<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_10_1854211</id>
	<title>Tech Tools Fostering "Mini Generation Gaps"</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1263151620000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://hughpickens.com/" rel="nofollow">Hugh Pickens</a> writes <i>"The NY Times has an interesting report on <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/10/weekinreview/10stone.html">the iGeneration, born in the '90s and this decade, comparing them to the Net Generation, born in the 1980s</a>. The Net Generation spend two hours a day talking on the phone and still use e-mail frequently while the iGeneration &mdash; conceivably their younger siblings &mdash; spends considerably more time texting than talking on the phone, pays less attention to television than the older group, and tends to communicate more over instant-messenger networks. 'People two, three or four years apart are having completely different experiences with technology,' says Lee Rainie, director of the Pew Research Center's Internet and American Life Project. 'College students scratch their heads at what their high school siblings are doing, and they scratch their heads at their younger siblings. It has sped up generational differences.' Dr. Larry Rosen, a professor of psychology at California State University, says that the iGeneration, unlike their older peers, expect an instant response from everyone they communicate with, and don't have the patience for anything less. 'They'll want their teachers and professors to respond to them immediately, and they will expect instantaneous access to everyone, because after all, that is the experience they have growing up,' says Rosen."</i> Read below for another intra-generational wrinkle.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hugh Pickens writes " The NY Times has an interesting report on the iGeneration , born in the '90s and this decade , comparing them to the Net Generation , born in the 1980s .
The Net Generation spend two hours a day talking on the phone and still use e-mail frequently while the iGeneration    conceivably their younger siblings    spends considerably more time texting than talking on the phone , pays less attention to television than the older group , and tends to communicate more over instant-messenger networks .
'People two , three or four years apart are having completely different experiences with technology, ' says Lee Rainie , director of the Pew Research Center 's Internet and American Life Project .
'College students scratch their heads at what their high school siblings are doing , and they scratch their heads at their younger siblings .
It has sped up generational differences .
' Dr. Larry Rosen , a professor of psychology at California State University , says that the iGeneration , unlike their older peers , expect an instant response from everyone they communicate with , and do n't have the patience for anything less .
'They 'll want their teachers and professors to respond to them immediately , and they will expect instantaneous access to everyone , because after all , that is the experience they have growing up, ' says Rosen .
" Read below for another intra-generational wrinkle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hugh Pickens writes "The NY Times has an interesting report on the iGeneration, born in the '90s and this decade, comparing them to the Net Generation, born in the 1980s.
The Net Generation spend two hours a day talking on the phone and still use e-mail frequently while the iGeneration — conceivably their younger siblings — spends considerably more time texting than talking on the phone, pays less attention to television than the older group, and tends to communicate more over instant-messenger networks.
'People two, three or four years apart are having completely different experiences with technology,' says Lee Rainie, director of the Pew Research Center's Internet and American Life Project.
'College students scratch their heads at what their high school siblings are doing, and they scratch their heads at their younger siblings.
It has sped up generational differences.
' Dr. Larry Rosen, a professor of psychology at California State University, says that the iGeneration, unlike their older peers, expect an instant response from everyone they communicate with, and don't have the patience for anything less.
'They'll want their teachers and professors to respond to them immediately, and they will expect instantaneous access to everyone, because after all, that is the experience they have growing up,' says Rosen.
" Read below for another intra-generational wrinkle.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30813602</id>
	<title>No difference between these technologies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263814200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is no difference between SMS and email. They are both text messages send async. Even the phone is often a voice message sent async via voicemail/answering machines. Unless you are famous, there is little difference between twitter, SMS-to-a-list-of-friends and a facebook update and a old fashioned telelphone tree.</p><p>Sure, digital technology has made it easy to send lots of messages at once, but since it did that there is little difference between the various wrappers it comes in.</p><p>Some people are social and like to send lots of message, the form doesn't really matter. Some don't. Big news, teenagers are more social than old people, on average.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no difference between SMS and email .
They are both text messages send async .
Even the phone is often a voice message sent async via voicemail/answering machines .
Unless you are famous , there is little difference between twitter , SMS-to-a-list-of-friends and a facebook update and a old fashioned telelphone tree.Sure , digital technology has made it easy to send lots of messages at once , but since it did that there is little difference between the various wrappers it comes in.Some people are social and like to send lots of message , the form does n't really matter .
Some do n't .
Big news , teenagers are more social than old people , on average .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no difference between SMS and email.
They are both text messages send async.
Even the phone is often a voice message sent async via voicemail/answering machines.
Unless you are famous, there is little difference between twitter, SMS-to-a-list-of-friends and a facebook update and a old fashioned telelphone tree.Sure, digital technology has made it easy to send lots of messages at once, but since it did that there is little difference between the various wrappers it comes in.Some people are social and like to send lots of message, the form doesn't really matter.
Some don't.
Big news, teenagers are more social than old people, on average.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30721066</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263205860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I've been using computers since 1979<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... been using BBS's since the first computer I owned<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... first bunch of people to actually use the Internet<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I regularly text, IM, use Facebook, read blogs, etc<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... accessing all my stuff from my phone<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></div><p>Okay, okay, I'll get off your lawn now!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been using computers since 1979 ... been using BBS 's since the first computer I owned ... first bunch of people to actually use the Internet ... I regularly text , IM , use Facebook , read blogs , etc ... accessing all my stuff from my phone ...Okay , okay , I 'll get off your lawn now !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been using computers since 1979 ... been using BBS's since the first computer I owned ... first bunch of people to actually use the Internet ... I regularly text, IM, use Facebook, read blogs, etc ... accessing all my stuff from my phone ...Okay, okay, I'll get off your lawn now!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716462</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30718596</id>
	<title>Extrapolated a whole generation from his 2-yr-old</title>
	<author>petes\_PoV</author>
	<datestamp>1263129180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Basically he's observed his family members (and some friends children) and assumed therefore that every child does or will behave like that.
<p>I've got to say, this sort of behaviour just reinforces the common view of psychology as mostly worthless generalisations and unsupported theory.
</p><p>
WHERE ARE THE NUMBERS?
<br>Let's see a proper study, using statistically valid numbers of subjects - taken from all races, creeds, famiily backgrounds and nationalities. Then there's be something worth discussing. Until then this is just a "aren't my children are wonderful" monolog. Boring.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Basically he 's observed his family members ( and some friends children ) and assumed therefore that every child does or will behave like that .
I 've got to say , this sort of behaviour just reinforces the common view of psychology as mostly worthless generalisations and unsupported theory .
WHERE ARE THE NUMBERS ?
Let 's see a proper study , using statistically valid numbers of subjects - taken from all races , creeds , famiily backgrounds and nationalities .
Then there 's be something worth discussing .
Until then this is just a " are n't my children are wonderful " monolog .
Boring .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Basically he's observed his family members (and some friends children) and assumed therefore that every child does or will behave like that.
I've got to say, this sort of behaviour just reinforces the common view of psychology as mostly worthless generalisations and unsupported theory.
WHERE ARE THE NUMBERS?
Let's see a proper study, using statistically valid numbers of subjects - taken from all races, creeds, famiily backgrounds and nationalities.
Then there's be something worth discussing.
Until then this is just a "aren't my children are wonderful" monolog.
Boring.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716618</id>
	<title>Stop the worries - it's pathetic</title>
	<author>el\_jake</author>
	<datestamp>1263115320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>For the last 1000 years old farts like myself have had there worries about the youngsters and new technology. Please stop the worries, there is no need to be worried about our fine young generation. Every generation will go one step further up the evolution ladder, and old farts like my self should stop the we-are-so-worried-because-they-do-things-differently crap and go back to our chess boards, old Spiderman magazines or Commodore 64 emulators and just STFU.</htmltext>
<tokenext>For the last 1000 years old farts like myself have had there worries about the youngsters and new technology .
Please stop the worries , there is no need to be worried about our fine young generation .
Every generation will go one step further up the evolution ladder , and old farts like my self should stop the we-are-so-worried-because-they-do-things-differently crap and go back to our chess boards , old Spiderman magazines or Commodore 64 emulators and just STFU .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For the last 1000 years old farts like myself have had there worries about the youngsters and new technology.
Please stop the worries, there is no need to be worried about our fine young generation.
Every generation will go one step further up the evolution ladder, and old farts like my self should stop the we-are-so-worried-because-they-do-things-differently crap and go back to our chess boards, old Spiderman magazines or Commodore 64 emulators and just STFU.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717014</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>noidentity</author>
	<datestamp>1263118140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>For work issues, I don't even answer email immediately, because I have no intention of serving as a brain trust for people who will not think. I let them age. The more I get from a single source the more I let them age.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>I like this model, and I can't help but thinking of the password entry screens that work like this. Mistyped your password the first time? OK, wait a couple of seconds and you can try again. Mistyped again?!? Wait a minute. Not this again, wait an hour luser.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For work issues , I do n't even answer email immediately , because I have no intention of serving as a brain trust for people who will not think .
I let them age .
The more I get from a single source the more I let them age .
I like this model , and I ca n't help but thinking of the password entry screens that work like this .
Mistyped your password the first time ?
OK , wait a couple of seconds and you can try again .
Mistyped again ? ! ?
Wait a minute .
Not this again , wait an hour luser .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For work issues, I don't even answer email immediately, because I have no intention of serving as a brain trust for people who will not think.
I let them age.
The more I get from a single source the more I let them age.
I like this model, and I can't help but thinking of the password entry screens that work like this.
Mistyped your password the first time?
OK, wait a couple of seconds and you can try again.
Mistyped again?!?
Wait a minute.
Not this again, wait an hour luser.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30723594</id>
	<title>Re:The lack of attention span is certainly true!</title>
	<author>CrackedButter</author>
	<datestamp>1263227640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Homer Simpson: "30 seconds, awwww, but I want it now."</htmltext>
<tokenext>Homer Simpson : " 30 seconds , awwww , but I want it now .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Homer Simpson: "30 seconds, awwww, but I want it now.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716326</id>
	<title>Multi-tasking?</title>
	<author>Anonymous Cowar</author>
	<datestamp>1263156480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>They're still doing one thing concurrently with X others. Just because they all have iphones and can switch back and forth between facebook, texting, and music doesn't mean that they've magically gained the ability to do 3 things when we just used to "talk on the phone" with the radio on. They're still using the phone. <br> <br>Maybe I'm wierd, but if I am talking to someone, it uses 100\% of my wetware. I have to turn off the TV, ignore the computer, and stop having IM conversations. However, I can routinely have IRC open with a flowing conversation, several IM windows open, browse the net, read slashdot, and be watching discovery channel, as long as the vocalization center of my brain is not engaged. That may account for the rise in "multi-tasking" seen across generations as speaking is such an inefficient (in terms of resource usage per task) means of conveying information.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're still doing one thing concurrently with X others .
Just because they all have iphones and can switch back and forth between facebook , texting , and music does n't mean that they 've magically gained the ability to do 3 things when we just used to " talk on the phone " with the radio on .
They 're still using the phone .
Maybe I 'm wierd , but if I am talking to someone , it uses 100 \ % of my wetware .
I have to turn off the TV , ignore the computer , and stop having IM conversations .
However , I can routinely have IRC open with a flowing conversation , several IM windows open , browse the net , read slashdot , and be watching discovery channel , as long as the vocalization center of my brain is not engaged .
That may account for the rise in " multi-tasking " seen across generations as speaking is such an inefficient ( in terms of resource usage per task ) means of conveying information .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're still doing one thing concurrently with X others.
Just because they all have iphones and can switch back and forth between facebook, texting, and music doesn't mean that they've magically gained the ability to do 3 things when we just used to "talk on the phone" with the radio on.
They're still using the phone.
Maybe I'm wierd, but if I am talking to someone, it uses 100\% of my wetware.
I have to turn off the TV, ignore the computer, and stop having IM conversations.
However, I can routinely have IRC open with a flowing conversation, several IM windows open, browse the net, read slashdot, and be watching discovery channel, as long as the vocalization center of my brain is not engaged.
That may account for the rise in "multi-tasking" seen across generations as speaking is such an inefficient (in terms of resource usage per task) means of conveying information.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30725314</id>
	<title>Re:It was better in the old days...</title>
	<author>BJ\_Covert\_Action</author>
	<datestamp>1263235140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Sometimes the younger generations ARE wrong. I think the problem is these technologies are fad technologies and the people making them popular haven't outgrown them yet.</p></div><p>
I think that you hit the nail on the head right there as to why this really isn't some kind of social crisis. These technologies, so far as I can tell, really are just fad technologies. I recall when Myspace was first introduced friggin' EVERYONE ran out, signed up, put a bunch of flashy hearts and mini hot rod icons on their page, and obsessed over that website for the next year and a half. Then facebook came along. Same general migration and adoption, less flashy hearts (those were eventually replaced with starving farm animals and who-bit-who updates regarding vampire games). I recall my first year of college how every student was on facebook. If you weren't then you missed out on a lot of party invites and what not. These days, facebook seems to be used more as a crap-gaming platform than an organizing event. For that, people seem more prone to text and/or twitter. So the moral of the story? These really are just fads I think. Fads that wear out after a year or two.
<br> <br>
Hell, right now I am watching folk my age (just entering the workplace out of college) starting to place a lot more value on time together at a pub or Starbucks rather than chatting on facebook or MSN. The funniest part of this migration is that after ~4 years of socializing through proxy technologies, socializing real time tends to be incredibly awkward (honestly, watching folk try to strike up conversation is downright hilarious as it takes a question-answer form like an IM conversation...I am just itching to see someone say, "ASL" to someone in real like). Nonetheless, folk are learning. I think people my age are starting to revalue the face-face interaction, but, just like the migration from myspace to facebook, the migration from facebook to the pub might be a bit slow and awkward and some die-hards might get left behind. In the end, while the article is an interesting discussion, I really think that both generations, iGeneration and Net Generation, are going to turn out just fine. They are just going to take some interesting and rather amusing paths to get there.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sometimes the younger generations ARE wrong .
I think the problem is these technologies are fad technologies and the people making them popular have n't outgrown them yet .
I think that you hit the nail on the head right there as to why this really is n't some kind of social crisis .
These technologies , so far as I can tell , really are just fad technologies .
I recall when Myspace was first introduced friggin ' EVERYONE ran out , signed up , put a bunch of flashy hearts and mini hot rod icons on their page , and obsessed over that website for the next year and a half .
Then facebook came along .
Same general migration and adoption , less flashy hearts ( those were eventually replaced with starving farm animals and who-bit-who updates regarding vampire games ) .
I recall my first year of college how every student was on facebook .
If you were n't then you missed out on a lot of party invites and what not .
These days , facebook seems to be used more as a crap-gaming platform than an organizing event .
For that , people seem more prone to text and/or twitter .
So the moral of the story ?
These really are just fads I think .
Fads that wear out after a year or two .
Hell , right now I am watching folk my age ( just entering the workplace out of college ) starting to place a lot more value on time together at a pub or Starbucks rather than chatting on facebook or MSN .
The funniest part of this migration is that after ~ 4 years of socializing through proxy technologies , socializing real time tends to be incredibly awkward ( honestly , watching folk try to strike up conversation is downright hilarious as it takes a question-answer form like an IM conversation...I am just itching to see someone say , " ASL " to someone in real like ) .
Nonetheless , folk are learning .
I think people my age are starting to revalue the face-face interaction , but , just like the migration from myspace to facebook , the migration from facebook to the pub might be a bit slow and awkward and some die-hards might get left behind .
In the end , while the article is an interesting discussion , I really think that both generations , iGeneration and Net Generation , are going to turn out just fine .
They are just going to take some interesting and rather amusing paths to get there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sometimes the younger generations ARE wrong.
I think the problem is these technologies are fad technologies and the people making them popular haven't outgrown them yet.
I think that you hit the nail on the head right there as to why this really isn't some kind of social crisis.
These technologies, so far as I can tell, really are just fad technologies.
I recall when Myspace was first introduced friggin' EVERYONE ran out, signed up, put a bunch of flashy hearts and mini hot rod icons on their page, and obsessed over that website for the next year and a half.
Then facebook came along.
Same general migration and adoption, less flashy hearts (those were eventually replaced with starving farm animals and who-bit-who updates regarding vampire games).
I recall my first year of college how every student was on facebook.
If you weren't then you missed out on a lot of party invites and what not.
These days, facebook seems to be used more as a crap-gaming platform than an organizing event.
For that, people seem more prone to text and/or twitter.
So the moral of the story?
These really are just fads I think.
Fads that wear out after a year or two.
Hell, right now I am watching folk my age (just entering the workplace out of college) starting to place a lot more value on time together at a pub or Starbucks rather than chatting on facebook or MSN.
The funniest part of this migration is that after ~4 years of socializing through proxy technologies, socializing real time tends to be incredibly awkward (honestly, watching folk try to strike up conversation is downright hilarious as it takes a question-answer form like an IM conversation...I am just itching to see someone say, "ASL" to someone in real like).
Nonetheless, folk are learning.
I think people my age are starting to revalue the face-face interaction, but, just like the migration from myspace to facebook, the migration from facebook to the pub might be a bit slow and awkward and some die-hards might get left behind.
In the end, while the article is an interesting discussion, I really think that both generations, iGeneration and Net Generation, are going to turn out just fine.
They are just going to take some interesting and rather amusing paths to get there.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716264</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716348</id>
	<title>I don't have time to read this...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263156600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... would someone just FAX it to me and I'll read it while I'm on the toilet?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... would someone just FAX it to me and I 'll read it while I 'm on the toilet ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... would someone just FAX it to me and I'll read it while I'm on the toilet?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30719440</id>
	<title>iFarted</title>
	<author>Lilith's Heart-shape</author>
	<datestamp>1263139680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Stink different.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Stink different .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stink different.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716420</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30718714</id>
	<title>Re:Calling BS</title>
	<author>Idiomatick</author>
	<datestamp>1263130380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Another thing about twitter being a thing of the iGeneration... It is true that lots of young kids use it. BUT it is also true that a huge portion of twitter users are over 35 as well (35+ greatly outnumbering younger people). So clearly something is missing. Also twitter started (really) 1 year ago, peaked 6months ago and has lost 20\% of its user base since then.  I don't know if it can be used to describe a whole generation.... Unless I'm the pog generation, defined by liking plastic chips... perhaps making me a future gambler.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Another thing about twitter being a thing of the iGeneration... It is true that lots of young kids use it .
BUT it is also true that a huge portion of twitter users are over 35 as well ( 35 + greatly outnumbering younger people ) .
So clearly something is missing .
Also twitter started ( really ) 1 year ago , peaked 6months ago and has lost 20 \ % of its user base since then .
I do n't know if it can be used to describe a whole generation.... Unless I 'm the pog generation , defined by liking plastic chips... perhaps making me a future gambler .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another thing about twitter being a thing of the iGeneration... It is true that lots of young kids use it.
BUT it is also true that a huge portion of twitter users are over 35 as well (35+ greatly outnumbering younger people).
So clearly something is missing.
Also twitter started (really) 1 year ago, peaked 6months ago and has lost 20\% of its user base since then.
I don't know if it can be used to describe a whole generation.... Unless I'm the pog generation, defined by liking plastic chips... perhaps making me a future gambler.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716370</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716818</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>dangitman</author>
	<datestamp>1263117000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> I don't even answer email immediately, because I have no intention of serving as a brain trust for people who will not think.</p></div><p>I don't know what your job is, but exactly what kind of emails are you getting that leads you to this attitude? Don't you get any other kind of email at work? The bulk of the work email that I get is about setting up meetings, asking for feedback on projects, information about new policies and procedures. I can't think of the last time I got an email as a "substitute for thinking," whatever that means.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't even answer email immediately , because I have no intention of serving as a brain trust for people who will not think.I do n't know what your job is , but exactly what kind of emails are you getting that leads you to this attitude ?
Do n't you get any other kind of email at work ?
The bulk of the work email that I get is about setting up meetings , asking for feedback on projects , information about new policies and procedures .
I ca n't think of the last time I got an email as a " substitute for thinking , " whatever that means .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> I don't even answer email immediately, because I have no intention of serving as a brain trust for people who will not think.I don't know what your job is, but exactly what kind of emails are you getting that leads you to this attitude?
Don't you get any other kind of email at work?
The bulk of the work email that I get is about setting up meetings, asking for feedback on projects, information about new policies and procedures.
I can't think of the last time I got an email as a "substitute for thinking," whatever that means.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30722922</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263224220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Watch your step. Mind the Marketing Crap.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Watch your step .
Mind the Marketing Crap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Watch your step.
Mind the Marketing Crap.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30720064</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263147180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>google wave will change this</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>google wave will change this</tokentext>
<sentencetext>google wave will change this</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30718612</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30722894</id>
	<title>Re:Calling BS</title>
	<author>jimbob666</author>
	<datestamp>1263224100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>&gt; That's why fake "viral videos" are so painful to watch.
<br> <br>
Good observation there. I cringe when non-IT friends show me certain viral fake-but-are-you-meant-to-know-it videos.

The one that stands out recently is the "one winged plane landing". Yeah, that is soooo fake. But I never say anything..</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; That 's why fake " viral videos " are so painful to watch .
Good observation there .
I cringe when non-IT friends show me certain viral fake-but-are-you-meant-to-know-it videos .
The one that stands out recently is the " one winged plane landing " .
Yeah , that is soooo fake .
But I never say anything. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; That's why fake "viral videos" are so painful to watch.
Good observation there.
I cringe when non-IT friends show me certain viral fake-but-are-you-meant-to-know-it videos.
The one that stands out recently is the "one winged plane landing".
Yeah, that is soooo fake.
But I never say anything..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716370</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717134</id>
	<title>An old foggy speaks.... er, types, er posts,</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263119040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, this a post, right?</p><p>Ok, i'm 57. My family had a telephone when I was a kid, we were on a party line and had to learn our ring so we wouldn't pick up calls for other families. OTOH, we knew who was getting a call and we learned how to listen in...</p><p>I remember when we got our first TV. it had no color, and a bunch of tubes inside. We got one channel. When it got to hot outside she would call us in and let us watch TV until it cooled down. The only show I remember was Liberace prancing on the keyboard painted along one edge of his piano shaped swimming pool. Mom kept saying "there is something odd about him..."</p><p>Skipping forward more than 50 years.</p><p>I use email all the damn time. I've had an email address continuously since '81. I have a cell phone. Unlike most of my friends I only use it to make calls. I keep it turned off. I only turn it on to make calls. I have linkedin and facebook accounts and I even have my kids as friends on facebook. I love facebook. I tolerate linkedin, because it is required for business. I run several web sites and have a blog. I have pretty much every channel the cable company provides (except sports, I never understood sports) and I have a PC with a broadband connection and a wireless keyboard hooked up to it so I can watch youtube and hulu and what ever from the comfort of my living room. Oh, yeah, I have *great* karma on slashdot.</p><p>The thing I have noticed is that my use of social technology is much more conditioned by the fact that I am a serious introvert than by my age. On the Myers Briggs I nearly peg the Introvert scale. I see that a lot. Introverts use social tech differently from extroverts. You just don't see them doing it because they are *introverts*. I've noticed that introverts are much more extroverted online than in person. It is much easier to act like an extrovert when you don't actually have to be around people.</p><p>Also, I was diagnosed in my early '40s as having ADD. These days they call it ADHD-PI. (In the '50s, 60s, and well into the '70s they called it "lazy" if you had mild to moderate levels and "brain dysfunction" or even "brain damage" at higher levels.) People like me do everything we can to minimize distractions. Even with medication (which can be *wonderful* when it works) I do not seek out distractions. BTW, my observation is that a lot of introverts have some form of ADHD.  Another unsubstantiated personal observations is that those people with ADHD who don't wind up as career criminals, tend to wind up as engineers and computer scientists i.e. as geeks.</p><p>Watching the way social technology has changed the behavior of cognitively normal extroverts leads me to conclude that their lives are so boring that they will do nearly anything to be distracted from them. OTOH, there is so much exciting stuff going on in side the head of this cognitively different introvert that I am never bored.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p><p>Stonewolf</p><p>P.S.</p><p>The meds I take to not make me anything like normal. They just make it a lot easier to function around all you weirdos<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p><p>P.P.S</p><p>Yes, check it out, the prisons in the US are full of people with ADHD.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , this a post , right ? Ok , i 'm 57 .
My family had a telephone when I was a kid , we were on a party line and had to learn our ring so we would n't pick up calls for other families .
OTOH , we knew who was getting a call and we learned how to listen in...I remember when we got our first TV .
it had no color , and a bunch of tubes inside .
We got one channel .
When it got to hot outside she would call us in and let us watch TV until it cooled down .
The only show I remember was Liberace prancing on the keyboard painted along one edge of his piano shaped swimming pool .
Mom kept saying " there is something odd about him... " Skipping forward more than 50 years.I use email all the damn time .
I 've had an email address continuously since '81 .
I have a cell phone .
Unlike most of my friends I only use it to make calls .
I keep it turned off .
I only turn it on to make calls .
I have linkedin and facebook accounts and I even have my kids as friends on facebook .
I love facebook .
I tolerate linkedin , because it is required for business .
I run several web sites and have a blog .
I have pretty much every channel the cable company provides ( except sports , I never understood sports ) and I have a PC with a broadband connection and a wireless keyboard hooked up to it so I can watch youtube and hulu and what ever from the comfort of my living room .
Oh , yeah , I have * great * karma on slashdot.The thing I have noticed is that my use of social technology is much more conditioned by the fact that I am a serious introvert than by my age .
On the Myers Briggs I nearly peg the Introvert scale .
I see that a lot .
Introverts use social tech differently from extroverts .
You just do n't see them doing it because they are * introverts * .
I 've noticed that introverts are much more extroverted online than in person .
It is much easier to act like an extrovert when you do n't actually have to be around people.Also , I was diagnosed in my early '40s as having ADD .
These days they call it ADHD-PI .
( In the '50s , 60s , and well into the '70s they called it " lazy " if you had mild to moderate levels and " brain dysfunction " or even " brain damage " at higher levels .
) People like me do everything we can to minimize distractions .
Even with medication ( which can be * wonderful * when it works ) I do not seek out distractions .
BTW , my observation is that a lot of introverts have some form of ADHD .
Another unsubstantiated personal observations is that those people with ADHD who do n't wind up as career criminals , tend to wind up as engineers and computer scientists i.e .
as geeks.Watching the way social technology has changed the behavior of cognitively normal extroverts leads me to conclude that their lives are so boring that they will do nearly anything to be distracted from them .
OTOH , there is so much exciting stuff going on in side the head of this cognitively different introvert that I am never bored .
: - ) StonewolfP.S.The meds I take to not make me anything like normal .
They just make it a lot easier to function around all you weirdos : - ) P.P.SYes , check it out , the prisons in the US are full of people with ADHD .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, this a post, right?Ok, i'm 57.
My family had a telephone when I was a kid, we were on a party line and had to learn our ring so we wouldn't pick up calls for other families.
OTOH, we knew who was getting a call and we learned how to listen in...I remember when we got our first TV.
it had no color, and a bunch of tubes inside.
We got one channel.
When it got to hot outside she would call us in and let us watch TV until it cooled down.
The only show I remember was Liberace prancing on the keyboard painted along one edge of his piano shaped swimming pool.
Mom kept saying "there is something odd about him..."Skipping forward more than 50 years.I use email all the damn time.
I've had an email address continuously since '81.
I have a cell phone.
Unlike most of my friends I only use it to make calls.
I keep it turned off.
I only turn it on to make calls.
I have linkedin and facebook accounts and I even have my kids as friends on facebook.
I love facebook.
I tolerate linkedin, because it is required for business.
I run several web sites and have a blog.
I have pretty much every channel the cable company provides (except sports, I never understood sports) and I have a PC with a broadband connection and a wireless keyboard hooked up to it so I can watch youtube and hulu and what ever from the comfort of my living room.
Oh, yeah, I have *great* karma on slashdot.The thing I have noticed is that my use of social technology is much more conditioned by the fact that I am a serious introvert than by my age.
On the Myers Briggs I nearly peg the Introvert scale.
I see that a lot.
Introverts use social tech differently from extroverts.
You just don't see them doing it because they are *introverts*.
I've noticed that introverts are much more extroverted online than in person.
It is much easier to act like an extrovert when you don't actually have to be around people.Also, I was diagnosed in my early '40s as having ADD.
These days they call it ADHD-PI.
(In the '50s, 60s, and well into the '70s they called it "lazy" if you had mild to moderate levels and "brain dysfunction" or even "brain damage" at higher levels.
) People like me do everything we can to minimize distractions.
Even with medication (which can be *wonderful* when it works) I do not seek out distractions.
BTW, my observation is that a lot of introverts have some form of ADHD.
Another unsubstantiated personal observations is that those people with ADHD who don't wind up as career criminals, tend to wind up as engineers and computer scientists i.e.
as geeks.Watching the way social technology has changed the behavior of cognitively normal extroverts leads me to conclude that their lives are so boring that they will do nearly anything to be distracted from them.
OTOH, there is so much exciting stuff going on in side the head of this cognitively different introvert that I am never bored.
:-)StonewolfP.S.The meds I take to not make me anything like normal.
They just make it a lot easier to function around all you weirdos :-)P.P.SYes, check it out, the prisons in the US are full of people with ADHD.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716580</id>
	<title>Re:It was better in the old days...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263115020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Interesting that you use Facebook as an example. Bebo used to be the only game in town until Facebook came along. There is quite a distinct difference in users.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Interesting that you use Facebook as an example .
Bebo used to be the only game in town until Facebook came along .
There is quite a distinct difference in users .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interesting that you use Facebook as an example.
Bebo used to be the only game in town until Facebook came along.
There is quite a distinct difference in users.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716264</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30725228</id>
	<title>Re:It was better in the old days...</title>
	<author>Lilith's Heart-shape</author>
	<datestamp>1263234780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So, you think that the only legitimate socialization is done face to face?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , you think that the only legitimate socialization is done face to face ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, you think that the only legitimate socialization is done face to face?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716264</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716856</id>
	<title>Re:Too true</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263117120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>self proclaimed "good" multi-taskers tend to think busy==productive.<br>self proclaimed "bad" multi-taskers tend to think busy!=productive.</p><p>Constant communication when you are younger tends to be a combination of the search for identity and lack of nuance. As you get more mature and have your identity as well as a mature relationship with someone (like a spouse), communication appears to be less, but it is just more targeted and subtle (Note: it is important that I try to link apparent reduced communication with maturity and not age).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>self proclaimed " good " multi-taskers tend to think busy = = productive.self proclaimed " bad " multi-taskers tend to think busy ! = productive.Constant communication when you are younger tends to be a combination of the search for identity and lack of nuance .
As you get more mature and have your identity as well as a mature relationship with someone ( like a spouse ) , communication appears to be less , but it is just more targeted and subtle ( Note : it is important that I try to link apparent reduced communication with maturity and not age ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>self proclaimed "good" multi-taskers tend to think busy==productive.self proclaimed "bad" multi-taskers tend to think busy!=productive.Constant communication when you are younger tends to be a combination of the search for identity and lack of nuance.
As you get more mature and have your identity as well as a mature relationship with someone (like a spouse), communication appears to be less, but it is just more targeted and subtle (Note: it is important that I try to link apparent reduced communication with maturity and not age).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716276</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717470</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>value\_added</author>
	<datestamp>1263121080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>So, if this "old dog can learn new tricks" and my friends have as well... </i></p><p>The question that I'd like answered is whether the new dogs can learn what the old dogs have learned, or whether they're too enamoured of (or distracted by) gadgets and interfaces so as to believe no such effort is necessary.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , if this " old dog can learn new tricks " and my friends have as well... The question that I 'd like answered is whether the new dogs can learn what the old dogs have learned , or whether they 're too enamoured of ( or distracted by ) gadgets and interfaces so as to believe no such effort is necessary .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, if this "old dog can learn new tricks" and my friends have as well... The question that I'd like answered is whether the new dogs can learn what the old dogs have learned, or whether they're too enamoured of (or distracted by) gadgets and interfaces so as to believe no such effort is necessary.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716462</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716210</id>
	<title>Instantly communcation indeed</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263155760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>FIRST instant POST!</htmltext>
<tokenext>FIRST instant POST !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FIRST instant POST!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30718060</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>BikeHelmet</author>
	<datestamp>1263125280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use Twitter to get free stuff. Companies like eVGA, online stores, etc. have promos and giveaways. I'm up a laptop case and wine rack, so far. Was hoping to win a GPU, but no luck yet.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use Twitter to get free stuff .
Companies like eVGA , online stores , etc .
have promos and giveaways .
I 'm up a laptop case and wine rack , so far .
Was hoping to win a GPU , but no luck yet .
: /</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use Twitter to get free stuff.
Companies like eVGA, online stores, etc.
have promos and giveaways.
I'm up a laptop case and wine rack, so far.
Was hoping to win a GPU, but no luck yet.
:/</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30721398</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>X0563511</author>
	<datestamp>1263211680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You have to admit, annoying as it is, the situational awareness fostered by this (you can only smack into an obstacle so much before you start paying attention) is not a bad thing to have.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You have to admit , annoying as it is , the situational awareness fostered by this ( you can only smack into an obstacle so much before you start paying attention ) is not a bad thing to have .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have to admit, annoying as it is, the situational awareness fostered by this (you can only smack into an obstacle so much before you start paying attention) is not a bad thing to have.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30719114</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30722114</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>MrCrassic</author>
	<datestamp>1263220260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I disagree. One of my younger siblings, born in the "iGeneration" Stone defines (1990-), text messages her friends significantly more than she calls them. On the other hand, my other sibling, who was born a year after I was, still spends a considerable amount of time on the phone, though she texts a lot too (usually to people younger than her...)</p><p>Furthermore, the women that I've dated who were born in that generation text messaged a LOT more as well. Same thing with the guys.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I disagree .
One of my younger siblings , born in the " iGeneration " Stone defines ( 1990- ) , text messages her friends significantly more than she calls them .
On the other hand , my other sibling , who was born a year after I was , still spends a considerable amount of time on the phone , though she texts a lot too ( usually to people younger than her... ) Furthermore , the women that I 've dated who were born in that generation text messaged a LOT more as well .
Same thing with the guys .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I disagree.
One of my younger siblings, born in the "iGeneration" Stone defines (1990-), text messages her friends significantly more than she calls them.
On the other hand, my other sibling, who was born a year after I was, still spends a considerable amount of time on the phone, though she texts a lot too (usually to people younger than her...)Furthermore, the women that I've dated who were born in that generation text messaged a LOT more as well.
Same thing with the guys.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30719732</id>
	<title>What's to talk about?</title>
	<author>GumphMaster</author>
	<datestamp>1263142800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The Net Generation spend two hours a day talking on the phone and still use e-mail frequently</p></div><p>Am I the only one here that, were it not for work calls, would not spend two hours per <b>month</b> on the phone?   I cannot for the life of me see where you can can get enough of consequence to talk about for two hours <i>every day</i> (on average) with people that you do not also meet in person in the average day.   My mistake, I think, is assuming that the "Net generation" is talking about anything of substance in that phone time.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Net Generation spend two hours a day talking on the phone and still use e-mail frequentlyAm I the only one here that , were it not for work calls , would not spend two hours per month on the phone ?
I can not for the life of me see where you can can get enough of consequence to talk about for two hours every day ( on average ) with people that you do not also meet in person in the average day .
My mistake , I think , is assuming that the " Net generation " is talking about anything of substance in that phone time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Net Generation spend two hours a day talking on the phone and still use e-mail frequentlyAm I the only one here that, were it not for work calls, would not spend two hours per month on the phone?
I cannot for the life of me see where you can can get enough of consequence to talk about for two hours every day (on average) with people that you do not also meet in person in the average day.
My mistake, I think, is assuming that the "Net generation" is talking about anything of substance in that phone time.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716570</id>
	<title>Research  needed</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263114900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds like this would make some great Phd research projects: "Generation Usage Patterns in Technology"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like this would make some great Phd research projects : " Generation Usage Patterns in Technology "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like this would make some great Phd research projects: "Generation Usage Patterns in Technology"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30782038</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263584940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was born in the early 70s. My friends already know when to meet me at the pub, and they have since long before Twitter. If there's no "job" to begin with, you don't need a tool for it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was born in the early 70s .
My friends already know when to meet me at the pub , and they have since long before Twitter .
If there 's no " job " to begin with , you do n't need a tool for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was born in the early 70s.
My friends already know when to meet me at the pub, and they have since long before Twitter.
If there's no "job" to begin with, you don't need a tool for it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716426</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30718028</id>
	<title>I did 7 things oh boy....</title>
	<author>SpoodyGoon</author>
	<datestamp>1263125100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I did 7 things at one tiem oh boy, of course none of them were any good because I divided my attention but hey they kind of done.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I did 7 things at one tiem oh boy , of course none of them were any good because I divided my attention but hey they kind of done .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I did 7 things at one tiem oh boy, of course none of them were any good because I divided my attention but hey they kind of done.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716786</id>
	<title>Youngsters.</title>
	<author>Lord Kano</author>
	<datestamp>1263116700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Another difference that I've noticed is that they changes accounts far more frequently than I do. I have had the same email address for 10 years. My young friends are constantly changing the email addresses and IM names.</p><p>LK</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Another difference that I 've noticed is that they changes accounts far more frequently than I do .
I have had the same email address for 10 years .
My young friends are constantly changing the email addresses and IM names.LK</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another difference that I've noticed is that they changes accounts far more frequently than I do.
I have had the same email address for 10 years.
My young friends are constantly changing the email addresses and IM names.LK</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30721102</id>
	<title>Whippersnappers!</title>
	<author>phreakincool</author>
	<datestamp>1263206460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Bah! I was born in 1967. In my day we had 300 baud modems that feed us 30 chars per second in both directions and we loved it!

Of course, I've always been an early adopter of anything faster that gets me my pr0n.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bah !
I was born in 1967 .
In my day we had 300 baud modems that feed us 30 chars per second in both directions and we loved it !
Of course , I 've always been an early adopter of anything faster that gets me my pr0n .
: D</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bah!
I was born in 1967.
In my day we had 300 baud modems that feed us 30 chars per second in both directions and we loved it!
Of course, I've always been an early adopter of anything faster that gets me my pr0n.
:D</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717878</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>Peter Cooper</author>
	<datestamp>1263124020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If Twitter's a fad, then I guess Slashdot's a fad too? Except more people use and get value out of Twitter than Slashdot<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-) Or is it just new stuff that you don't use that's a "fad"?</p><p>Twitter is way beyond "fad" stage. If you want fads, try Google Wave or Clojure. Doesn't mean they won't become significant as time goes by though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If Twitter 's a fad , then I guess Slashdot 's a fad too ?
Except more people use and get value out of Twitter than Slashdot : - ) Or is it just new stuff that you do n't use that 's a " fad " ? Twitter is way beyond " fad " stage .
If you want fads , try Google Wave or Clojure .
Does n't mean they wo n't become significant as time goes by though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Twitter's a fad, then I guess Slashdot's a fad too?
Except more people use and get value out of Twitter than Slashdot :-) Or is it just new stuff that you don't use that's a "fad"?Twitter is way beyond "fad" stage.
If you want fads, try Google Wave or Clojure.
Doesn't mean they won't become significant as time goes by though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717062</id>
	<title>Indeed...</title>
	<author>J.D. Fielder</author>
	<datestamp>1263118440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I mean, I still miss my Atari 2600...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean , I still miss my Atari 2600.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean, I still miss my Atari 2600...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30721298</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>jochem\_m</author>
	<datestamp>1263210240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't know what it's like in the states, and this obviously depends on your plan or not, but in general here in the netherlands, a text message is more expensive than a call. In that first minute you pay for when you make the connection, you can impart way more than 160 characters of text. Most calls I place to my parents (who I see twice a week out in meatspace) last between 15 and 30 seconds, but it would take at least half a dozen textmessages to get the same content across.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know what it 's like in the states , and this obviously depends on your plan or not , but in general here in the netherlands , a text message is more expensive than a call .
In that first minute you pay for when you make the connection , you can impart way more than 160 characters of text .
Most calls I place to my parents ( who I see twice a week out in meatspace ) last between 15 and 30 seconds , but it would take at least half a dozen textmessages to get the same content across .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know what it's like in the states, and this obviously depends on your plan or not, but in general here in the netherlands, a text message is more expensive than a call.
In that first minute you pay for when you make the connection, you can impart way more than 160 characters of text.
Most calls I place to my parents (who I see twice a week out in meatspace) last between 15 and 30 seconds, but it would take at least half a dozen textmessages to get the same content across.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30728786</id>
	<title>Re:The lack of attention span is certainly true!</title>
	<author>hguorbray</author>
	<datestamp>1263204660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>also, the lack of engagement.<br><br>Note how many kids are being babysat by a DVD player in their parents cars -they are not really watching it in depth, but it is just on and it occupies some of their attention without really engaging them.<br><br>I think this hurts the ability to concentrate fully on anything when they get in the classroom for instance.<br><br>My sister teaches preschool and that is her observation.<br><br>-I'm just sayin'</htmltext>
<tokenext>also , the lack of engagement.Note how many kids are being babysat by a DVD player in their parents cars -they are not really watching it in depth , but it is just on and it occupies some of their attention without really engaging them.I think this hurts the ability to concentrate fully on anything when they get in the classroom for instance.My sister teaches preschool and that is her observation.-I 'm just sayin'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>also, the lack of engagement.Note how many kids are being babysat by a DVD player in their parents cars -they are not really watching it in depth, but it is just on and it occupies some of their attention without really engaging them.I think this hurts the ability to concentrate fully on anything when they get in the classroom for instance.My sister teaches preschool and that is her observation.-I'm just sayin'</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717166</id>
	<title>Multitasking?</title>
	<author>Eggbloke</author>
	<datestamp>1263119160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Studies show that 16- to 18-year-olds perform seven tasks, on average, in their free time &mdash; like texting on the phone, sending instant messages, and checking Facebook while sitting in front of the television; while people in their early 20s can handle only six, and those in their 30s about five and a half."

These studies dont really show a generation gap. They show that older people can multitask less, possibly because they are older</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Studies show that 16- to 18-year-olds perform seven tasks , on average , in their free time    like texting on the phone , sending instant messages , and checking Facebook while sitting in front of the television ; while people in their early 20s can handle only six , and those in their 30s about five and a half .
" These studies dont really show a generation gap .
They show that older people can multitask less , possibly because they are older</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Studies show that 16- to 18-year-olds perform seven tasks, on average, in their free time — like texting on the phone, sending instant messages, and checking Facebook while sitting in front of the television; while people in their early 20s can handle only six, and those in their 30s about five and a half.
"

These studies dont really show a generation gap.
They show that older people can multitask less, possibly because they are older</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716638</id>
	<title>Re:It was better in the old days...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263115560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"It's electronic substitution for true socializing,"</p><p>people have been saying that since i was 12 with my first win95comp(probably in ~98)</p><p>I met a girl over the internet, from germany, who came to stay with me. Electronic Socialization = Socializing. Really you old people are so diluted.</p><p>this is coming from someone who rarely text and hasn't been logged into myspace(never got into other sites) for ~4 years now.</p><p>But I sure as hell will disagree about your bullshit socializing bs</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" It 's electronic substitution for true socializing , " people have been saying that since i was 12 with my first win95comp ( probably in ~ 98 ) I met a girl over the internet , from germany , who came to stay with me .
Electronic Socialization = Socializing .
Really you old people are so diluted.this is coming from someone who rarely text and has n't been logged into myspace ( never got into other sites ) for ~ 4 years now.But I sure as hell will disagree about your bullshit socializing bs</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"It's electronic substitution for true socializing,"people have been saying that since i was 12 with my first win95comp(probably in ~98)I met a girl over the internet, from germany, who came to stay with me.
Electronic Socialization = Socializing.
Really you old people are so diluted.this is coming from someone who rarely text and hasn't been logged into myspace(never got into other sites) for ~4 years now.But I sure as hell will disagree about your bullshit socializing bs</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716264</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30722892</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>M-RES</author>
	<datestamp>1263224100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>A text message is probably cheaper than a voice call</p></div><p>You're shitting me right?</p><p>Text is one of the most expensive ways to communicate. What you can say in a 10 second conversation may take a multitude of texts back n forth. Given that a phone call costs an initial 'connection fee' plus the length of call only, but texts are charged 'PER TEXT', it means that your call is paid for once and by only one party in the conversation and with a short conversation that can be a small charge, whereas a texted conversation is charged per response to both sides, thus earning the phone company possibly 10 times as much! Texts are a huge scam - they bundle x number 'free' in with monthly tariffs to persuade younger people to may more than they should for phone service rather than dropping their price to a representative level (virtually free) on PAYG deals. Corporate scam scam scam.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A text message is probably cheaper than a voice callYou 're shitting me right ? Text is one of the most expensive ways to communicate .
What you can say in a 10 second conversation may take a multitude of texts back n forth .
Given that a phone call costs an initial 'connection fee ' plus the length of call only , but texts are charged 'PER TEXT ' , it means that your call is paid for once and by only one party in the conversation and with a short conversation that can be a small charge , whereas a texted conversation is charged per response to both sides , thus earning the phone company possibly 10 times as much !
Texts are a huge scam - they bundle x number 'free ' in with monthly tariffs to persuade younger people to may more than they should for phone service rather than dropping their price to a representative level ( virtually free ) on PAYG deals .
Corporate scam scam scam .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A text message is probably cheaper than a voice callYou're shitting me right?Text is one of the most expensive ways to communicate.
What you can say in a 10 second conversation may take a multitude of texts back n forth.
Given that a phone call costs an initial 'connection fee' plus the length of call only, but texts are charged 'PER TEXT', it means that your call is paid for once and by only one party in the conversation and with a short conversation that can be a small charge, whereas a texted conversation is charged per response to both sides, thus earning the phone company possibly 10 times as much!
Texts are a huge scam - they bundle x number 'free' in with monthly tariffs to persuade younger people to may more than they should for phone service rather than dropping their price to a representative level (virtually free) on PAYG deals.
Corporate scam scam scam.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30777390</id>
	<title>Multitasking</title>
	<author>tehcyder</author>
	<datestamp>1263560340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I know it's old-fashioned, but surely multi-tasking means more than just not paying attention to more than one thing at once?  If you're (say) reading a book and watching TV, you're not multi-tasking, you're at best flitting between the two.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I know it 's old-fashioned , but surely multi-tasking means more than just not paying attention to more than one thing at once ?
If you 're ( say ) reading a book and watching TV , you 're not multi-tasking , you 're at best flitting between the two .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know it's old-fashioned, but surely multi-tasking means more than just not paying attention to more than one thing at once?
If you're (say) reading a book and watching TV, you're not multi-tasking, you're at best flitting between the two.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716420</id>
	<title>iScrew this!</title>
	<author>NoSleepDemon</author>
	<datestamp>1263157140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>iSwear, iF iHear another God-damn iPhrase iM going to kill everyone of those iFreaks. It's NOT a podcast, it's a SOUND CLIP you DOWNLOADED onto your MP3 PLAYER. People have jumped onto the iBandWagon the same way Businesses started calling all their services 'Solutions'... So yeah, definitely not a member of the iGeneration, oh how I hate that letter.</htmltext>
<tokenext>iSwear , iF iHear another God-damn iPhrase iM going to kill everyone of those iFreaks .
It 's NOT a podcast , it 's a SOUND CLIP you DOWNLOADED onto your MP3 PLAYER .
People have jumped onto the iBandWagon the same way Businesses started calling all their services 'Solutions'... So yeah , definitely not a member of the iGeneration , oh how I hate that letter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>iSwear, iF iHear another God-damn iPhrase iM going to kill everyone of those iFreaks.
It's NOT a podcast, it's a SOUND CLIP you DOWNLOADED onto your MP3 PLAYER.
People have jumped onto the iBandWagon the same way Businesses started calling all their services 'Solutions'... So yeah, definitely not a member of the iGeneration, oh how I hate that letter.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716168</id>
	<title>And Now, a Joke (FROSTY PISS!)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263155280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What's the difference between black pussy and a bowling ball?  If you really HAD TO, you could eat the bowling ball.
<br> <br>
<b>NIGGERS</b></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's the difference between black pussy and a bowling ball ?
If you really HAD TO , you could eat the bowling ball .
NIGGERS</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's the difference between black pussy and a bowling ball?
If you really HAD TO, you could eat the bowling ball.
NIGGERS</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30741074</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>jp10558</author>
	<datestamp>1263326280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just don't understand the concept of Twitter (as a member of the net generation I guess)... Why not just use a blog and turn on RSS for people who want to be pinged when you do whatever length blog update you want to? Why be limited to someone elses privacy policy, access restrictions (are there any) or 140 characters?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just do n't understand the concept of Twitter ( as a member of the net generation I guess ) ... Why not just use a blog and turn on RSS for people who want to be pinged when you do whatever length blog update you want to ?
Why be limited to someone elses privacy policy , access restrictions ( are there any ) or 140 characters ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just don't understand the concept of Twitter (as a member of the net generation I guess)... Why not just use a blog and turn on RSS for people who want to be pinged when you do whatever length blog update you want to?
Why be limited to someone elses privacy policy, access restrictions (are there any) or 140 characters?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716426</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30720192</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>mrbcs</author>
	<datestamp>1263149040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is the only guy I "follow" on twitter. I don't have an account, I just book marked his page: <a href="http://twitter.com/shitmydadsays" title="twitter.com">http://twitter.com/shitmydadsays</a> [twitter.com]

<p>Now get off my lawn<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is the only guy I " follow " on twitter .
I do n't have an account , I just book marked his page : http : //twitter.com/shitmydadsays [ twitter.com ] Now get off my lawn ; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is the only guy I "follow" on twitter.
I don't have an account, I just book marked his page: http://twitter.com/shitmydadsays [twitter.com]

Now get off my lawn ;-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716322</id>
	<title>!Generations</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263156480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Generations keep getting shorter and shorter somehow.  This is because they're favoured by journalists who can't think of a better way to seem significant, so they have to keep finding more.</p><p>"iGeneration"? "Net Generation"?  Come on, give some to...<br>
&nbsp; - the Latte Generation<br>
&nbsp; - the 9/11 Generation<br>
&nbsp; - the Keyless Entry Generation<br>
&nbsp; - the LOLcat Generation<br>
&nbsp; - the "Juno" Generation<br>
&nbsp; - the "Ima Let you Finish" Generation</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Generations keep getting shorter and shorter somehow .
This is because they 're favoured by journalists who ca n't think of a better way to seem significant , so they have to keep finding more. " iGeneration " ?
" Net Generation " ?
Come on , give some to.. .   - the Latte Generation   - the 9/11 Generation   - the Keyless Entry Generation   - the LOLcat Generation   - the " Juno " Generation   - the " Ima Let you Finish " Generation</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Generations keep getting shorter and shorter somehow.
This is because they're favoured by journalists who can't think of a better way to seem significant, so they have to keep finding more."iGeneration"?
"Net Generation"?
Come on, give some to...
  - the Latte Generation
  - the 9/11 Generation
  - the Keyless Entry Generation
  - the LOLcat Generation
  - the "Juno" Generation
  - the "Ima Let you Finish" Generation</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716368</id>
	<title>I hate predictions</title>
	<author>PatTheGreat</author>
	<datestamp>1263156720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think these guys have a point that different technologies affect the way we interact with people.  I will fully agree that it is far easier to keep in touch with your grandmother when you can call her at night and fly cross-country to see her than it was back in the "day" when you had to send a letter in order to communicate with anyone at a distance and you had to take a stage coach cross-country.

However, I always think such researchers begin to sound old and crotchety when they start making predictions that "the kids of tomorrow will have no attention span!" and whatnot.  Tech changes, people change, but it's not always BAD.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think these guys have a point that different technologies affect the way we interact with people .
I will fully agree that it is far easier to keep in touch with your grandmother when you can call her at night and fly cross-country to see her than it was back in the " day " when you had to send a letter in order to communicate with anyone at a distance and you had to take a stage coach cross-country .
However , I always think such researchers begin to sound old and crotchety when they start making predictions that " the kids of tomorrow will have no attention span !
" and whatnot .
Tech changes , people change , but it 's not always BAD .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think these guys have a point that different technologies affect the way we interact with people.
I will fully agree that it is far easier to keep in touch with your grandmother when you can call her at night and fly cross-country to see her than it was back in the "day" when you had to send a letter in order to communicate with anyone at a distance and you had to take a stage coach cross-country.
However, I always think such researchers begin to sound old and crotchety when they start making predictions that "the kids of tomorrow will have no attention span!
" and whatnot.
Tech changes, people change, but it's not always BAD.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717472</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>mabinogi</author>
	<datestamp>1263121080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I get those sorts of emails all the time - I'm the lead developer for a couple of our flagship products, and others in the company seem to think that means I'm a walking manual.</p><p>So like the GP, emails that wouldn't have existed if the sender had just read the manual (or even the error message in front of them) get left to age a bit before I reply - particularly if they're from a multiple offender</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I get those sorts of emails all the time - I 'm the lead developer for a couple of our flagship products , and others in the company seem to think that means I 'm a walking manual.So like the GP , emails that would n't have existed if the sender had just read the manual ( or even the error message in front of them ) get left to age a bit before I reply - particularly if they 're from a multiple offender</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I get those sorts of emails all the time - I'm the lead developer for a couple of our flagship products, and others in the company seem to think that means I'm a walking manual.So like the GP, emails that wouldn't have existed if the sender had just read the manual (or even the error message in front of them) get left to age a bit before I reply - particularly if they're from a multiple offender</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716818</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30718742</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263130740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>These same people exist in the other 'generations'.  They just used different tools.  One place I worked at I had to babysit my email because god forbid I work on something else and MISS one and the phone call 2 mins later.  This was 10 years ago...</p><p>It took a couple of years of doing exactly what you say.  Let it 'age'.  By the time you get to them they got impatient and figured it out on their own.  Hell I do this to my parents who are in their 60's.  They were using me as their 'fix the computer guy' every time something stupid popped up on the screen and calling me.  I would get back to them many hours later.</p><p>Newer techs just let more people do exactly what you are talking about and not think about what to do.</p><p>Best compliment I get after doing this to people for years?  'You are the best teacher you always have time for me and make it clear what to do'.  Which is funny I am doing the exact opposite...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>These same people exist in the other 'generations' .
They just used different tools .
One place I worked at I had to babysit my email because god forbid I work on something else and MISS one and the phone call 2 mins later .
This was 10 years ago...It took a couple of years of doing exactly what you say .
Let it 'age' .
By the time you get to them they got impatient and figured it out on their own .
Hell I do this to my parents who are in their 60 's .
They were using me as their 'fix the computer guy ' every time something stupid popped up on the screen and calling me .
I would get back to them many hours later.Newer techs just let more people do exactly what you are talking about and not think about what to do.Best compliment I get after doing this to people for years ?
'You are the best teacher you always have time for me and make it clear what to do' .
Which is funny I am doing the exact opposite.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These same people exist in the other 'generations'.
They just used different tools.
One place I worked at I had to babysit my email because god forbid I work on something else and MISS one and the phone call 2 mins later.
This was 10 years ago...It took a couple of years of doing exactly what you say.
Let it 'age'.
By the time you get to them they got impatient and figured it out on their own.
Hell I do this to my parents who are in their 60's.
They were using me as their 'fix the computer guy' every time something stupid popped up on the screen and calling me.
I would get back to them many hours later.Newer techs just let more people do exactly what you are talking about and not think about what to do.Best compliment I get after doing this to people for years?
'You are the best teacher you always have time for me and make it clear what to do'.
Which is funny I am doing the exact opposite...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30719428</id>
	<title>I was born in 1978</title>
	<author>Lilith's Heart-shape</author>
	<datestamp>1263139440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I use email and IM. I receive text messages, but prefer to reply to SMS messages by emailing people's phones. I ignore TV. If somebody sends me a link to a video of a lecture or speech on Youtube, I'll look for a text transcript. So where do I stand? Does it even matter?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I use email and IM .
I receive text messages , but prefer to reply to SMS messages by emailing people 's phones .
I ignore TV .
If somebody sends me a link to a video of a lecture or speech on Youtube , I 'll look for a text transcript .
So where do I stand ?
Does it even matter ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use email and IM.
I receive text messages, but prefer to reply to SMS messages by emailing people's phones.
I ignore TV.
If somebody sends me a link to a video of a lecture or speech on Youtube, I'll look for a text transcript.
So where do I stand?
Does it even matter?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716992</id>
	<title>School of hard knocks</title>
	<author>EmperorOfCanada</author>
	<datestamp>1263117960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When I first started programming I used a VIC 20 with 3.5K. At first I dreamed about getting the tape device. So all my basic programming vanished when turned the machine was turned off. Then with the tape drive the best way that I figured out to squeeze the maximum out of this was to first create an assembler to machine code converter which stored the machine code to tape as you created it. Then you loaded the program back from tape and poof you had the absolute most you could squeeze out of 3.5K. After that I cobbled together 8086s and put every version of DOS that came along as well as radical new upgrades like a mouse and a hard drive. I squeezed Windows version 1 onto a machine that it wasn't meant for and so on. I see my intelligent Nephews and Neices (all around 20) who would be hard pressed to install windows if there was any hurdle like having to manually install a network driver. Some geeks to be are jumping into the depths of Linux and are probably getting some awesome experience but I have met many a comp sci grad who would be hard pressed to properly set up a pretty basic LAMP server and then do the slightest of unusual configurations (say memcached). Yet these same Comp Sci grads might have built a basic compiler or OS at some point during their education. I think that my particular timing was pretty good in that I have had the time to digest the zillion little wonderful innovations (color codes in my IDE) without having them overwhelm me like someone who might have started in the 60's. But I agree with the premise of this article. Facebook is not important to many of my generation and I can't remember the last time I sent a text message. The kids of today are probably doing with their cell phones what I did with computers 30 years ago; that is to squeeze every erg of functionality they can out of them. Texts are cheaper than calls thus better. Also innovations like keyboards on reasonably priced phones are better than typing texts on a number pad. Also the incentives are different; My social life does not depend on my text plan or abilities.</htmltext>
<tokenext>When I first started programming I used a VIC 20 with 3.5K .
At first I dreamed about getting the tape device .
So all my basic programming vanished when turned the machine was turned off .
Then with the tape drive the best way that I figured out to squeeze the maximum out of this was to first create an assembler to machine code converter which stored the machine code to tape as you created it .
Then you loaded the program back from tape and poof you had the absolute most you could squeeze out of 3.5K .
After that I cobbled together 8086s and put every version of DOS that came along as well as radical new upgrades like a mouse and a hard drive .
I squeezed Windows version 1 onto a machine that it was n't meant for and so on .
I see my intelligent Nephews and Neices ( all around 20 ) who would be hard pressed to install windows if there was any hurdle like having to manually install a network driver .
Some geeks to be are jumping into the depths of Linux and are probably getting some awesome experience but I have met many a comp sci grad who would be hard pressed to properly set up a pretty basic LAMP server and then do the slightest of unusual configurations ( say memcached ) .
Yet these same Comp Sci grads might have built a basic compiler or OS at some point during their education .
I think that my particular timing was pretty good in that I have had the time to digest the zillion little wonderful innovations ( color codes in my IDE ) without having them overwhelm me like someone who might have started in the 60 's .
But I agree with the premise of this article .
Facebook is not important to many of my generation and I ca n't remember the last time I sent a text message .
The kids of today are probably doing with their cell phones what I did with computers 30 years ago ; that is to squeeze every erg of functionality they can out of them .
Texts are cheaper than calls thus better .
Also innovations like keyboards on reasonably priced phones are better than typing texts on a number pad .
Also the incentives are different ; My social life does not depend on my text plan or abilities .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I first started programming I used a VIC 20 with 3.5K.
At first I dreamed about getting the tape device.
So all my basic programming vanished when turned the machine was turned off.
Then with the tape drive the best way that I figured out to squeeze the maximum out of this was to first create an assembler to machine code converter which stored the machine code to tape as you created it.
Then you loaded the program back from tape and poof you had the absolute most you could squeeze out of 3.5K.
After that I cobbled together 8086s and put every version of DOS that came along as well as radical new upgrades like a mouse and a hard drive.
I squeezed Windows version 1 onto a machine that it wasn't meant for and so on.
I see my intelligent Nephews and Neices (all around 20) who would be hard pressed to install windows if there was any hurdle like having to manually install a network driver.
Some geeks to be are jumping into the depths of Linux and are probably getting some awesome experience but I have met many a comp sci grad who would be hard pressed to properly set up a pretty basic LAMP server and then do the slightest of unusual configurations (say memcached).
Yet these same Comp Sci grads might have built a basic compiler or OS at some point during their education.
I think that my particular timing was pretty good in that I have had the time to digest the zillion little wonderful innovations (color codes in my IDE) without having them overwhelm me like someone who might have started in the 60's.
But I agree with the premise of this article.
Facebook is not important to many of my generation and I can't remember the last time I sent a text message.
The kids of today are probably doing with their cell phones what I did with computers 30 years ago; that is to squeeze every erg of functionality they can out of them.
Texts are cheaper than calls thus better.
Also innovations like keyboards on reasonably priced phones are better than typing texts on a number pad.
Also the incentives are different; My social life does not depend on my text plan or abilities.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716416</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263157140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Get Off My Lawn Kids</p><p>Having been classified as ADHD in the early 70's it's so nice to finally get my revenge now that everyone has been infected with the damn Attention Deficit Syndrome. Those who don't learn to focus and develop short term memory are bound to fail and I can sincerely state "Welcome to my World" - sukkers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Get Off My Lawn KidsHaving been classified as ADHD in the early 70 's it 's so nice to finally get my revenge now that everyone has been infected with the damn Attention Deficit Syndrome .
Those who do n't learn to focus and develop short term memory are bound to fail and I can sincerely state " Welcome to my World " - sukkers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Get Off My Lawn KidsHaving been classified as ADHD in the early 70's it's so nice to finally get my revenge now that everyone has been infected with the damn Attention Deficit Syndrome.
Those who don't learn to focus and develop short term memory are bound to fail and I can sincerely state "Welcome to my World" - sukkers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30721094</id>
	<title>Wha?</title>
	<author>Ozlanthos</author>
	<datestamp>1263206340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Another intra-generational gap is the iGeneration comfort in multi-tasking. Studies show that 16- to 18-year-olds perform seven tasks, on average, in their free time &mdash; like texting on the phone, sending instant messages, and checking Facebook while sitting in front of the television"
<br>
<br>
Too bad they aren't really paying attention to at least half of it.
<br>
<br>
-Oz</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Another intra-generational gap is the iGeneration comfort in multi-tasking .
Studies show that 16- to 18-year-olds perform seven tasks , on average , in their free time    like texting on the phone , sending instant messages , and checking Facebook while sitting in front of the television " Too bad they are n't really paying attention to at least half of it .
-Oz</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Another intra-generational gap is the iGeneration comfort in multi-tasking.
Studies show that 16- to 18-year-olds perform seven tasks, on average, in their free time — like texting on the phone, sending instant messages, and checking Facebook while sitting in front of the television"


Too bad they aren't really paying attention to at least half of it.
-Oz</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716370</id>
	<title>Calling BS</title>
	<author>clinko</author>
	<datestamp>1263156720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would like to add this one:</p><p>As a member of the "Net Generation", I feel we have tuned ourselves to calling out Bullshit...<br>We have an ability to figure out that some stuff is the result of marketing vs. actual Buzz.  That's why fake "viral videos" are so painful to watch.</p><p>Examples:<br>- Cyber Monday (We know this WAS fake, but stores use it to market now)<br>- MySpace Buzz (We knew this was dead years ago)<br>- CNN trying to be "hip" (We saw this from a mile away)<br>- The ACTUAL relevancy of Twitter vs. what is said on TV  (Regis has a twitter account, it's officially uncool)<br>- 3DTV (A new one from this week due to CES.  Seriously, I/We're not feeling it)</p><p>Now we can easily add the phrases "iGeneration" and "Net Generation"</p><p>We know these phrases are bullshit, but get ready to hear more about it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would like to add this one : As a member of the " Net Generation " , I feel we have tuned ourselves to calling out Bullshit...We have an ability to figure out that some stuff is the result of marketing vs. actual Buzz .
That 's why fake " viral videos " are so painful to watch.Examples : - Cyber Monday ( We know this WAS fake , but stores use it to market now ) - MySpace Buzz ( We knew this was dead years ago ) - CNN trying to be " hip " ( We saw this from a mile away ) - The ACTUAL relevancy of Twitter vs. what is said on TV ( Regis has a twitter account , it 's officially uncool ) - 3DTV ( A new one from this week due to CES .
Seriously , I/We 're not feeling it ) Now we can easily add the phrases " iGeneration " and " Net Generation " We know these phrases are bullshit , but get ready to hear more about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would like to add this one:As a member of the "Net Generation", I feel we have tuned ourselves to calling out Bullshit...We have an ability to figure out that some stuff is the result of marketing vs. actual Buzz.
That's why fake "viral videos" are so painful to watch.Examples:- Cyber Monday (We know this WAS fake, but stores use it to market now)- MySpace Buzz (We knew this was dead years ago)- CNN trying to be "hip" (We saw this from a mile away)- The ACTUAL relevancy of Twitter vs. what is said on TV  (Regis has a twitter account, it's officially uncool)- 3DTV (A new one from this week due to CES.
Seriously, I/We're not feeling it)Now we can easily add the phrases "iGeneration" and "Net Generation"We know these phrases are bullshit, but get ready to hear more about it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30721296</id>
	<title>Re:Privacy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263210180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>E-mail is 100\% superior to SMSs minus the fact SMSs have slightly better radio range than data does...</p></div><p>What has SMS got to do with radio?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>E-mail is 100 \ % superior to SMSs minus the fact SMSs have slightly better radio range than data does...What has SMS got to do with radio ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>E-mail is 100\% superior to SMSs minus the fact SMSs have slightly better radio range than data does...What has SMS got to do with radio?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30718484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716588</id>
	<title>Sorry, sounds a bit "get off my lawn" ish</title>
	<author>BrianRoach</author>
	<datestamp>1263115080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To say that you can't separate work/school behaviour from leisure behaviour is silly.  I can be incredibly focused on singular tasks while working, and be rapidly task switching when that level of attention is not necessary. The article says nothing about the younger generations' ability to focus on work/school other than a supposition at the end based on their leisure time activites.</p><p>For whatever reason, I'm a "Net generation" that<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... kept up with the times, I guess. I hate the phone (I think I have 8000 roll over minutes at the moment and only have a VOIP line at home because my wife likes having it), and I've noticed in the last year the only consistent use I have for email is online shopping (receipts &amp; advertising) and bills/confirmations (mortgage got paid, lights will be on next week, etc ).</p><p>Texting/IM/Facebook have really become my main forms of personal communication, unless it's someone who<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... erm, still uses email. And honestly that's few and far between - even my Mom stalks me on facebook these days, I don't know that we've exchanged an email in over a year.</p><p>Work? That's a different matter. If you're updating facebook every 5 minutes, you're obviously not focused. Email is king as the primary form of communication, with the occasional IM (which usually is asking if I'd read an email<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... or if I could come over to their physical location to discuss something<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... ).</p><p>And yes, the last part above should be enclosed in a sarcasm tag. But at the same time<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I find no harm in having IM up and running while I'm working on code. If I'm deep into it, I ignore the IM until later. When I come out of the code trance, I'll often take a little 5 minute break and check facebook and maybe respond to a text or IM. I might even check slashdot. It's healthy.</p><p>The younger (mid 20's), junior engineers I've worked with over the last couple years exhibit the same behaviours, so I'm going to call Shenanigans.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To say that you ca n't separate work/school behaviour from leisure behaviour is silly .
I can be incredibly focused on singular tasks while working , and be rapidly task switching when that level of attention is not necessary .
The article says nothing about the younger generations ' ability to focus on work/school other than a supposition at the end based on their leisure time activites.For whatever reason , I 'm a " Net generation " that ... kept up with the times , I guess .
I hate the phone ( I think I have 8000 roll over minutes at the moment and only have a VOIP line at home because my wife likes having it ) , and I 've noticed in the last year the only consistent use I have for email is online shopping ( receipts &amp; advertising ) and bills/confirmations ( mortgage got paid , lights will be on next week , etc ) .Texting/IM/Facebook have really become my main forms of personal communication , unless it 's someone who ... erm , still uses email .
And honestly that 's few and far between - even my Mom stalks me on facebook these days , I do n't know that we 've exchanged an email in over a year.Work ?
That 's a different matter .
If you 're updating facebook every 5 minutes , you 're obviously not focused .
Email is king as the primary form of communication , with the occasional IM ( which usually is asking if I 'd read an email ... or if I could come over to their physical location to discuss something ... ) .And yes , the last part above should be enclosed in a sarcasm tag .
But at the same time ... I find no harm in having IM up and running while I 'm working on code .
If I 'm deep into it , I ignore the IM until later .
When I come out of the code trance , I 'll often take a little 5 minute break and check facebook and maybe respond to a text or IM .
I might even check slashdot .
It 's healthy.The younger ( mid 20 's ) , junior engineers I 've worked with over the last couple years exhibit the same behaviours , so I 'm going to call Shenanigans .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To say that you can't separate work/school behaviour from leisure behaviour is silly.
I can be incredibly focused on singular tasks while working, and be rapidly task switching when that level of attention is not necessary.
The article says nothing about the younger generations' ability to focus on work/school other than a supposition at the end based on their leisure time activites.For whatever reason, I'm a "Net generation" that ... kept up with the times, I guess.
I hate the phone (I think I have 8000 roll over minutes at the moment and only have a VOIP line at home because my wife likes having it), and I've noticed in the last year the only consistent use I have for email is online shopping (receipts &amp; advertising) and bills/confirmations (mortgage got paid, lights will be on next week, etc ).Texting/IM/Facebook have really become my main forms of personal communication, unless it's someone who ... erm, still uses email.
And honestly that's few and far between - even my Mom stalks me on facebook these days, I don't know that we've exchanged an email in over a year.Work?
That's a different matter.
If you're updating facebook every 5 minutes, you're obviously not focused.
Email is king as the primary form of communication, with the occasional IM (which usually is asking if I'd read an email ... or if I could come over to their physical location to discuss something ... ).And yes, the last part above should be enclosed in a sarcasm tag.
But at the same time ... I find no harm in having IM up and running while I'm working on code.
If I'm deep into it, I ignore the IM until later.
When I come out of the code trance, I'll often take a little 5 minute break and check facebook and maybe respond to a text or IM.
I might even check slashdot.
It's healthy.The younger (mid 20's), junior engineers I've worked with over the last couple years exhibit the same behaviours, so I'm going to call Shenanigans.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30720208</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263149220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would go so far as to say that it doesn't count as activity, rather dull mindless semicommunication, rather like grunting, but across a very high speed network of switches.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would go so far as to say that it does n't count as activity , rather dull mindless semicommunication , rather like grunting , but across a very high speed network of switches .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would go so far as to say that it doesn't count as activity, rather dull mindless semicommunication, rather like grunting, but across a very high speed network of switches.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30722158</id>
	<title>communicate more ?</title>
	<author>viralMeme</author>
	<datestamp>1263220680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"<i>The Net Generation spend two hours a day talking on the phone and still use e-mail frequently while the iGeneration -- conceivably their younger siblings -- spends considerably more time texting than talking on the phone, pays less attention to television than the older group, and tends to communicate more over instant-messenger networks</i>"<br> <br>

They may spend considerably more time instant-messaging, but does anything of real value get communicated. Instant messages are invariably vacuous and shallow, contain no real value and tend to instantly vanish into the ether<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..</htmltext>
<tokenext>" The Net Generation spend two hours a day talking on the phone and still use e-mail frequently while the iGeneration -- conceivably their younger siblings -- spends considerably more time texting than talking on the phone , pays less attention to television than the older group , and tends to communicate more over instant-messenger networks " They may spend considerably more time instant-messaging , but does anything of real value get communicated .
Instant messages are invariably vacuous and shallow , contain no real value and tend to instantly vanish into the ether . .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The Net Generation spend two hours a day talking on the phone and still use e-mail frequently while the iGeneration -- conceivably their younger siblings -- spends considerably more time texting than talking on the phone, pays less attention to television than the older group, and tends to communicate more over instant-messenger networks" 

They may spend considerably more time instant-messaging, but does anything of real value get communicated.
Instant messages are invariably vacuous and shallow, contain no real value and tend to instantly vanish into the ether ..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30721264</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263209760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sure, your mom can text message, but does she text more than she uses the voice function of her phone? I think the point isn't that the Net generation (of which I'm a part) \_doesn't\_ use text messaging, but that they use it less than their younger iGeneration counterparts.</p><p>I'm quite techsavvy myself (I work as a sysadmin / programmer at a small IT firm, and am generally the best versed in technology in general of my colleagues), my WinMo smartphone is practically glued to my hand, but I still use voice more than text, like the article says.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure , your mom can text message , but does she text more than she uses the voice function of her phone ?
I think the point is n't that the Net generation ( of which I 'm a part ) \ _does n't \ _ use text messaging , but that they use it less than their younger iGeneration counterparts.I 'm quite techsavvy myself ( I work as a sysadmin / programmer at a small IT firm , and am generally the best versed in technology in general of my colleagues ) , my WinMo smartphone is practically glued to my hand , but I still use voice more than text , like the article says .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure, your mom can text message, but does she text more than she uses the voice function of her phone?
I think the point isn't that the Net generation (of which I'm a part) \_doesn't\_ use text messaging, but that they use it less than their younger iGeneration counterparts.I'm quite techsavvy myself (I work as a sysadmin / programmer at a small IT firm, and am generally the best versed in technology in general of my colleagues), my WinMo smartphone is practically glued to my hand, but I still use voice more than text, like the article says.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716462</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716908</id>
	<title>Not sure if I agree.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263117420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not sure if I agree with the assessment. I'm of the "Net generation." Which is a B.S. phrase in and of itself, but television is blatantly ignored, and the only reason I even have a cable coming into my home is for the internet itself. I rarely am on the phone longer than 25 minutes unless it's work-related. Otherwise, texting is one of my only means of communication. I actually prefer using instant-messaging systems as they allow me to type and construct my thoughts. My younger brother is 7 years younger than myself, and his activities are not much different than my own when it comes to communication and technology. I'd like to see where this "report" got its scientific data from. It sounds like people completely disconnected from the two generations are trying to analyze us, while failing miserably.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not sure if I agree with the assessment .
I 'm of the " Net generation .
" Which is a B.S .
phrase in and of itself , but television is blatantly ignored , and the only reason I even have a cable coming into my home is for the internet itself .
I rarely am on the phone longer than 25 minutes unless it 's work-related .
Otherwise , texting is one of my only means of communication .
I actually prefer using instant-messaging systems as they allow me to type and construct my thoughts .
My younger brother is 7 years younger than myself , and his activities are not much different than my own when it comes to communication and technology .
I 'd like to see where this " report " got its scientific data from .
It sounds like people completely disconnected from the two generations are trying to analyze us , while failing miserably .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not sure if I agree with the assessment.
I'm of the "Net generation.
" Which is a B.S.
phrase in and of itself, but television is blatantly ignored, and the only reason I even have a cable coming into my home is for the internet itself.
I rarely am on the phone longer than 25 minutes unless it's work-related.
Otherwise, texting is one of my only means of communication.
I actually prefer using instant-messaging systems as they allow me to type and construct my thoughts.
My younger brother is 7 years younger than myself, and his activities are not much different than my own when it comes to communication and technology.
I'd like to see where this "report" got its scientific data from.
It sounds like people completely disconnected from the two generations are trying to analyze us, while failing miserably.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30718264</id>
	<title>Dumb as a Rock or as stupid as a Turnip</title>
	<author>b4upoo</author>
	<datestamp>1263126480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>       Take your pick. But any definition of stupid includes people who text trivia back and forth to each other. Thought is avoided completely. And any fool who bothers a teacher with a text message expecting a reply deserves an F for bad conduct. We are raising a pile of trash and calling them kids.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Take your pick .
But any definition of stupid includes people who text trivia back and forth to each other .
Thought is avoided completely .
And any fool who bothers a teacher with a text message expecting a reply deserves an F for bad conduct .
We are raising a pile of trash and calling them kids .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>       Take your pick.
But any definition of stupid includes people who text trivia back and forth to each other.
Thought is avoided completely.
And any fool who bothers a teacher with a text message expecting a reply deserves an F for bad conduct.
We are raising a pile of trash and calling them kids.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716876</id>
	<title>Or is this simply young people, of every generatio</title>
	<author>SmallFurryCreature</author>
	<datestamp>1263117240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think this might not be so much a generation difference as an age difference. As you get older, you mellow out. The urgency of your teen years seems silly in retrospect and you realize that not everything has to happen now and that you won't just die if xxx.
</p><p>As you get a bit older, and see more then one younger generation, you will realize this. Or if you remember yourself a bit better.
</p><p>About the only problem happens if a person doesn't grow up. If someone stays a teen to long, then they run into problem in the work place where adult behavior is expected. But teens being teens is not a problem.
</p><p>If you watch young kids, they can jump from one topic to another faster then any adult can follow, but they are in fact doing 1 thing, talking to you. They just aren't very good yet at moderating their enthusiasms. A kid that plays with a dozen toys is doing 1 task: playing. A kid that talks about a dozen subjects, is doing 1 task: talking.
</p><p>You can see children concentrate often enough, on say drawing with an intensity that is almost scary. You can call them and they don't ignore you because no child ignores a call for candy, they just are lost in their own universe, lost one doing on task really focused.
</p><p>Teens have the same capability but when they are NOT focused on one task, they are struggling with a world that is full of new things and trying to find their role in it. How is a teen supposed to know what it wants to do later, if it doesn't try everything? A teens role is NOT to do one task very well, but to learn and you learn by trying lots of different things. And all the hormones rushing around make everything seem very urgent. A child has no concept of time because it doesn't happen to it, an adult knows its time is limited but so what? But to a teen, death is new and makes everything have to happen now.
</p><p>And frankly, if you watch different generations and read accounts of teens far older then you, you realize that this sense of urgency and impatience with slow adults is universal.
</p><p>Mind you, bitching about the youth of today is also universal.
</p><p>The only problems occur if we start seeing teen behavior as desirable in an adult. Teens that don't grow up are the real problem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think this might not be so much a generation difference as an age difference .
As you get older , you mellow out .
The urgency of your teen years seems silly in retrospect and you realize that not everything has to happen now and that you wo n't just die if xxx .
As you get a bit older , and see more then one younger generation , you will realize this .
Or if you remember yourself a bit better .
About the only problem happens if a person does n't grow up .
If someone stays a teen to long , then they run into problem in the work place where adult behavior is expected .
But teens being teens is not a problem .
If you watch young kids , they can jump from one topic to another faster then any adult can follow , but they are in fact doing 1 thing , talking to you .
They just are n't very good yet at moderating their enthusiasms .
A kid that plays with a dozen toys is doing 1 task : playing .
A kid that talks about a dozen subjects , is doing 1 task : talking .
You can see children concentrate often enough , on say drawing with an intensity that is almost scary .
You can call them and they do n't ignore you because no child ignores a call for candy , they just are lost in their own universe , lost one doing on task really focused .
Teens have the same capability but when they are NOT focused on one task , they are struggling with a world that is full of new things and trying to find their role in it .
How is a teen supposed to know what it wants to do later , if it does n't try everything ?
A teens role is NOT to do one task very well , but to learn and you learn by trying lots of different things .
And all the hormones rushing around make everything seem very urgent .
A child has no concept of time because it does n't happen to it , an adult knows its time is limited but so what ?
But to a teen , death is new and makes everything have to happen now .
And frankly , if you watch different generations and read accounts of teens far older then you , you realize that this sense of urgency and impatience with slow adults is universal .
Mind you , bitching about the youth of today is also universal .
The only problems occur if we start seeing teen behavior as desirable in an adult .
Teens that do n't grow up are the real problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think this might not be so much a generation difference as an age difference.
As you get older, you mellow out.
The urgency of your teen years seems silly in retrospect and you realize that not everything has to happen now and that you won't just die if xxx.
As you get a bit older, and see more then one younger generation, you will realize this.
Or if you remember yourself a bit better.
About the only problem happens if a person doesn't grow up.
If someone stays a teen to long, then they run into problem in the work place where adult behavior is expected.
But teens being teens is not a problem.
If you watch young kids, they can jump from one topic to another faster then any adult can follow, but they are in fact doing 1 thing, talking to you.
They just aren't very good yet at moderating their enthusiasms.
A kid that plays with a dozen toys is doing 1 task: playing.
A kid that talks about a dozen subjects, is doing 1 task: talking.
You can see children concentrate often enough, on say drawing with an intensity that is almost scary.
You can call them and they don't ignore you because no child ignores a call for candy, they just are lost in their own universe, lost one doing on task really focused.
Teens have the same capability but when they are NOT focused on one task, they are struggling with a world that is full of new things and trying to find their role in it.
How is a teen supposed to know what it wants to do later, if it doesn't try everything?
A teens role is NOT to do one task very well, but to learn and you learn by trying lots of different things.
And all the hormones rushing around make everything seem very urgent.
A child has no concept of time because it doesn't happen to it, an adult knows its time is limited but so what?
But to a teen, death is new and makes everything have to happen now.
And frankly, if you watch different generations and read accounts of teens far older then you, you realize that this sense of urgency and impatience with slow adults is universal.
Mind you, bitching about the youth of today is also universal.
The only problems occur if we start seeing teen behavior as desirable in an adult.
Teens that don't grow up are the real problem.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30727110</id>
	<title>Re:Calling BS</title>
	<author>Improv</author>
	<datestamp>1263242460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What does cyber monday have to do with stores? Unless you're buying kinky<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... ohhh<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... err excuse me I have some apologies to send.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What does cyber monday have to do with stores ?
Unless you 're buying kinky ... ohhh ... err excuse me I have some apologies to send .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What does cyber monday have to do with stores?
Unless you're buying kinky ... ohhh ... err excuse me I have some apologies to send.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716370</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716418</id>
	<title>Re:It was better in the old days...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263157140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let "true socializing" mean socializing with uninteresting people in your local neighborhood and "false socializing" mean socializing within boundaryless global pools of people who share your interests.</p><p>My brother has met all kinds of people to go off-roading with in his larger than local sphere.  That kind of possibility simply wasn't there before instant messaging made everyone seem closer to their shared interests.  I'm certainly no authority on socializing, but I don't believe that there's any social sense of being a human being that's lost when you socialize over a text medium vs in person.  If anything, it allows us to socialize with more people than ever before.</p><p>Only thing that's not great about it is that we are likely to be more exposed to social networks we do not agree with, which may cause larger conflicts vs smaller isolated instances of ostracization.  But that's inherent in the risks of globalization as a whole.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let " true socializing " mean socializing with uninteresting people in your local neighborhood and " false socializing " mean socializing within boundaryless global pools of people who share your interests.My brother has met all kinds of people to go off-roading with in his larger than local sphere .
That kind of possibility simply was n't there before instant messaging made everyone seem closer to their shared interests .
I 'm certainly no authority on socializing , but I do n't believe that there 's any social sense of being a human being that 's lost when you socialize over a text medium vs in person .
If anything , it allows us to socialize with more people than ever before.Only thing that 's not great about it is that we are likely to be more exposed to social networks we do not agree with , which may cause larger conflicts vs smaller isolated instances of ostracization .
But that 's inherent in the risks of globalization as a whole .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let "true socializing" mean socializing with uninteresting people in your local neighborhood and "false socializing" mean socializing within boundaryless global pools of people who share your interests.My brother has met all kinds of people to go off-roading with in his larger than local sphere.
That kind of possibility simply wasn't there before instant messaging made everyone seem closer to their shared interests.
I'm certainly no authority on socializing, but I don't believe that there's any social sense of being a human being that's lost when you socialize over a text medium vs in person.
If anything, it allows us to socialize with more people than ever before.Only thing that's not great about it is that we are likely to be more exposed to social networks we do not agree with, which may cause larger conflicts vs smaller isolated instances of ostracization.
But that's inherent in the risks of globalization as a whole.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716264</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717814</id>
	<title>Re:Too true</title>
	<author>Alcoholist</author>
	<datestamp>1263123540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Same.</p><p>I also have wondered what the point of texting is.  It doesn't seem an efficient a way to communicate any reasonable amount of data.  You can speak like ten times faster than you can type on a proper keyboard and I'm going to go out on a limb here and reckon that a regular keyboard is around 10 times faster than a cellphone keypad..  There is only so fast you can move your thumbs.  Since you are holding a mobile communication device anyway, why not just call them and speak?</p><p>Another one I don't get, perhaps because I'm only of the 'Net Generation', is Twitter.  Email I get, blogs I get, forums and lists I get, even Blackberries make some sense to me.  But Twitter makes zero sense to me.  The very nature of micro-blogging seems to guarantee the tiny posts will always be insufficient in content or trivial in nature.  So what is the point?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Same.I also have wondered what the point of texting is .
It does n't seem an efficient a way to communicate any reasonable amount of data .
You can speak like ten times faster than you can type on a proper keyboard and I 'm going to go out on a limb here and reckon that a regular keyboard is around 10 times faster than a cellphone keypad.. There is only so fast you can move your thumbs .
Since you are holding a mobile communication device anyway , why not just call them and speak ? Another one I do n't get , perhaps because I 'm only of the 'Net Generation ' , is Twitter .
Email I get , blogs I get , forums and lists I get , even Blackberries make some sense to me .
But Twitter makes zero sense to me .
The very nature of micro-blogging seems to guarantee the tiny posts will always be insufficient in content or trivial in nature .
So what is the point ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Same.I also have wondered what the point of texting is.
It doesn't seem an efficient a way to communicate any reasonable amount of data.
You can speak like ten times faster than you can type on a proper keyboard and I'm going to go out on a limb here and reckon that a regular keyboard is around 10 times faster than a cellphone keypad..  There is only so fast you can move your thumbs.
Since you are holding a mobile communication device anyway, why not just call them and speak?Another one I don't get, perhaps because I'm only of the 'Net Generation', is Twitter.
Email I get, blogs I get, forums and lists I get, even Blackberries make some sense to me.
But Twitter makes zero sense to me.
The very nature of micro-blogging seems to guarantee the tiny posts will always be insufficient in content or trivial in nature.
So what is the point?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716276</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716554</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263114780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I guess I'm Net generation. Except that doesn't sound right for anyone I know of my age group.<br>Furthermore, I've always adopted the best tools for the job, and ignored blatant fads such as twitter.</p></div><p>For work issues, I don't even answer email immediately, because I have no intention of serving as a brain trust for people who <b>will not</b> think.  I let them age.  The more I get from a single source the more I let them age.</p><p>For recreational use, I still prefer an email for anything other than the "What time will you arrive" question via text.</p><p>Thinking carefully, I can not come up with a single person I care to follow on twitter, but it is nice for breaking news issues if you are a news junkie.</p><p>I think we are breeding the first generation of the BORG.  People who can't think and can't act without first checking in with the collective.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess I 'm Net generation .
Except that does n't sound right for anyone I know of my age group.Furthermore , I 've always adopted the best tools for the job , and ignored blatant fads such as twitter.For work issues , I do n't even answer email immediately , because I have no intention of serving as a brain trust for people who will not think .
I let them age .
The more I get from a single source the more I let them age.For recreational use , I still prefer an email for anything other than the " What time will you arrive " question via text.Thinking carefully , I can not come up with a single person I care to follow on twitter , but it is nice for breaking news issues if you are a news junkie.I think we are breeding the first generation of the BORG .
People who ca n't think and ca n't act without first checking in with the collective .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess I'm Net generation.
Except that doesn't sound right for anyone I know of my age group.Furthermore, I've always adopted the best tools for the job, and ignored blatant fads such as twitter.For work issues, I don't even answer email immediately, because I have no intention of serving as a brain trust for people who will not think.
I let them age.
The more I get from a single source the more I let them age.For recreational use, I still prefer an email for anything other than the "What time will you arrive" question via text.Thinking carefully, I can not come up with a single person I care to follow on twitter, but it is nice for breaking news issues if you are a news junkie.I think we are breeding the first generation of the BORG.
People who can't think and can't act without first checking in with the collective.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30718520</id>
	<title>Fossil Generation</title>
	<author>theGhostPony</author>
	<datestamp>1263128580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Born in the early 60s. Still listen to vinyl and love vacuum tube amps though I do have an iPod video that I use all the time. I still like to work on old cars. Started surfing in the mid 80s on PCPursuit with a TRS-80 Model 3. I build and maintain my own computers. I'm online all day (laid-off software dev) to keep up with news and politics and use Firefox, Opera and Safari and only power-down the PCs once a week. Have four hobby related blogs and code my own web pages. I don't use Twitter although I can see how invaluable it can be for things like news gathering (read about last night's Cali earthquake as it was happening).
<br> <br>
Doing seven things at once?!? Not me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Born in the early 60s .
Still listen to vinyl and love vacuum tube amps though I do have an iPod video that I use all the time .
I still like to work on old cars .
Started surfing in the mid 80s on PCPursuit with a TRS-80 Model 3 .
I build and maintain my own computers .
I 'm online all day ( laid-off software dev ) to keep up with news and politics and use Firefox , Opera and Safari and only power-down the PCs once a week .
Have four hobby related blogs and code my own web pages .
I do n't use Twitter although I can see how invaluable it can be for things like news gathering ( read about last night 's Cali earthquake as it was happening ) .
Doing seven things at once ? ! ?
Not me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Born in the early 60s.
Still listen to vinyl and love vacuum tube amps though I do have an iPod video that I use all the time.
I still like to work on old cars.
Started surfing in the mid 80s on PCPursuit with a TRS-80 Model 3.
I build and maintain my own computers.
I'm online all day (laid-off software dev) to keep up with news and politics and use Firefox, Opera and Safari and only power-down the PCs once a week.
Have four hobby related blogs and code my own web pages.
I don't use Twitter although I can see how invaluable it can be for things like news gathering (read about last night's Cali earthquake as it was happening).
Doing seven things at once?!?
Not me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716820</id>
	<title>Re:I thought multi-tasking didn't really work</title>
	<author>phantomfive</author>
	<datestamp>1263117000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is anecdotal evidence, but I am certain multi-tasking is something that can be improved with practice.<br> <br>
Part of it is just technique, like leaving all your necessary windows open on different virtual desktops for quick switching, and some of it is keeping your mind awake.<br> <br>
I used to work for a consulting firm where I was doing work for three different clients at the same time.  At first it was hard mentally, but pretty soon I got really fast at it.  In fact, I felt like multi-tasking was more productive because in the down-time for one project, I had another project I could work on, so there was no down-time.<br> <br>
From a mental perspective, it felt a lot like switching languages.  Some people initially have a lot of trouble in an room where people are speaking Spanish and English mixed, for example, even if they speak both languages; but if they spend much time in such rooms, they will quickly get the hang of it.  In that case it's mostly a matter of turning on the switch in your mind that reminds you to switch to Spanish mode when you hear Spanish or English mode when you hear English.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is anecdotal evidence , but I am certain multi-tasking is something that can be improved with practice .
Part of it is just technique , like leaving all your necessary windows open on different virtual desktops for quick switching , and some of it is keeping your mind awake .
I used to work for a consulting firm where I was doing work for three different clients at the same time .
At first it was hard mentally , but pretty soon I got really fast at it .
In fact , I felt like multi-tasking was more productive because in the down-time for one project , I had another project I could work on , so there was no down-time .
From a mental perspective , it felt a lot like switching languages .
Some people initially have a lot of trouble in an room where people are speaking Spanish and English mixed , for example , even if they speak both languages ; but if they spend much time in such rooms , they will quickly get the hang of it .
In that case it 's mostly a matter of turning on the switch in your mind that reminds you to switch to Spanish mode when you hear Spanish or English mode when you hear English .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is anecdotal evidence, but I am certain multi-tasking is something that can be improved with practice.
Part of it is just technique, like leaving all your necessary windows open on different virtual desktops for quick switching, and some of it is keeping your mind awake.
I used to work for a consulting firm where I was doing work for three different clients at the same time.
At first it was hard mentally, but pretty soon I got really fast at it.
In fact, I felt like multi-tasking was more productive because in the down-time for one project, I had another project I could work on, so there was no down-time.
From a mental perspective, it felt a lot like switching languages.
Some people initially have a lot of trouble in an room where people are speaking Spanish and English mixed, for example, even if they speak both languages; but if they spend much time in such rooms, they will quickly get the hang of it.
In that case it's mostly a matter of turning on the switch in your mind that reminds you to switch to Spanish mode when you hear Spanish or English mode when you hear English.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716284</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716866</id>
	<title>Re:Too true</title>
	<author>ScrewMaster</author>
	<datestamp>1263117180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm in my early thirties and I avoid multitasking like the plague.</p></div><p>I'm in my late forties and I feel the same way. Well, I'm also a software developer and multitasking doesn't really help much there<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... a little concentration helps get the job done. An old girlfriend once called me "completion oriented", and I would drive her nuts because I would rather finish something right rather than do it halfway and skip to the next thing, and then try to come back to the first thing having forgotten what the hell I was trying to do. I've also found that the majority of multitaskers are nowhere <i>near</i> as good at it as they think they are. Fact is, the human brain has certain limitations, and no amount of shifting mental gears can overcome that, and unless you're performing trivial tasks multitasking doesn't really buy you anything.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm in my early thirties and I avoid multitasking like the plague.I 'm in my late forties and I feel the same way .
Well , I 'm also a software developer and multitasking does n't really help much there ... a little concentration helps get the job done .
An old girlfriend once called me " completion oriented " , and I would drive her nuts because I would rather finish something right rather than do it halfway and skip to the next thing , and then try to come back to the first thing having forgotten what the hell I was trying to do .
I 've also found that the majority of multitaskers are nowhere near as good at it as they think they are .
Fact is , the human brain has certain limitations , and no amount of shifting mental gears can overcome that , and unless you 're performing trivial tasks multitasking does n't really buy you anything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm in my early thirties and I avoid multitasking like the plague.I'm in my late forties and I feel the same way.
Well, I'm also a software developer and multitasking doesn't really help much there ... a little concentration helps get the job done.
An old girlfriend once called me "completion oriented", and I would drive her nuts because I would rather finish something right rather than do it halfway and skip to the next thing, and then try to come back to the first thing having forgotten what the hell I was trying to do.
I've also found that the majority of multitaskers are nowhere near as good at it as they think they are.
Fact is, the human brain has certain limitations, and no amount of shifting mental gears can overcome that, and unless you're performing trivial tasks multitasking doesn't really buy you anything.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716276</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30719192</id>
	<title>Duh, noticed that with my brother 20 years ago</title>
	<author>sprior</author>
	<datestamp>1263136320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My brother is 5 years younger than me (I'm 44 now).  That difference meant that when he was in high school he had the VCR and cable TV and I just missed those things.  Amazing how different his experience was.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My brother is 5 years younger than me ( I 'm 44 now ) .
That difference meant that when he was in high school he had the VCR and cable TV and I just missed those things .
Amazing how different his experience was .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My brother is 5 years younger than me (I'm 44 now).
That difference meant that when he was in high school he had the VCR and cable TV and I just missed those things.
Amazing how different his experience was.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717434</id>
	<title>Get a real job Dr. Larry!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263120780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't doubt Dr. Larry's finding! This is the same old poo-poo that social science has been cranking out since king John was forced to sign the Magna Carta. After gen-QXYZ, or what ever Next Dr. Larry Jr. will be calling them, ousts the next senior generation of worker, they too will be belly aching about technology induced job stress. What is a constant is that youth will vanish into middle-age! There are still baby-boomers that intend to work into their grave. Great, if you are the boss. Not so good if you are forced out by the new young IM-textin'-fill-in-next-new-trend boss! Better put some nuts in the tree, squirrel, and get off my lawn.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't doubt Dr. Larry 's finding !
This is the same old poo-poo that social science has been cranking out since king John was forced to sign the Magna Carta .
After gen-QXYZ , or what ever Next Dr. Larry Jr. will be calling them , ousts the next senior generation of worker , they too will be belly aching about technology induced job stress .
What is a constant is that youth will vanish into middle-age !
There are still baby-boomers that intend to work into their grave .
Great , if you are the boss .
Not so good if you are forced out by the new young IM-textin'-fill-in-next-new-trend boss !
Better put some nuts in the tree , squirrel , and get off my lawn .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't doubt Dr. Larry's finding!
This is the same old poo-poo that social science has been cranking out since king John was forced to sign the Magna Carta.
After gen-QXYZ, or what ever Next Dr. Larry Jr. will be calling them, ousts the next senior generation of worker, they too will be belly aching about technology induced job stress.
What is a constant is that youth will vanish into middle-age!
There are still baby-boomers that intend to work into their grave.
Great, if you are the boss.
Not so good if you are forced out by the new young IM-textin'-fill-in-next-new-trend boss!
Better put some nuts in the tree, squirrel, and get off my lawn.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30718484</id>
	<title>Privacy</title>
	<author>JimboFBX</author>
	<datestamp>1263128220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It all comes down to privacy and free time. Their behavior will change once they no longer have to be concerned about someone overhearing their conversation, and they actually want to get a conversation done in a timely fashion. People in high school don't want their plans/problems heard throughout the house. Personally, I used to rarely use e-mail, but that changed after I got an iphone because I don't waste money on unlimited SMSs. E-mail is 100\% superior to SMSs minus the fact SMSs have slightly better radio range than data does...<br> <br>

And I question this "7 things" number. Instant messaging, while surfing the internet, while texting, while watching TV, while playing WOW, while playing Xbox (on a second TV), while chowing down a hoagie? Or are they counting "7 windows open on the task bar" as 7 things? Cuz if thats the case I do 40 things at once at work...</htmltext>
<tokenext>It all comes down to privacy and free time .
Their behavior will change once they no longer have to be concerned about someone overhearing their conversation , and they actually want to get a conversation done in a timely fashion .
People in high school do n't want their plans/problems heard throughout the house .
Personally , I used to rarely use e-mail , but that changed after I got an iphone because I do n't waste money on unlimited SMSs .
E-mail is 100 \ % superior to SMSs minus the fact SMSs have slightly better radio range than data does.. . And I question this " 7 things " number .
Instant messaging , while surfing the internet , while texting , while watching TV , while playing WOW , while playing Xbox ( on a second TV ) , while chowing down a hoagie ?
Or are they counting " 7 windows open on the task bar " as 7 things ?
Cuz if thats the case I do 40 things at once at work.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It all comes down to privacy and free time.
Their behavior will change once they no longer have to be concerned about someone overhearing their conversation, and they actually want to get a conversation done in a timely fashion.
People in high school don't want their plans/problems heard throughout the house.
Personally, I used to rarely use e-mail, but that changed after I got an iphone because I don't waste money on unlimited SMSs.
E-mail is 100\% superior to SMSs minus the fact SMSs have slightly better radio range than data does... 

And I question this "7 things" number.
Instant messaging, while surfing the internet, while texting, while watching TV, while playing WOW, while playing Xbox (on a second TV), while chowing down a hoagie?
Or are they counting "7 windows open on the task bar" as 7 things?
Cuz if thats the case I do 40 things at once at work...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716842</id>
	<title>Re:It was better in the old days...</title>
	<author>mlts</author>
	<datestamp>1263117060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd say it is a change that is not going away post 30.  I've seen people start texting when it came available and still do today, because it has become easier than a voice call in a number of situations, and that text messages almost always get through.  Plus, it beats voice mail especially for a very short note such as "we arrived at the pub."</p><p>The main technology that was replaced by texting is the pager.  A lot of pagers will miss the signal being set out by the broadcast station, especially in a server room.  So one used to work in a data center, come out, then get your manager telling you about angry people in other departments who say they have been paging you for hours repeatedly because of something.  Since most pagers were one-way, the paging service could only send out a single paging notification.  Now, as soon as one steps out of the data center, a text message gets received.  This way one can reply "call the helldesk because IT is not allowed to work on items without a trouble ticket.  If you don't like that, please have your department manager call IT's so the proper time is credited. [1]"  Of course, some two-way pagers would have services which would resend until the pager acknowledged that it got the page, but those were few and far between.</p><p>Before SMS, it also took some effort to send something more than just a phone number to a pager.  You either had to have a terminal or two-way pager, or in some cases, call the paging service's operator and dictate a text.</p><p>Eventually cellphones got some sort of paging feature where you could leave a message, or hit "5" on the voice mail and leave a text page.  This was good because the phone, being a two way device, would eventually pick up the notification.</p><p>Compared to the catch-as-catch-can system of one way pagers, and even two way pagers which required spending time calling voice mail, SMS is a lot nicer.  It doesn't matter what network someone is on for cellphone service, you can reach them.  And if more details are needed, one can just fire up a voice call.  You also don't need to be paying for a paging service on top of your cellphone service (and paging services got expensive, easily $100-$200 a month if you have a two way pager that allowed you to reply.)  Finally, with device convergence, one only needs a single device, perhaps two (home/work phones) on the belt.  Gone are the days of a sysadmin having to have a Batman-esque belt with a pager, a PDA, and a cellphone at all times at work, and when on call.</p><p>Of course, MMS gives some advantages.  If you don't have someone's E-mail, you can send them a copy of the Excel document they have been wanting to their phone.</p><p>[1]:  In medium to large businesses, having everything documented on trouble tickets means the difference between getting additional admins to handle tasks come the next FY, versus losing headcount because of the perception that IT is not doing anything.  If you don't have it documented on a trouble ticket, it didn't happen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd say it is a change that is not going away post 30 .
I 've seen people start texting when it came available and still do today , because it has become easier than a voice call in a number of situations , and that text messages almost always get through .
Plus , it beats voice mail especially for a very short note such as " we arrived at the pub .
" The main technology that was replaced by texting is the pager .
A lot of pagers will miss the signal being set out by the broadcast station , especially in a server room .
So one used to work in a data center , come out , then get your manager telling you about angry people in other departments who say they have been paging you for hours repeatedly because of something .
Since most pagers were one-way , the paging service could only send out a single paging notification .
Now , as soon as one steps out of the data center , a text message gets received .
This way one can reply " call the helldesk because IT is not allowed to work on items without a trouble ticket .
If you do n't like that , please have your department manager call IT 's so the proper time is credited .
[ 1 ] " Of course , some two-way pagers would have services which would resend until the pager acknowledged that it got the page , but those were few and far between.Before SMS , it also took some effort to send something more than just a phone number to a pager .
You either had to have a terminal or two-way pager , or in some cases , call the paging service 's operator and dictate a text.Eventually cellphones got some sort of paging feature where you could leave a message , or hit " 5 " on the voice mail and leave a text page .
This was good because the phone , being a two way device , would eventually pick up the notification.Compared to the catch-as-catch-can system of one way pagers , and even two way pagers which required spending time calling voice mail , SMS is a lot nicer .
It does n't matter what network someone is on for cellphone service , you can reach them .
And if more details are needed , one can just fire up a voice call .
You also do n't need to be paying for a paging service on top of your cellphone service ( and paging services got expensive , easily $ 100- $ 200 a month if you have a two way pager that allowed you to reply .
) Finally , with device convergence , one only needs a single device , perhaps two ( home/work phones ) on the belt .
Gone are the days of a sysadmin having to have a Batman-esque belt with a pager , a PDA , and a cellphone at all times at work , and when on call.Of course , MMS gives some advantages .
If you do n't have someone 's E-mail , you can send them a copy of the Excel document they have been wanting to their phone .
[ 1 ] : In medium to large businesses , having everything documented on trouble tickets means the difference between getting additional admins to handle tasks come the next FY , versus losing headcount because of the perception that IT is not doing anything .
If you do n't have it documented on a trouble ticket , it did n't happen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd say it is a change that is not going away post 30.
I've seen people start texting when it came available and still do today, because it has become easier than a voice call in a number of situations, and that text messages almost always get through.
Plus, it beats voice mail especially for a very short note such as "we arrived at the pub.
"The main technology that was replaced by texting is the pager.
A lot of pagers will miss the signal being set out by the broadcast station, especially in a server room.
So one used to work in a data center, come out, then get your manager telling you about angry people in other departments who say they have been paging you for hours repeatedly because of something.
Since most pagers were one-way, the paging service could only send out a single paging notification.
Now, as soon as one steps out of the data center, a text message gets received.
This way one can reply "call the helldesk because IT is not allowed to work on items without a trouble ticket.
If you don't like that, please have your department manager call IT's so the proper time is credited.
[1]"  Of course, some two-way pagers would have services which would resend until the pager acknowledged that it got the page, but those were few and far between.Before SMS, it also took some effort to send something more than just a phone number to a pager.
You either had to have a terminal or two-way pager, or in some cases, call the paging service's operator and dictate a text.Eventually cellphones got some sort of paging feature where you could leave a message, or hit "5" on the voice mail and leave a text page.
This was good because the phone, being a two way device, would eventually pick up the notification.Compared to the catch-as-catch-can system of one way pagers, and even two way pagers which required spending time calling voice mail, SMS is a lot nicer.
It doesn't matter what network someone is on for cellphone service, you can reach them.
And if more details are needed, one can just fire up a voice call.
You also don't need to be paying for a paging service on top of your cellphone service (and paging services got expensive, easily $100-$200 a month if you have a two way pager that allowed you to reply.
)  Finally, with device convergence, one only needs a single device, perhaps two (home/work phones) on the belt.
Gone are the days of a sysadmin having to have a Batman-esque belt with a pager, a PDA, and a cellphone at all times at work, and when on call.Of course, MMS gives some advantages.
If you don't have someone's E-mail, you can send them a copy of the Excel document they have been wanting to their phone.
[1]:  In medium to large businesses, having everything documented on trouble tickets means the difference between getting additional admins to handle tasks come the next FY, versus losing headcount because of the perception that IT is not doing anything.
If you don't have it documented on a trouble ticket, it didn't happen.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716264</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716978</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>couchslug</author>
	<datestamp>1263117840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> "People who can't think and can't act without first checking in with the collective."</p><p>That's never been different.</p><p>The collective rules, the thinking man studies those rules in order to exploit them, and the sheeple serve their masters.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" People who ca n't think and ca n't act without first checking in with the collective .
" That 's never been different.The collective rules , the thinking man studies those rules in order to exploit them , and the sheeple serve their masters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> "People who can't think and can't act without first checking in with the collective.
"That's never been different.The collective rules, the thinking man studies those rules in order to exploit them, and the sheeple serve their masters.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716796</id>
	<title>1 2 3 4</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263116820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Studies show that 16- to 18-year-olds perform seven tasks, on average, in their free time &mdash; like texting on the phone, sending instant messages, and checking Facebook while sitting in front of the television;"<br>I count only 4 tasks not seven. The writer's generation fails to imagine more than 4 tasks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Studies show that 16- to 18-year-olds perform seven tasks , on average , in their free time    like texting on the phone , sending instant messages , and checking Facebook while sitting in front of the television ; " I count only 4 tasks not seven .
The writer 's generation fails to imagine more than 4 tasks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Studies show that 16- to 18-year-olds perform seven tasks, on average, in their free time — like texting on the phone, sending instant messages, and checking Facebook while sitting in front of the television;"I count only 4 tasks not seven.
The writer's generation fails to imagine more than 4 tasks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30719836</id>
	<title>Re:iScrew this!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263144240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>iToo.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>iToo .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>iToo.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716420</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716646</id>
	<title>Re:Where does this leave old Gen-X farts like me?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263115620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow. Thanks for making me feel old.</p><p>The tube-tester-at-the-grocery part really got me, I totally remember those. Imagine asking someone today to open their television or stereo, remove a component, and go test it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow .
Thanks for making me feel old.The tube-tester-at-the-grocery part really got me , I totally remember those .
Imagine asking someone today to open their television or stereo , remove a component , and go test it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow.
Thanks for making me feel old.The tube-tester-at-the-grocery part really got me, I totally remember those.
Imagine asking someone today to open their television or stereo, remove a component, and go test it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716458</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30720038</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>ClosedSource</author>
	<datestamp>1263147000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You remind me of Reverend Scot Sloan. You can "talk to the young".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You remind me of Reverend Scot Sloan .
You can " talk to the young " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You remind me of Reverend Scot Sloan.
You can "talk to the young".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716462</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716276</id>
	<title>Too true</title>
	<author>Icarium</author>
	<datestamp>1263156120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm in my early thirties and I avoid multitasking like the plague. My younger colleagues and siblings seem to have no problems with doing several things at once - but the flip side is they end up doing many things twice simply because they sacrifice focus for versatility. They're so busy trying to do too many things at once that they rarely get anything done properly.</p><p>As for being always in contact, I couldn't care less. I'll usually answer as soon as possible, but I have no qualms when it comes to ignoring calls or messages if I'm busy with something, or simply don't feel like talking to someone. I don't expect people to be available on my schedule and see no reason why I am obligated to be always available when it suits them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm in my early thirties and I avoid multitasking like the plague .
My younger colleagues and siblings seem to have no problems with doing several things at once - but the flip side is they end up doing many things twice simply because they sacrifice focus for versatility .
They 're so busy trying to do too many things at once that they rarely get anything done properly.As for being always in contact , I could n't care less .
I 'll usually answer as soon as possible , but I have no qualms when it comes to ignoring calls or messages if I 'm busy with something , or simply do n't feel like talking to someone .
I do n't expect people to be available on my schedule and see no reason why I am obligated to be always available when it suits them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm in my early thirties and I avoid multitasking like the plague.
My younger colleagues and siblings seem to have no problems with doing several things at once - but the flip side is they end up doing many things twice simply because they sacrifice focus for versatility.
They're so busy trying to do too many things at once that they rarely get anything done properly.As for being always in contact, I couldn't care less.
I'll usually answer as soon as possible, but I have no qualms when it comes to ignoring calls or messages if I'm busy with something, or simply don't feel like talking to someone.
I don't expect people to be available on my schedule and see no reason why I am obligated to be always available when it suits them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716734</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>RDW</author>
	<datestamp>1263116400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>'Texting and facebook updating is a leisure activity, and doesn't mix with work at all.'</p><p>I wonder how many of the other supposed differences are really down to the younger generation being, well, younger? A text message is probably cheaper than a voice call, which is handy if you're on a limited budget with a PAYG phone. A school or college age kid may have a wider social network than an older person in a full-time job, so online networking tools could be more useful. There be may less tendency to veg out in front of passive TV entertainment like an exhausted wage slave if you're out enjoying yourself all the time. Multitasking could be less difficult for a younger brain, etc. Of course, these are just the senile ramblings of an ageing mind, so take them with a pinch of salt. And get off my lawn.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>'Texting and facebook updating is a leisure activity , and does n't mix with work at all .
'I wonder how many of the other supposed differences are really down to the younger generation being , well , younger ?
A text message is probably cheaper than a voice call , which is handy if you 're on a limited budget with a PAYG phone .
A school or college age kid may have a wider social network than an older person in a full-time job , so online networking tools could be more useful .
There be may less tendency to veg out in front of passive TV entertainment like an exhausted wage slave if you 're out enjoying yourself all the time .
Multitasking could be less difficult for a younger brain , etc .
Of course , these are just the senile ramblings of an ageing mind , so take them with a pinch of salt .
And get off my lawn .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'Texting and facebook updating is a leisure activity, and doesn't mix with work at all.
'I wonder how many of the other supposed differences are really down to the younger generation being, well, younger?
A text message is probably cheaper than a voice call, which is handy if you're on a limited budget with a PAYG phone.
A school or college age kid may have a wider social network than an older person in a full-time job, so online networking tools could be more useful.
There be may less tendency to veg out in front of passive TV entertainment like an exhausted wage slave if you're out enjoying yourself all the time.
Multitasking could be less difficult for a younger brain, etc.
Of course, these are just the senile ramblings of an ageing mind, so take them with a pinch of salt.
And get off my lawn.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30719200</id>
	<title>Re:I don't have time to read this...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263136500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Tech up, dude.  I'm reading this on my iphone while *sitting* on the toilet.</p><p>And I could include a time and geo-stamped video, to prove it.  Which marks me as "old generation".  "New generation" would already have uploaded the video to facebook, tweeted it to everyone, and be engaged in a flame war on some blog as to whether the Google Nexus One could do as high quality toilet video as the iphone (low light, acoustically bad, etc.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Tech up , dude .
I 'm reading this on my iphone while * sitting * on the toilet.And I could include a time and geo-stamped video , to prove it .
Which marks me as " old generation " .
" New generation " would already have uploaded the video to facebook , tweeted it to everyone , and be engaged in a flame war on some blog as to whether the Google Nexus One could do as high quality toilet video as the iphone ( low light , acoustically bad , etc .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tech up, dude.
I'm reading this on my iphone while *sitting* on the toilet.And I could include a time and geo-stamped video, to prove it.
Which marks me as "old generation".
"New generation" would already have uploaded the video to facebook, tweeted it to everyone, and be engaged in a flame war on some blog as to whether the Google Nexus One could do as high quality toilet video as the iphone (low light, acoustically bad, etc.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30718208</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263126120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>&gt;&gt;<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.... People who can't think and can't act without first checking in with the collective.
<br> <br>And now you know why iphone is so popular.</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; .... People who ca n't think and ca n't act without first checking in with the collective .
And now you know why iphone is so popular .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt; .... People who can't think and can't act without first checking in with the collective.
And now you know why iphone is so popular.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30720432</id>
	<title>Generation Interface Module</title>
	<author>martijnd</author>
	<datestamp>1263152400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> 'They'll want their teachers and professors to respond to them immediately, and they will expect instantaneous access to everyone, because after all, that is the experience they have growing up,' says Rosen."</p></div><p>Solution (and I am going to patent this as a business method) : the holding pattern interface</p><p>If an iGeneration member wants to communicate with an oldGeneration member ; they will receive an instant automated reply, followed by automated "i am working on it" reponses until the oldGeneration member finds time to get around to it.</p><p>"Hi [sibling] great to hear from you, busy doing a million things, will talk to you soon"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...<br>".. just let you know that I haven't forgotten about [thing] will talk to you later"</p><p>Customizable, 9000 canned responses (including "I am about to land in Hawaii.. waiting for signal") in 99 different languages.</p><p>Available sometime in the future at iHoldingPattern.com</p><p>Just like real life.</p><p>(Any parent knows that children want everything NOW, whereas us "grownups" try to juggle these demands in between the really important things. Like catching some TV)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>'They 'll want their teachers and professors to respond to them immediately , and they will expect instantaneous access to everyone , because after all , that is the experience they have growing up, ' says Rosen .
" Solution ( and I am going to patent this as a business method ) : the holding pattern interfaceIf an iGeneration member wants to communicate with an oldGeneration member ; they will receive an instant automated reply , followed by automated " i am working on it " reponses until the oldGeneration member finds time to get around to it .
" Hi [ sibling ] great to hear from you , busy doing a million things , will talk to you soon " ... " .. just let you know that I have n't forgotten about [ thing ] will talk to you later " Customizable , 9000 canned responses ( including " I am about to land in Hawaii.. waiting for signal " ) in 99 different languages.Available sometime in the future at iHoldingPattern.comJust like real life .
( Any parent knows that children want everything NOW , whereas us " grownups " try to juggle these demands in between the really important things .
Like catching some TV )</tokentext>
<sentencetext> 'They'll want their teachers and professors to respond to them immediately, and they will expect instantaneous access to everyone, because after all, that is the experience they have growing up,' says Rosen.
"Solution (and I am going to patent this as a business method) : the holding pattern interfaceIf an iGeneration member wants to communicate with an oldGeneration member ; they will receive an instant automated reply, followed by automated "i am working on it" reponses until the oldGeneration member finds time to get around to it.
"Hi [sibling] great to hear from you, busy doing a million things, will talk to you soon" ...".. just let you know that I haven't forgotten about [thing] will talk to you later"Customizable, 9000 canned responses (including "I am about to land in Hawaii.. waiting for signal") in 99 different languages.Available sometime in the future at iHoldingPattern.comJust like real life.
(Any parent knows that children want everything NOW, whereas us "grownups" try to juggle these demands in between the really important things.
Like catching some TV)
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716874</id>
	<title>Translation</title>
	<author>MightyMartian</author>
	<datestamp>1263117240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>... 'They'll want their teachers and professors to respond to them immediately, and they will expect instantaneous access to everyone, because after all, that is the experience they have growing up,' says Rosen."</p></div></blockquote><p>Translation: They're a bunch of spoiled little brat.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>... 'They 'll want their teachers and professors to respond to them immediately , and they will expect instantaneous access to everyone , because after all , that is the experience they have growing up, ' says Rosen .
" Translation : They 're a bunch of spoiled little brat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... 'They'll want their teachers and professors to respond to them immediately, and they will expect instantaneous access to everyone, because after all, that is the experience they have growing up,' says Rosen.
"Translation: They're a bunch of spoiled little brat.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30719042</id>
	<title>Re:Where does this leave old Gen-X farts like me?</title>
	<author>DemonCat</author>
	<datestamp>1263134040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Either that or the Sandmen are going to come and get me.</p></div><p>The young'uns don't even know who the Sandmen are.  When I've made jokes about being a grup or going to Carosel most of my 20-something friends need to explained to them.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Either that or the Sandmen are going to come and get me.The young'uns do n't even know who the Sandmen are .
When I 've made jokes about being a grup or going to Carosel most of my 20-something friends need to explained to them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Either that or the Sandmen are going to come and get me.The young'uns don't even know who the Sandmen are.
When I've made jokes about being a grup or going to Carosel most of my 20-something friends need to explained to them.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716458</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30722960</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263224400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Using solely my experience as a sample size, I have realized that everyone realizes what an adequate sample size is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Using solely my experience as a sample size , I have realized that everyone realizes what an adequate sample size is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Using solely my experience as a sample size, I have realized that everyone realizes what an adequate sample size is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30721130</id>
	<title>The '10s called...</title>
	<author>HigH5</author>
	<datestamp>1263207000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>... and they wan't their focus back. I can multitask e-mail, phone/SMS, 3 IM chats at a time while watching TV and at the end of the day I can't really remember is a blur (I born in the '80s). I'm trying to scale back on all this distractions by having a call whitelist on my cell phone which is also muted most of the time (SMS is actually better for managing distraction), my e-mail client checks for e-mail every hour or two (or I just leave it closed and open it once or twice a day).
<br>
<br>
A "multi" prefix doesn't necessarily make tasking better. It's mostly hype if you ask me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>... and they wa n't their focus back .
I can multitask e-mail , phone/SMS , 3 IM chats at a time while watching TV and at the end of the day I ca n't really remember is a blur ( I born in the '80s ) .
I 'm trying to scale back on all this distractions by having a call whitelist on my cell phone which is also muted most of the time ( SMS is actually better for managing distraction ) , my e-mail client checks for e-mail every hour or two ( or I just leave it closed and open it once or twice a day ) .
A " multi " prefix does n't necessarily make tasking better .
It 's mostly hype if you ask me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... and they wan't their focus back.
I can multitask e-mail, phone/SMS, 3 IM chats at a time while watching TV and at the end of the day I can't really remember is a blur (I born in the '80s).
I'm trying to scale back on all this distractions by having a call whitelist on my cell phone which is also muted most of the time (SMS is actually better for managing distraction), my e-mail client checks for e-mail every hour or two (or I just leave it closed and open it once or twice a day).
A "multi" prefix doesn't necessarily make tasking better.
It's mostly hype if you ask me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30718612</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>Idiomatick</author>
	<datestamp>1263129420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>But with a twitter update you can only get together with people that use twitter, there is your flaw...<br> <br>(I couldn't help it, sorry</htmltext>
<tokenext>But with a twitter update you can only get together with people that use twitter , there is your flaw... ( I could n't help it , sorry</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But with a twitter update you can only get together with people that use twitter, there is your flaw... (I couldn't help it, sorry</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716426</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717544</id>
	<title>Re:I'm teaching Freshman Comp..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263121560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>As tech support for a university department, I have the same experiences. Students email a problem; then show up at my door 20 minutes later asking why I did not answer or fix the problem yet. The problem description is usually incomplete as if  120 characters is the limit of their communication ability. When I require a more specific description of the problem, various forms of exasperation and indignation appear. Somedays I wish for the return of 80 column punch cards.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As tech support for a university department , I have the same experiences .
Students email a problem ; then show up at my door 20 minutes later asking why I did not answer or fix the problem yet .
The problem description is usually incomplete as if 120 characters is the limit of their communication ability .
When I require a more specific description of the problem , various forms of exasperation and indignation appear .
Somedays I wish for the return of 80 column punch cards .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As tech support for a university department, I have the same experiences.
Students email a problem; then show up at my door 20 minutes later asking why I did not answer or fix the problem yet.
The problem description is usually incomplete as if  120 characters is the limit of their communication ability.
When I require a more specific description of the problem, various forms of exasperation and indignation appear.
Somedays I wish for the return of 80 column punch cards.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716550</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716508</id>
	<title>TLDR</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263114540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>2 long didnt reed</htmltext>
<tokenext>2 long didnt reed</tokentext>
<sentencetext>2 long didnt reed</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717872</id>
	<title>Instant this, Immediate that!</title>
	<author>omb</author>
	<datestamp>1263123960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If this is right you will end up with more dis-functional idiots than there already are.<br><br>Kids need to be able to appreciate calm, read and think, all the tweeting and texting does is generate constant worthless meaningless noise.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If this is right you will end up with more dis-functional idiots than there already are.Kids need to be able to appreciate calm , read and think , all the tweeting and texting does is generate constant worthless meaningless noise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If this is right you will end up with more dis-functional idiots than there already are.Kids need to be able to appreciate calm, read and think, all the tweeting and texting does is generate constant worthless meaningless noise.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716742</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1263116400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Exactly what I thought: BULLSHIT of the highest grade.</p><p>I was born in &rsquo;78, and I communicate preferably with an IM client, via phone or by meeting someone. Just like friends of mine who are 10 years younger, and sometimes 10 years older.<br>And I already did this in &rsquo;96 right when ICQ came out, with many young people of my age. A time when that pseudo-article suggests ICQ users were just about to be born.</p><p>Yeah right.<br>You know what? I&rsquo;m from &rsquo;78, and I use EPIC FAIL, to describe this farticle.</p><p>I&rsquo;m the norm, not the exception. And I got all of Facebook to prove it.<br>Maybe the author just missed time by some decades, is unable to keep up with the times, yet still assumes he can speak for us all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly what I thought : BULLSHIT of the highest grade.I was born in    78 , and I communicate preferably with an IM client , via phone or by meeting someone .
Just like friends of mine who are 10 years younger , and sometimes 10 years older.And I already did this in    96 right when ICQ came out , with many young people of my age .
A time when that pseudo-article suggests ICQ users were just about to be born.Yeah right.You know what ?
I    m from    78 , and I use EPIC FAIL , to describe this farticle.I    m the norm , not the exception .
And I got all of Facebook to prove it.Maybe the author just missed time by some decades , is unable to keep up with the times , yet still assumes he can speak for us all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly what I thought: BULLSHIT of the highest grade.I was born in ’78, and I communicate preferably with an IM client, via phone or by meeting someone.
Just like friends of mine who are 10 years younger, and sometimes 10 years older.And I already did this in ’96 right when ICQ came out, with many young people of my age.
A time when that pseudo-article suggests ICQ users were just about to be born.Yeah right.You know what?
I’m from ’78, and I use EPIC FAIL, to describe this farticle.I’m the norm, not the exception.
And I got all of Facebook to prove it.Maybe the author just missed time by some decades, is unable to keep up with the times, yet still assumes he can speak for us all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717094</id>
	<title>maybe none of this is bad, just different</title>
	<author>jimfinity</author>
	<datestamp>1263118680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm seeing a lot of "bah, humbug" responses to this article, especially regarding the subject of concentration/learning/etc., but i think that it's quite possible that this shift in paradigms of communication has a broader reach than we are currently considering.</p><p>If more people are more connected, doesn't this mean that there will be more collaborative projects?  maybe the "hive mind" will replace a lot of the expertise we currently value?</p><p>As a teacher, i am especially interested to see how this interconnectedness affects learning and schooling.  It's conceivable that in 30 years, we won't be teaching the knowledge via memorization of facts, but instead teaching the knowledge of where to go to look/who to talk to in order to obtain those facts.</p><p>Will this affect how people assemble bits of information? sure, but maybe the collective mind can produce something as good as, or better than what one person can construct on their own...</p><p>maybe it's a load of hooey, but as a teacher i can't afford to not think about these things</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm seeing a lot of " bah , humbug " responses to this article , especially regarding the subject of concentration/learning/etc. , but i think that it 's quite possible that this shift in paradigms of communication has a broader reach than we are currently considering.If more people are more connected , does n't this mean that there will be more collaborative projects ?
maybe the " hive mind " will replace a lot of the expertise we currently value ? As a teacher , i am especially interested to see how this interconnectedness affects learning and schooling .
It 's conceivable that in 30 years , we wo n't be teaching the knowledge via memorization of facts , but instead teaching the knowledge of where to go to look/who to talk to in order to obtain those facts.Will this affect how people assemble bits of information ?
sure , but maybe the collective mind can produce something as good as , or better than what one person can construct on their own...maybe it 's a load of hooey , but as a teacher i ca n't afford to not think about these things</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm seeing a lot of "bah, humbug" responses to this article, especially regarding the subject of concentration/learning/etc., but i think that it's quite possible that this shift in paradigms of communication has a broader reach than we are currently considering.If more people are more connected, doesn't this mean that there will be more collaborative projects?
maybe the "hive mind" will replace a lot of the expertise we currently value?As a teacher, i am especially interested to see how this interconnectedness affects learning and schooling.
It's conceivable that in 30 years, we won't be teaching the knowledge via memorization of facts, but instead teaching the knowledge of where to go to look/who to talk to in order to obtain those facts.Will this affect how people assemble bits of information?
sure, but maybe the collective mind can produce something as good as, or better than what one person can construct on their own...maybe it's a load of hooey, but as a teacher i can't afford to not think about these things</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717260</id>
	<title>It's better now</title>
	<author>thetoadwarrior</author>
	<datestamp>1263119880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Having to wait to save up cereal labels and then wait a month or two for an action figure in the mail was a complete pain in the ass. Where as now you can often sign up for something instantly and have your freebie in a fraction of the time.
<br> <br>
I think the only reason my limited edition action figures are still sealed is because I couldn't be fucked to play with them when they came what felt like a year later.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Having to wait to save up cereal labels and then wait a month or two for an action figure in the mail was a complete pain in the ass .
Where as now you can often sign up for something instantly and have your freebie in a fraction of the time .
I think the only reason my limited edition action figures are still sealed is because I could n't be fucked to play with them when they came what felt like a year later .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having to wait to save up cereal labels and then wait a month or two for an action figure in the mail was a complete pain in the ass.
Where as now you can often sign up for something instantly and have your freebie in a fraction of the time.
I think the only reason my limited edition action figures are still sealed is because I couldn't be fucked to play with them when they came what felt like a year later.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717202</id>
	<title>Re:Calling BS</title>
	<author>Angst Badger</author>
	<datestamp>1263119520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You do realize, don't you, that you have described a skill that, like being able to tell the difference between the Olsen twins, is completely useless?</p><p>Try instead to learn to tell the difference between marketing and buzz versus information of actual value.</p><p>Oh, and hint: Mary-Kate is usually the one looking directly at the camera.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do realize , do n't you , that you have described a skill that , like being able to tell the difference between the Olsen twins , is completely useless ? Try instead to learn to tell the difference between marketing and buzz versus information of actual value.Oh , and hint : Mary-Kate is usually the one looking directly at the camera .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You do realize, don't you, that you have described a skill that, like being able to tell the difference between the Olsen twins, is completely useless?Try instead to learn to tell the difference between marketing and buzz versus information of actual value.Oh, and hint: Mary-Kate is usually the one looking directly at the camera.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716370</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716284</id>
	<title>I thought multi-tasking didn't really work</title>
	<author>zz5555</author>
	<datestamp>1263156180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Seems to me there was a study recently that showed that people were pretty bad at multi-tasking, due to the time lost in context switching.  This would seem to indicate that the "iGeneration" would, in general, be poorer workers than their older brethren.  Or have the new kids gotten better at the context switching somehow?  (Maybe added cores to their brains?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seems to me there was a study recently that showed that people were pretty bad at multi-tasking , due to the time lost in context switching .
This would seem to indicate that the " iGeneration " would , in general , be poorer workers than their older brethren .
Or have the new kids gotten better at the context switching somehow ?
( Maybe added cores to their brains ?
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seems to me there was a study recently that showed that people were pretty bad at multi-tasking, due to the time lost in context switching.
This would seem to indicate that the "iGeneration" would, in general, be poorer workers than their older brethren.
Or have the new kids gotten better at the context switching somehow?
(Maybe added cores to their brains?
:)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30718360</id>
	<title>New Generation</title>
	<author>Ximok</author>
	<datestamp>1263127320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Between the time of the article submission and first post, a new generation gap has been created between the iGeneration and the WhatEverTheHeckWe'llCallThemNext Generation.</p><p>Shoot, there went another one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Between the time of the article submission and first post , a new generation gap has been created between the iGeneration and the WhatEverTheHeckWe'llCallThemNext Generation.Shoot , there went another one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Between the time of the article submission and first post, a new generation gap has been created between the iGeneration and the WhatEverTheHeckWe'llCallThemNext Generation.Shoot, there went another one.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716426</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263114000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> I've always adopted the best tools for the job, and ignored blatant fads such as twitter</p></div><p>What?  Sometimes twitter is the best tool for the job.  I was born in the mid-80's, and have found twitter to be a great tool for meeting friends at the pub.  It is more effective than a facebook update or mass text.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've always adopted the best tools for the job , and ignored blatant fads such as twitterWhat ?
Sometimes twitter is the best tool for the job .
I was born in the mid-80 's , and have found twitter to be a great tool for meeting friends at the pub .
It is more effective than a facebook update or mass text .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> I've always adopted the best tools for the job, and ignored blatant fads such as twitterWhat?
Sometimes twitter is the best tool for the job.
I was born in the mid-80's, and have found twitter to be a great tool for meeting friends at the pub.
It is more effective than a facebook update or mass text.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716462</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>RobertM1968</author>
	<datestamp>1263114180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Agreed... my own experience is this article is nonsense and not indicative of such as a whole.

</p><p>I've been using computers since 1979 (at the schools I went to), started programming in BASIC back then, worked my way up. I'd been using BBS's since the first computer I owned - which was an IBM PC Portable (an IBM XT in a suitcase sized case with amber screen). I was in the first bunch of people to actually use the Internet (I used OS/2 almost exclusively, and we had actual Internet access long before Windows - while Windows users were suckered... I mean <b>stuck</b> with AOL or NetCom). Nowadays, besides the "Net Generation" stuff, I regularly text, IM, use Facebook, read blogs, etc - along with all of the other "iGeneration" stuff. And accessing all my stuff from my phone (TMo G1) when I am not in front of the computer... email, visual voicemail, IM, chat, text messaging, web, Facebook, etc.

</p><p>So, if this "old dog can learn new tricks" and my friends have as well... I doubt there is any real divide as indicated by the article. But I could be wrong... most of my friends are very tech savvy - but even so, I doubt the "divide" is anything to speak of. Even my mom text messages and such.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed... my own experience is this article is nonsense and not indicative of such as a whole .
I 've been using computers since 1979 ( at the schools I went to ) , started programming in BASIC back then , worked my way up .
I 'd been using BBS 's since the first computer I owned - which was an IBM PC Portable ( an IBM XT in a suitcase sized case with amber screen ) .
I was in the first bunch of people to actually use the Internet ( I used OS/2 almost exclusively , and we had actual Internet access long before Windows - while Windows users were suckered... I mean stuck with AOL or NetCom ) .
Nowadays , besides the " Net Generation " stuff , I regularly text , IM , use Facebook , read blogs , etc - along with all of the other " iGeneration " stuff .
And accessing all my stuff from my phone ( TMo G1 ) when I am not in front of the computer... email , visual voicemail , IM , chat , text messaging , web , Facebook , etc .
So , if this " old dog can learn new tricks " and my friends have as well... I doubt there is any real divide as indicated by the article .
But I could be wrong... most of my friends are very tech savvy - but even so , I doubt the " divide " is anything to speak of .
Even my mom text messages and such .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed... my own experience is this article is nonsense and not indicative of such as a whole.
I've been using computers since 1979 (at the schools I went to), started programming in BASIC back then, worked my way up.
I'd been using BBS's since the first computer I owned - which was an IBM PC Portable (an IBM XT in a suitcase sized case with amber screen).
I was in the first bunch of people to actually use the Internet (I used OS/2 almost exclusively, and we had actual Internet access long before Windows - while Windows users were suckered... I mean stuck with AOL or NetCom).
Nowadays, besides the "Net Generation" stuff, I regularly text, IM, use Facebook, read blogs, etc - along with all of the other "iGeneration" stuff.
And accessing all my stuff from my phone (TMo G1) when I am not in front of the computer... email, visual voicemail, IM, chat, text messaging, web, Facebook, etc.
So, if this "old dog can learn new tricks" and my friends have as well... I doubt there is any real divide as indicated by the article.
But I could be wrong... most of my friends are very tech savvy - but even so, I doubt the "divide" is anything to speak of.
Even my mom text messages and such.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716524</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263114660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> <i>Texting and facebook updating is a leisure activity, and doesn't mix with work at all.</i></p></div> </blockquote><p>Work? They do that while driving on your side of the road.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Texting and facebook updating is a leisure activity , and does n't mix with work at all .
Work ? They do that while driving on your side of the road .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Texting and facebook updating is a leisure activity, and doesn't mix with work at all.
Work? They do that while driving on your side of the road.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214</id>
	<title>Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>sakdoctor</author>
	<datestamp>1263155760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess I'm Net generation. Except that doesn't sound right for anyone I know of my age group.<br>Furthermore, I've always adopted the best tools for the job, and ignored blatant fads such as twitter.</p><p>As for multi-tasking; Again, not a generation issue, as task switching just interrupts. Texting and facebook updating is a leisure activity, and doesn't mix with work at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess I 'm Net generation .
Except that does n't sound right for anyone I know of my age group.Furthermore , I 've always adopted the best tools for the job , and ignored blatant fads such as twitter.As for multi-tasking ; Again , not a generation issue , as task switching just interrupts .
Texting and facebook updating is a leisure activity , and does n't mix with work at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess I'm Net generation.
Except that doesn't sound right for anyone I know of my age group.Furthermore, I've always adopted the best tools for the job, and ignored blatant fads such as twitter.As for multi-tasking; Again, not a generation issue, as task switching just interrupts.
Texting and facebook updating is a leisure activity, and doesn't mix with work at all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716560</id>
	<title>Re:It was better in the old days...</title>
	<author>Daniel Dvorkin</author>
	<datestamp>1263114840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i> In my late teens we had dial-up web sites that would pass messages back and forth with each other as far as a local call would go.</i></p><p>You called them "web sites?"  Really?  We had these things called BBS's, which did something very similar to what you describe -- but you had actual web sites!  Wow!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In my late teens we had dial-up web sites that would pass messages back and forth with each other as far as a local call would go.You called them " web sites ?
" Really ?
We had these things called BBS 's , which did something very similar to what you describe -- but you had actual web sites !
Wow !</tokentext>
<sentencetext> In my late teens we had dial-up web sites that would pass messages back and forth with each other as far as a local call would go.You called them "web sites?
"  Really?
We had these things called BBS's, which did something very similar to what you describe -- but you had actual web sites!
Wow!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716264</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716288</id>
	<title>The lack of attention span is certainly true!</title>
	<author>level\_headed\_midwest</author>
	<datestamp>1263156240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The instant-gratification bit in the article regarding messages is certainly true, but it goes much further than that. Many of these people born in the 1990s feel that the entire world should instantly respond to them and they get extremely impatient when it doesn't. They also tend to have the attention span of a gnat. I see a lot of people in this age range at work and I swear that most of them can't sit still for more than 30 seconds before the phone comes out and they're texting away. Some will even just start texting right in the middle of a conversation.</p><p>There are really two big problems with their behavior. One is that they are extremely impatient and rush through everything, acting like huge spoiled brats in the process ("what do you mean I have to wait two days for this package to get here! I want it nooooooooooowwwwwwwwww!!!!"). The second is that their tiny attention spans and easy distractability are recipes for disaster if they are ever in a potentially hazardous situation that requires their full attention, such as driving or operating equipment or machinery. I think that their parents had an "epic fail" in allowing them to grow up in this manner.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The instant-gratification bit in the article regarding messages is certainly true , but it goes much further than that .
Many of these people born in the 1990s feel that the entire world should instantly respond to them and they get extremely impatient when it does n't .
They also tend to have the attention span of a gnat .
I see a lot of people in this age range at work and I swear that most of them ca n't sit still for more than 30 seconds before the phone comes out and they 're texting away .
Some will even just start texting right in the middle of a conversation.There are really two big problems with their behavior .
One is that they are extremely impatient and rush through everything , acting like huge spoiled brats in the process ( " what do you mean I have to wait two days for this package to get here !
I want it nooooooooooowwwwwwwwww ! ! ! ! " ) .
The second is that their tiny attention spans and easy distractability are recipes for disaster if they are ever in a potentially hazardous situation that requires their full attention , such as driving or operating equipment or machinery .
I think that their parents had an " epic fail " in allowing them to grow up in this manner .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The instant-gratification bit in the article regarding messages is certainly true, but it goes much further than that.
Many of these people born in the 1990s feel that the entire world should instantly respond to them and they get extremely impatient when it doesn't.
They also tend to have the attention span of a gnat.
I see a lot of people in this age range at work and I swear that most of them can't sit still for more than 30 seconds before the phone comes out and they're texting away.
Some will even just start texting right in the middle of a conversation.There are really two big problems with their behavior.
One is that they are extremely impatient and rush through everything, acting like huge spoiled brats in the process ("what do you mean I have to wait two days for this package to get here!
I want it nooooooooooowwwwwwwwww!!!!").
The second is that their tiny attention spans and easy distractability are recipes for disaster if they are ever in a potentially hazardous situation that requires their full attention, such as driving or operating equipment or machinery.
I think that their parents had an "epic fail" in allowing them to grow up in this manner.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716538</id>
	<title>Re:Instantly communcation indeed</title>
	<author>Mikkeles</author>
	<datestamp>1263114720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>'They'll want their teachers and professors to respond to them immediately, and they will expect instantaneous access to everyone, because after all, that is the experience they have growing up,' says Rosen.</i></p><p>Well, aren't we special!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>'They 'll want their teachers and professors to respond to them immediately , and they will expect instantaneous access to everyone , because after all , that is the experience they have growing up, ' says Rosen.Well , are n't we special !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'They'll want their teachers and professors to respond to them immediately, and they will expect instantaneous access to everyone, because after all, that is the experience they have growing up,' says Rosen.Well, aren't we special!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716210</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30720834</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>hitmark</author>
	<datestamp>1263202020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and this is different from the days of when the teens of the house had to maintain extended calls with their peers to make sure they did not offend some kind of collective taboo?</p><p>or hell, extend it to newspapers, priests, or others of position to speak to many at the same time.</p><p>the human race is a collective, a tribe, a pack. But that is not to say that we should just accept anything the person on top says. But then again one should not go fully paranoid, and disregard anything that goes against the status quo.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and this is different from the days of when the teens of the house had to maintain extended calls with their peers to make sure they did not offend some kind of collective taboo ? or hell , extend it to newspapers , priests , or others of position to speak to many at the same time.the human race is a collective , a tribe , a pack .
But that is not to say that we should just accept anything the person on top says .
But then again one should not go fully paranoid , and disregard anything that goes against the status quo .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and this is different from the days of when the teens of the house had to maintain extended calls with their peers to make sure they did not offend some kind of collective taboo?or hell, extend it to newspapers, priests, or others of position to speak to many at the same time.the human race is a collective, a tribe, a pack.
But that is not to say that we should just accept anything the person on top says.
But then again one should not go fully paranoid, and disregard anything that goes against the status quo.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717408</id>
	<title>Re:I don't have time to read this...</title>
	<author>GaryOlson</author>
	<datestamp>1263120720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You don't get the most bars while in the toilet?</htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't get the most bars while in the toilet ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't get the most bars while in the toilet?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716264</id>
	<title>It was better in the old days...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263156060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I was a child, there was no public Internet.  In my late teens we had dial-up web sites that would pass messages back and forth with each other as far as a local call would go.</p><p>I don't miss those days - I think information should be available more or less instantly 24/7 if possible.</p><p>However, the current constant phone texting, Facebook, etc crap is just that, crap.  It's electronic substitution for true socializing, and I can't help but feel that when a bunch of people stand around unable to interact with the people in their immediate vicinity because they're texting with someone who couldn't be bothered to actually show up... well, I think there's something wrong with that.</p><p>Sometimes the younger generations ARE wrong.  I think the problem is these technologies are fad technologies and the people making them popular haven't outgrown them yet.</p><p>Call me if the text-aholics of today are still rabidly texting when they're 30.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I was a child , there was no public Internet .
In my late teens we had dial-up web sites that would pass messages back and forth with each other as far as a local call would go.I do n't miss those days - I think information should be available more or less instantly 24/7 if possible.However , the current constant phone texting , Facebook , etc crap is just that , crap .
It 's electronic substitution for true socializing , and I ca n't help but feel that when a bunch of people stand around unable to interact with the people in their immediate vicinity because they 're texting with someone who could n't be bothered to actually show up... well , I think there 's something wrong with that.Sometimes the younger generations ARE wrong .
I think the problem is these technologies are fad technologies and the people making them popular have n't outgrown them yet.Call me if the text-aholics of today are still rabidly texting when they 're 30 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I was a child, there was no public Internet.
In my late teens we had dial-up web sites that would pass messages back and forth with each other as far as a local call would go.I don't miss those days - I think information should be available more or less instantly 24/7 if possible.However, the current constant phone texting, Facebook, etc crap is just that, crap.
It's electronic substitution for true socializing, and I can't help but feel that when a bunch of people stand around unable to interact with the people in their immediate vicinity because they're texting with someone who couldn't be bothered to actually show up... well, I think there's something wrong with that.Sometimes the younger generations ARE wrong.
I think the problem is these technologies are fad technologies and the people making them popular haven't outgrown them yet.Call me if the text-aholics of today are still rabidly texting when they're 30.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30719316</id>
	<title>As long as ...</title>
	<author>PPH</author>
	<datestamp>1263137760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>... they spend less time on my lawn!</htmltext>
<tokenext>... they spend less time on my lawn !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... they spend less time on my lawn!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716550</id>
	<title>I'm teaching Freshman Comp..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263114780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...and I find this experience to be accurate.  I am teaching kids in this age range, and they will expect me to answer their emails near instantly and get frustrated if I take more than a few hours to answer them.</p><p>Unfortunately, the experience doesn't work both ways:  While I'm expected to be available 24/7, I can't expect the same from them.  Even though it should be a two way street, I can, for example, send them an email telling them to print something and bring it to class and half of the class won't do it and say "I didn't check my email before class."</p><p>But as far as that goes, it's good to be a college instructor, because those things are dictated on my terms.  I can dock points from kids who don't come prepared for class, or use Facebook on their phone instead of paying attention.</p><p>A posted above hit the nail on the head - these kids are in for a reality check when they enter the "real world."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...and I find this experience to be accurate .
I am teaching kids in this age range , and they will expect me to answer their emails near instantly and get frustrated if I take more than a few hours to answer them.Unfortunately , the experience does n't work both ways : While I 'm expected to be available 24/7 , I ca n't expect the same from them .
Even though it should be a two way street , I can , for example , send them an email telling them to print something and bring it to class and half of the class wo n't do it and say " I did n't check my email before class .
" But as far as that goes , it 's good to be a college instructor , because those things are dictated on my terms .
I can dock points from kids who do n't come prepared for class , or use Facebook on their phone instead of paying attention.A posted above hit the nail on the head - these kids are in for a reality check when they enter the " real world .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...and I find this experience to be accurate.
I am teaching kids in this age range, and they will expect me to answer their emails near instantly and get frustrated if I take more than a few hours to answer them.Unfortunately, the experience doesn't work both ways:  While I'm expected to be available 24/7, I can't expect the same from them.
Even though it should be a two way street, I can, for example, send them an email telling them to print something and bring it to class and half of the class won't do it and say "I didn't check my email before class.
"But as far as that goes, it's good to be a college instructor, because those things are dictated on my terms.
I can dock points from kids who don't come prepared for class, or use Facebook on their phone instead of paying attention.A posted above hit the nail on the head - these kids are in for a reality check when they enter the "real world.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716918</id>
	<title>kids these days..spoiled</title>
	<author>zogger</author>
	<datestamp>1263117480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Try, a wooden box on the wall with the speaker on a cord, the mouth piece on the box, and a crank handle to get the operators attention. That was one granny had that, I remember talking on it. My other granny had an icebox, and some dude would trot down the alley with a horse and ice wagon and come in and put a huge chunk of ice in it. We had a rotary at home though, think it was made out of cast iron.</p><p>We had the first TV in the 'hood, a 9" philco IIRC, and a buncha neighbors and relatives would come over and sit around and watch TV, not a whole lotta channels though and it all went off at night.</p><p>Lemme see...35 cent indoor movies, that was the only place with air conditioning, nickle cokes, nickle candy bars, and a real five and dime store that had tons of stuff for a nickle or a dime.</p><p>I don't remember all the prices on stuff, but a lot of it, like hamburger 5 lbs for a buck. Lot of cars still under a grand brand new. A portable radio was half a suitcase with heavy batteries in it.</p><p>Oh man, my fav, REAL army navy stores that had all the great stuff, just everything, you could go nuts in there poking through the junk, they had everything including surplus rifles. Dang giant rubber rafts hanging from the ceiling, old torpedoes, tons of neat stuff like that.</p><p>Bicycles were like harleys with no engines., about the same amount of steel.</p><p>Wimminks all still wore real stockings all the time...err..that was major cool....<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>Dang, ain't a year goes by I don't regret losing my baseball cards, comic books, all my early sci fiction paper backs, stuff like that.</p><p>A lot of tech and some aspects of society today are a lot better, a lot isn't though. Leaving keys in the car was common, never locking the door, etc. No school massacres, but we could carry our<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.22s to school to go shooting after school, etc. It was no big deal at all, stick 'em in your locker.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; Back then, most everything was fixable, and did get fixed, now..not much, it works or it is junk.</p><p>Would I trade..uhh "timezones"? Nope, not a straight swap, but I would if I could pick and choose various things from then and now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Try , a wooden box on the wall with the speaker on a cord , the mouth piece on the box , and a crank handle to get the operators attention .
That was one granny had that , I remember talking on it .
My other granny had an icebox , and some dude would trot down the alley with a horse and ice wagon and come in and put a huge chunk of ice in it .
We had a rotary at home though , think it was made out of cast iron.We had the first TV in the 'hood , a 9 " philco IIRC , and a buncha neighbors and relatives would come over and sit around and watch TV , not a whole lotta channels though and it all went off at night.Lem me see...35 cent indoor movies , that was the only place with air conditioning , nickle cokes , nickle candy bars , and a real five and dime store that had tons of stuff for a nickle or a dime.I do n't remember all the prices on stuff , but a lot of it , like hamburger 5 lbs for a buck .
Lot of cars still under a grand brand new .
A portable radio was half a suitcase with heavy batteries in it.Oh man , my fav , REAL army navy stores that had all the great stuff , just everything , you could go nuts in there poking through the junk , they had everything including surplus rifles .
Dang giant rubber rafts hanging from the ceiling , old torpedoes , tons of neat stuff like that.Bicycles were like harleys with no engines. , about the same amount of steel.Wimminks all still wore real stockings all the time...err..that was major cool.... ; ) Dang , ai n't a year goes by I do n't regret losing my baseball cards , comic books , all my early sci fiction paper backs , stuff like that.A lot of tech and some aspects of society today are a lot better , a lot is n't though .
Leaving keys in the car was common , never locking the door , etc .
No school massacres , but we could carry our .22s to school to go shooting after school , etc .
It was no big deal at all , stick 'em in your locker .
    Back then , most everything was fixable , and did get fixed , now..not much , it works or it is junk.Would I trade..uhh " timezones " ?
Nope , not a straight swap , but I would if I could pick and choose various things from then and now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Try, a wooden box on the wall with the speaker on a cord, the mouth piece on the box, and a crank handle to get the operators attention.
That was one granny had that, I remember talking on it.
My other granny had an icebox, and some dude would trot down the alley with a horse and ice wagon and come in and put a huge chunk of ice in it.
We had a rotary at home though, think it was made out of cast iron.We had the first TV in the 'hood, a 9" philco IIRC, and a buncha neighbors and relatives would come over and sit around and watch TV, not a whole lotta channels though and it all went off at night.Lemme see...35 cent indoor movies, that was the only place with air conditioning, nickle cokes, nickle candy bars, and a real five and dime store that had tons of stuff for a nickle or a dime.I don't remember all the prices on stuff, but a lot of it, like hamburger 5 lbs for a buck.
Lot of cars still under a grand brand new.
A portable radio was half a suitcase with heavy batteries in it.Oh man, my fav, REAL army navy stores that had all the great stuff, just everything, you could go nuts in there poking through the junk, they had everything including surplus rifles.
Dang giant rubber rafts hanging from the ceiling, old torpedoes, tons of neat stuff like that.Bicycles were like harleys with no engines., about the same amount of steel.Wimminks all still wore real stockings all the time...err..that was major cool.... ;)Dang, ain't a year goes by I don't regret losing my baseball cards, comic books, all my early sci fiction paper backs, stuff like that.A lot of tech and some aspects of society today are a lot better, a lot isn't though.
Leaving keys in the car was common, never locking the door, etc.
No school massacres, but we could carry our .22s to school to go shooting after school, etc.
It was no big deal at all, stick 'em in your locker.
    Back then, most everything was fixable, and did get fixed, now..not much, it works or it is junk.Would I trade..uhh "timezones"?
Nope, not a straight swap, but I would if I could pick and choose various things from then and now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716458</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716304</id>
	<title>Bogus</title>
	<author>dangitman</author>
	<datestamp>1263156360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Firstly, I think the designation of birth decades is completely bogus. Somebody who was born in 1980 is likely to have had a very different technology experience to someone born after 1985, but they are all lumped together. Someone born in 1980 would be 18 by the time the internet started to see mass adoption and computers started to become cheap, while someone born in 1985 would only be 13, and have their formative high-school years ahead of them.</p><p>And talking about the tech habits of people born in the 00s? They aren't old enough to have any entrenched tech habits yet! It will be the next decade that shapes them, not the past one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Firstly , I think the designation of birth decades is completely bogus .
Somebody who was born in 1980 is likely to have had a very different technology experience to someone born after 1985 , but they are all lumped together .
Someone born in 1980 would be 18 by the time the internet started to see mass adoption and computers started to become cheap , while someone born in 1985 would only be 13 , and have their formative high-school years ahead of them.And talking about the tech habits of people born in the 00s ?
They are n't old enough to have any entrenched tech habits yet !
It will be the next decade that shapes them , not the past one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Firstly, I think the designation of birth decades is completely bogus.
Somebody who was born in 1980 is likely to have had a very different technology experience to someone born after 1985, but they are all lumped together.
Someone born in 1980 would be 18 by the time the internet started to see mass adoption and computers started to become cheap, while someone born in 1985 would only be 13, and have their formative high-school years ahead of them.And talking about the tech habits of people born in the 00s?
They aren't old enough to have any entrenched tech habits yet!
It will be the next decade that shapes them, not the past one.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717764</id>
	<title>Re:Calling BS</title>
	<author>lennier</author>
	<datestamp>1263123240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Regis has a twitter account, it's officially uncool</p></div><p>Does "officially uncool" now mean "dependable, reliable, and used by everyone as a basic service"?</p><p>Because if so, then Twitter still isn't uncool, because lots of people I know don't use it.</p><p>Facebook on the other hand...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Regis has a twitter account , it 's officially uncoolDoes " officially uncool " now mean " dependable , reliable , and used by everyone as a basic service " ? Because if so , then Twitter still is n't uncool , because lots of people I know do n't use it.Facebook on the other hand.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Regis has a twitter account, it's officially uncoolDoes "officially uncool" now mean "dependable, reliable, and used by everyone as a basic service"?Because if so, then Twitter still isn't uncool, because lots of people I know don't use it.Facebook on the other hand...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716370</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716386</id>
	<title>And you have to contrast this with</title>
	<author>blackdropbear</author>
	<datestamp>1263156780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>the number of articles being spewed out on how this same generation is ready and able to take over the running of the corporations and countries before they have even turned thirty. Since all the articles tend to be written by the baby boomer generation (who in their eyes are infallible) I await the results of all their predictions and their tendencies to mollycoddle their children and it's effects with interest.</htmltext>
<tokenext>the number of articles being spewed out on how this same generation is ready and able to take over the running of the corporations and countries before they have even turned thirty .
Since all the articles tend to be written by the baby boomer generation ( who in their eyes are infallible ) I await the results of all their predictions and their tendencies to mollycoddle their children and it 's effects with interest .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the number of articles being spewed out on how this same generation is ready and able to take over the running of the corporations and countries before they have even turned thirty.
Since all the articles tend to be written by the baby boomer generation (who in their eyes are infallible) I await the results of all their predictions and their tendencies to mollycoddle their children and it's effects with interest.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716862</id>
	<title>To summarize:</title>
	<author>horigath</author>
	<datestamp>1263117180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wow! Grade school kids and university/college students and grads have different interests and different social behaviors. Who knew?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow !
Grade school kids and university/college students and grads have different interests and different social behaviors .
Who knew ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow!
Grade school kids and university/college students and grads have different interests and different social behaviors.
Who knew?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30718716</id>
	<title>Re:iScrew this!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263130380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's NOT a podcast, it's a SOUND CLIP</p></div><p>The origin of "podcast" does not relate to the iPod.</p><p>See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podcast</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's NOT a podcast , it 's a SOUND CLIPThe origin of " podcast " does not relate to the iPod.See http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podcast</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's NOT a podcast, it's a SOUND CLIPThe origin of "podcast" does not relate to the iPod.See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podcast
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716420</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30719002</id>
	<title>Re:It was better in the old days...</title>
	<author>iknowcss</author>
	<datestamp>1263133680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sorry, but I don't buy your analysis. Kids these days aren't substituting "real" interaction with electronic. They're augmenting the real with the virtual. I would argue that the average slashdotter, in contrast, is more inclined actually to substitute real socialising with electronic, and has been doing so since the first BBS servers went up.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry , but I do n't buy your analysis .
Kids these days are n't substituting " real " interaction with electronic .
They 're augmenting the real with the virtual .
I would argue that the average slashdotter , in contrast , is more inclined actually to substitute real socialising with electronic , and has been doing so since the first BBS servers went up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry, but I don't buy your analysis.
Kids these days aren't substituting "real" interaction with electronic.
They're augmenting the real with the virtual.
I would argue that the average slashdotter, in contrast, is more inclined actually to substitute real socialising with electronic, and has been doing so since the first BBS servers went up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716264</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716458</id>
	<title>Where does this leave old Gen-X farts like me?</title>
	<author>multiplexo</author>
	<datestamp>1263114120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm 44. I can remember rotary phones, black and white televisions and when it was a big deal when televisions became solid state (with the exception of the CRT) in the mid 1970s, tube testers at grocery and drug stores and going to the library to do research using card catalogs and the Reader's Periodical Guide. Christ, I'm probably going to be processed into Soylent Green soon. Either that or the Sandmen are going to come and get me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm 44 .
I can remember rotary phones , black and white televisions and when it was a big deal when televisions became solid state ( with the exception of the CRT ) in the mid 1970s , tube testers at grocery and drug stores and going to the library to do research using card catalogs and the Reader 's Periodical Guide .
Christ , I 'm probably going to be processed into Soylent Green soon .
Either that or the Sandmen are going to come and get me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm 44.
I can remember rotary phones, black and white televisions and when it was a big deal when televisions became solid state (with the exception of the CRT) in the mid 1970s, tube testers at grocery and drug stores and going to the library to do research using card catalogs and the Reader's Periodical Guide.
Christ, I'm probably going to be processed into Soylent Green soon.
Either that or the Sandmen are going to come and get me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30722420</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1263222000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Same here, and I'm a boomer. Furthermore my 22 and 24 year old daughters fit the "iGeneration" by these guys' measures. I'm calling bullshit.</p><p>However, one thing is certain, afaic: Twitter is for twits.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Same here , and I 'm a boomer .
Furthermore my 22 and 24 year old daughters fit the " iGeneration " by these guys ' measures .
I 'm calling bullshit.However , one thing is certain , afaic : Twitter is for twits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Same here, and I'm a boomer.
Furthermore my 22 and 24 year old daughters fit the "iGeneration" by these guys' measures.
I'm calling bullshit.However, one thing is certain, afaic: Twitter is for twits.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716376</id>
	<title>Whippersnappers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263156780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Get off my lawn!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Get off my lawn !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Get off my lawn!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30719114</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263135240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I went ice skating recently, and I noticed that most of the high school girls in our group were texting while they were skating, often to their friends who were also at the rink skating.  Bizarre.  Social and anti-social at the same time.  I kept thinking they would run into something or someone, but they seemed to have an uncanny sense of their surroundings without actually lifting their eyes from their phone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I went ice skating recently , and I noticed that most of the high school girls in our group were texting while they were skating , often to their friends who were also at the rink skating .
Bizarre. Social and anti-social at the same time .
I kept thinking they would run into something or someone , but they seemed to have an uncanny sense of their surroundings without actually lifting their eyes from their phone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I went ice skating recently, and I noticed that most of the high school girls in our group were texting while they were skating, often to their friends who were also at the rink skating.
Bizarre.  Social and anti-social at the same time.
I kept thinking they would run into something or someone, but they seemed to have an uncanny sense of their surroundings without actually lifting their eyes from their phone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716734</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30728786
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30722922
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716876
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716264
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30725228
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716264
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30719002
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30722892
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30719200
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716264
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716418
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30721298
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716370
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30727110
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716370
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717202
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717014
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30722420
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716458
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716918
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30722114
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30718208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716742
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30718484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30721296
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716264
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716842
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716420
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30719836
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716550
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717544
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716458
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30719042
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30741074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30719114
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30721398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716420
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30719440
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716462
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30721264
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30722960
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716264
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716580
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716284
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716820
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717472
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716370
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30718714
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716538
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717408
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717814
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30782038
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30718742
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716420
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30718716
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716416
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716462
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717470
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30720834
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716462
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30720038
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716264
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30725314
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716856
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716370
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717764
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716462
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30721066
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716458
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716646
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30720208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716264
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716560
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30718612
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30720064
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716866
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30718060
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716264
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716638
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716524
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716978
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30720192
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30723594
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_10_1854211_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716370
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30722894
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_10_1854211.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716210
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716538
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_10_1854211.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716550
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717544
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_10_1854211.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716420
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30718716
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30719836
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30719440
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_10_1854211.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716284
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716820
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_10_1854211.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30718484
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30721296
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_10_1854211.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716288
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716876
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30728786
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30723594
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_10_1854211.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716264
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716638
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716418
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30725314
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30725228
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716560
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30719002
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716842
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716580
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_10_1854211.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716348
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717408
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30719200
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_10_1854211.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716276
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716866
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716856
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717814
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_10_1854211.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716618
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_10_1854211.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716322
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_10_1854211.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717166
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_10_1854211.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30721130
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_10_1854211.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30722158
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_10_1854211.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716214
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716524
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30722960
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717878
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716742
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30722114
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716462
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30721066
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30721264
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30720038
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717470
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30722922
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716554
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717014
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716978
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716818
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717472
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30718742
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30718060
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30720834
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30720192
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30718208
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30722420
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716734
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30719114
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30721398
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30721298
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30722892
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716426
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30718612
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30720064
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30782038
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30741074
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30720208
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716416
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_10_1854211.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716458
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30719042
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716646
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716918
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_10_1854211.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716326
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_10_1854211.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30716370
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30718714
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717764
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30717202
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30722894
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_10_1854211.30727110
</commentlist>
</conversation>
