchy phrases to get promotion .
What you fear may be true one day , but it will be long long time , not before they can develop a culture of trust .
Our competitive advantages are not in making cheap stuff , but in that we have an overall higher trust and integrity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Chinese aren't idiots; they learn and are about to surpass the west in many technological areas.Well... they learn how to lie about their technical accomplishment to the public faster than anything.
The design of this train, like the government-sponsored commercial jets and supercomputers they are making, are from foreign companies and key components are imported; only the end products are assembled in China, much like your iPhone.
These are publicly acknowledged facts in the news even in China.
Yet they claim to "own the IP" in the headline, because the officials want to use such catchy phrases to get promotion.
What you fear may be true one day, but it will be long long time, not before they can develop a culture of trust.
Our competitive advantages are not in making cheap stuff, but in that we have an overall higher trust and integrity.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574962</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it to have something like this in U</title>
	<author>mikael</author>
	<datestamp>1261991220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem is getting land rights from every county boundary. California proposed a high-speed shuttle train from San Francisco to Los Angeles via Sacremento that would take less than 90 minutes. The mayors of all three cities were extremely happy about this. Unfortunately, the mayors of all the cities in between also wanted a stop at their city. For every city that had a stop, that would add another 5 minutes to the train journey, and at least 20 other cities were wanting stations in their towns.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is getting land rights from every county boundary .
California proposed a high-speed shuttle train from San Francisco to Los Angeles via Sacremento that would take less than 90 minutes .
The mayors of all three cities were extremely happy about this .
Unfortunately , the mayors of all the cities in between also wanted a stop at their city .
For every city that had a stop , that would add another 5 minutes to the train journey , and at least 20 other cities were wanting stations in their towns .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is getting land rights from every county boundary.
California proposed a high-speed shuttle train from San Francisco to Los Angeles via Sacremento that would take less than 90 minutes.
The mayors of all three cities were extremely happy about this.
Unfortunately, the mayors of all the cities in between also wanted a stop at their city.
For every city that had a stop, that would add another 5 minutes to the train journey, and at least 20 other cities were wanting stations in their towns.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574868</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575950</id>
	<title>Re:Pennies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261996200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Devaluation.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Devaluation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Devaluation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575472</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575978</id>
	<title>Energy efficiency per ton: train vs airfreight?</title>
	<author>mrflash818</author>
	<datestamp>1261996380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Then it seems we could cut down air traffic considerably. NYC to Atalanta is only about 800 miles, if I could get there by train in four hours, a airplane would offer no time advantage.</p><p>If the difference in fuel efficiency is considerable, then maybe the US should consider building something like that?"</p><p>That is an interesting question, that I will have to go research.</p><p>I need to try to find credible numbers on the relative total-system energy required of hauling people via each method, and for hauling a ton of freight via each method.</p><p>I even wonder what the total cost of each system, say over 20yrs, would be.</p><p>(Share if you have already found such answers.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Then it seems we could cut down air traffic considerably .
NYC to Atalanta is only about 800 miles , if I could get there by train in four hours , a airplane would offer no time advantage.If the difference in fuel efficiency is considerable , then maybe the US should consider building something like that ?
" That is an interesting question , that I will have to go research.I need to try to find credible numbers on the relative total-system energy required of hauling people via each method , and for hauling a ton of freight via each method.I even wonder what the total cost of each system , say over 20yrs , would be .
( Share if you have already found such answers .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Then it seems we could cut down air traffic considerably.
NYC to Atalanta is only about 800 miles, if I could get there by train in four hours, a airplane would offer no time advantage.If the difference in fuel efficiency is considerable, then maybe the US should consider building something like that?
"That is an interesting question, that I will have to go research.I need to try to find credible numbers on the relative total-system energy required of hauling people via each method, and for hauling a ton of freight via each method.I even wonder what the total cost of each system, say over 20yrs, would be.
(Share if you have already found such answers.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576186</id>
	<title>Re:Nice</title>
	<author>YrWrstNtmr</author>
	<datestamp>1261997280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Everytime I read something like this I ask myself, "Why not in the US."</i> <br> <br>Because we already have high speed travel between just about every place you would put a high speed train. Have had for decades.<br> <br>Airlines.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Everytime I read something like this I ask myself , " Why not in the US .
" Because we already have high speed travel between just about every place you would put a high speed train .
Have had for decades .
Airlines .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everytime I read something like this I ask myself, "Why not in the US.
"  Because we already have high speed travel between just about every place you would put a high speed train.
Have had for decades.
Airlines.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575320</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575974</id>
	<title>mountains are easy</title>
	<author>r00t</author>
	<datestamp>1261996320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Swap is difficult. It's daft to build a rail line on a swamp. It'll sink into the swap.</p><p>Urban is difficult. It's full of historical landmarks and buried pipes.</p><p>Mountains? Make a hole. Normally the rock in nice and solid. Mostly you can avoid taking ownership of  the surface land, and anyway it's probably public already because people prefer to build condos and mcmansions on the most productive farmland.</p><p>There's really only one exception to the rule. Mountains are not easy if they already have natural holes, specifically vertical ones filled with liquid magma. Of course no decent engineer would pass up the opportunity to get a front page article in a civil engineering magazine, so mere lava need not be a show-stopper.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Swap is difficult .
It 's daft to build a rail line on a swamp .
It 'll sink into the swap.Urban is difficult .
It 's full of historical landmarks and buried pipes.Mountains ?
Make a hole .
Normally the rock in nice and solid .
Mostly you can avoid taking ownership of the surface land , and anyway it 's probably public already because people prefer to build condos and mcmansions on the most productive farmland.There 's really only one exception to the rule .
Mountains are not easy if they already have natural holes , specifically vertical ones filled with liquid magma .
Of course no decent engineer would pass up the opportunity to get a front page article in a civil engineering magazine , so mere lava need not be a show-stopper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Swap is difficult.
It's daft to build a rail line on a swamp.
It'll sink into the swap.Urban is difficult.
It's full of historical landmarks and buried pipes.Mountains?
Make a hole.
Normally the rock in nice and solid.
Mostly you can avoid taking ownership of  the surface land, and anyway it's probably public already because people prefer to build condos and mcmansions on the most productive farmland.There's really only one exception to the rule.
Mountains are not easy if they already have natural holes, specifically vertical ones filled with liquid magma.
Of course no decent engineer would pass up the opportunity to get a front page article in a civil engineering magazine, so mere lava need not be a show-stopper.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575012</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575148</id>
	<title>Big Picture: this is no surprise at all</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261992120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The US and the whole western world have almost completely outsourced their whole production and with it, the technology, to China. When I visited the various Smithsonian museums, just for shits and giggles I asked at the souvenir shops if they had a single item that <b>wasn't</b> made in China. I repeated this little game in various museums. Try as they may, the shopkeepers weren't able to find a single fucking item that wasn't Made in China. Not one. This just to illustrate you the magnitude of production in China, and the magnitude of how much the west has given up.  The Chinese aren't idiots; they learn and are about to surpass the west in many technological areas.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The US and the whole western world have almost completely outsourced their whole production and with it , the technology , to China .
When I visited the various Smithsonian museums , just for shits and giggles I asked at the souvenir shops if they had a single item that was n't made in China .
I repeated this little game in various museums .
Try as they may , the shopkeepers were n't able to find a single fucking item that was n't Made in China .
Not one .
This just to illustrate you the magnitude of production in China , and the magnitude of how much the west has given up .
The Chinese are n't idiots ; they learn and are about to surpass the west in many technological areas .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The US and the whole western world have almost completely outsourced their whole production and with it, the technology, to China.
When I visited the various Smithsonian museums, just for shits and giggles I asked at the souvenir shops if they had a single item that wasn't made in China.
I repeated this little game in various museums.
Try as they may, the shopkeepers weren't able to find a single fucking item that wasn't Made in China.
Not one.
This just to illustrate you the magnitude of production in China, and the magnitude of how much the west has given up.
The Chinese aren't idiots; they learn and are about to surpass the west in many technological areas.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30587422</id>
	<title>Re:Fuel efficiency of this train vs airplane?</title>
	<author>Eclipse-now</author>
	<datestamp>1262085060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Electrifying fast-speed rail everywhere across the USA is a brilliant idea. Your nation uses 20\% of the world's oil and double the per capita use of the EU. You are highly exposed to high oil prices that will eventuate after peak oil hits. Fast rail and electrifying car transport systems (around a battery-swap system like Better Place) is not just about saving fuel, not just about reducing Co2 emissions, not just about reducing local air pollution in cities, not just about saving money, not just about energy independence, not just about providing local jobs through either green energy or 3rd Gen nuclear (which turns your radioactive waste dumps into FUEL dumps as 3rd Gen eats nuclear waste!) but it is about NATIONAL SECURITY!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Electrifying fast-speed rail everywhere across the USA is a brilliant idea .
Your nation uses 20 \ % of the world 's oil and double the per capita use of the EU .
You are highly exposed to high oil prices that will eventuate after peak oil hits .
Fast rail and electrifying car transport systems ( around a battery-swap system like Better Place ) is not just about saving fuel , not just about reducing Co2 emissions , not just about reducing local air pollution in cities , not just about saving money , not just about energy independence , not just about providing local jobs through either green energy or 3rd Gen nuclear ( which turns your radioactive waste dumps into FUEL dumps as 3rd Gen eats nuclear waste !
) but it is about NATIONAL SECURITY !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Electrifying fast-speed rail everywhere across the USA is a brilliant idea.
Your nation uses 20\% of the world's oil and double the per capita use of the EU.
You are highly exposed to high oil prices that will eventuate after peak oil hits.
Fast rail and electrifying car transport systems (around a battery-swap system like Better Place) is not just about saving fuel, not just about reducing Co2 emissions, not just about reducing local air pollution in cities, not just about saving money, not just about energy independence, not just about providing local jobs through either green energy or 3rd Gen nuclear (which turns your radioactive waste dumps into FUEL dumps as 3rd Gen eats nuclear waste!
) but it is about NATIONAL SECURITY!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575816</id>
	<title>Not even close to the fastest</title>
	<author>WindBourne</author>
	<datestamp>1261995540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The fastest train is the Shanghai Train. It has an average speed of 245.5 km/h. However, that is due to the fact that the line is only 30 km. As such, it hits the normal cruise speed of 431 km/h and then starts slowing down. <br> <br>
OTH, this actual EU train, has a top speed of 394 km/h, and normally cruises much slower.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The fastest train is the Shanghai Train .
It has an average speed of 245.5 km/h .
However , that is due to the fact that the line is only 30 km .
As such , it hits the normal cruise speed of 431 km/h and then starts slowing down .
OTH , this actual EU train , has a top speed of 394 km/h , and normally cruises much slower .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The fastest train is the Shanghai Train.
It has an average speed of 245.5 km/h.
However, that is due to the fact that the line is only 30 km.
As such, it hits the normal cruise speed of 431 km/h and then starts slowing down.
OTH, this actual EU train, has a top speed of 394 km/h, and normally cruises much slower.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576276</id>
	<title>Re:Siemens, not Seimens...</title>
	<author>GNUThomson</author>
	<datestamp>1261997760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Siemens, not Seimens...</p></div><p>It's Seimens alright. The cheap China fake one.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Siemens , not Seimens...It 's Seimens alright .
The cheap China fake one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Siemens, not Seimens...It's Seimens alright.
The cheap China fake one.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578864</id>
	<title>Re:Big Picture: this is no surprise at all</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262018460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't forget that today's chinese people are a victim of this, they have to work for a low wage payable in a suppressed currency. You want to voluntarily give up your lifestyle for a generation or three to get the country's economy growing? In most western countries a country's economy growing means for the people, not for some long term goal. Only in a country with a centralized government with absolute power you can suppress your people like that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't forget that today 's chinese people are a victim of this , they have to work for a low wage payable in a suppressed currency .
You want to voluntarily give up your lifestyle for a generation or three to get the country 's economy growing ?
In most western countries a country 's economy growing means for the people , not for some long term goal .
Only in a country with a centralized government with absolute power you can suppress your people like that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't forget that today's chinese people are a victim of this, they have to work for a low wage payable in a suppressed currency.
You want to voluntarily give up your lifestyle for a generation or three to get the country's economy growing?
In most western countries a country's economy growing means for the people, not for some long term goal.
Only in a country with a centralized government with absolute power you can suppress your people like that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576718</id>
	<title>Re:Siemens, not Seimens...</title>
	<author>vegiVamp</author>
	<datestamp>1262000760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's probably like those Rolax watches you can buy there.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's probably like those Rolax watches you can buy there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's probably like those Rolax watches you can buy there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576084</id>
	<title>Re:Nice</title>
	<author>godrik</author>
	<datestamp>1261996860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't think it is overkilled. I used to take the TGV between Paris and Grenoble. It is about 350 miles (570Km) and I really appreciated doing it in 3 hours. The Train is on TGV rail up between Paris and Lyon (290 miles) and does it in 2 hours and takes an other hour to reach grenoble (60 Miles) on classical rail. If the rail was TGV between Lyon and Grenoble, the travel time would drop to 2 hours and 20 minutes which I would have loved.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think it is overkilled .
I used to take the TGV between Paris and Grenoble .
It is about 350 miles ( 570Km ) and I really appreciated doing it in 3 hours .
The Train is on TGV rail up between Paris and Lyon ( 290 miles ) and does it in 2 hours and takes an other hour to reach grenoble ( 60 Miles ) on classical rail .
If the rail was TGV between Lyon and Grenoble , the travel time would drop to 2 hours and 20 minutes which I would have loved .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think it is overkilled.
I used to take the TGV between Paris and Grenoble.
It is about 350 miles (570Km) and I really appreciated doing it in 3 hours.
The Train is on TGV rail up between Paris and Lyon (290 miles) and does it in 2 hours and takes an other hour to reach grenoble (60 Miles) on classical rail.
If the rail was TGV between Lyon and Grenoble, the travel time would drop to 2 hours and 20 minutes which I would have loved.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574912</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575652</id>
	<title>stops are not 10'</title>
	<author>Herve5</author>
	<datestamp>1261994820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know for the rest, but on french TGVs a stop is 3mn max, not 10. And yes it works, I checked it again some weeks ago. Doors are large, and local controllers (that stay in the station) are very active just before and during stops.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know for the rest , but on french TGVs a stop is 3mn max , not 10 .
And yes it works , I checked it again some weeks ago .
Doors are large , and local controllers ( that stay in the station ) are very active just before and during stops .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know for the rest, but on french TGVs a stop is 3mn max, not 10.
And yes it works, I checked it again some weeks ago.
Doors are large, and local controllers (that stay in the station) are very active just before and during stops.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575676</id>
	<title>Re:Nice</title>
	<author>vlm</author>
	<datestamp>1261994940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It just isn't possible. Assuming that, at each city, you have 3 minutes of deceleration, a stop time of 10 minutes, and 5 minutes of acceleration, that's 18*20 = 360 minutes, or 6 hours. That doesn't even include time at full speed. Okay, let's be insane and decelerate in only 1 minute and accelerate in 2 and stop for only 3 minutes, that's now two hours,</p></div><p>Ever ridden in a passenger train?  They accelerate and decelerate at a car like pace.  The only time they don't, is to save energy if they're on time or ahead of time.  Its downright uncomfortable/impossible to stand without holding onto something, hence the hand straps to grab.  A super fast train is probably much worse.  I find it highly unlikely it would take more than 60 secs to go 0-300 or 300-0.  That's actually pretty slow acceleration, compared to a car.</p><p>I'm thinking one / one / one, total three mins, times 20 is 60 mins station time, leaving two hours, cruise around 300 MPH, it does all work out.  Of course there is always marketing BS, such as not counting station time...</p><p>You may be confusing passenger trains with freight trains.  A couple million pounds of coal does indeed take awhile to accelerate and decelerate.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It just is n't possible .
Assuming that , at each city , you have 3 minutes of deceleration , a stop time of 10 minutes , and 5 minutes of acceleration , that 's 18 * 20 = 360 minutes , or 6 hours .
That does n't even include time at full speed .
Okay , let 's be insane and decelerate in only 1 minute and accelerate in 2 and stop for only 3 minutes , that 's now two hours,Ever ridden in a passenger train ?
They accelerate and decelerate at a car like pace .
The only time they do n't , is to save energy if they 're on time or ahead of time .
Its downright uncomfortable/impossible to stand without holding onto something , hence the hand straps to grab .
A super fast train is probably much worse .
I find it highly unlikely it would take more than 60 secs to go 0-300 or 300-0 .
That 's actually pretty slow acceleration , compared to a car.I 'm thinking one / one / one , total three mins , times 20 is 60 mins station time , leaving two hours , cruise around 300 MPH , it does all work out .
Of course there is always marketing BS , such as not counting station time...You may be confusing passenger trains with freight trains .
A couple million pounds of coal does indeed take awhile to accelerate and decelerate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It just isn't possible.
Assuming that, at each city, you have 3 minutes of deceleration, a stop time of 10 minutes, and 5 minutes of acceleration, that's 18*20 = 360 minutes, or 6 hours.
That doesn't even include time at full speed.
Okay, let's be insane and decelerate in only 1 minute and accelerate in 2 and stop for only 3 minutes, that's now two hours,Ever ridden in a passenger train?
They accelerate and decelerate at a car like pace.
The only time they don't, is to save energy if they're on time or ahead of time.
Its downright uncomfortable/impossible to stand without holding onto something, hence the hand straps to grab.
A super fast train is probably much worse.
I find it highly unlikely it would take more than 60 secs to go 0-300 or 300-0.
That's actually pretty slow acceleration, compared to a car.I'm thinking one / one / one, total three mins, times 20 is 60 mins station time, leaving two hours, cruise around 300 MPH, it does all work out.
Of course there is always marketing BS, such as not counting station time...You may be confusing passenger trains with freight trains.
A couple million pounds of coal does indeed take awhile to accelerate and decelerate.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575586</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it to have something like this in U</title>
	<author>GooberToo</author>
	<datestamp>1261994580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The problem is getting land rights from every county boundary.</p> </div><p>And that's why eminent domain exists.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is getting land rights from every county boundary .
And that 's why eminent domain exists .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is getting land rights from every county boundary.
And that's why eminent domain exists.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574962</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576258</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it to have something like this in U</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261997700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm confused why you think we need one in the US.  If you want to ride one, simply go to China.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm confused why you think we need one in the US .
If you want to ride one , simply go to China .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm confused why you think we need one in the US.
If you want to ride one, simply go to China.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574868</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575342</id>
	<title>Re:Nice</title>
	<author>amRadioHed</author>
	<datestamp>1261993080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>One picky point with TFA... it suggests that the fast travel times of a high-speed rail network would not come with the security overhead of air travel. I'm not so sure about that.</p></div><p>Why do you think rail would have the same security overhead? Last time I used Amtrak there was no security at all. It was a very refreshing departure from what I was used to with air travel.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>One picky point with TFA... it suggests that the fast travel times of a high-speed rail network would not come with the security overhead of air travel .
I 'm not so sure about that.Why do you think rail would have the same security overhead ?
Last time I used Amtrak there was no security at all .
It was a very refreshing departure from what I was used to with air travel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One picky point with TFA... it suggests that the fast travel times of a high-speed rail network would not come with the security overhead of air travel.
I'm not so sure about that.Why do you think rail would have the same security overhead?
Last time I used Amtrak there was no security at all.
It was a very refreshing departure from what I was used to with air travel.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574912</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574870</id>
	<title>245mph max speed? Not so impressive</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262033940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The french managed 357mph (yes three hundred) with a lightly modified TGV in 2007 (google it).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The french managed 357mph ( yes three hundred ) with a lightly modified TGV in 2007 ( google it ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The french managed 357mph (yes three hundred) with a lightly modified TGV in 2007 (google it).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578778</id>
	<title>Re:245mph max speed? Not so impressive</title>
	<author>spong</author>
	<datestamp>1262017200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Youtube clip here <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=\_Ir\_n3J5ABA" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=\_Ir\_n3J5ABA</a> [youtube.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Youtube clip here http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = \ _Ir \ _n3J5ABA [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Youtube clip here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=\_Ir\_n3J5ABA [youtube.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576056</id>
	<title>Re:Big Picture: this is no surprise at all</title>
	<author>TheEvilOverlord</author>
	<datestamp>1261996680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not trolling here, but explain to me exactly why this is so terrible?</p><p>So what if someone else makes stuff for you?  You could say we should all be making our own food, because each person needs food, and if they don't make their own food they're in danger of starving...</p><p>As far as I understand it, it was the very fact that moving away from subsistence farming that allowed modern society to flourish.</p><p>How is this any different?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not trolling here , but explain to me exactly why this is so terrible ? So what if someone else makes stuff for you ?
You could say we should all be making our own food , because each person needs food , and if they do n't make their own food they 're in danger of starving...As far as I understand it , it was the very fact that moving away from subsistence farming that allowed modern society to flourish.How is this any different ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not trolling here, but explain to me exactly why this is so terrible?So what if someone else makes stuff for you?
You could say we should all be making our own food, because each person needs food, and if they don't make their own food they're in danger of starving...As far as I understand it, it was the very fact that moving away from subsistence farming that allowed modern society to flourish.How is this any different?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30584672</id>
	<title>Re:China's Achievements</title>
	<author>Idiomatick</author>
	<datestamp>1262115780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Because we don't have 300 million unskilled laborers who will work their ass off for a few bucks a day."<br> <br>
You do... you just decided to build a fence to keep them out instead. Yay squandering resources.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Because we do n't have 300 million unskilled laborers who will work their ass off for a few bucks a day .
" You do... you just decided to build a fence to keep them out instead .
Yay squandering resources .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Because we don't have 300 million unskilled laborers who will work their ass off for a few bucks a day.
" 
You do... you just decided to build a fence to keep them out instead.
Yay squandering resources.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577608</id>
	<title>Re:Why not in the US?</title>
	<author>dkf</author>
	<datestamp>1262007720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I often wonder why high-speed rail couldn't be built in the empty median of interstate highways.</p></div><p>The key problem is that most of the places you really want to build high-speed rail (i.e., relatively densely populated regions) you're much less likely to have enough room in the median. Sure there's plenty of room in the midwest, but there's also not the population density to make investing in high-speed rail lines there. (Well, not for now. No point in worrying about things too far off in the future though.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I often wonder why high-speed rail could n't be built in the empty median of interstate highways.The key problem is that most of the places you really want to build high-speed rail ( i.e. , relatively densely populated regions ) you 're much less likely to have enough room in the median .
Sure there 's plenty of room in the midwest , but there 's also not the population density to make investing in high-speed rail lines there .
( Well , not for now .
No point in worrying about things too far off in the future though .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I often wonder why high-speed rail couldn't be built in the empty median of interstate highways.The key problem is that most of the places you really want to build high-speed rail (i.e., relatively densely populated regions) you're much less likely to have enough room in the median.
Sure there's plenty of room in the midwest, but there's also not the population density to make investing in high-speed rail lines there.
(Well, not for now.
No point in worrying about things too far off in the future though.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576854</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577408</id>
	<title>Won't happen!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262005920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Party of NO is  dead set against mass transit as it could cut into sale and import of oil upon which their campaign financing is dependent and is actually in place to prevent.</p><p>Want technological progress in the future?  Move to Asia or Europe.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Party of NO is dead set against mass transit as it could cut into sale and import of oil upon which their campaign financing is dependent and is actually in place to prevent.Want technological progress in the future ?
Move to Asia or Europe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Party of NO is  dead set against mass transit as it could cut into sale and import of oil upon which their campaign financing is dependent and is actually in place to prevent.Want technological progress in the future?
Move to Asia or Europe.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574926</id>
	<title>Re: 357mph vs 245mph</title>
	<author>xiando</author>
	<datestamp>1261991040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There is some difference between setting a speed record once and running a regular train service which is actually used by people on a daily basis.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is some difference between setting a speed record once and running a regular train service which is actually used by people on a daily basis .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is some difference between setting a speed record once and running a regular train service which is actually used by people on a daily basis.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577540</id>
	<title>Seamens!</title>
	<author>antdude</author>
	<datestamp>1262007120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or Semens?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or Semens ?
: P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or Semens?
:P</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30581106</id>
	<title>Re:Nice</title>
	<author>xaxa</author>
	<datestamp>1262093940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Non-metro passenger trains generally accelerate (and decelerate) smoothly. I can't tell you how quickly (although there's plenty of <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvAUiODWUk8" title="youtube.com">train nerd videos</a> [youtube.com] [<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDDw2PmQPNs" title="youtube.com">smaller train</a> [youtube.com]] on YouTube), but newer ones use clever engineering of the motors and control systems to make it as smooth as possible.</p><p>In practise, cars accelerate much faster than trains (but then, from zero I can accelerate faster than a car on my bicycle).</p><p>(When you only stop at the station for 60 seconds many people will still be standing -- and even putting luggage in the trays above their seats -- when the train departs, and it wouldn't be a good idea to have everyone fall over.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Non-metro passenger trains generally accelerate ( and decelerate ) smoothly .
I ca n't tell you how quickly ( although there 's plenty of train nerd videos [ youtube.com ] [ smaller train [ youtube.com ] ] on YouTube ) , but newer ones use clever engineering of the motors and control systems to make it as smooth as possible.In practise , cars accelerate much faster than trains ( but then , from zero I can accelerate faster than a car on my bicycle ) .
( When you only stop at the station for 60 seconds many people will still be standing -- and even putting luggage in the trays above their seats -- when the train departs , and it would n't be a good idea to have everyone fall over .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Non-metro passenger trains generally accelerate (and decelerate) smoothly.
I can't tell you how quickly (although there's plenty of train nerd videos [youtube.com] [smaller train [youtube.com]] on YouTube), but newer ones use clever engineering of the motors and control systems to make it as smooth as possible.In practise, cars accelerate much faster than trains (but then, from zero I can accelerate faster than a car on my bicycle).
(When you only stop at the station for 60 seconds many people will still be standing -- and even putting luggage in the trays above their seats -- when the train departs, and it wouldn't be a good idea to have everyone fall over.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575676</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576854</id>
	<title>Re:Why not in the US?</title>
	<author>Eil</author>
	<datestamp>1262001480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Federal rail regulations being what they are, the only prospect for high speed rail is if the entire system is grade separated - that is, there are no at-grade crossings. Existing rights-of-way can be used, but every where out in the middle of Modesto or Coalinga where a gravel road crosses the tracks the road will either need to be cut or a bridge or tunnel built.</p></div></blockquote><p>I often wonder why high-speed rail couldn't be built in the empty median of interstate highways. Sure, you couldn't lay the entire track down in the middle of the highway, but you could cover at least 95\% of a long route that way.</p><p>Advantages:<br>- Far less need to take/buy private property<br>- No at-grade crossings<br>- Most interstates are already fairly straight and level<br>- A small pang of guilt felt by Hummer owners every time eco-friendly transportation keeps whooshing by them</p><p>Disadvantages:</p><p>- Many bridges would have to be modified or rebuilt (their center pillars are usually, but not always, in the median)<br>- The median would no longer be a "safety net" in snowy weather</p><p>Slow-speed rail isn't going away any time soon, so it doesn't make sense to repurpose those lines. And if we're going to build new rail, we might as well use existing infrastructure (highways) as much as possible.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Federal rail regulations being what they are , the only prospect for high speed rail is if the entire system is grade separated - that is , there are no at-grade crossings .
Existing rights-of-way can be used , but every where out in the middle of Modesto or Coalinga where a gravel road crosses the tracks the road will either need to be cut or a bridge or tunnel built.I often wonder why high-speed rail could n't be built in the empty median of interstate highways .
Sure , you could n't lay the entire track down in the middle of the highway , but you could cover at least 95 \ % of a long route that way.Advantages : - Far less need to take/buy private property- No at-grade crossings- Most interstates are already fairly straight and level- A small pang of guilt felt by Hummer owners every time eco-friendly transportation keeps whooshing by themDisadvantages : - Many bridges would have to be modified or rebuilt ( their center pillars are usually , but not always , in the median ) - The median would no longer be a " safety net " in snowy weatherSlow-speed rail is n't going away any time soon , so it does n't make sense to repurpose those lines .
And if we 're going to build new rail , we might as well use existing infrastructure ( highways ) as much as possible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Federal rail regulations being what they are, the only prospect for high speed rail is if the entire system is grade separated - that is, there are no at-grade crossings.
Existing rights-of-way can be used, but every where out in the middle of Modesto or Coalinga where a gravel road crosses the tracks the road will either need to be cut or a bridge or tunnel built.I often wonder why high-speed rail couldn't be built in the empty median of interstate highways.
Sure, you couldn't lay the entire track down in the middle of the highway, but you could cover at least 95\% of a long route that way.Advantages:- Far less need to take/buy private property- No at-grade crossings- Most interstates are already fairly straight and level- A small pang of guilt felt by Hummer owners every time eco-friendly transportation keeps whooshing by themDisadvantages:- Many bridges would have to be modified or rebuilt (their center pillars are usually, but not always, in the median)- The median would no longer be a "safety net" in snowy weatherSlow-speed rail isn't going away any time soon, so it doesn't make sense to repurpose those lines.
And if we're going to build new rail, we might as well use existing infrastructure (highways) as much as possible.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575878</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578136</id>
	<title>Re:Why not in the US?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262011800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why not do it Singapore MRT style?</p><p>I think about half the tracks are build above the road, with the tracks taking "short cuts" when the road bends. And near downtown, it's pretty much all underground. I think only a couple of KM of track and one station is at ground level. Everything else is either above or below.</p><p>It is not a high speed system, but it sure is moving alot of people here daily, with trains every 4-8 minutes (depending on peak / off peak).</p><p>This way, the MRT system does not need any roads to be modified, and neither do they need extra land wherever it is build above the road.</p><p>The system has been running for about 20 years now, with more and more stations added to increase the coverage.</p><p>Sure, the one time investment can be relatively high, but as far as I know, it's running at a decent profit for a while now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why not do it Singapore MRT style ? I think about half the tracks are build above the road , with the tracks taking " short cuts " when the road bends .
And near downtown , it 's pretty much all underground .
I think only a couple of KM of track and one station is at ground level .
Everything else is either above or below.It is not a high speed system , but it sure is moving alot of people here daily , with trains every 4-8 minutes ( depending on peak / off peak ) .This way , the MRT system does not need any roads to be modified , and neither do they need extra land wherever it is build above the road.The system has been running for about 20 years now , with more and more stations added to increase the coverage.Sure , the one time investment can be relatively high , but as far as I know , it 's running at a decent profit for a while now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why not do it Singapore MRT style?I think about half the tracks are build above the road, with the tracks taking "short cuts" when the road bends.
And near downtown, it's pretty much all underground.
I think only a couple of KM of track and one station is at ground level.
Everything else is either above or below.It is not a high speed system, but it sure is moving alot of people here daily, with trains every 4-8 minutes (depending on peak / off peak).This way, the MRT system does not need any roads to be modified, and neither do they need extra land wherever it is build above the road.The system has been running for about 20 years now, with more and more stations added to increase the coverage.Sure, the one time investment can be relatively high, but as far as I know, it's running at a decent profit for a while now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575878</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575298</id>
	<title>Re:Nice</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261992840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <em>Averaging 217 mph over a distance of 663 miles, supposedly connecting 20 cities... according to TFA, a trip of under three hours...</em> </p><p>It just isn't possible. Assuming that, at each city, you have 3 minutes of deceleration, a stop time of 10 minutes, and 5 minutes of acceleration, that's 18*20 = 360 minutes, or 6 hours. That doesn't even include time at full speed. Okay, let's be insane and decelerate in only 1 minute and accelerate in 2 and stop for only 3 minutes, that's now two hours, leaving you one hour to travel 663 miles for an average speed of (duh) 663 miles per hour. That means top speed is somewhat more than that, but approximating the top speed as 663 MPH, then decelerating from 663 to 0 in one minute would give about 0.5 G's, which is going to be an uncomfortable experience for an entire minute. At the very least you would need to be facing backward so you'd be pressed into your seat instead of thrown out of it. It's just totally impossible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Averaging 217 mph over a distance of 663 miles , supposedly connecting 20 cities... according to TFA , a trip of under three hours... It just is n't possible .
Assuming that , at each city , you have 3 minutes of deceleration , a stop time of 10 minutes , and 5 minutes of acceleration , that 's 18 * 20 = 360 minutes , or 6 hours .
That does n't even include time at full speed .
Okay , let 's be insane and decelerate in only 1 minute and accelerate in 2 and stop for only 3 minutes , that 's now two hours , leaving you one hour to travel 663 miles for an average speed of ( duh ) 663 miles per hour .
That means top speed is somewhat more than that , but approximating the top speed as 663 MPH , then decelerating from 663 to 0 in one minute would give about 0.5 G 's , which is going to be an uncomfortable experience for an entire minute .
At the very least you would need to be facing backward so you 'd be pressed into your seat instead of thrown out of it .
It 's just totally impossible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Averaging 217 mph over a distance of 663 miles, supposedly connecting 20 cities... according to TFA, a trip of under three hours... It just isn't possible.
Assuming that, at each city, you have 3 minutes of deceleration, a stop time of 10 minutes, and 5 minutes of acceleration, that's 18*20 = 360 minutes, or 6 hours.
That doesn't even include time at full speed.
Okay, let's be insane and decelerate in only 1 minute and accelerate in 2 and stop for only 3 minutes, that's now two hours, leaving you one hour to travel 663 miles for an average speed of (duh) 663 miles per hour.
That means top speed is somewhat more than that, but approximating the top speed as 663 MPH, then decelerating from 663 to 0 in one minute would give about 0.5 G's, which is going to be an uncomfortable experience for an entire minute.
At the very least you would need to be facing backward so you'd be pressed into your seat instead of thrown out of it.
It's just totally impossible.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574912</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575748</id>
	<title>Re:Fuel efficiency of this train vs airplane?</title>
	<author>TheEvilOverlord</author>
	<datestamp>1261995240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The trouble is a project of that size usually requires some level of state/federal organisation or funding to secure the necessary investment from private funding and the power to buy the land.  Which in the USA seems to cause foaming at the mouth and long rants about the evils of communism.</p><p>(I'm assuming here a new high speed railway would require a new less bendy track than already exists)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The trouble is a project of that size usually requires some level of state/federal organisation or funding to secure the necessary investment from private funding and the power to buy the land .
Which in the USA seems to cause foaming at the mouth and long rants about the evils of communism .
( I 'm assuming here a new high speed railway would require a new less bendy track than already exists )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The trouble is a project of that size usually requires some level of state/federal organisation or funding to secure the necessary investment from private funding and the power to buy the land.
Which in the USA seems to cause foaming at the mouth and long rants about the evils of communism.
(I'm assuming here a new high speed railway would require a new less bendy track than already exists)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578122</id>
	<title>Re:China's Achievements</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262011680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well obviously a similar rail line would be much more expensive in the US, but then the US has *a lot* more money too. Think about it, China is spending a significant portion of their GDP to invest in infrastructure, a much larger portion than the US.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well obviously a similar rail line would be much more expensive in the US , but then the US has * a lot * more money too .
Think about it , China is spending a significant portion of their GDP to invest in infrastructure , a much larger portion than the US .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well obviously a similar rail line would be much more expensive in the US, but then the US has *a lot* more money too.
Think about it, China is spending a significant portion of their GDP to invest in infrastructure, a much larger portion than the US.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575144</id>
	<title>Re:245mph max speed?  TGV not the fastest</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261992120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Japanese Maglev went to 581 km/h 361 mph.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Japanese Maglev went to 581 km/h 361 mph .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Japanese Maglev went to 581 km/h 361 mph.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577006</id>
	<title>Re:Fuel efficiency of this train vs airplane?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262002800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>If the difference in fuel efficiency is considerable, then maybe the US should consider building something like that?</p></div></blockquote><p>

Fuel efficiency on long hauls might be disappointing.  Several studies have shown that on short trips (up to around 800km), high-speed trains beat airplanes on emissions and fuel consumption.  On long haul trips. not so much.  An airplane burns a metric crapload of fuel on takeoff, but uses decidedly less to cruise, and on trips over 1000km or so it is actually more environmentally friendly than the high-speed train... unless that train gets its power from nuclear power plants (which is the case for the French TGV).  One of the studies confirming this was conducted by the Dutch RIVM agency, which is generally very much in the environmentalist camp (and thus -automatically- predispositioned against anything not public transport).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the difference in fuel efficiency is considerable , then maybe the US should consider building something like that ?
Fuel efficiency on long hauls might be disappointing .
Several studies have shown that on short trips ( up to around 800km ) , high-speed trains beat airplanes on emissions and fuel consumption .
On long haul trips .
not so much .
An airplane burns a metric crapload of fuel on takeoff , but uses decidedly less to cruise , and on trips over 1000km or so it is actually more environmentally friendly than the high-speed train... unless that train gets its power from nuclear power plants ( which is the case for the French TGV ) .
One of the studies confirming this was conducted by the Dutch RIVM agency , which is generally very much in the environmentalist camp ( and thus -automatically- predispositioned against anything not public transport ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the difference in fuel efficiency is considerable, then maybe the US should consider building something like that?
Fuel efficiency on long hauls might be disappointing.
Several studies have shown that on short trips (up to around 800km), high-speed trains beat airplanes on emissions and fuel consumption.
On long haul trips.
not so much.
An airplane burns a metric crapload of fuel on takeoff, but uses decidedly less to cruise, and on trips over 1000km or so it is actually more environmentally friendly than the high-speed train... unless that train gets its power from nuclear power plants (which is the case for the French TGV).
One of the studies confirming this was conducted by the Dutch RIVM agency, which is generally very much in the environmentalist camp (and thus -automatically- predispositioned against anything not public transport).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574820</id>
	<title>mph ?q</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262033700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sorry using metric system over here... Damn Americans...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry using metric system over here... Damn Americans.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry using metric system over here... Damn Americans...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30584530</id>
	<title>Re:245mph max speed? Not so impressive</title>
	<author>Idiomatick</author>
	<datestamp>1262115120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is the fastest LAUNCHED train. Meaning, actually in use. BTW japan had a test track running at 581km/h<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... in 2003. (also, ew mph)</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is the fastest LAUNCHED train .
Meaning , actually in use .
BTW japan had a test track running at 581km/h ... in 2003 .
( also , ew mph )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is the fastest LAUNCHED train.
Meaning, actually in use.
BTW japan had a test track running at 581km/h ... in 2003.
(also, ew mph)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577702</id>
	<title>Re:Nice</title>
	<author>Macrat</author>
	<datestamp>1262008380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I tend to agree with you on several of these points.  Everytime I read something like this I ask myself, "Why not in the US."</p></div><p>California is planning a high speed rail from Los Angeles to San Francisco and already people in Palo Alto have filed a lawsuit to stop it because they don't want it going through their city.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I tend to agree with you on several of these points .
Everytime I read something like this I ask myself , " Why not in the US .
" California is planning a high speed rail from Los Angeles to San Francisco and already people in Palo Alto have filed a lawsuit to stop it because they do n't want it going through their city .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I tend to agree with you on several of these points.
Everytime I read something like this I ask myself, "Why not in the US.
"California is planning a high speed rail from Los Angeles to San Francisco and already people in Palo Alto have filed a lawsuit to stop it because they don't want it going through their city.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575320</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574844</id>
	<title>Pearl River Delta??</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262033760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Delhi is in India.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Delhi is in India .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Delhi is in India.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575394</id>
	<title>Re:Big Picture: this is no surprise at all</title>
	<author>fprintf</author>
	<datestamp>1261993320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>China is the new Japan. For those of us who lived in the States in the late 70s and early 80s, everything was being made by the Japanese and they were buying everything over here. Ski resorts, swanky real estate, heck even Rockerfeller Center in NYCity.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>China is the new Japan .
For those of us who lived in the States in the late 70s and early 80s , everything was being made by the Japanese and they were buying everything over here .
Ski resorts , swanky real estate , heck even Rockerfeller Center in NYCity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>China is the new Japan.
For those of us who lived in the States in the late 70s and early 80s, everything was being made by the Japanese and they were buying everything over here.
Ski resorts, swanky real estate, heck even Rockerfeller Center in NYCity.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575108</id>
	<title>Re:Nice</title>
	<author>DeathToBill</author>
	<datestamp>1261991940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sigh.  Try going from London to Paris by air and by train, and see which one takes longer.  Why was that?  Oh, yeah...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sigh .
Try going from London to Paris by air and by train , and see which one takes longer .
Why was that ?
Oh , yeah.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sigh.
Try going from London to Paris by air and by train, and see which one takes longer.
Why was that?
Oh, yeah...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574912</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575310</id>
	<title>Fuel efficiency of this train vs airplane?</title>
	<author>walterbyrd</author>
	<datestamp>1261992960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If trains can travel that fast safely. Then it seems we could cut down air traffic considerably. NYC to Atalanta is only about 800 miles, if I could get there by train in four hours, a airplane would offer no time advantage.</p><p>If the difference in fuel efficiency is considerable, then maybe the US should consider building something like that?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If trains can travel that fast safely .
Then it seems we could cut down air traffic considerably .
NYC to Atalanta is only about 800 miles , if I could get there by train in four hours , a airplane would offer no time advantage.If the difference in fuel efficiency is considerable , then maybe the US should consider building something like that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If trains can travel that fast safely.
Then it seems we could cut down air traffic considerably.
NYC to Atalanta is only about 800 miles, if I could get there by train in four hours, a airplane would offer no time advantage.If the difference in fuel efficiency is considerable, then maybe the US should consider building something like that?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575472</id>
	<title>Pennies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261993800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So what happens when a train going 245mph encounters a penny on the track?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So what happens when a train going 245mph encounters a penny on the track ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So what happens when a train going 245mph encounters a penny on the track?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577174</id>
	<title>Re:Big Picture: this is no surprise at all</title>
	<author>forceman130</author>
	<datestamp>1262004000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The counter to that is, while you couldn't find a single trinket that wasn't made in China, the Chinese couldn't find a single Chinese manufacturer to build their high-speed train.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The counter to that is , while you could n't find a single trinket that was n't made in China , the Chinese could n't find a single Chinese manufacturer to build their high-speed train .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The counter to that is, while you couldn't find a single trinket that wasn't made in China, the Chinese couldn't find a single Chinese manufacturer to build their high-speed train.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577356</id>
	<title>Re:Why not in the US?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262005380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Monorails!!!  Recently the Travel Channel had an hour featuring past and present monorails.  Surprisingly there are successful monorails running in several spots in the world besides Disneyland.  All I ever heard was that they were "too expensive" - HOW could they possibly be more expensive than surface rail?  They can be built sufficiently above ground to allow animal migration (a blessing for EIR-conscious California), auto and pedestrian traffic, and most truck traffic to pass under.  Many land uses would still be possible, unlike surface rail, and more like having a powerline over your land.</p><p>One monorail in Germany has a design with two-legged tower support, and overhead suspension for a cambered track.  It allows higher speeds because the cars need not slow down for turns.  Look up the Schwebebahn Wuppertal and see a monorail that's been around for a hundred years.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Monorails ! ! !
Recently the Travel Channel had an hour featuring past and present monorails .
Surprisingly there are successful monorails running in several spots in the world besides Disneyland .
All I ever heard was that they were " too expensive " - HOW could they possibly be more expensive than surface rail ?
They can be built sufficiently above ground to allow animal migration ( a blessing for EIR-conscious California ) , auto and pedestrian traffic , and most truck traffic to pass under .
Many land uses would still be possible , unlike surface rail , and more like having a powerline over your land.One monorail in Germany has a design with two-legged tower support , and overhead suspension for a cambered track .
It allows higher speeds because the cars need not slow down for turns .
Look up the Schwebebahn Wuppertal and see a monorail that 's been around for a hundred years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Monorails!!!
Recently the Travel Channel had an hour featuring past and present monorails.
Surprisingly there are successful monorails running in several spots in the world besides Disneyland.
All I ever heard was that they were "too expensive" - HOW could they possibly be more expensive than surface rail?
They can be built sufficiently above ground to allow animal migration (a blessing for EIR-conscious California), auto and pedestrian traffic, and most truck traffic to pass under.
Many land uses would still be possible, unlike surface rail, and more like having a powerline over your land.One monorail in Germany has a design with two-legged tower support, and overhead suspension for a cambered track.
It allows higher speeds because the cars need not slow down for turns.
Look up the Schwebebahn Wuppertal and see a monorail that's been around for a hundred years.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575878</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575482</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it to have something like this in U</title>
	<author>vlm</author>
	<datestamp>1261993860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>airports already have the infrastructure like rent a cars and public transportation that will have to be duplicated at a new high speed rail station.</p></div><p>Do you have any idea where Grand Central Station in NYC or Union Station in CHC are located?  Beyond obviously, they are in NYC, and CHC, I mean?  Obviously the last mile would have to be at the sedate 60 MPH the trains currently cruise at, but thats only one minute...</p><p>Another form of infrastructure is best demonstrated by Amtrak MKA station, aka MARS, which is on the airport grounds...</p><p>I've been to all three stations... the idea that there is a lack of station transportation infrastructure is laughable.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>airports already have the infrastructure like rent a cars and public transportation that will have to be duplicated at a new high speed rail station.Do you have any idea where Grand Central Station in NYC or Union Station in CHC are located ?
Beyond obviously , they are in NYC , and CHC , I mean ?
Obviously the last mile would have to be at the sedate 60 MPH the trains currently cruise at , but thats only one minute...Another form of infrastructure is best demonstrated by Amtrak MKA station , aka MARS , which is on the airport grounds...I 've been to all three stations... the idea that there is a lack of station transportation infrastructure is laughable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>airports already have the infrastructure like rent a cars and public transportation that will have to be duplicated at a new high speed rail station.Do you have any idea where Grand Central Station in NYC or Union Station in CHC are located?
Beyond obviously, they are in NYC, and CHC, I mean?
Obviously the last mile would have to be at the sedate 60 MPH the trains currently cruise at, but thats only one minute...Another form of infrastructure is best demonstrated by Amtrak MKA station, aka MARS, which is on the airport grounds...I've been to all three stations... the idea that there is a lack of station transportation infrastructure is laughable.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575090</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574964</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it to have something like this in U</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261991220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>No way, not possible. First of all you'll have the NIMBY's out protesting with their M4A1's threatening to secede due to the huge power grab by the state for land rights or whatever and that it "looks ugly." Then you'll have the Corporate Overlords from automotive/airliners bemoaning about their guaranteed right of increased profit margins. Thirdly you'll have the politicos saying that the terrorists could use it to travel around the country with greater ease and/or make it a terrorist target. Last but not least you'll have some religious bureaucrats saying how this is a plot against God and is un-American or some shit, probably Pat Buchanan will be against it because it could be used by gay/black/female persons. This will be modded flamebait but is absolutely true in every aspect I am afraid.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No way , not possible .
First of all you 'll have the NIMBY 's out protesting with their M4A1 's threatening to secede due to the huge power grab by the state for land rights or whatever and that it " looks ugly .
" Then you 'll have the Corporate Overlords from automotive/airliners bemoaning about their guaranteed right of increased profit margins .
Thirdly you 'll have the politicos saying that the terrorists could use it to travel around the country with greater ease and/or make it a terrorist target .
Last but not least you 'll have some religious bureaucrats saying how this is a plot against God and is un-American or some shit , probably Pat Buchanan will be against it because it could be used by gay/black/female persons .
This will be modded flamebait but is absolutely true in every aspect I am afraid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No way, not possible.
First of all you'll have the NIMBY's out protesting with their M4A1's threatening to secede due to the huge power grab by the state for land rights or whatever and that it "looks ugly.
" Then you'll have the Corporate Overlords from automotive/airliners bemoaning about their guaranteed right of increased profit margins.
Thirdly you'll have the politicos saying that the terrorists could use it to travel around the country with greater ease and/or make it a terrorist target.
Last but not least you'll have some religious bureaucrats saying how this is a plot against God and is un-American or some shit, probably Pat Buchanan will be against it because it could be used by gay/black/female persons.
This will be modded flamebait but is absolutely true in every aspect I am afraid.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574868</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576438</id>
	<title>ahh</title>
	<author>nomadic</author>
	<datestamp>1261998720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's nothing, I have the engineering know-how to accelerate any train you give me to about 9,000 feet per second, if I can find a high enough cliff.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's nothing , I have the engineering know-how to accelerate any train you give me to about 9,000 feet per second , if I can find a high enough cliff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's nothing, I have the engineering know-how to accelerate any train you give me to about 9,000 feet per second, if I can find a high enough cliff.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575682</id>
	<title>There were a lot of errors</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261995000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It should obviously be <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl\_River\_Delta" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Pearl River Delta</a> [wikipedia.org]... But TFA had it wrong too, not just the submitter. Also, article has "Seimens" when there should be "Siemens"...</p><p>TFA also claims that it averages 217 mph (350 km/h) but claims that the total distance of 663 miles will only take 2h45min, which would average 241 mph...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It should obviously be Pearl River Delta [ wikipedia.org ] ... But TFA had it wrong too , not just the submitter .
Also , article has " Seimens " when there should be " Siemens " ...TFA also claims that it averages 217 mph ( 350 km/h ) but claims that the total distance of 663 miles will only take 2h45min , which would average 241 mph.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It should obviously be Pearl River Delta [wikipedia.org]... But TFA had it wrong too, not just the submitter.
Also, article has "Seimens" when there should be "Siemens"...TFA also claims that it averages 217 mph (350 km/h) but claims that the total distance of 663 miles will only take 2h45min, which would average 241 mph...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575266</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it to have something like this in U</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261992660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The problem is getting land rights from every county boundary. California proposed a high-speed shuttle train from San Francisco to Los Angeles via Sacremento that would take less than 90 minutes. The mayors of all three cities were extremely happy about this. Unfortunately, the mayors of all the cities in between also wanted a stop at their city. For every city that had a stop, that would add another 5 minutes to the train journey, and at least 20 other cities were wanting stations in their towns.</p></div><p>Japanese rail handles this by having several tiers of trains.  Some trains run much faster, and have less stops, and the stations and schedules are designed so that the "faster" trains pass the more frequently stopping ones.  As long as the schedules are perfect and the stations have passing lanes you could easily have a route that only stops in 2 cities running side-by-side with a route that stops at every one.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is getting land rights from every county boundary .
California proposed a high-speed shuttle train from San Francisco to Los Angeles via Sacremento that would take less than 90 minutes .
The mayors of all three cities were extremely happy about this .
Unfortunately , the mayors of all the cities in between also wanted a stop at their city .
For every city that had a stop , that would add another 5 minutes to the train journey , and at least 20 other cities were wanting stations in their towns.Japanese rail handles this by having several tiers of trains .
Some trains run much faster , and have less stops , and the stations and schedules are designed so that the " faster " trains pass the more frequently stopping ones .
As long as the schedules are perfect and the stations have passing lanes you could easily have a route that only stops in 2 cities running side-by-side with a route that stops at every one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is getting land rights from every county boundary.
California proposed a high-speed shuttle train from San Francisco to Los Angeles via Sacremento that would take less than 90 minutes.
The mayors of all three cities were extremely happy about this.
Unfortunately, the mayors of all the cities in between also wanted a stop at their city.
For every city that had a stop, that would add another 5 minutes to the train journey, and at least 20 other cities were wanting stations in their towns.Japanese rail handles this by having several tiers of trains.
Some trains run much faster, and have less stops, and the stations and schedules are designed so that the "faster" trains pass the more frequently stopping ones.
As long as the schedules are perfect and the stations have passing lanes you could easily have a route that only stops in 2 cities running side-by-side with a route that stops at every one.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574962</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577068</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it to have something like this in U</title>
	<author>dakameleon</author>
	<datestamp>1262003280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Although they did also put it mainly on flat land.</p></div><p>Someone should tell the Japanese and the Europeans that they should have built their high-speed rail only where they have flat land. They'd be even faster!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Although they did also put it mainly on flat land.Someone should tell the Japanese and the Europeans that they should have built their high-speed rail only where they have flat land .
They 'd be even faster !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Although they did also put it mainly on flat land.Someone should tell the Japanese and the Europeans that they should have built their high-speed rail only where they have flat land.
They'd be even faster!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575012</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575592</id>
	<title>politics or technology?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261994580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For a technology story some people seems to have a reflexive holier than thou attitude about the achievements of others (I'm afraid I have to call out the jealous small penis wannabes where I see them).</p><p>Back to technology.<br>One would think bullet trains might have advantages in terms of cost, safety, and possibly even time (for distances up to about 2,000 km) over air travel.<br>It really might be the better way.</p><p>I have a comparable sentiments about it being near impossible to implement in a country like the USA though.<br>Objectively, the USA currently is not capable of much that anyone would consider to be "cool" anymore (if any of the following American institutions is not a joke please correct: debt, law &amp; justice/crime, moral rectitude, *add your own*,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For a technology story some people seems to have a reflexive holier than thou attitude about the achievements of others ( I 'm afraid I have to call out the jealous small penis wannabes where I see them ) .Back to technology.One would think bullet trains might have advantages in terms of cost , safety , and possibly even time ( for distances up to about 2,000 km ) over air travel.It really might be the better way.I have a comparable sentiments about it being near impossible to implement in a country like the USA though.Objectively , the USA currently is not capable of much that anyone would consider to be " cool " anymore ( if any of the following American institutions is not a joke please correct : debt , law &amp; justice/crime , moral rectitude , * add your own * , ... ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For a technology story some people seems to have a reflexive holier than thou attitude about the achievements of others (I'm afraid I have to call out the jealous small penis wannabes where I see them).Back to technology.One would think bullet trains might have advantages in terms of cost, safety, and possibly even time (for distances up to about 2,000 km) over air travel.It really might be the better way.I have a comparable sentiments about it being near impossible to implement in a country like the USA though.Objectively, the USA currently is not capable of much that anyone would consider to be "cool" anymore (if any of the following American institutions is not a joke please correct: debt, law &amp; justice/crime, moral rectitude, *add your own*, ...).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577848</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it to have something like this in U</title>
	<author>westlake</author>
	<datestamp>1262009340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I mean, we could something that connect the high traffic areas in the East Coast and California.</i>,</p><p>The driving distance betwen New York and San Francisco is about 2900 miles.</p><p> Call it a minimum of 12 hours by rail at 245 mph.</p><p>The "high traffic" routes in the U.S. run North-South. Atlantic Coast. Central. [Chicago - New Orleans] Pacific Coast.</p><p>The profitable East-West high speed continental rail route that makes economic and geographical sense is not easy to map.<br>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean , we could something that connect the high traffic areas in the East Coast and California.,The driving distance betwen New York and San Francisco is about 2900 miles .
Call it a minimum of 12 hours by rail at 245 mph.The " high traffic " routes in the U.S. run North-South .
Atlantic Coast .
Central. [ Chicago - New Orleans ] Pacific Coast.The profitable East-West high speed continental rail route that makes economic and geographical sense is not easy to map .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean, we could something that connect the high traffic areas in the East Coast and California.,The driving distance betwen New York and San Francisco is about 2900 miles.
Call it a minimum of 12 hours by rail at 245 mph.The "high traffic" routes in the U.S. run North-South.
Atlantic Coast.
Central. [Chicago - New Orleans] Pacific Coast.The profitable East-West high speed continental rail route that makes economic and geographical sense is not easy to map.
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574868</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576538</id>
	<title>Re:Nice</title>
	<author>supernova87a</author>
	<datestamp>1261999440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>on a side topic, does anyone remember the concept that a Taiwanese engineer showed a few months ago on video, where a neat trick solves the problem of station stops?  What was that called?  <br> <br> The train decelerates a little bit coming into a station, and on a parallel track or overhead, a small module containing the new passengers gets up to speed with the train and attaches.  Then the passengers can transfer in and out without the train having to slow down much.  (And of course, the train dumps the similar module as it enters the station, for disembarking pax).</htmltext>
<tokenext>on a side topic , does anyone remember the concept that a Taiwanese engineer showed a few months ago on video , where a neat trick solves the problem of station stops ?
What was that called ?
The train decelerates a little bit coming into a station , and on a parallel track or overhead , a small module containing the new passengers gets up to speed with the train and attaches .
Then the passengers can transfer in and out without the train having to slow down much .
( And of course , the train dumps the similar module as it enters the station , for disembarking pax ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>on a side topic, does anyone remember the concept that a Taiwanese engineer showed a few months ago on video, where a neat trick solves the problem of station stops?
What was that called?
The train decelerates a little bit coming into a station, and on a parallel track or overhead, a small module containing the new passengers gets up to speed with the train and attaches.
Then the passengers can transfer in and out without the train having to slow down much.
(And of course, the train dumps the similar module as it enters the station, for disembarking pax).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574912</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574802</id>
	<title>China debuts human rights abuses</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262033580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>let's glorify them!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>let 's glorify them !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>let's glorify them!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30586262</id>
	<title>Re:China's Achievements</title>
	<author>steelfood</author>
	<datestamp>1262079840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>we don't have 300 million unskilled laborers who will work their ass off for a few bucks a day.</p></div><p>That may be true, but I know there are 300 million such people on our doorstep begging to be allowed to do such work. In fact, they want to do this work so badly, they'll risk life and limb to be given the opportunity to work.</p><p>It's all about special interests here, and maintaining the status quo, i.e. social stagnation.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>we do n't have 300 million unskilled laborers who will work their ass off for a few bucks a day.That may be true , but I know there are 300 million such people on our doorstep begging to be allowed to do such work .
In fact , they want to do this work so badly , they 'll risk life and limb to be given the opportunity to work.It 's all about special interests here , and maintaining the status quo , i.e .
social stagnation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>we don't have 300 million unskilled laborers who will work their ass off for a few bucks a day.That may be true, but I know there are 300 million such people on our doorstep begging to be allowed to do such work.
In fact, they want to do this work so badly, they'll risk life and limb to be given the opportunity to work.It's all about special interests here, and maintaining the status quo, i.e.
social stagnation.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574984</id>
	<title>Comparisons</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261991340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Many western countries have borderline or outright political prisoners. Since China has such an enormous population I wonder how the numbers compare percentage wise.</p><p>There is also the issue where statistics turn sentences political. One example might be the extreme over representation of afro-americans in the us prison system. At some point you have to accept that it is systematic oppression.</p><p>Also see Northern Ireland for secession related issues.</p><p>I'm honestly just curious about those numbers. I'm in no way an apologist for China or other oppressive states.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Many western countries have borderline or outright political prisoners .
Since China has such an enormous population I wonder how the numbers compare percentage wise.There is also the issue where statistics turn sentences political .
One example might be the extreme over representation of afro-americans in the us prison system .
At some point you have to accept that it is systematic oppression.Also see Northern Ireland for secession related issues.I 'm honestly just curious about those numbers .
I 'm in no way an apologist for China or other oppressive states .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Many western countries have borderline or outright political prisoners.
Since China has such an enormous population I wonder how the numbers compare percentage wise.There is also the issue where statistics turn sentences political.
One example might be the extreme over representation of afro-americans in the us prison system.
At some point you have to accept that it is systematic oppression.Also see Northern Ireland for secession related issues.I'm honestly just curious about those numbers.
I'm in no way an apologist for China or other oppressive states.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575712</id>
	<title>extra stops need not hurt</title>
	<author>r00t</author>
	<datestamp>1261995120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Suppose the train goes from city C to metropolis M. We want to also serve D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, and L. No problem, we just run 9 trains and ensure that stopped trains aren't sitting on the main track.</p><p>The first train of the day serves C, D, M.</p><p>The second train of the day serves C, E, M.</p><p>The third train of the day serves C, F, M.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...and so on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Suppose the train goes from city C to metropolis M. We want to also serve D , E , F , G , H , I , J , K , and L. No problem , we just run 9 trains and ensure that stopped trains are n't sitting on the main track.The first train of the day serves C , D , M.The second train of the day serves C , E , M.The third train of the day serves C , F , M. ...and so on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Suppose the train goes from city C to metropolis M. We want to also serve D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, and L. No problem, we just run 9 trains and ensure that stopped trains aren't sitting on the main track.The first train of the day serves C, D, M.The second train of the day serves C, E, M.The third train of the day serves C, F, M. ...and so on.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574962</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576548</id>
	<title>Re:Nice</title>
	<author>onenil</author>
	<datestamp>1261999560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Re security, perhaps take a look at other fast trains around the world.  Europe and Japan both have such transport and - at least from personal experience in Japan, and stories I read / hear from Europe, security is not a big deal at all.  You go through a barrier that checks your ticket, you pass a number of attendants both throughout the station and on the platform, but never do you need to pass any security clearance.<br> <br>

I think it an odd nuance of human nature - pile us on to a tin can and send us flying through the air, and we need to be checked for explosives etc.  Do the same where the tin can hurtles along the ground on a fixed path and we don't.  Perhaps this is because trains are on rails and therefore more controlled, but I'm not so sure.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Re security , perhaps take a look at other fast trains around the world .
Europe and Japan both have such transport and - at least from personal experience in Japan , and stories I read / hear from Europe , security is not a big deal at all .
You go through a barrier that checks your ticket , you pass a number of attendants both throughout the station and on the platform , but never do you need to pass any security clearance .
I think it an odd nuance of human nature - pile us on to a tin can and send us flying through the air , and we need to be checked for explosives etc .
Do the same where the tin can hurtles along the ground on a fixed path and we do n't .
Perhaps this is because trains are on rails and therefore more controlled , but I 'm not so sure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Re security, perhaps take a look at other fast trains around the world.
Europe and Japan both have such transport and - at least from personal experience in Japan, and stories I read / hear from Europe, security is not a big deal at all.
You go through a barrier that checks your ticket, you pass a number of attendants both throughout the station and on the platform, but never do you need to pass any security clearance.
I think it an odd nuance of human nature - pile us on to a tin can and send us flying through the air, and we need to be checked for explosives etc.
Do the same where the tin can hurtles along the ground on a fixed path and we don't.
Perhaps this is because trains are on rails and therefore more controlled, but I'm not so sure.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574912</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30580494</id>
	<title>Re:245mph max speed? Not so impressive</title>
	<author>richlv</author>
	<datestamp>1262085840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ok, so average speed for the chinese train is 349 km/h, and max speed for french is 574 km/h.</p><p>speed of sound, according to wikipedia, is ~ 1236 km/h, so that's pretty damn impressive for trains.</p><p>also, can somebody please tag the story with imperialunits, slashdot tagging isn't working for me for the last 6 months or so. not that it worked great before.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ok , so average speed for the chinese train is 349 km/h , and max speed for french is 574 km/h.speed of sound , according to wikipedia , is ~ 1236 km/h , so that 's pretty damn impressive for trains.also , can somebody please tag the story with imperialunits , slashdot tagging is n't working for me for the last 6 months or so .
not that it worked great before .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ok, so average speed for the chinese train is 349 km/h, and max speed for french is 574 km/h.speed of sound, according to wikipedia, is ~ 1236 km/h, so that's pretty damn impressive for trains.also, can somebody please tag the story with imperialunits, slashdot tagging isn't working for me for the last 6 months or so.
not that it worked great before.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576062</id>
	<title>Re:Nice</title>
	<author>zorro-z</author>
	<datestamp>1261996740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm a huge fan of HSR, and would love to see it debut in the US (by international standards, Acela is strictly mid-speed). But a few things need to be noted:</p><p>1) You refer to our current rail network is 'aging.' That's putting it mildly. I read once that, the only reason that Amtrak can run Acela on the northeast corridor (NEC) is that the Pennsylvania Railroad did a major system upgrade... in the 1930s. On one hand, that tells you what a good job the PRR did; it's not for nothing that they were referred to as 'the World's Standard Railroad.' On the other hand, it also illustrates how aged- not aging, but already aged- our rail network is.</p><p>2) Even at the height of the US rail industry, passengers were always a loss-leader for freight. I was told by an old railman that the PRR actually hired people to burn down passenger stations so that the railroad could justify ending passenger service on that line. The only reason that major railroads carried passengers was that the Federal Railroad Administration required them to, as part of their license to carry freight (the real money maker).</p><p>In short, if true HSR's ever going to make an appearance in the US, it will likely be in the context of passenger trains running on upgraded freight lines. Now, if we upgrade the freight lines, that can have a huge impact on the US. Rail moves freight much faster, and at a far lower cost, than moving it via truck, and, right now, there are far too many choke points on the US rail network. Upgrade the rail network to handle more freight more efficiently, and you may just get HSR for passengers as a side benefit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a huge fan of HSR , and would love to see it debut in the US ( by international standards , Acela is strictly mid-speed ) .
But a few things need to be noted : 1 ) You refer to our current rail network is 'aging .
' That 's putting it mildly .
I read once that , the only reason that Amtrak can run Acela on the northeast corridor ( NEC ) is that the Pennsylvania Railroad did a major system upgrade... in the 1930s .
On one hand , that tells you what a good job the PRR did ; it 's not for nothing that they were referred to as 'the World 's Standard Railroad .
' On the other hand , it also illustrates how aged- not aging , but already aged- our rail network is.2 ) Even at the height of the US rail industry , passengers were always a loss-leader for freight .
I was told by an old railman that the PRR actually hired people to burn down passenger stations so that the railroad could justify ending passenger service on that line .
The only reason that major railroads carried passengers was that the Federal Railroad Administration required them to , as part of their license to carry freight ( the real money maker ) .In short , if true HSR 's ever going to make an appearance in the US , it will likely be in the context of passenger trains running on upgraded freight lines .
Now , if we upgrade the freight lines , that can have a huge impact on the US .
Rail moves freight much faster , and at a far lower cost , than moving it via truck , and , right now , there are far too many choke points on the US rail network .
Upgrade the rail network to handle more freight more efficiently , and you may just get HSR for passengers as a side benefit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a huge fan of HSR, and would love to see it debut in the US (by international standards, Acela is strictly mid-speed).
But a few things need to be noted:1) You refer to our current rail network is 'aging.
' That's putting it mildly.
I read once that, the only reason that Amtrak can run Acela on the northeast corridor (NEC) is that the Pennsylvania Railroad did a major system upgrade... in the 1930s.
On one hand, that tells you what a good job the PRR did; it's not for nothing that they were referred to as 'the World's Standard Railroad.
' On the other hand, it also illustrates how aged- not aging, but already aged- our rail network is.2) Even at the height of the US rail industry, passengers were always a loss-leader for freight.
I was told by an old railman that the PRR actually hired people to burn down passenger stations so that the railroad could justify ending passenger service on that line.
The only reason that major railroads carried passengers was that the Federal Railroad Administration required them to, as part of their license to carry freight (the real money maker).In short, if true HSR's ever going to make an appearance in the US, it will likely be in the context of passenger trains running on upgraded freight lines.
Now, if we upgrade the freight lines, that can have a huge impact on the US.
Rail moves freight much faster, and at a far lower cost, than moving it via truck, and, right now, there are far too many choke points on the US rail network.
Upgrade the rail network to handle more freight more efficiently, and you may just get HSR for passengers as a side benefit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574912</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574912</id>
	<title>Nice</title>
	<author>Red Flayer</author>
	<datestamp>1261990980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Averaging 217 mph over a distance of 663 miles, supposedly connecting 20 cities... according to TFA, a trip of under three hours...<br> <br>Just how much time are they allowing for deceleration and acceleration between stops?  Or is it pretty much end-to-end with multiple stops near the origin and destination?<br> <br>Anyway, there's little doubt in my mind that this is overkill, more a demonstration of technical capability and will to spend than anything else.  But damn, I'd like to have a network of these in the US to replace our aging and slow rail passenger rail system.  At the very least, they are much more energy efficient than air travel.<br> <br>One picky point with TFA... it suggests that the fast travel times of a high-speed rail network would not come with the security overhead of air travel.  I'm not so sure about that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Averaging 217 mph over a distance of 663 miles , supposedly connecting 20 cities... according to TFA , a trip of under three hours... Just how much time are they allowing for deceleration and acceleration between stops ?
Or is it pretty much end-to-end with multiple stops near the origin and destination ?
Anyway , there 's little doubt in my mind that this is overkill , more a demonstration of technical capability and will to spend than anything else .
But damn , I 'd like to have a network of these in the US to replace our aging and slow rail passenger rail system .
At the very least , they are much more energy efficient than air travel .
One picky point with TFA... it suggests that the fast travel times of a high-speed rail network would not come with the security overhead of air travel .
I 'm not so sure about that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Averaging 217 mph over a distance of 663 miles, supposedly connecting 20 cities... according to TFA, a trip of under three hours... Just how much time are they allowing for deceleration and acceleration between stops?
Or is it pretty much end-to-end with multiple stops near the origin and destination?
Anyway, there's little doubt in my mind that this is overkill, more a demonstration of technical capability and will to spend than anything else.
But damn, I'd like to have a network of these in the US to replace our aging and slow rail passenger rail system.
At the very least, they are much more energy efficient than air travel.
One picky point with TFA... it suggests that the fast travel times of a high-speed rail network would not come with the security overhead of air travel.
I'm not so sure about that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575630</id>
	<title>Re:Pennies</title>
	<author>FauxPasIII</author>
	<datestamp>1261994760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Liquid penny.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Liquid penny .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Liquid penny.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575472</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30580650</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it to have something like this in U</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262087940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not to forget that a lot of existing U.S. passenger rail infrastructure that would be easy (in relative terms, due to existing grades/straightness and rail easements) to upgrade happens to be shared use with freight. And freight rail is happy as long as it can move massive loads efficiently at speeds competive with commercial trucking, thus they typically go 50-60 MPH. And because those rail companies seem more than content and profitable competing with ground freight rather than air, sinking any money into infrastructure costs is something they don't care for. Factor in the fact that any major railway upgrades needed for high speed passenger service would be disruptive to freight schedules, and it becomes yet another reason for it not happening. Also even if the rails are upgraded such that passenger trains can go significantly faster than 70 MPH, they would have even worse scheduling conflict with the freight engines. So it would likely require more switching infrastructure, control systems, and doubling of available tracks on a given route, which makes things more expensive yet.</p><p>The thing is, existing engines could almost go twice as fast - making them "high speed". Historically some long route U.S. passenger rail averaged above 100MPH (ie: Zephyr) until the track quality declined and it became unsafe to do so. The problem with high speed rail in the U.S. is not of knowhow or an inability to build the trains, but simply the unwillingness to put any money into infrastructure required. (And the same unwillingness to spend on infrastructure also explains why we have stupidly slow speed limits instead of autobahn-like no limits, even though there's miles and miles of open and straight of interstate highway with jack shit in the way of traffic. The roads aren't built or maintained good enough for it, and hitting a rut or pothole at 100+ MPH isn't exactly a good thing.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not to forget that a lot of existing U.S. passenger rail infrastructure that would be easy ( in relative terms , due to existing grades/straightness and rail easements ) to upgrade happens to be shared use with freight .
And freight rail is happy as long as it can move massive loads efficiently at speeds competive with commercial trucking , thus they typically go 50-60 MPH .
And because those rail companies seem more than content and profitable competing with ground freight rather than air , sinking any money into infrastructure costs is something they do n't care for .
Factor in the fact that any major railway upgrades needed for high speed passenger service would be disruptive to freight schedules , and it becomes yet another reason for it not happening .
Also even if the rails are upgraded such that passenger trains can go significantly faster than 70 MPH , they would have even worse scheduling conflict with the freight engines .
So it would likely require more switching infrastructure , control systems , and doubling of available tracks on a given route , which makes things more expensive yet.The thing is , existing engines could almost go twice as fast - making them " high speed " .
Historically some long route U.S. passenger rail averaged above 100MPH ( ie : Zephyr ) until the track quality declined and it became unsafe to do so .
The problem with high speed rail in the U.S. is not of knowhow or an inability to build the trains , but simply the unwillingness to put any money into infrastructure required .
( And the same unwillingness to spend on infrastructure also explains why we have stupidly slow speed limits instead of autobahn-like no limits , even though there 's miles and miles of open and straight of interstate highway with jack shit in the way of traffic .
The roads are n't built or maintained good enough for it , and hitting a rut or pothole at 100 + MPH is n't exactly a good thing .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not to forget that a lot of existing U.S. passenger rail infrastructure that would be easy (in relative terms, due to existing grades/straightness and rail easements) to upgrade happens to be shared use with freight.
And freight rail is happy as long as it can move massive loads efficiently at speeds competive with commercial trucking, thus they typically go 50-60 MPH.
And because those rail companies seem more than content and profitable competing with ground freight rather than air, sinking any money into infrastructure costs is something they don't care for.
Factor in the fact that any major railway upgrades needed for high speed passenger service would be disruptive to freight schedules, and it becomes yet another reason for it not happening.
Also even if the rails are upgraded such that passenger trains can go significantly faster than 70 MPH, they would have even worse scheduling conflict with the freight engines.
So it would likely require more switching infrastructure, control systems, and doubling of available tracks on a given route, which makes things more expensive yet.The thing is, existing engines could almost go twice as fast - making them "high speed".
Historically some long route U.S. passenger rail averaged above 100MPH (ie: Zephyr) until the track quality declined and it became unsafe to do so.
The problem with high speed rail in the U.S. is not of knowhow or an inability to build the trains, but simply the unwillingness to put any money into infrastructure required.
(And the same unwillingness to spend on infrastructure also explains why we have stupidly slow speed limits instead of autobahn-like no limits, even though there's miles and miles of open and straight of interstate highway with jack shit in the way of traffic.
The roads aren't built or maintained good enough for it, and hitting a rut or pothole at 100+ MPH isn't exactly a good thing.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575012</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578450</id>
	<title>Re:56 trains a day</title>
	<author>prefec2</author>
	<datestamp>1262014200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I do not find this that expressive. 56 trains is even a little vague, but assuming the mean 56 trains running over the whole distance, than that would mean 2.33 trains an hour over the whole day. Further assuming they will not run trains during the night. Then this results in a 30 minute schedule for both directions. The Japanese are running their trains in a tighter schedule and in Germany there run more trains on the tracks with even different speeds between the stations. So this looks only impressive to US-Americans. The impressive thing about that Chinese train system is, that a developing country is building a developed country rail system. And they want to build a rail grid with 16000 km length. That is really impressive even though Germany's total track length is 41000 km (20000km electrified).</p><p>As for the US you really should invest in your rail infrastructure, while fossil fuels will get very expensive in future, many flights might become very expensive too. Trains however can be powered with electricity from renewable sources. And the east and west coast are densely populated to make trains a good alternative to plains. And building infrastructure would be a far better way to spend money than giving it to banks. It will even generate lots of jobs for years. To make most of a trains system you should combine it with a local train subnet and streetcars(trams) and city railways.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do not find this that expressive .
56 trains is even a little vague , but assuming the mean 56 trains running over the whole distance , than that would mean 2.33 trains an hour over the whole day .
Further assuming they will not run trains during the night .
Then this results in a 30 minute schedule for both directions .
The Japanese are running their trains in a tighter schedule and in Germany there run more trains on the tracks with even different speeds between the stations .
So this looks only impressive to US-Americans .
The impressive thing about that Chinese train system is , that a developing country is building a developed country rail system .
And they want to build a rail grid with 16000 km length .
That is really impressive even though Germany 's total track length is 41000 km ( 20000km electrified ) .As for the US you really should invest in your rail infrastructure , while fossil fuels will get very expensive in future , many flights might become very expensive too .
Trains however can be powered with electricity from renewable sources .
And the east and west coast are densely populated to make trains a good alternative to plains .
And building infrastructure would be a far better way to spend money than giving it to banks .
It will even generate lots of jobs for years .
To make most of a trains system you should combine it with a local train subnet and streetcars ( trams ) and city railways .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I do not find this that expressive.
56 trains is even a little vague, but assuming the mean 56 trains running over the whole distance, than that would mean 2.33 trains an hour over the whole day.
Further assuming they will not run trains during the night.
Then this results in a 30 minute schedule for both directions.
The Japanese are running their trains in a tighter schedule and in Germany there run more trains on the tracks with even different speeds between the stations.
So this looks only impressive to US-Americans.
The impressive thing about that Chinese train system is, that a developing country is building a developed country rail system.
And they want to build a rail grid with 16000 km length.
That is really impressive even though Germany's total track length is 41000 km (20000km electrified).As for the US you really should invest in your rail infrastructure, while fossil fuels will get very expensive in future, many flights might become very expensive too.
Trains however can be powered with electricity from renewable sources.
And the east and west coast are densely populated to make trains a good alternative to plains.
And building infrastructure would be a far better way to spend money than giving it to banks.
It will even generate lots of jobs for years.
To make most of a trains system you should combine it with a local train subnet and streetcars(trams) and city railways.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575056</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575064</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it to have something like this in U</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261991700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Very easy, as long as it is not in my back yard!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Very easy , as long as it is not in my back yard !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Very easy, as long as it is not in my back yard!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574868</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574946</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it to have something like this in U</title>
	<author>FooAtWFU</author>
	<datestamp>1261991160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Like this? <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed\_rail\_in\_the\_United\_States#Current\_federal\_efforts" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed\_rail\_in\_the\_United\_States#Current\_federal\_efforts</a> [wikipedia.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Like this ?
http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed \ _rail \ _in \ _the \ _United \ _States # Current \ _federal \ _efforts [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed\_rail\_in\_the\_United\_States#Current\_federal\_efforts [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574868</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575912</id>
	<title>More accurately...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261996020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...European and North American companies debut the worlds fastest train in China.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...European and North American companies debut the worlds fastest train in China .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...European and North American companies debut the worlds fastest train in China.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30581588</id>
	<title>Re:Fuel efficiency of this train vs airplane?</title>
	<author>stephanruby</author>
	<datestamp>1262099220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem with bullet trains is not their achievable technical speed, it's the fact that some people always cross the railroads on foot, or walk along the rails, cutting fences or jumping over them, and then end up getting run down by those bullet trains (that they only hear at the last second).</p><p>This is why you should never take the metrics for bullet trains you hear at face value. Sure, they may go especially fast on opening day, but the rest of the time, they'll go much slower, since it's next to impossible to maintain perfect airtight security on the actual railroad all the time. The rails that go through the France-UK Tchunnel come close, but even there the Eurostar has to slow down whenever it's back into open air.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem with bullet trains is not their achievable technical speed , it 's the fact that some people always cross the railroads on foot , or walk along the rails , cutting fences or jumping over them , and then end up getting run down by those bullet trains ( that they only hear at the last second ) .This is why you should never take the metrics for bullet trains you hear at face value .
Sure , they may go especially fast on opening day , but the rest of the time , they 'll go much slower , since it 's next to impossible to maintain perfect airtight security on the actual railroad all the time .
The rails that go through the France-UK Tchunnel come close , but even there the Eurostar has to slow down whenever it 's back into open air .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem with bullet trains is not their achievable technical speed, it's the fact that some people always cross the railroads on foot, or walk along the rails, cutting fences or jumping over them, and then end up getting run down by those bullet trains (that they only hear at the last second).This is why you should never take the metrics for bullet trains you hear at face value.
Sure, they may go especially fast on opening day, but the rest of the time, they'll go much slower, since it's next to impossible to maintain perfect airtight security on the actual railroad all the time.
The rails that go through the France-UK Tchunnel come close, but even there the Eurostar has to slow down whenever it's back into open air.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30588038</id>
	<title>Re:China's Achievements</title>
	<author>Eclipse-now</author>
	<datestamp>1262087340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>  Why can infrastructure like this not be built in the U.S.? Because we don't have 300 million unskilled laborers who will work their ass off for a few bucks a day. We don't have a government that has the authority to just displace hundreds of people in order to build a subway station without going through a lot of red tape. In order to keep up with China in this area, we'd have to give up a lot of the values we treasure for the sake of progress, which is something most of us here on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>./. wouldn't do.</p></div><p>


If world oil price were to rise to $300 a barrel as a permanent new pricing mechanism, don't you think that some emergency "war-time" economy and legislative actions would be taken by the Federal government to help wean your country off oil?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why can infrastructure like this not be built in the U.S. ?
Because we do n't have 300 million unskilled laborers who will work their ass off for a few bucks a day .
We do n't have a government that has the authority to just displace hundreds of people in order to build a subway station without going through a lot of red tape .
In order to keep up with China in this area , we 'd have to give up a lot of the values we treasure for the sake of progress , which is something most of us here on ./ .
would n't do .
If world oil price were to rise to $ 300 a barrel as a permanent new pricing mechanism , do n't you think that some emergency " war-time " economy and legislative actions would be taken by the Federal government to help wean your country off oil ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>  Why can infrastructure like this not be built in the U.S.?
Because we don't have 300 million unskilled laborers who will work their ass off for a few bucks a day.
We don't have a government that has the authority to just displace hundreds of people in order to build a subway station without going through a lot of red tape.
In order to keep up with China in this area, we'd have to give up a lot of the values we treasure for the sake of progress, which is something most of us here on ./.
wouldn't do.
If world oil price were to rise to $300 a barrel as a permanent new pricing mechanism, don't you think that some emergency "war-time" economy and legislative actions would be taken by the Federal government to help wean your country off oil?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575588</id>
	<title>China's Achievements</title>
	<author>argmanah</author>
	<datestamp>1261994580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you look at China's achievements, they are mainly construction achievements.  They build massive skyscrapers (Shanghai for example, already has a 100 story building, and is in the middle of constructing a 128 story one).  Any Chinese citizen living in a major city in China will brag about their city's skyscrapers, bridges, tunnels, subways, railways, etc.  And, having visited a lot of those cities, I will admit they are really impressive.<br>
<br>
The primary reason for this though, is that China is taking the massive amount of money flowing into the country and they're choosing to spend it on improving the economy through public works projects.  Building skyscrapers, subways, etc. require lots of unskilled manpower, something that China has in abundance.  Any problem, like digging a hole, laying pipe, or other manual labor tasks, that can be accomplished in greater scale by simply throwing raw manpower at it.... well, China is unsurpassed in its ability to throw raw manpower at something.
<br> <br>
Why can infrastructure like this not be built in the U.S.?  Because we don't have 300 million unskilled laborers who will work their ass off for a few bucks a day.  We don't have a government that has the authority to just displace hundreds of people in order to build a subway station without going through a lot of red tape.  In order to keep up with China in this area, we'd have to give up a lot of the values we treasure for the sake of progress, which is something most of us here on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>./. wouldn't do.
<br> <br>
You can like or hate the policies in China all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that their massive overpopulation of unskilled labor is getting employed and their infrastructure is developing extremely fast.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you look at China 's achievements , they are mainly construction achievements .
They build massive skyscrapers ( Shanghai for example , already has a 100 story building , and is in the middle of constructing a 128 story one ) .
Any Chinese citizen living in a major city in China will brag about their city 's skyscrapers , bridges , tunnels , subways , railways , etc .
And , having visited a lot of those cities , I will admit they are really impressive .
The primary reason for this though , is that China is taking the massive amount of money flowing into the country and they 're choosing to spend it on improving the economy through public works projects .
Building skyscrapers , subways , etc .
require lots of unskilled manpower , something that China has in abundance .
Any problem , like digging a hole , laying pipe , or other manual labor tasks , that can be accomplished in greater scale by simply throwing raw manpower at it.... well , China is unsurpassed in its ability to throw raw manpower at something .
Why can infrastructure like this not be built in the U.S. ?
Because we do n't have 300 million unskilled laborers who will work their ass off for a few bucks a day .
We do n't have a government that has the authority to just displace hundreds of people in order to build a subway station without going through a lot of red tape .
In order to keep up with China in this area , we 'd have to give up a lot of the values we treasure for the sake of progress , which is something most of us here on ./ .
would n't do .
You can like or hate the policies in China all you want , but it does n't change the fact that their massive overpopulation of unskilled labor is getting employed and their infrastructure is developing extremely fast .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you look at China's achievements, they are mainly construction achievements.
They build massive skyscrapers (Shanghai for example, already has a 100 story building, and is in the middle of constructing a 128 story one).
Any Chinese citizen living in a major city in China will brag about their city's skyscrapers, bridges, tunnels, subways, railways, etc.
And, having visited a lot of those cities, I will admit they are really impressive.
The primary reason for this though, is that China is taking the massive amount of money flowing into the country and they're choosing to spend it on improving the economy through public works projects.
Building skyscrapers, subways, etc.
require lots of unskilled manpower, something that China has in abundance.
Any problem, like digging a hole, laying pipe, or other manual labor tasks, that can be accomplished in greater scale by simply throwing raw manpower at it.... well, China is unsurpassed in its ability to throw raw manpower at something.
Why can infrastructure like this not be built in the U.S.?
Because we don't have 300 million unskilled laborers who will work their ass off for a few bucks a day.
We don't have a government that has the authority to just displace hundreds of people in order to build a subway station without going through a lot of red tape.
In order to keep up with China in this area, we'd have to give up a lot of the values we treasure for the sake of progress, which is something most of us here on ./.
wouldn't do.
You can like or hate the policies in China all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that their massive overpopulation of unskilled labor is getting employed and their infrastructure is developing extremely fast.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575608</id>
	<title>Re:Fuel efficiency of this train vs airplane?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261994700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You can fly new york-atlanta non-stop.  Not so with the train.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You can fly new york-atlanta non-stop .
Not so with the train .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can fly new york-atlanta non-stop.
Not so with the train.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575150</id>
	<title>Re:China debuts human rights abuses</title>
	<author>gregarican</author>
	<datestamp>1261992180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Plus you have <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXo4h1vwHCg" title="youtube.com">this guy</a> [youtube.com] as the train's engineer!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Plus you have this guy [ youtube.com ] as the train 's engineer !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Plus you have this guy [youtube.com] as the train's engineer!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574802</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575390</id>
	<title>In other news,</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261993320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>US astronauts walk on moon</p><p>uh, 40 years ago</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>US astronauts walk on moonuh , 40 years ago</tokentext>
<sentencetext>US astronauts walk on moonuh, 40 years ago</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575788</id>
	<title>Many bothans died to bring us this transformation</title>
	<author>admiralex</author>
	<datestamp>1261995480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Before we start lauding the Chinese for bringing this technological marvel to the world and criticizing the "west" for falling behind, perhaps we should be mindful of the fact that the only reason this is possible is because the Chinese government can walk up to your house, tell you it's no longer yours, and you have no recourse.  No concern for the environmental impact, human impact, long term impact, etc.  The Soviet Union's great technological leaps looked mind blowing at the time as well, and look where they are today.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Before we start lauding the Chinese for bringing this technological marvel to the world and criticizing the " west " for falling behind , perhaps we should be mindful of the fact that the only reason this is possible is because the Chinese government can walk up to your house , tell you it 's no longer yours , and you have no recourse .
No concern for the environmental impact , human impact , long term impact , etc .
The Soviet Union 's great technological leaps looked mind blowing at the time as well , and look where they are today .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Before we start lauding the Chinese for bringing this technological marvel to the world and criticizing the "west" for falling behind, perhaps we should be mindful of the fact that the only reason this is possible is because the Chinese government can walk up to your house, tell you it's no longer yours, and you have no recourse.
No concern for the environmental impact, human impact, long term impact, etc.
The Soviet Union's great technological leaps looked mind blowing at the time as well, and look where they are today.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575320</id>
	<title>Re:Nice</title>
	<author>Ouchie</author>
	<datestamp>1261992960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'd like to have a network of these in the US to replace our aging and slow rail passenger rail system.  At the very least, they are much more energy efficient than air travel.

One picky point with TFA... it suggests that the fast travel times of a high-speed rail network would not come with the security overhead of air travel.  I'm not so sure about that.</p></div><p>I tend to agree with you on several of these points.  Everytime I read something like this I ask myself, "Why not in the US." While the long distance would probably be a factor in the lack of transcontinental high speed rail but there is solid evidence to support regional high speed rail systems.</p><p>
The TFA has a point that you can't secure the rails but you can counter that with, 'you can't fly a train into the pentagon.'</p><p>If they implimented a high speed rail system to cover the densly populated northeast and great lakes regions and pass legislation to limit short hop flights you could reduce air trafic in the US by 25\%.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd like to have a network of these in the US to replace our aging and slow rail passenger rail system .
At the very least , they are much more energy efficient than air travel .
One picky point with TFA... it suggests that the fast travel times of a high-speed rail network would not come with the security overhead of air travel .
I 'm not so sure about that.I tend to agree with you on several of these points .
Everytime I read something like this I ask myself , " Why not in the US .
" While the long distance would probably be a factor in the lack of transcontinental high speed rail but there is solid evidence to support regional high speed rail systems .
The TFA has a point that you ca n't secure the rails but you can counter that with , 'you ca n't fly a train into the pentagon .
'If they implimented a high speed rail system to cover the densly populated northeast and great lakes regions and pass legislation to limit short hop flights you could reduce air trafic in the US by 25 \ % .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd like to have a network of these in the US to replace our aging and slow rail passenger rail system.
At the very least, they are much more energy efficient than air travel.
One picky point with TFA... it suggests that the fast travel times of a high-speed rail network would not come with the security overhead of air travel.
I'm not so sure about that.I tend to agree with you on several of these points.
Everytime I read something like this I ask myself, "Why not in the US.
" While the long distance would probably be a factor in the lack of transcontinental high speed rail but there is solid evidence to support regional high speed rail systems.
The TFA has a point that you can't secure the rails but you can counter that with, 'you can't fly a train into the pentagon.
'If they implimented a high speed rail system to cover the densly populated northeast and great lakes regions and pass legislation to limit short hop flights you could reduce air trafic in the US by 25\%.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574912</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575774</id>
	<title>Everything is made there anyways...</title>
	<author>jameskojiro</author>
	<datestamp>1261995420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And it surprises people they can build a train this quickly, all the parts were made in China so it is not like they had to wait weeks for certain parts to be shipped over to their country.   Plus anyone who delays the project quickly became an involuntary organ donor.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And it surprises people they can build a train this quickly , all the parts were made in China so it is not like they had to wait weeks for certain parts to be shipped over to their country .
Plus anyone who delays the project quickly became an involuntary organ donor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And it surprises people they can build a train this quickly, all the parts were made in China so it is not like they had to wait weeks for certain parts to be shipped over to their country.
Plus anyone who delays the project quickly became an involuntary organ donor.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577510</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it to have something like this in U</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262007000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hope your idea of putting high speed by airports never comes to pass.  In my view, there are three reasons rail is competitive in Europe but not the US: closer cities (on average), downtown stations vs outside city airports, and separate tracks from freight.  You would give up one of these advantages by locating them by the airport.  I agree that having a connector would be worthwhile, but you'd want these coming into union station, etc where you have good public transit hubs.  For cities lacking such a station, it would be worth building such as part of any urban renewal program.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope your idea of putting high speed by airports never comes to pass .
In my view , there are three reasons rail is competitive in Europe but not the US : closer cities ( on average ) , downtown stations vs outside city airports , and separate tracks from freight .
You would give up one of these advantages by locating them by the airport .
I agree that having a connector would be worthwhile , but you 'd want these coming into union station , etc where you have good public transit hubs .
For cities lacking such a station , it would be worth building such as part of any urban renewal program .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope your idea of putting high speed by airports never comes to pass.
In my view, there are three reasons rail is competitive in Europe but not the US: closer cities (on average), downtown stations vs outside city airports, and separate tracks from freight.
You would give up one of these advantages by locating them by the airport.
I agree that having a connector would be worthwhile, but you'd want these coming into union station, etc where you have good public transit hubs.
For cities lacking such a station, it would be worth building such as part of any urban renewal program.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575656</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575616</id>
	<title>That is the stopping distance.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261994700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The high speed brakes are under development<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The high speed brakes are under development : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The high speed brakes are under development :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575012</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it to have something like this in U</title>
	<author>Trepidity</author>
	<datestamp>1261991460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How "hard" is it is mainly a matter of spending money and ramming through the environmental permits, eminent domain seizures, and other such hurdles. China spent $20 billion on this, probably more like $30 billion at purchasing-power parity, and they also have a much larger supply of cheap labor (even cheap semi-skilled labor), and when the central government wants something done, bureaucratic hassles magically disappear.</p><p>Although they did also put it mainly on flat land. Some of our most promising city pairs with high traffic and strong local support for such a project are unfortunately in or separated by mountainous areas: LA-SF, Seattle-Portland, Atlanta-DC, etc.</p><p>We do have flat areas, like Chicago-Detroit and Chicago-StLouis, but they don't have quite that volume of travel, and no strong push.</p><p>Texas is occasionally actually seen as the best bet, with Dallas-Houston-Austin-San Antonio all fairly close (distances where rail is competitive over air) and separated by fairly flat land. However, Southwest has spent a lot of lobbying effort killing any attempts to put something like that in, since they do a lot of short-hop business out of their original Dallas hub.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How " hard " is it is mainly a matter of spending money and ramming through the environmental permits , eminent domain seizures , and other such hurdles .
China spent $ 20 billion on this , probably more like $ 30 billion at purchasing-power parity , and they also have a much larger supply of cheap labor ( even cheap semi-skilled labor ) , and when the central government wants something done , bureaucratic hassles magically disappear.Although they did also put it mainly on flat land .
Some of our most promising city pairs with high traffic and strong local support for such a project are unfortunately in or separated by mountainous areas : LA-SF , Seattle-Portland , Atlanta-DC , etc.We do have flat areas , like Chicago-Detroit and Chicago-StLouis , but they do n't have quite that volume of travel , and no strong push.Texas is occasionally actually seen as the best bet , with Dallas-Houston-Austin-San Antonio all fairly close ( distances where rail is competitive over air ) and separated by fairly flat land .
However , Southwest has spent a lot of lobbying effort killing any attempts to put something like that in , since they do a lot of short-hop business out of their original Dallas hub .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How "hard" is it is mainly a matter of spending money and ramming through the environmental permits, eminent domain seizures, and other such hurdles.
China spent $20 billion on this, probably more like $30 billion at purchasing-power parity, and they also have a much larger supply of cheap labor (even cheap semi-skilled labor), and when the central government wants something done, bureaucratic hassles magically disappear.Although they did also put it mainly on flat land.
Some of our most promising city pairs with high traffic and strong local support for such a project are unfortunately in or separated by mountainous areas: LA-SF, Seattle-Portland, Atlanta-DC, etc.We do have flat areas, like Chicago-Detroit and Chicago-StLouis, but they don't have quite that volume of travel, and no strong push.Texas is occasionally actually seen as the best bet, with Dallas-Houston-Austin-San Antonio all fairly close (distances where rail is competitive over air) and separated by fairly flat land.
However, Southwest has spent a lot of lobbying effort killing any attempts to put something like that in, since they do a lot of short-hop business out of their original Dallas hub.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574868</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575090</id>
	<title>Re:How hard is it to have something like this in U</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261991880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the northeast already has a nice rail system called LIRR/Metro-North and NJ Transit. It brings millions of people to work every day. too bad it's fairly expensive and very full at the moment. they are in the process of digging new tunnels to expand the number of trains they are able to run.</p><p>as for long distance rail, Amtrak is already unreliable. there is no reason to think that a new high speed train will be reliable and there is no benefit over flying. airports already have the infrastructure like rent a cars and public transportation that will have to be duplicated at a new high speed rail station.</p><p>for the speed it sounds nice, but that is not the entire way. i've traveled on the Eurostar in Italy and it took something like 20 minutes to slow down and speed up when entering and leaving big stations like Venezia, Roma and Fiorenze.</p><p>i also know someone that used to take the Acela from NYC to Boston for work years ago and it took like 3 hours each way. The Delta Shuttle was 1 hour. 90 minutes if you count getting to the airport early. back when we bought a competitor we used to fly to Boston in the morning and come back for dinner. if we took the train it would mean extra expenses in staying at a hotel</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the northeast already has a nice rail system called LIRR/Metro-North and NJ Transit .
It brings millions of people to work every day .
too bad it 's fairly expensive and very full at the moment .
they are in the process of digging new tunnels to expand the number of trains they are able to run.as for long distance rail , Amtrak is already unreliable .
there is no reason to think that a new high speed train will be reliable and there is no benefit over flying .
airports already have the infrastructure like rent a cars and public transportation that will have to be duplicated at a new high speed rail station.for the speed it sounds nice , but that is not the entire way .
i 've traveled on the Eurostar in Italy and it took something like 20 minutes to slow down and speed up when entering and leaving big stations like Venezia , Roma and Fiorenze.i also know someone that used to take the Acela from NYC to Boston for work years ago and it took like 3 hours each way .
The Delta Shuttle was 1 hour .
90 minutes if you count getting to the airport early .
back when we bought a competitor we used to fly to Boston in the morning and come back for dinner .
if we took the train it would mean extra expenses in staying at a hotel</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the northeast already has a nice rail system called LIRR/Metro-North and NJ Transit.
It brings millions of people to work every day.
too bad it's fairly expensive and very full at the moment.
they are in the process of digging new tunnels to expand the number of trains they are able to run.as for long distance rail, Amtrak is already unreliable.
there is no reason to think that a new high speed train will be reliable and there is no benefit over flying.
airports already have the infrastructure like rent a cars and public transportation that will have to be duplicated at a new high speed rail station.for the speed it sounds nice, but that is not the entire way.
i've traveled on the Eurostar in Italy and it took something like 20 minutes to slow down and speed up when entering and leaving big stations like Venezia, Roma and Fiorenze.i also know someone that used to take the Acela from NYC to Boston for work years ago and it took like 3 hours each way.
The Delta Shuttle was 1 hour.
90 minutes if you count getting to the airport early.
back when we bought a competitor we used to fly to Boston in the morning and come back for dinner.
if we took the train it would mean extra expenses in staying at a hotel</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574868</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576754</id>
	<title>Re:Fuel efficiency of this train vs airplane?</title>
	<author>SixAndFiftyThree</author>
	<datestamp>1262000940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Brad Templeton says it better than I can: <a href="http://www.templetons.com/brad/transit-myth.html" title="templetons.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.templetons.com/brad/transit-myth.html</a> [templetons.com]</p><p>I'm no more into knocking mass transit than he<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... was<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... but I can no more help manipulating numbers than I can help breathing, and the numbers show that mass transit works well where you have heavy population density, which most of the USA does not.  It works even better when you have low to moderate income and low car ownership, which most of China still has.</p><p>And since you don't ask, no, I'm not hoping to impoverish the USA so that mass transit becomes the optimal choice.  It'll happen anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Brad Templeton says it better than I can : http : //www.templetons.com/brad/transit-myth.html [ templetons.com ] I 'm no more into knocking mass transit than he ... was ... but I can no more help manipulating numbers than I can help breathing , and the numbers show that mass transit works well where you have heavy population density , which most of the USA does not .
It works even better when you have low to moderate income and low car ownership , which most of China still has.And since you do n't ask , no , I 'm not hoping to impoverish the USA so that mass transit becomes the optimal choice .
It 'll happen anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Brad Templeton says it better than I can: http://www.templetons.com/brad/transit-myth.html [templetons.com]I'm no more into knocking mass transit than he ... was ... but I can no more help manipulating numbers than I can help breathing, and the numbers show that mass transit works well where you have heavy population density, which most of the USA does not.
It works even better when you have low to moderate income and low car ownership, which most of China still has.And since you don't ask, no, I'm not hoping to impoverish the USA so that mass transit becomes the optimal choice.
It'll happen anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30582870</id>
	<title>Re:245mph max speed? Not so impressive</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262107260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, but one of the interesting things about this Chinese train is the small difference in speeds between the top test speed and everyday running speed -- 394 km/h vs 347 km/hr, whereas for the French TGV, the test track speeds were in excess of 500 km/h while they average only about 277 km/hr (peak around 300 km/h during a journey). This is amazing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , but one of the interesting things about this Chinese train is the small difference in speeds between the top test speed and everyday running speed -- 394 km/h vs 347 km/hr , whereas for the French TGV , the test track speeds were in excess of 500 km/h while they average only about 277 km/hr ( peak around 300 km/h during a journey ) .
This is amazing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, but one of the interesting things about this Chinese train is the small difference in speeds between the top test speed and everyday running speed -- 394 km/h vs 347 km/hr, whereas for the French TGV, the test track speeds were in excess of 500 km/h while they average only about 277 km/hr (peak around 300 km/h during a journey).
This is amazing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576764</id>
	<title>Military use</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262001060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd imagine such an awesome network of high speed trains would be invaluable for transporting goods during war time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd imagine such an awesome network of high speed trains would be invaluable for transporting goods during war time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd imagine such an awesome network of high speed trains would be invaluable for transporting goods during war time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578360</id>
	<title>Re:Pennies</title>
	<author>petermgreen</author>
	<datestamp>1262013360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd bet the penny gets crushed beyond recontion and very little happens to the train.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd bet the penny gets crushed beyond recontion and very little happens to the train .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd bet the penny gets crushed beyond recontion and very little happens to the train.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575472</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30579514</id>
	<title>Re:China debuts human rights abuses</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262025840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nobody, least of all you, is going to read this, but... yeah, and the USA is a great holy land where all humans are treated decently? FUCK YOU! Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, secret prisons and renditions of innocent people? Oh wait, they were dirty brown people, they deserve to be treated less, right? No they don't, FUCK YOU!</p><p>For some reason I nowadays root for the US to fail. I don't know why, maybe it's because they scream and yell about human rights and democracy while in private they torture people. At least China doesn't scream that it's a nation that respects human rights...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nobody , least of all you , is going to read this , but... yeah , and the USA is a great holy land where all humans are treated decently ?
FUCK YOU !
Abu Ghraib , Guantanamo , secret prisons and renditions of innocent people ?
Oh wait , they were dirty brown people , they deserve to be treated less , right ?
No they do n't , FUCK YOU ! For some reason I nowadays root for the US to fail .
I do n't know why , maybe it 's because they scream and yell about human rights and democracy while in private they torture people .
At least China does n't scream that it 's a nation that respects human rights.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nobody, least of all you, is going to read this, but... yeah, and the USA is a great holy land where all humans are treated decently?
FUCK YOU!
Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, secret prisons and renditions of innocent people?
Oh wait, they were dirty brown people, they deserve to be treated less, right?
No they don't, FUCK YOU!For some reason I nowadays root for the US to fail.
I don't know why, maybe it's because they scream and yell about human rights and democracy while in private they torture people.
At least China doesn't scream that it's a nation that respects human rights...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574802</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575814</id>
	<title>Re:Pennies</title>
	<author>nsayer</author>
	<datestamp>1261995540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>High speed rail should, in general, be grade separated and fenced in to avoid such hijinks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>High speed rail should , in general , be grade separated and fenced in to avoid such hijinks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>High speed rail should, in general, be grade separated and fenced in to avoid such hijinks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575472</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576274</id>
	<title>infrastructure duplication</title>
	<author>r00t</author>
	<datestamp>1261997760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>airports already have the infrastructure like rent a cars and public transportation that will have to be duplicated at a new high speed rail station.</p></div><p>The train station also needs a runway so that I can transfer from train to airplane. Hey, wait...</p><p>The damn obvious thing is to give the airport some extra gates dedicated to train service. People could walk between train and airplane without passing through security and without messing with checked baggage.</p><p>Code sharing is important too. I should be able to book a trip through any airline and get offered routes that involve a train. I should be getting frequent flyer miles when I do that.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>airports already have the infrastructure like rent a cars and public transportation that will have to be duplicated at a new high speed rail station.The train station also needs a runway so that I can transfer from train to airplane .
Hey , wait...The damn obvious thing is to give the airport some extra gates dedicated to train service .
People could walk between train and airplane without passing through security and without messing with checked baggage.Code sharing is important too .
I should be able to book a trip through any airline and get offered routes that involve a train .
I should be getting frequent flyer miles when I do that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>airports already have the infrastructure like rent a cars and public transportation that will have to be duplicated at a new high speed rail station.The train station also needs a runway so that I can transfer from train to airplane.
Hey, wait...The damn obvious thing is to give the airport some extra gates dedicated to train service.
People could walk between train and airplane without passing through security and without messing with checked baggage.Code sharing is important too.
I should be able to book a trip through any airline and get offered routes that involve a train.
I should be getting frequent flyer miles when I do that.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575090</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577684</id>
	<title>Re:Why not in the US?</title>
	<author>dkf</author>
	<datestamp>1262008200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Federal rail regulations being what they are, the only prospect for high speed rail is if the entire system is grade separated - that is, there are no at-grade crossings.</p></div><p>Experience with high-speed rail in Europe indicates that you really don't want at-grade crossings. They're just massively dangerous, especially with trains going at over 200kph. You also want to put stout fencing around the line to keep out vehicles that aren't supposed to be there in order to prevent <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selby\_rail\_crash" title="wikipedia.org">accidents</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Federal rail regulations being what they are , the only prospect for high speed rail is if the entire system is grade separated - that is , there are no at-grade crossings.Experience with high-speed rail in Europe indicates that you really do n't want at-grade crossings .
They 're just massively dangerous , especially with trains going at over 200kph .
You also want to put stout fencing around the line to keep out vehicles that are n't supposed to be there in order to prevent accidents [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Federal rail regulations being what they are, the only prospect for high speed rail is if the entire system is grade separated - that is, there are no at-grade crossings.Experience with high-speed rail in Europe indicates that you really don't want at-grade crossings.
They're just massively dangerous, especially with trains going at over 200kph.
You also want to put stout fencing around the line to keep out vehicles that aren't supposed to be there in order to prevent accidents [wikipedia.org].
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575878</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578508</id>
	<title>Is the Siemens train still using</title>
	<author>Nicolas MONNET</author>
	<datestamp>1262014620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>bogies on each side of every wagon, instead of having just one in between two wagons like on the TGV?</p><p>Looking at a derailed TGV vs a derailed ICE makes me wonder about that 350 km/h figure.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>bogies on each side of every wagon , instead of having just one in between two wagons like on the TGV ? Looking at a derailed TGV vs a derailed ICE makes me wonder about that 350 km/h figure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>bogies on each side of every wagon, instead of having just one in between two wagons like on the TGV?Looking at a derailed TGV vs a derailed ICE makes me wonder about that 350 km/h figure.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576952</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30629342</id>
	<title>Re:Big Picture: this is no surprise at all</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1230918600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And China has some major demographic issues, owing to the one-child policy. Because of sex-selective abortions (more people prefer boys to girls) an entire cohort has just hit their twenties where there are about twenty percent more males than females. Think about it: twenty percent that cannot, by definition, marry and settle down. And since marriage typically civilizes men, China will either end up with a rather large and unruly bunch of unattached young males running around -- not exactly a recipe for regional stability, assuming most of them move to cities -- or they'll have to be dealt with in some other fashion. Emigration is one possibility, so other countries could wind up benefiting significantly from whatever percentage of that cohort is well-educated and/or technically skilled.</p><p>China has its fair share of problems; its dominance of the 21st century is by no means assured. I wouldn't be blas&#233; about their power and influence, but one should exaggerate either.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And China has some major demographic issues , owing to the one-child policy .
Because of sex-selective abortions ( more people prefer boys to girls ) an entire cohort has just hit their twenties where there are about twenty percent more males than females .
Think about it : twenty percent that can not , by definition , marry and settle down .
And since marriage typically civilizes men , China will either end up with a rather large and unruly bunch of unattached young males running around -- not exactly a recipe for regional stability , assuming most of them move to cities -- or they 'll have to be dealt with in some other fashion .
Emigration is one possibility , so other countries could wind up benefiting significantly from whatever percentage of that cohort is well-educated and/or technically skilled.China has its fair share of problems ; its dominance of the 21st century is by no means assured .
I would n't be blas   about their power and influence , but one should exaggerate either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And China has some major demographic issues, owing to the one-child policy.
Because of sex-selective abortions (more people prefer boys to girls) an entire cohort has just hit their twenties where there are about twenty percent more males than females.
Think about it: twenty percent that cannot, by definition, marry and settle down.
And since marriage typically civilizes men, China will either end up with a rather large and unruly bunch of unattached young males running around -- not exactly a recipe for regional stability, assuming most of them move to cities -- or they'll have to be dealt with in some other fashion.
Emigration is one possibility, so other countries could wind up benefiting significantly from whatever percentage of that cohort is well-educated and/or technically skilled.China has its fair share of problems; its dominance of the 21st century is by no means assured.
I wouldn't be blasé about their power and influence, but one should exaggerate either.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578988</id>
	<title>Re:Why not in the US?</title>
	<author>WuphonsReach</author>
	<datestamp>1262019960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Interestate 795 (the Northwest Expressway) outside of Baltimore, MD did this.  But not for high-speed rail (which requires things to be too straight).  They did it as part of the Baltimore subway system.  The tracks run between the two sections of highway, including a station out at Owings Mills being placed between the two sides.<br>
<br>
The major downside from the point-of-view of the passengers... putting your station in the middle of a divided highway means that it's already 25-50 meters away from any useful destination.  That station could have been located a lot closer to the Owings Mills mall (just west of the station).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Interestate 795 ( the Northwest Expressway ) outside of Baltimore , MD did this .
But not for high-speed rail ( which requires things to be too straight ) .
They did it as part of the Baltimore subway system .
The tracks run between the two sections of highway , including a station out at Owings Mills being placed between the two sides .
The major downside from the point-of-view of the passengers... putting your station in the middle of a divided highway means that it 's already 25-50 meters away from any useful destination .
That station could have been located a lot closer to the Owings Mills mall ( just west of the station ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interestate 795 (the Northwest Expressway) outside of Baltimore, MD did this.
But not for high-speed rail (which requires things to be too straight).
They did it as part of the Baltimore subway system.
The tracks run between the two sections of highway, including a station out at Owings Mills being placed between the two sides.
The major downside from the point-of-view of the passengers... putting your station in the middle of a divided highway means that it's already 25-50 meters away from any useful destination.
That station could have been located a lot closer to the Owings Mills mall (just west of the station).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576854</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575312</id>
	<title>Dictartorship = Effciency</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261992960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Once again proved that our natives are more superior than yours. Time to wipe out the white-man based Euro-centric NWO.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Once again proved that our natives are more superior than yours .
Time to wipe out the white-man based Euro-centric NWO .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Once again proved that our natives are more superior than yours.
Time to wipe out the white-man based Euro-centric NWO.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574868</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575382</id>
	<title>America Fuck Yeah !!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261993200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Another first For American Can do - Oh wait<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Another first For American Can do - Oh wait ... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another first For American Can do - Oh wait ....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30580272</id>
	<title>Re:Fuel efficiency of this train vs airplane?</title>
	<author>fishexe</author>
	<datestamp>1262081640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The trouble is a project of that size usually requires some level of state/federal organisation or funding to secure the necessary investment from private funding and the power to buy the land.  Which in the USA seems to cause foaming at the mouth and long rants about the evils of communism.</p></div><p>
Gosh, that high-speed rail, robust economy, and strengthening currency the red Chinese have sure are <b> <i>evil.</i> </b></p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The trouble is a project of that size usually requires some level of state/federal organisation or funding to secure the necessary investment from private funding and the power to buy the land .
Which in the USA seems to cause foaming at the mouth and long rants about the evils of communism .
Gosh , that high-speed rail , robust economy , and strengthening currency the red Chinese have sure are evil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The trouble is a project of that size usually requires some level of state/federal organisation or funding to secure the necessary investment from private funding and the power to buy the land.
Which in the USA seems to cause foaming at the mouth and long rants about the evils of communism.
Gosh, that high-speed rail, robust economy, and strengthening currency the red Chinese have sure are  evil. 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575748</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578054</id>
	<title>Good for China !</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262011140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Then all best wishes for China !</p><p>Unlike USA, China don't waste their money to feed those useless Africans.</p><p>Unlike USA, China don't waste their money to feed those usless Moslems in Pakistan, Bangladesh.</p><p>Unlike USA, China rather spend their money to beef up their country.</p><p>And this should be the priority for any government, right?</p><p>How come the US government isn't doing what it should have been doing?</p><p>Why is the US government wasting the tax money on the Africans, the Moslems, and so on?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Then all best wishes for China ! Unlike USA , China do n't waste their money to feed those useless Africans.Unlike USA , China do n't waste their money to feed those usless Moslems in Pakistan , Bangladesh.Unlike USA , China rather spend their money to beef up their country.And this should be the priority for any government , right ? How come the US government is n't doing what it should have been doing ? Why is the US government wasting the tax money on the Africans , the Moslems , and so on ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then all best wishes for China !Unlike USA, China don't waste their money to feed those useless Africans.Unlike USA, China don't waste their money to feed those usless Moslems in Pakistan, Bangladesh.Unlike USA, China rather spend their money to beef up their country.And this should be the priority for any government, right?How come the US government isn't doing what it should have been doing?Why is the US government wasting the tax money on the Africans, the Moslems, and so on?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575056</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575074</id>
	<title>Re:Pearl River Delta??</title>
	<author>sconeu</author>
	<datestamp>1261991820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The river got outsourced.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The river got outsourced .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The river got outsourced.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577648</id>
	<title>Re:China's Achievements</title>
	<author>AlbertKnox</author>
	<datestamp>1262008020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe if the US stopped to sending so many people and resources into battlefields, then there would be some left for upgrading infrastructure.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe if the US stopped to sending so many people and resources into battlefields , then there would be some left for upgrading infrastructure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe if the US stopped to sending so many people and resources into battlefields, then there would be some left for upgrading infrastructure.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575028</id>
	<title>Yup</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261991580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I first thought "Oh, come on. I am european too but it isn't that difficult to use google calculator for instant answer: <a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=217+miles+to+kilometres" title="google.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.google.com/search?q=217+miles+to+kilometres</a> [google.com]. You are just being rediculous now."</p><p>Then I looked at TFA (sorry, guys). It actually has the next paragraph:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Averaging 217 mph (350 km/h), the new train is faster than a speeding bullet train, and will link Wuhan in central China to Guangzhou in the south, covering a total distance of 663 miles (1,068 km). The new rail service will cut the travel time between the cities from over 6 hours down to 2 hours and 45 minutes</p></div><p>As it was already mentioned in TFA, the submitter could have just... not decided to leave it out. Hell, he could have just used that paragraph.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I first thought " Oh , come on .
I am european too but it is n't that difficult to use google calculator for instant answer : http : //www.google.com/search ? q = 217 + miles + to + kilometres [ google.com ] .
You are just being rediculous now .
" Then I looked at TFA ( sorry , guys ) .
It actually has the next paragraph : Averaging 217 mph ( 350 km/h ) , the new train is faster than a speeding bullet train , and will link Wuhan in central China to Guangzhou in the south , covering a total distance of 663 miles ( 1,068 km ) .
The new rail service will cut the travel time between the cities from over 6 hours down to 2 hours and 45 minutesAs it was already mentioned in TFA , the submitter could have just... not decided to leave it out .
Hell , he could have just used that paragraph .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I first thought "Oh, come on.
I am european too but it isn't that difficult to use google calculator for instant answer: http://www.google.com/search?q=217+miles+to+kilometres [google.com].
You are just being rediculous now.
"Then I looked at TFA (sorry, guys).
It actually has the next paragraph:Averaging 217 mph (350 km/h), the new train is faster than a speeding bullet train, and will link Wuhan in central China to Guangzhou in the south, covering a total distance of 663 miles (1,068 km).
The new rail service will cut the travel time between the cities from over 6 hours down to 2 hours and 45 minutesAs it was already mentioned in TFA, the submitter could have just... not decided to leave it out.
Hell, he could have just used that paragraph.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574820</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576870</id>
	<title>China allready got worlds fastest train...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262001720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>AFAIK they got a transrapid in China which is quite faster than this, from http://transrapid.com/ : "With an operating speed of 430 km/h, it travels on a 30-kilometer-long double-track guideway, connecting Long Yang Road Station in Shanghai to Pudong International Airport. The journey time is just under eight minutes. Three Transrapid vehicles, each with five sections, make up the maglev fleet. Until the end of 2008 over 17 million passengers have glided to the airport." The 430 km/h is not even near Transrapids max. speed (usually estimated to about 700 km/h).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>AFAIK they got a transrapid in China which is quite faster than this , from http : //transrapid.com/ : " With an operating speed of 430 km/h , it travels on a 30-kilometer-long double-track guideway , connecting Long Yang Road Station in Shanghai to Pudong International Airport .
The journey time is just under eight minutes .
Three Transrapid vehicles , each with five sections , make up the maglev fleet .
Until the end of 2008 over 17 million passengers have glided to the airport .
" The 430 km/h is not even near Transrapids max .
speed ( usually estimated to about 700 km/h ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>AFAIK they got a transrapid in China which is quite faster than this, from http://transrapid.com/ : "With an operating speed of 430 km/h, it travels on a 30-kilometer-long double-track guideway, connecting Long Yang Road Station in Shanghai to Pudong International Airport.
The journey time is just under eight minutes.
Three Transrapid vehicles, each with five sections, make up the maglev fleet.
Until the end of 2008 over 17 million passengers have glided to the airport.
" The 430 km/h is not even near Transrapids max.
speed (usually estimated to about 700 km/h).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30581752</id>
	<title>Re:China debuts human rights abuses</title>
	<author>RobertM1968</author>
	<datestamp>1262100480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>China debuts human rights abuses   </p><p>let's glorify them!</p></div><p>Irrelevant - <b>condemn</b> them for their human rights abuses (and learn from it) and learn from their triumphs (such as this addition to their mass transit system).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>China debuts human rights abuses let 's glorify them ! Irrelevant - condemn them for their human rights abuses ( and learn from it ) and learn from their triumphs ( such as this addition to their mass transit system ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>China debuts human rights abuses   let's glorify them!Irrelevant - condemn them for their human rights abuses (and learn from it) and learn from their triumphs (such as this addition to their mass transit system).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574802</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576056
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576490
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_97</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575152
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578196
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575312
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_91</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575748
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30580272
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576186
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578122
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575616
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577762
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30582870
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575090
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575296
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575090
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575656
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577510
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30580494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578188
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576258
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575710
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_96</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30588038
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576718
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576952
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30581174
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576232
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_90</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575064
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574802
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575150
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30581588
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577826
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576084
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575682
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574802
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30579514
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574946
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577702
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578054
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577006
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574962
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575586
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30587422
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576050
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577540
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577356
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575090
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575482
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577684
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575090
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576274
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574802
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30581752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575788
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30579384
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577174
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575954
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575342
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576062
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575090
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575656
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30579080
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578864
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575652
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576754
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575608
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575108
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577608
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_95</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577848
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574820
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575028
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30584672
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30629342
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30584530
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577408
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574984
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575890
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578102
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578778
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575814
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575630
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_92</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30580650
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_94</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577586
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30579630
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576952
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30580524
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575788
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577790
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_93</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578450
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576276
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30586262
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578586
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576538
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30582890
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576548
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574964
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574962
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575974
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575144
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578988
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575748
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577032
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30586216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574802
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578528
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575950
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578130
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30580354
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574962
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575266
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574926
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575978
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575394
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575676
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30581106
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578136
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_28_1613237_98</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_1613237.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575878
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578130
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576854
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577608
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578988
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578136
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577684
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577356
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577762
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_1613237.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575148
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575394
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30629342
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30579630
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577586
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575954
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576056
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578864
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577174
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_1613237.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574802
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30579514
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30581752
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575150
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578528
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_1613237.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574868
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576258
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575012
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576050
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577068
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575710
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30580650
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575974
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576232
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575090
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575656
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577510
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30579080
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575482
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575296
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576274
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575064
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575312
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577848
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574946
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574964
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574962
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575266
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575586
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575712
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_1613237.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575774
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_1613237.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574864
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576718
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576276
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577540
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_1613237.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575788
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577790
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30579384
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_1613237.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574912
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575670
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576084
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576548
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575320
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577702
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576186
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576062
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575108
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575342
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576490
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576538
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30582890
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575298
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575676
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30581106
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575652
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_1613237.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575472
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575630
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575950
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578360
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575814
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_1613237.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575310
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577408
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575608
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578102
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575978
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30581588
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577006
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575748
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30580272
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577032
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576754
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30587422
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_1613237.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574820
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575028
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_1613237.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576952
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578508
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30581174
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30580524
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_1613237.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574870
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574914
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575144
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574948
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574926
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578778
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30584530
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30580494
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575152
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30582870
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_1613237.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575588
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30584672
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578196
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30586262
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30588038
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578122
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577826
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578188
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30577648
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_1613237.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575912
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_1613237.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575816
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_1613237.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30576870
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_1613237.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575056
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578450
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578054
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30586216
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_1613237.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574844
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30578586
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30580354
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575616
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575682
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575074
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_28_1613237.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30574984
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_28_1613237.30575890
</commentlist>
</conversation>
