<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_21_230201</id>
	<title>75\% of Linux Code Now Written By Paid Developers</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1264071600000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>i\_want\_you\_to\_throw\_ writes <i>"During a presentation at Linux.conf.au 2010 in Wellington, LWN.net founder and kernel contributor Jonathan Corbet offered an <a href="http://apcmag.com/linux-now-75-corporate.htm">analysis of the code contributed to the Linux kernel between December 24 2008 and January 10 2010</a>. The Linux world makes much of its community roots, but when it comes to developing the kernel of the operating system, it's less a case of 'volunteers ahoy!' and more a case of 'where's my pay?'"</i>

It's not clear from the article why anyone should perceive a contradiction between having high ideals and getting paid to do something you enjoy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>i \ _want \ _you \ _to \ _throw \ _ writes " During a presentation at Linux.conf.au 2010 in Wellington , LWN.net founder and kernel contributor Jonathan Corbet offered an analysis of the code contributed to the Linux kernel between December 24 2008 and January 10 2010 .
The Linux world makes much of its community roots , but when it comes to developing the kernel of the operating system , it 's less a case of 'volunteers ahoy !
' and more a case of 'where 's my pay ?
' " It 's not clear from the article why anyone should perceive a contradiction between having high ideals and getting paid to do something you enjoy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i\_want\_you\_to\_throw\_ writes "During a presentation at Linux.conf.au 2010 in Wellington, LWN.net founder and kernel contributor Jonathan Corbet offered an analysis of the code contributed to the Linux kernel between December 24 2008 and January 10 2010.
The Linux world makes much of its community roots, but when it comes to developing the kernel of the operating system, it's less a case of 'volunteers ahoy!
' and more a case of 'where's my pay?
'"

It's not clear from the article why anyone should perceive a contradiction between having high ideals and getting paid to do something you enjoy.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30856546</id>
	<title>Re:Open Source is not about money</title>
	<author>CodeBuster</author>
	<datestamp>1264097580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Even experienced developers can learn something new by seeing the code of another; steel sharpens steel after all. IMHO, the day that we stop improving in our profession is the day that we hang up the editor and retire.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Even experienced developers can learn something new by seeing the code of another ; steel sharpens steel after all .
IMHO , the day that we stop improving in our profession is the day that we hang up the editor and retire .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even experienced developers can learn something new by seeing the code of another; steel sharpens steel after all.
IMHO, the day that we stop improving in our profession is the day that we hang up the editor and retire.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854178</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30859694</id>
	<title>Linux is succesful because Windows needs a counter</title>
	<author>giladpn</author>
	<datestamp>1264177200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Having read a lot of the responses (though not all), I am surprised this point does not come up.
<br> <br>
When Linus Torvalds started Linux, he obviously did it for love not money. Indeed the early contributors were driven by their ideals.
<br> <br>
But the SUCCESS of Linux is because a lot of those big companies (IBM, Sun/Oracle, Intel, Google,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...) need a way to keep the Microsoft Windows monopoly in line.
<br> <br>
Remember that for decades (1980-2000) they tried to do that by offering their proprietary UNIX operating systems. That failed miserably, which is the main reason they were forced to learn and band together around Linux.
<br> <br>
I like Linux, I think its great. But the SUCCESS of the open source movement, and especially Linux, owes everything to the scare Microsoft has given the entire industry.
<br> <br>
So: the people who are being payed to write Linux, are getting the money because they are producing the most credible challenge to MS. It has nothing at all to do with high ideals.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Having read a lot of the responses ( though not all ) , I am surprised this point does not come up .
When Linus Torvalds started Linux , he obviously did it for love not money .
Indeed the early contributors were driven by their ideals .
But the SUCCESS of Linux is because a lot of those big companies ( IBM , Sun/Oracle , Intel , Google , ... ) need a way to keep the Microsoft Windows monopoly in line .
Remember that for decades ( 1980-2000 ) they tried to do that by offering their proprietary UNIX operating systems .
That failed miserably , which is the main reason they were forced to learn and band together around Linux .
I like Linux , I think its great .
But the SUCCESS of the open source movement , and especially Linux , owes everything to the scare Microsoft has given the entire industry .
So : the people who are being payed to write Linux , are getting the money because they are producing the most credible challenge to MS. It has nothing at all to do with high ideals .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having read a lot of the responses (though not all), I am surprised this point does not come up.
When Linus Torvalds started Linux, he obviously did it for love not money.
Indeed the early contributors were driven by their ideals.
But the SUCCESS of Linux is because a lot of those big companies (IBM, Sun/Oracle, Intel, Google, ...) need a way to keep the Microsoft Windows monopoly in line.
Remember that for decades (1980-2000) they tried to do that by offering their proprietary UNIX operating systems.
That failed miserably, which is the main reason they were forced to learn and band together around Linux.
I like Linux, I think its great.
But the SUCCESS of the open source movement, and especially Linux, owes everything to the scare Microsoft has given the entire industry.
So: the people who are being payed to write Linux, are getting the money because they are producing the most credible challenge to MS. It has nothing at all to do with high ideals.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857194</id>
	<title>Re:Because It Makes A Mockery Of Everything Held H</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264192620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How many years has it been that Bearded GNU Freaks have been working toward their Retarded GNU Nirvana?</p></div><p>And we have yet to see the Hurd!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How many years has it been that Bearded GNU Freaks have been working toward their Retarded GNU Nirvana ? And we have yet to see the Hurd !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many years has it been that Bearded GNU Freaks have been working toward their Retarded GNU Nirvana?And we have yet to see the Hurd!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853818</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855314</id>
	<title>Bah! Pay for THIS</title>
	<author>dmomo</author>
	<datestamp>1264085580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>echo '75\% of Linux Code Now Written By Paid Developers' | sed 's/Written/Copy\/Pasted/g' &gt; there-fixed-it.txt</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>echo '75 \ % of Linux Code Now Written By Paid Developers ' | sed 's/Written/Copy \ /Pasted/g ' &gt; there-fixed-it.txt</tokentext>
<sentencetext>echo '75\% of Linux Code Now Written By Paid Developers' | sed 's/Written/Copy\/Pasted/g' &gt; there-fixed-it.txt</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854292</id>
	<title>Theres no such thing as a</title>
	<author>Twillerror</author>
	<datestamp>1264078860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>free lunch. Yep your high school economics teacher wasn't a complete idiot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>free lunch .
Yep your high school economics teacher was n't a complete idiot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>free lunch.
Yep your high school economics teacher wasn't a complete idiot.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855596</id>
	<title>Re:And this is a bad thing?!</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1264088100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The best thing about Linux is that it is <strong>F</strong>ree as in <em>Software Libre</em>, not <strong>f</strong>ree as in <em>I didn't pay</em>. It's what makes it possible for all these companies to contribute without taking ownership.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The best thing about Linux is that it is Free as in Software Libre , not free as in I did n't pay .
It 's what makes it possible for all these companies to contribute without taking ownership .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The best thing about Linux is that it is Free as in Software Libre, not free as in I didn't pay.
It's what makes it possible for all these companies to contribute without taking ownership.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854072</id>
	<title>misrepresented</title>
	<author>shaitand</author>
	<datestamp>1264077720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are definitely plenty of paid coders on the kernel. But are they counting the kernel hackers that companies have chosen to sponsor as paid or as volunteer? Does a grass roots volunteer kernel hacker stop counting once a company sponsors him to be able to contribute full time?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are definitely plenty of paid coders on the kernel .
But are they counting the kernel hackers that companies have chosen to sponsor as paid or as volunteer ?
Does a grass roots volunteer kernel hacker stop counting once a company sponsors him to be able to contribute full time ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are definitely plenty of paid coders on the kernel.
But are they counting the kernel hackers that companies have chosen to sponsor as paid or as volunteer?
Does a grass roots volunteer kernel hacker stop counting once a company sponsors him to be able to contribute full time?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853818</id>
	<title>Because It Makes A Mockery Of Everything Held Holy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264076640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How many years has it been listening to teenage Slashdot poster proclaiming the dawn of a new era was just around the corner? How many years has it been that Bearded GNU Freaks have been working toward their Retarded GNU Nirvana?</p><p>Commercial, paid for software developers and companies were pitied. Claimed to be soon to be relics of a new era.</p><p>They couldn't possibly compete with the Power of the Entire Internet/Open Source World.</p><p>They couldn't possibly compete with the Million Eyes ensuring bugfree open source software.</p><p>Google and Apple have made complete joke out of every single claim made here on Slashdot. Android, OS X, iPhone partially or fully the most free open source license, BSD, based. While Ubuntu and the open source world's cellphone efforts are jokes in the eyes of the rest of the world.</p><p>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How many years has it been listening to teenage Slashdot poster proclaiming the dawn of a new era was just around the corner ?
How many years has it been that Bearded GNU Freaks have been working toward their Retarded GNU Nirvana ? Commercial , paid for software developers and companies were pitied .
Claimed to be soon to be relics of a new era.They could n't possibly compete with the Power of the Entire Internet/Open Source World.They could n't possibly compete with the Million Eyes ensuring bugfree open source software.Google and Apple have made complete joke out of every single claim made here on Slashdot .
Android , OS X , iPhone partially or fully the most free open source license , BSD , based .
While Ubuntu and the open source world 's cellphone efforts are jokes in the eyes of the rest of the world .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many years has it been listening to teenage Slashdot poster proclaiming the dawn of a new era was just around the corner?
How many years has it been that Bearded GNU Freaks have been working toward their Retarded GNU Nirvana?Commercial, paid for software developers and companies were pitied.
Claimed to be soon to be relics of a new era.They couldn't possibly compete with the Power of the Entire Internet/Open Source World.They couldn't possibly compete with the Million Eyes ensuring bugfree open source software.Google and Apple have made complete joke out of every single claim made here on Slashdot.
Android, OS X, iPhone partially or fully the most free open source license, BSD, based.
While Ubuntu and the open source world's cellphone efforts are jokes in the eyes of the rest of the world.
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853458</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30856798</id>
	<title>The Computer World is Running on Linux</title>
	<author>warncke</author>
	<datestamp>1264101060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Of course people should get paid for their work.  If the cost of software goes down, the cost of a finished device goes down, and sales and profits for hardware manufacturers go up.  Why do you think every major hardware company chips in on linux development?  It is smart business.  Google, Apple, and thousands of other smaller companies would not exist without open source software.  Not only the software itself, but the skills of programmers who have learned the art through the availability of high quality open source code.  There are a lot of people making a lot of money using open source software, which is great.  The smart ones recognize this and give back to the community that made them.  Where's the problem?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course people should get paid for their work .
If the cost of software goes down , the cost of a finished device goes down , and sales and profits for hardware manufacturers go up .
Why do you think every major hardware company chips in on linux development ?
It is smart business .
Google , Apple , and thousands of other smaller companies would not exist without open source software .
Not only the software itself , but the skills of programmers who have learned the art through the availability of high quality open source code .
There are a lot of people making a lot of money using open source software , which is great .
The smart ones recognize this and give back to the community that made them .
Where 's the problem ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course people should get paid for their work.
If the cost of software goes down, the cost of a finished device goes down, and sales and profits for hardware manufacturers go up.
Why do you think every major hardware company chips in on linux development?
It is smart business.
Google, Apple, and thousands of other smaller companies would not exist without open source software.
Not only the software itself, but the skills of programmers who have learned the art through the availability of high quality open source code.
There are a lot of people making a lot of money using open source software, which is great.
The smart ones recognize this and give back to the community that made them.
Where's the problem?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854112</id>
	<title>Re:Missing critical information...</title>
	<author>jabberw0k</author>
	<datestamp>1264077960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How much does a line<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... cost?</p></div><p>First one's free?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How much does a line ... cost ? First one 's free ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How much does a line ... cost?First one's free?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853472</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30867994</id>
	<title>Will you answer a question please BitZtream?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264239420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why are you so fucking stupid?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why are you so fucking stupid ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why are you so fucking stupid?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857108</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854194</id>
	<title>This is just the Kernel</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264078320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What about applications?</p><p>For the exception of a very small percentage of applications (MySQL, NetBeans, Apache), every other application is coded by volunteers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What about applications ? For the exception of a very small percentage of applications ( MySQL , NetBeans , Apache ) , every other application is coded by volunteers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What about applications?For the exception of a very small percentage of applications (MySQL, NetBeans, Apache), every other application is coded by volunteers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30856824</id>
	<title>Re:Linux IS the adults table</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264101360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Also ARM, Intel, AMD, Freescale, RedHat, HP, Citrix, Vmware, Netapp, Fujitsu, NEC, NSA (yes NSA), Adaptec, Cisco, Dell, Ericsson, Panasonic, Qlogic, Sony, Toshiba, to name a few more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Also ARM , Intel , AMD , Freescale , RedHat , HP , Citrix , Vmware , Netapp , Fujitsu , NEC , NSA ( yes NSA ) , Adaptec , Cisco , Dell , Ericsson , Panasonic , Qlogic , Sony , Toshiba , to name a few more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also ARM, Intel, AMD, Freescale, RedHat, HP, Citrix, Vmware, Netapp, Fujitsu, NEC, NSA (yes NSA), Adaptec, Cisco, Dell, Ericsson, Panasonic, Qlogic, Sony, Toshiba, to name a few more.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855120</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853830</id>
	<title>25\% non-corporate?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264076700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As part of my job, I port Linux to our embedded boards and occasionally hack a  driver or two.</p><p>However, in order not to scream out to our competitors "Hey! We're making a new product!", the small amounts of code I send pack at patches (it's a pain in are done so though a nondescript gmail account.</p><p>I suspect this practice is fairly widespread.  Therefore, I'd say that 75\% is an under-estimate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As part of my job , I port Linux to our embedded boards and occasionally hack a driver or two.However , in order not to scream out to our competitors " Hey !
We 're making a new product !
" , the small amounts of code I send pack at patches ( it 's a pain in are done so though a nondescript gmail account.I suspect this practice is fairly widespread .
Therefore , I 'd say that 75 \ % is an under-estimate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As part of my job, I port Linux to our embedded boards and occasionally hack a  driver or two.However, in order not to scream out to our competitors "Hey!
We're making a new product!
", the small amounts of code I send pack at patches (it's a pain in are done so though a nondescript gmail account.I suspect this practice is fairly widespread.
Therefore, I'd say that 75\% is an under-estimate.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857614</id>
	<title>not incompatible neither irrelevant</title>
	<author>maninalift</author>
	<datestamp>1264156740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Lots of people seem to be getting tied up arguing that money doesn't make something non-free. I think we can all agree on that and move on: Move on to discussing the impact of the involvement of more paid developers.

If you want to ensure the health of a project, you need to be aware of forces at work within it.

There are paid developers who act like kernel-hackers and then there are paid developers who simply try to fix bug X in release Y for hardware Z which is being released next Tuesday. This isn't evil, but neither is it true to say it's irrelevant.

Finally we should acknowledge that the financial self-interest of companies rarely aligns perfectly with the principals of freedom: That's OK different developers ideas rarely align completely, but it is a different sort of force, and growth of it does influence the nature of the community and the development process.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Lots of people seem to be getting tied up arguing that money does n't make something non-free .
I think we can all agree on that and move on : Move on to discussing the impact of the involvement of more paid developers .
If you want to ensure the health of a project , you need to be aware of forces at work within it .
There are paid developers who act like kernel-hackers and then there are paid developers who simply try to fix bug X in release Y for hardware Z which is being released next Tuesday .
This is n't evil , but neither is it true to say it 's irrelevant .
Finally we should acknowledge that the financial self-interest of companies rarely aligns perfectly with the principals of freedom : That 's OK different developers ideas rarely align completely , but it is a different sort of force , and growth of it does influence the nature of the community and the development process .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lots of people seem to be getting tied up arguing that money doesn't make something non-free.
I think we can all agree on that and move on: Move on to discussing the impact of the involvement of more paid developers.
If you want to ensure the health of a project, you need to be aware of forces at work within it.
There are paid developers who act like kernel-hackers and then there are paid developers who simply try to fix bug X in release Y for hardware Z which is being released next Tuesday.
This isn't evil, but neither is it true to say it's irrelevant.
Finally we should acknowledge that the financial self-interest of companies rarely aligns perfectly with the principals of freedom: That's OK different developers ideas rarely align completely, but it is a different sort of force, and growth of it does influence the nature of the community and the development process.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853772</id>
	<title>Statistics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264076460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And if we wait another 100 years, then 100\% of Linux code will be written by historians. That's the power of statistics.
<p>
Linux is a mature project, amounts of code written today have a minuscule impact on the overall project compared with amounts of code written in the late 90s. When all the heavy lifting was being done, where were all the paid developers then?
</p><p>
Nothing to see here. Linux is as much a volunteer project as it has ever been.
If companies are willing to pay for polishing the kernel, I have no objections.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And if we wait another 100 years , then 100 \ % of Linux code will be written by historians .
That 's the power of statistics .
Linux is a mature project , amounts of code written today have a minuscule impact on the overall project compared with amounts of code written in the late 90s .
When all the heavy lifting was being done , where were all the paid developers then ?
Nothing to see here .
Linux is as much a volunteer project as it has ever been .
If companies are willing to pay for polishing the kernel , I have no objections .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And if we wait another 100 years, then 100\% of Linux code will be written by historians.
That's the power of statistics.
Linux is a mature project, amounts of code written today have a minuscule impact on the overall project compared with amounts of code written in the late 90s.
When all the heavy lifting was being done, where were all the paid developers then?
Nothing to see here.
Linux is as much a volunteer project as it has ever been.
If companies are willing to pay for polishing the kernel, I have no objections.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853808</id>
	<title>What about Google?</title>
	<author>netcruiser</author>
	<datestamp>1264076580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>So why isn't Google more involved in kernel development? I assume they use Linux extensively and hence make billions from using it. Do no evil, do no good?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So why is n't Google more involved in kernel development ?
I assume they use Linux extensively and hence make billions from using it .
Do no evil , do no good ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So why isn't Google more involved in kernel development?
I assume they use Linux extensively and hence make billions from using it.
Do no evil, do no good?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854038</id>
	<title>Re:I'll be the first to say...</title>
	<author>ClosedSource</author>
	<datestamp>1264077540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And this differs from closed source software in what way? Did you believe that developers of closed source software typically get "a piece of the action"?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And this differs from closed source software in what way ?
Did you believe that developers of closed source software typically get " a piece of the action " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And this differs from closed source software in what way?
Did you believe that developers of closed source software typically get "a piece of the action"?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857796</id>
	<title>work, not own</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264160040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course you can make money out of FOSS. Stallman was saying this for years! And now when it comes that it is the case people seems to be confused why it is so. The great thing about FOSS and it's business model as such is that you get money for your \_work\_. If you don't work you starve. Companies do not like to do pure FOSS business because it "brings a lot of risk". The stereotype is there that you must \_own\_ things. But in the end, it is always comes to the point where people trust you because of your \_work\_ and because of your \_can\_ altitude, not because you own products. Grown up in FOSS community I am not attracted to the proprietary models of business in computing as I believe it somewhat rottens the industry. Especially when people are not aware of FOSS value - as opposed to commercial benefit.</p><p>The mentality is out there, first thing we are thought in universities is that "how to protect what is yours". And this is just wrong. As long as there will be such altitude, people will not understand that the great value is in giving. Not taking. But I said too much already..<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>thanx,</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course you can make money out of FOSS .
Stallman was saying this for years !
And now when it comes that it is the case people seems to be confused why it is so .
The great thing about FOSS and it 's business model as such is that you get money for your \ _work \ _ .
If you do n't work you starve .
Companies do not like to do pure FOSS business because it " brings a lot of risk " .
The stereotype is there that you must \ _own \ _ things .
But in the end , it is always comes to the point where people trust you because of your \ _work \ _ and because of your \ _can \ _ altitude , not because you own products .
Grown up in FOSS community I am not attracted to the proprietary models of business in computing as I believe it somewhat rottens the industry .
Especially when people are not aware of FOSS value - as opposed to commercial benefit.The mentality is out there , first thing we are thought in universities is that " how to protect what is yours " .
And this is just wrong .
As long as there will be such altitude , people will not understand that the great value is in giving .
Not taking .
But I said too much already.. : ) thanx,</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course you can make money out of FOSS.
Stallman was saying this for years!
And now when it comes that it is the case people seems to be confused why it is so.
The great thing about FOSS and it's business model as such is that you get money for your \_work\_.
If you don't work you starve.
Companies do not like to do pure FOSS business because it "brings a lot of risk".
The stereotype is there that you must \_own\_ things.
But in the end, it is always comes to the point where people trust you because of your \_work\_ and because of your \_can\_ altitude, not because you own products.
Grown up in FOSS community I am not attracted to the proprietary models of business in computing as I believe it somewhat rottens the industry.
Especially when people are not aware of FOSS value - as opposed to commercial benefit.The mentality is out there, first thing we are thought in universities is that "how to protect what is yours".
And this is just wrong.
As long as there will be such altitude, people will not understand that the great value is in giving.
Not taking.
But I said too much already.. :)thanx,</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30856224</id>
	<title>Not surprising</title>
	<author>quinine</author>
	<datestamp>1264094100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In a world where certain hardware developers are wont to open their specs, this is not surprising.  When we talk about "Linux" proper, that's the kernel.  It's much easier for employees of HW companies to contribute(with or without official support) there.  I would likewise expect the remaining 25\% to be made up of hard-core computer scientists and/or mathematicians.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In a world where certain hardware developers are wont to open their specs , this is not surprising .
When we talk about " Linux " proper , that 's the kernel .
It 's much easier for employees of HW companies to contribute ( with or without official support ) there .
I would likewise expect the remaining 25 \ % to be made up of hard-core computer scientists and/or mathematicians .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In a world where certain hardware developers are wont to open their specs, this is not surprising.
When we talk about "Linux" proper, that's the kernel.
It's much easier for employees of HW companies to contribute(with or without official support) there.
I would likewise expect the remaining 25\% to be made up of hard-core computer scientists and/or mathematicians.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854442</id>
	<title>from bash.org</title>
	<author>Sparx139</author>
	<datestamp>1264079700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Asmodee`: ibm said they were investing 1 billion $ into open source projects<br>
DAL9000: Asmodee`: do you know what happens when you invest money in opensource projects?<br>
DAL9000: NOTHING! it buys the coders some beer, nachos, and porn to watch instead of coding.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Asmodee ` : ibm said they were investing 1 billion $ into open source projects DAL9000 : Asmodee ` : do you know what happens when you invest money in opensource projects ?
DAL9000 : NOTHING !
it buys the coders some beer , nachos , and porn to watch instead of coding .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Asmodee`: ibm said they were investing 1 billion $ into open source projects
DAL9000: Asmodee`: do you know what happens when you invest money in opensource projects?
DAL9000: NOTHING!
it buys the coders some beer, nachos, and porn to watch instead of coding.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855350</id>
	<title>Isn't that kind of the end goal?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264085880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I use linux professionally. So does most of the web. We're "forced" to GPL any improvements we have to make in the process of getting the job done. "Forced" is in quotes because fair is fair - so did everyone else including those bat**** crazy people following Linus and Sallman who wrote the seeds that grew into this and frankly I feel I'm getting more then I could ever give (at best correcting the occasional bug). GPL is there so it's clear to the managers that if you have a problem with that, feel free to pay quite handsomely. It's cheaper to improve linux (and/or the rest of GNU) then it is to not use it. Epic score - that was the whole point all along, right?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I use linux professionally .
So does most of the web .
We 're " forced " to GPL any improvements we have to make in the process of getting the job done .
" Forced " is in quotes because fair is fair - so did everyone else including those bat * * * * crazy people following Linus and Sallman who wrote the seeds that grew into this and frankly I feel I 'm getting more then I could ever give ( at best correcting the occasional bug ) .
GPL is there so it 's clear to the managers that if you have a problem with that , feel free to pay quite handsomely .
It 's cheaper to improve linux ( and/or the rest of GNU ) then it is to not use it .
Epic score - that was the whole point all along , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use linux professionally.
So does most of the web.
We're "forced" to GPL any improvements we have to make in the process of getting the job done.
"Forced" is in quotes because fair is fair - so did everyone else including those bat**** crazy people following Linus and Sallman who wrote the seeds that grew into this and frankly I feel I'm getting more then I could ever give (at best correcting the occasional bug).
GPL is there so it's clear to the managers that if you have a problem with that, feel free to pay quite handsomely.
It's cheaper to improve linux (and/or the rest of GNU) then it is to not use it.
Epic score - that was the whole point all along, right?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853924</id>
	<title>Re:I'll be the first to say...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264077060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Amen. Remember, these people are getting paid for their <i>labor</i>, not paid a million times over, every time a copy of the code is distributed.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Amen .
Remember , these people are getting paid for their labor , not paid a million times over , every time a copy of the code is distributed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Amen.
Remember, these people are getting paid for their labor, not paid a million times over, every time a copy of the code is distributed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853458</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30856178</id>
	<title>Economies of scale = 1/0 = infinity = irrelevant</title>
	<author>robot256</author>
	<datestamp>1264093560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>
This can be swept under the rug if the volume of freely given software is small.</p></div><p>It actually doesn't matter what the volume of free software is as long you have a revenue stream to support development.  It's software; the number of copies made has nothing whatsoever to do with the effort required to create it.  Even if everyone in the world downloaded Red Hat Linux right now, they would still have their customer base and still contribute to development at the same rate they do now.  Why?  Because their customers CHOOSE to pay them for their services, and do so on a regular basis regardless of development progress.  They are not locked into a single vendor or coerced into untimely upgrades or anything--if they were going to put their money elsewhere they would have done so already.
</p><p>Therefore, I rest my case.  Paying for data, any data, is fundamentally flawed both in theory and in practice.  Paying for support and service when you want it, from whom you want it, and using software that does not lock you into specific vendors is the only sustainable business model in the software industry.  Microsoft et al need to pull their heads out of the sand and get with the picture.

</p><p>.</p><p>P.S.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>For some time OSS developers chose the time, thus dragging projects for years (while competing commercial jobs were done in months.)</p></div><p>And how many of those commercial jobs done in months were rush jobs that were released full of holes and bugs?  Just saying, speed isn't always the best benchmark for comparison.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This can be swept under the rug if the volume of freely given software is small.It actually does n't matter what the volume of free software is as long you have a revenue stream to support development .
It 's software ; the number of copies made has nothing whatsoever to do with the effort required to create it .
Even if everyone in the world downloaded Red Hat Linux right now , they would still have their customer base and still contribute to development at the same rate they do now .
Why ? Because their customers CHOOSE to pay them for their services , and do so on a regular basis regardless of development progress .
They are not locked into a single vendor or coerced into untimely upgrades or anything--if they were going to put their money elsewhere they would have done so already .
Therefore , I rest my case .
Paying for data , any data , is fundamentally flawed both in theory and in practice .
Paying for support and service when you want it , from whom you want it , and using software that does not lock you into specific vendors is the only sustainable business model in the software industry .
Microsoft et al need to pull their heads out of the sand and get with the picture .
.P.S.For some time OSS developers chose the time , thus dragging projects for years ( while competing commercial jobs were done in months .
) And how many of those commercial jobs done in months were rush jobs that were released full of holes and bugs ?
Just saying , speed is n't always the best benchmark for comparison .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
This can be swept under the rug if the volume of freely given software is small.It actually doesn't matter what the volume of free software is as long you have a revenue stream to support development.
It's software; the number of copies made has nothing whatsoever to do with the effort required to create it.
Even if everyone in the world downloaded Red Hat Linux right now, they would still have their customer base and still contribute to development at the same rate they do now.
Why?  Because their customers CHOOSE to pay them for their services, and do so on a regular basis regardless of development progress.
They are not locked into a single vendor or coerced into untimely upgrades or anything--if they were going to put their money elsewhere they would have done so already.
Therefore, I rest my case.
Paying for data, any data, is fundamentally flawed both in theory and in practice.
Paying for support and service when you want it, from whom you want it, and using software that does not lock you into specific vendors is the only sustainable business model in the software industry.
Microsoft et al need to pull their heads out of the sand and get with the picture.
.P.S.For some time OSS developers chose the time, thus dragging projects for years (while competing commercial jobs were done in months.
)And how many of those commercial jobs done in months were rush jobs that were released full of holes and bugs?
Just saying, speed isn't always the best benchmark for comparison.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30859634</id>
	<title>Re:I'll be the first to say...</title>
	<author>drsmithy</author>
	<datestamp>1264176900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>The article itself basically presents the facts, but it does mention that it's interesting that a bunch of companies that otherwise compete with each other are in fact cooperating to develop Linux.</i>
</p><p>Firstly, they're not competing at developing Linux, they're competing at delivering the services and/or software they tie to Linux to make it commercially viable.
</p><p>Secondly, they're not "co-operating", they're following the conditions of the licensing under which Linux is distributed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The article itself basically presents the facts , but it does mention that it 's interesting that a bunch of companies that otherwise compete with each other are in fact cooperating to develop Linux .
Firstly , they 're not competing at developing Linux , they 're competing at delivering the services and/or software they tie to Linux to make it commercially viable .
Secondly , they 're not " co-operating " , they 're following the conditions of the licensing under which Linux is distributed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> The article itself basically presents the facts, but it does mention that it's interesting that a bunch of companies that otherwise compete with each other are in fact cooperating to develop Linux.
Firstly, they're not competing at developing Linux, they're competing at delivering the services and/or software they tie to Linux to make it commercially viable.
Secondly, they're not "co-operating", they're following the conditions of the licensing under which Linux is distributed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853600</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30858638</id>
	<title>Yeah, pinkos,</title>
	<author>qqi239</author>
	<datestamp>1264170900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>free software is alive and well only because it makes a lot of commercial sense for companies that do not sell software but have software component in their products, get over it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>free software is alive and well only because it makes a lot of commercial sense for companies that do not sell software but have software component in their products , get over it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>free software is alive and well only because it makes a lot of commercial sense for companies that do not sell software but have software component in their products, get over it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855154</id>
	<title>Re:Hmmm...</title>
	<author>Zero\_\_Kelvin</author>
	<datestamp>1264084440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>"<b> <i>What I take away from this</i></b>  is the fact that the Linux "community" is dominated by corporations. In many cases (but not all), for-profit corporations, all trying to compete against several other for-profit corporations named Microsoft, Apple, Google, Oracle, etc.</p></div></blockquote><p>Put it back.  It's no good.  (Among the many flaws in your analysis is your mixing of commodity and service based businesses, and the fact that Google is powered by Linux)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" What I take away from this is the fact that the Linux " community " is dominated by corporations .
In many cases ( but not all ) , for-profit corporations , all trying to compete against several other for-profit corporations named Microsoft , Apple , Google , Oracle , etc.Put it back .
It 's no good .
( Among the many flaws in your analysis is your mixing of commodity and service based businesses , and the fact that Google is powered by Linux )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>" What I take away from this  is the fact that the Linux "community" is dominated by corporations.
In many cases (but not all), for-profit corporations, all trying to compete against several other for-profit corporations named Microsoft, Apple, Google, Oracle, etc.Put it back.
It's no good.
(Among the many flaws in your analysis is your mixing of commodity and service based businesses, and the fact that Google is powered by Linux)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853698</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855422</id>
	<title>Re:But are they in the software business?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264086660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What percentage of these paid developers work for a company that derives its revenue primarily from software development?</p></div><p>... or hardware companies hacking and using pieces and parts  (medical, media, routers, nas drives, tv's, kiosks, embedded devices, etc.)</p><p>Yet i can't get a hardware driver to work fully like it is was designed and capable of.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What percentage of these paid developers work for a company that derives its revenue primarily from software development ? .. .
or hardware companies hacking and using pieces and parts ( medical , media , routers , nas drives , tv 's , kiosks , embedded devices , etc .
) Yet i ca n't get a hardware driver to work fully like it is was designed and capable of .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What percentage of these paid developers work for a company that derives its revenue primarily from software development?...
or hardware companies hacking and using pieces and parts  (medical, media, routers, nas drives, tv's, kiosks, embedded devices, etc.
)Yet i can't get a hardware driver to work fully like it is was designed and capable of.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854088</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853600</id>
	<title>Re:I'll be the first to say...</title>
	<author>ceoyoyo</author>
	<datestamp>1264075800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Kinda defensive, aren't you?  Who said anything was wrong with it?</p><p>The article itself basically presents the facts, but it does mention that it's interesting that a bunch of companies that otherwise compete with each other are in fact cooperating to develop Linux.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Kinda defensive , are n't you ?
Who said anything was wrong with it ? The article itself basically presents the facts , but it does mention that it 's interesting that a bunch of companies that otherwise compete with each other are in fact cooperating to develop Linux .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Kinda defensive, aren't you?
Who said anything was wrong with it?The article itself basically presents the facts, but it does mention that it's interesting that a bunch of companies that otherwise compete with each other are in fact cooperating to develop Linux.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853458</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30856226</id>
	<title>thats ironic</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264094100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, its actually large companies essentially shorting any competition with a bid at zero. Now you can't make money by competing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , its actually large companies essentially shorting any competition with a bid at zero .
Now you ca n't make money by competing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, its actually large companies essentially shorting any competition with a bid at zero.
Now you can't make money by competing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30858700</id>
	<title>From an embedded designer..</title>
	<author>gmarsh</author>
	<datestamp>1264171560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Linux is seriously one of the best things to happen to the embedded design market. I'd describe it as "a big pile of work that's already done for you, for free".</p><p>We've currently working on a project which uses a NXP LPC32xx ARM9 processor. NXP themselves wrote a pile of supporting code for the processor's peripherals and contributed it to the kernel - doing this work lets them say "hey, our chip runs Linux" and makes the chip much more attractive to their customers. Like us; we decided the chip had the right set of peripherals and price for our application, and we were planning on running Linux anyway, so it was a perfect fit.</p><p>So we built our board and started verification. Most things worked right out of the box, except for Ethernet; after fighting for a couple of days with it, we found a bug in NXP's code which didn't work with our PHY configuration, which we fixed and now it's working great. Kernel patch is on the way, which should hopefully save the next guy some work.</p><p>End result? NXP's happy because they're selling their chips, and we're happy because we're selling our products. And Linux improves in the process. What's not to love?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Linux is seriously one of the best things to happen to the embedded design market .
I 'd describe it as " a big pile of work that 's already done for you , for free " .We 've currently working on a project which uses a NXP LPC32xx ARM9 processor .
NXP themselves wrote a pile of supporting code for the processor 's peripherals and contributed it to the kernel - doing this work lets them say " hey , our chip runs Linux " and makes the chip much more attractive to their customers .
Like us ; we decided the chip had the right set of peripherals and price for our application , and we were planning on running Linux anyway , so it was a perfect fit.So we built our board and started verification .
Most things worked right out of the box , except for Ethernet ; after fighting for a couple of days with it , we found a bug in NXP 's code which did n't work with our PHY configuration , which we fixed and now it 's working great .
Kernel patch is on the way , which should hopefully save the next guy some work.End result ?
NXP 's happy because they 're selling their chips , and we 're happy because we 're selling our products .
And Linux improves in the process .
What 's not to love ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Linux is seriously one of the best things to happen to the embedded design market.
I'd describe it as "a big pile of work that's already done for you, for free".We've currently working on a project which uses a NXP LPC32xx ARM9 processor.
NXP themselves wrote a pile of supporting code for the processor's peripherals and contributed it to the kernel - doing this work lets them say "hey, our chip runs Linux" and makes the chip much more attractive to their customers.
Like us; we decided the chip had the right set of peripherals and price for our application, and we were planning on running Linux anyway, so it was a perfect fit.So we built our board and started verification.
Most things worked right out of the box, except for Ethernet; after fighting for a couple of days with it, we found a bug in NXP's code which didn't work with our PHY configuration, which we fixed and now it's working great.
Kernel patch is on the way, which should hopefully save the next guy some work.End result?
NXP's happy because they're selling their chips, and we're happy because we're selling our products.
And Linux improves in the process.
What's not to love?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857008</id>
	<title>Re:Good. Glad to Hear It.</title>
	<author>ProfMobius</author>
	<datestamp>1264190400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If Linux wants to sit at the adults' table.</p></div><p>I guess you never used a cluster. I still have to see a scientific cluster (most computer intensive thing you can find) running under something else than linux, unix or bsd (this last one is for the mac clusters out there). As an astrophysicist, i already used a correct number of top 100 clusters, all running under a variant of Linux. </p><p> Nuff said...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If Linux wants to sit at the adults ' table.I guess you never used a cluster .
I still have to see a scientific cluster ( most computer intensive thing you can find ) running under something else than linux , unix or bsd ( this last one is for the mac clusters out there ) .
As an astrophysicist , i already used a correct number of top 100 clusters , all running under a variant of Linux .
Nuff said.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Linux wants to sit at the adults' table.I guess you never used a cluster.
I still have to see a scientific cluster (most computer intensive thing you can find) running under something else than linux, unix or bsd (this last one is for the mac clusters out there).
As an astrophysicist, i already used a correct number of top 100 clusters, all running under a variant of Linux.
Nuff said...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853558</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855512</id>
	<title>redhat?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264087500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>RedHat?<br>Its been a while, but last i checked, Redhat was the only linux distro that isn't free. so.. maybe the revenue from that is paying these greedy developers?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>RedHat ? Its been a while , but last i checked , Redhat was the only linux distro that is n't free .
so.. maybe the revenue from that is paying these greedy developers ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>RedHat?Its been a while, but last i checked, Redhat was the only linux distro that isn't free.
so.. maybe the revenue from that is paying these greedy developers?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30870144</id>
	<title>Re:And this is a bad thing?!</title>
	<author>phreed</author>
	<datestamp>1264267140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In his book "Trust" economist Francis Fukuyama argues that a healthy economy is characterized by players of different sizes.
In a healthy economy as the size of the player increases the number of players of that size decreases (roughly) linearly.
Or, the healthy economy has many small players, fewer medium size players, very few large players and one government player.
(To understand why this should be so will hopefully be obvious.)

If that is true then I would hope that the linux community (economy) would exhibit this property, as this article apparently finds.
Defective communities would be characterized by such things as...

 - only very small players (only individual contributors)

 - only a few very large players (monopolies, cartels)

 - players more powerful (larger) than the regulating body (government)

 - no middle players (only individuals and government sponsored monopolies)

The suspects that meet these criteria should be obvious.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In his book " Trust " economist Francis Fukuyama argues that a healthy economy is characterized by players of different sizes .
In a healthy economy as the size of the player increases the number of players of that size decreases ( roughly ) linearly .
Or , the healthy economy has many small players , fewer medium size players , very few large players and one government player .
( To understand why this should be so will hopefully be obvious .
) If that is true then I would hope that the linux community ( economy ) would exhibit this property , as this article apparently finds .
Defective communities would be characterized by such things as.. . - only very small players ( only individual contributors ) - only a few very large players ( monopolies , cartels ) - players more powerful ( larger ) than the regulating body ( government ) - no middle players ( only individuals and government sponsored monopolies ) The suspects that meet these criteria should be obvious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In his book "Trust" economist Francis Fukuyama argues that a healthy economy is characterized by players of different sizes.
In a healthy economy as the size of the player increases the number of players of that size decreases (roughly) linearly.
Or, the healthy economy has many small players, fewer medium size players, very few large players and one government player.
(To understand why this should be so will hopefully be obvious.
)

If that is true then I would hope that the linux community (economy) would exhibit this property, as this article apparently finds.
Defective communities would be characterized by such things as...

 - only very small players (only individual contributors)

 - only a few very large players (monopolies, cartels)

 - players more powerful (larger) than the regulating body (government)

 - no middle players (only individuals and government sponsored monopolies)

The suspects that meet these criteria should be obvious.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853708</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855202</id>
	<title>The answer to your question is: nobody</title>
	<author>ClosedSource</author>
	<datestamp>1264084800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The open issue is whether most <i>software</i> companies could make money writing exclusively open source software.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The open issue is whether most software companies could make money writing exclusively open source software .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The open issue is whether most software companies could make money writing exclusively open source software.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854178</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30861120</id>
	<title>Let's look closer</title>
	<author>ClosedSource</author>
	<datestamp>1264184100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Red Hat is really a distributor. What original products have they developed?</p><p>Novell is a primarily a proprietary software company.</p><p>Linux Foundation - I don't know - non-profit perhaps</p><p>Oracle = another proprietary software company who dabbles in Linux.</p><p>Name me some successful software companies who created a new product and is 100\% open source.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Red Hat is really a distributor .
What original products have they developed ? Novell is a primarily a proprietary software company.Linux Foundation - I do n't know - non-profit perhapsOracle = another proprietary software company who dabbles in Linux.Name me some successful software companies who created a new product and is 100 \ % open source .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Red Hat is really a distributor.
What original products have they developed?Novell is a primarily a proprietary software company.Linux Foundation - I don't know - non-profit perhapsOracle = another proprietary software company who dabbles in Linux.Name me some successful software companies who created a new product and is 100\% open source.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855438</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30861146</id>
	<title>Re:Missing critical information...</title>
	<author>ebuck</author>
	<datestamp>1264184160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cost per line of code is like cost per flower.  You don't mention what kind of flower, whether it is a cheap bulk flower or a premium single flower, whether it is spoiled or fresh, or whether it can be picked outside your window or it has to be shipped half way around the world.  Since there is so much variability in what a flower can be, you can manipulate the cost per flower by manipulating the size, quality, and desirability of delivered flowers.</p><p>Cost per line of code is subject to similar manipulations as cost per flower.  One can easily take one line of code and cut it into two lines without changing the functionality of the program.  One can likewise take two lines of code and make them one without changing the functionality of the program.  With ability to manipulate the number of lines, one can take a program and arrive at nearly any cost per line they desire.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cost per line of code is like cost per flower .
You do n't mention what kind of flower , whether it is a cheap bulk flower or a premium single flower , whether it is spoiled or fresh , or whether it can be picked outside your window or it has to be shipped half way around the world .
Since there is so much variability in what a flower can be , you can manipulate the cost per flower by manipulating the size , quality , and desirability of delivered flowers.Cost per line of code is subject to similar manipulations as cost per flower .
One can easily take one line of code and cut it into two lines without changing the functionality of the program .
One can likewise take two lines of code and make them one without changing the functionality of the program .
With ability to manipulate the number of lines , one can take a program and arrive at nearly any cost per line they desire .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cost per line of code is like cost per flower.
You don't mention what kind of flower, whether it is a cheap bulk flower or a premium single flower, whether it is spoiled or fresh, or whether it can be picked outside your window or it has to be shipped half way around the world.
Since there is so much variability in what a flower can be, you can manipulate the cost per flower by manipulating the size, quality, and desirability of delivered flowers.Cost per line of code is subject to similar manipulations as cost per flower.
One can easily take one line of code and cut it into two lines without changing the functionality of the program.
One can likewise take two lines of code and make them one without changing the functionality of the program.
With ability to manipulate the number of lines, one can take a program and arrive at nearly any cost per line they desire.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853472</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857038</id>
	<title>If you are compalining about this...</title>
	<author>FlyingGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1264190880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Then go stick your head in a barrel of shit.</p><p>Because that is exactly where it belongs.  Writing kernel code is <b>damn hard</b> not one line of it is trivial.  It requires a massive commitment of time and energy and people <b>deserve</b> to be compensated for it.  Writing kernel code is not a <b>hobby</b> if you write anything of substance it is work.</p><p>I have been actively studying the kernel code for about two months now and it gives me headaches just trying to keep the big picture in mind as I just <b>read</b> much less try and write any of it, although that is my end goal.</p><p>Linux is no longer a hobby it is a main stream OS that is unning a great deal of corporate America and those corporations realize this and hire people who write kernel code and fix things that need fixing.  Linus is the gate keeper, but he long ago set the kernel free and allowed it to blossom into what it is and even he will admit that what is happening is a "good thing".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Then go stick your head in a barrel of shit.Because that is exactly where it belongs .
Writing kernel code is damn hard not one line of it is trivial .
It requires a massive commitment of time and energy and people deserve to be compensated for it .
Writing kernel code is not a hobby if you write anything of substance it is work.I have been actively studying the kernel code for about two months now and it gives me headaches just trying to keep the big picture in mind as I just read much less try and write any of it , although that is my end goal.Linux is no longer a hobby it is a main stream OS that is unning a great deal of corporate America and those corporations realize this and hire people who write kernel code and fix things that need fixing .
Linus is the gate keeper , but he long ago set the kernel free and allowed it to blossom into what it is and even he will admit that what is happening is a " good thing " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then go stick your head in a barrel of shit.Because that is exactly where it belongs.
Writing kernel code is damn hard not one line of it is trivial.
It requires a massive commitment of time and energy and people deserve to be compensated for it.
Writing kernel code is not a hobby if you write anything of substance it is work.I have been actively studying the kernel code for about two months now and it gives me headaches just trying to keep the big picture in mind as I just read much less try and write any of it, although that is my end goal.Linux is no longer a hobby it is a main stream OS that is unning a great deal of corporate America and those corporations realize this and hire people who write kernel code and fix things that need fixing.
Linus is the gate keeper, but he long ago set the kernel free and allowed it to blossom into what it is and even he will admit that what is happening is a "good thing".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855848</id>
	<title>ideals vs. pay</title>
	<author>kimvette</author>
	<datestamp>1264090200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Ideals" don't put food on the table, don't pay for a sportscar to impress women, and don't keep a roof over your head.</p><p>Income does.</p><p>However, if you can get someone to pay you to do what you love, what's wrong with that?</p><p>Answer: absolutely nothing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Ideals " do n't put food on the table , do n't pay for a sportscar to impress women , and do n't keep a roof over your head.Income does.However , if you can get someone to pay you to do what you love , what 's wrong with that ? Answer : absolutely nothing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Ideals" don't put food on the table, don't pay for a sportscar to impress women, and don't keep a roof over your head.Income does.However, if you can get someone to pay you to do what you love, what's wrong with that?Answer: absolutely nothing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855788</id>
	<title>Re:I'll be the first to say...</title>
	<author>im\_thatoneguy</author>
	<datestamp>1264089780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Probably because while they compete, they aren't competing in the OS marketplace, nor have any interest to ever compete in the OS marketplace.</p><p>It's a statement that comes up our studio pretty frequently. "We aren't in the software business."  So while we write code, we aren't looking to sell and support said code.  Nor do we think the code we release would give the competition an unfair advantage.  Instead if someone were to adopt it then maybe we could stop investing our own time in developing it.</p><p>The real problem with FOSS software from this standpoint though is that it's almost never cost effective to write something if there is even a mediocre commercial product available.  The simplest of all applications would take at least two days.  If you count the opportunity costs then that's hundreds of dollars for a simple tool.</p><p>So we only really invest in things which haven't been done before or are very specific to our own needs.  If it hasn't been done before then in all likelihood it offers us a competitive advantage and we won't release it.  Once it's become common hat then we don't mind releasing it but commercial software probably offers something better.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Probably because while they compete , they are n't competing in the OS marketplace , nor have any interest to ever compete in the OS marketplace.It 's a statement that comes up our studio pretty frequently .
" We are n't in the software business .
" So while we write code , we are n't looking to sell and support said code .
Nor do we think the code we release would give the competition an unfair advantage .
Instead if someone were to adopt it then maybe we could stop investing our own time in developing it.The real problem with FOSS software from this standpoint though is that it 's almost never cost effective to write something if there is even a mediocre commercial product available .
The simplest of all applications would take at least two days .
If you count the opportunity costs then that 's hundreds of dollars for a simple tool.So we only really invest in things which have n't been done before or are very specific to our own needs .
If it has n't been done before then in all likelihood it offers us a competitive advantage and we wo n't release it .
Once it 's become common hat then we do n't mind releasing it but commercial software probably offers something better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Probably because while they compete, they aren't competing in the OS marketplace, nor have any interest to ever compete in the OS marketplace.It's a statement that comes up our studio pretty frequently.
"We aren't in the software business.
"  So while we write code, we aren't looking to sell and support said code.
Nor do we think the code we release would give the competition an unfair advantage.
Instead if someone were to adopt it then maybe we could stop investing our own time in developing it.The real problem with FOSS software from this standpoint though is that it's almost never cost effective to write something if there is even a mediocre commercial product available.
The simplest of all applications would take at least two days.
If you count the opportunity costs then that's hundreds of dollars for a simple tool.So we only really invest in things which haven't been done before or are very specific to our own needs.
If it hasn't been done before then in all likelihood it offers us a competitive advantage and we won't release it.
Once it's become common hat then we don't mind releasing it but commercial software probably offers something better.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853600</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30879298</id>
	<title>nothing new</title>
	<author>pydev</author>
	<datestamp>1264355580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>The Linux world makes much of its community roots, but when it comes to developing the kernel of the operating system, it's less a case of 'volunteers ahoy!' and more a case of 'where's my pay?'</i></p><p>What does the guy think how "the community" was paying for food and housing?  Open source developers have always usually had mainstream computer-related jobs and done open source development as part of their paid job.  The only thing that's changed is that over the last few years, open source development has changed from a part-time activity to a full time activity for many developers and that therefore their job titles have changed as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Linux world makes much of its community roots , but when it comes to developing the kernel of the operating system , it 's less a case of 'volunteers ahoy !
' and more a case of 'where 's my pay ?
'What does the guy think how " the community " was paying for food and housing ?
Open source developers have always usually had mainstream computer-related jobs and done open source development as part of their paid job .
The only thing that 's changed is that over the last few years , open source development has changed from a part-time activity to a full time activity for many developers and that therefore their job titles have changed as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Linux world makes much of its community roots, but when it comes to developing the kernel of the operating system, it's less a case of 'volunteers ahoy!
' and more a case of 'where's my pay?
'What does the guy think how "the community" was paying for food and housing?
Open source developers have always usually had mainstream computer-related jobs and done open source development as part of their paid job.
The only thing that's changed is that over the last few years, open source development has changed from a part-time activity to a full time activity for many developers and that therefore their job titles have changed as well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853794</id>
	<title>Re:And this is a bad thing?!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264076520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Since when does community == volunteers?</p><p>That large, well funded corporations are now contributing members of the linux community is a Good Thing.</p></div><p>Exactly!  What's great about Linux is that it's free, not that its developers are unpaid!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Since when does community = = volunteers ? That large , well funded corporations are now contributing members of the linux community is a Good Thing.Exactly !
What 's great about Linux is that it 's free , not that its developers are unpaid !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since when does community == volunteers?That large, well funded corporations are now contributing members of the linux community is a Good Thing.Exactly!
What's great about Linux is that it's free, not that its developers are unpaid!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853556</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854424</id>
	<title>Re:I'll be the first to say...</title>
	<author>dkf</author>
	<datestamp>1264079580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What's wrong with that?</p></div><p>Nothing at all.</p><p>I remember getting my first programming job. I noted to my family almost exactly this: I'm doing what I love, and those fools are paying me to do it. These days I'm a little more mercenary (if they stop paying me I'll go and find some other employer) but I still love programming. Best. Gig. Ever.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's wrong with that ? Nothing at all.I remember getting my first programming job .
I noted to my family almost exactly this : I 'm doing what I love , and those fools are paying me to do it .
These days I 'm a little more mercenary ( if they stop paying me I 'll go and find some other employer ) but I still love programming .
Best. Gig .
Ever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's wrong with that?Nothing at all.I remember getting my first programming job.
I noted to my family almost exactly this: I'm doing what I love, and those fools are paying me to do it.
These days I'm a little more mercenary (if they stop paying me I'll go and find some other employer) but I still love programming.
Best. Gig.
Ever.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853458</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855260</id>
	<title>Re:So much for "free software", eh?</title>
	<author>betterunixthanunix</author>
	<datestamp>1264085220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Free does not mean gratis in this context, as I am sure plenty of other people are going to point out.  The Linux kernel is free in the sense that you may freely use, modify, or redistribute it, without worrying about patents or royalties, or EULAs or whatnot.  Yes, I know some BSD license fans will probably point out that you are not free to redistribute it as if it were proprietary software, but the GPL is about protecting the other freedoms from that exact activity.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Free does not mean gratis in this context , as I am sure plenty of other people are going to point out .
The Linux kernel is free in the sense that you may freely use , modify , or redistribute it , without worrying about patents or royalties , or EULAs or whatnot .
Yes , I know some BSD license fans will probably point out that you are not free to redistribute it as if it were proprietary software , but the GPL is about protecting the other freedoms from that exact activity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Free does not mean gratis in this context, as I am sure plenty of other people are going to point out.
The Linux kernel is free in the sense that you may freely use, modify, or redistribute it, without worrying about patents or royalties, or EULAs or whatnot.
Yes, I know some BSD license fans will probably point out that you are not free to redistribute it as if it were proprietary software, but the GPL is about protecting the other freedoms from that exact activity.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853450</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857108</id>
	<title>Re:Linux IS the adults table</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264191660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855120</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854996</id>
	<title>Re:But are they in the software business?</title>
	<author>zzatz</author>
	<datestamp>1264083120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's the point - bypass the middleman's sales overhead and profit.</p><p>On one hand, Company A buys software from Company B, indirectly funding the development of the software. If Company A wants changes or new features, they can beg and plead for them, and they might get them. Company A will indirectly pay for development at Company B whether or not they get the changes they want. Company B will then sell the software, possibly incorporating Company A's ideas and improvements, to all of Company A's competitors. Company B's customers pay the cost of the development, plus the cost of sales (marketing, commissions, etc.), plus a markup.</p><p>On the other hand, Company A hires developers to improve software that others have made freely available. They get exactly the changes they want. Company A's competitors also get those changes, but the reverse is true: Company A gets Company C's improvements. Both companies find this agreeable because neither can gain an advantage through the software, and both have reduced the cost of developing it. Company A has cut out the middlemen, avoiding the cost of sales and profits extracted by Company B.</p><p>You can't gain an advantage over your competition by buying your software from a third party, because your competitor can buy it, too. You can't gain an advantage over your competition by hiring developers to write open source software, because your competitor can dowload it, too. There's no difference between open source software and third party commercial closed source software as far as advantage over a competitor. The only way to use software as a competitive differentiator is to develop it internally, keep it closed, don't sell it, and pay the high cost of developing for a single customer - yourself.</p><p>In economic terms, software is a complementary good. Intel sells processors, which are not useful without software. But every dollar spent on software is a dollar that isn't spent on processors. Red Hat is in a similar situation; they sell support, not software, and giving away software makes money available for support.</p><p>The economics are simple. Any software that has a large enough base to support sales in binary form has a large enough base to support shared development under open source licenses with a lower overhead. Selling binaries is a temporary aberration caused by network effects during the initial growth of the market. As the market matures, sales of mass market software will decline.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's the point - bypass the middleman 's sales overhead and profit.On one hand , Company A buys software from Company B , indirectly funding the development of the software .
If Company A wants changes or new features , they can beg and plead for them , and they might get them .
Company A will indirectly pay for development at Company B whether or not they get the changes they want .
Company B will then sell the software , possibly incorporating Company A 's ideas and improvements , to all of Company A 's competitors .
Company B 's customers pay the cost of the development , plus the cost of sales ( marketing , commissions , etc .
) , plus a markup.On the other hand , Company A hires developers to improve software that others have made freely available .
They get exactly the changes they want .
Company A 's competitors also get those changes , but the reverse is true : Company A gets Company C 's improvements .
Both companies find this agreeable because neither can gain an advantage through the software , and both have reduced the cost of developing it .
Company A has cut out the middlemen , avoiding the cost of sales and profits extracted by Company B.You ca n't gain an advantage over your competition by buying your software from a third party , because your competitor can buy it , too .
You ca n't gain an advantage over your competition by hiring developers to write open source software , because your competitor can dowload it , too .
There 's no difference between open source software and third party commercial closed source software as far as advantage over a competitor .
The only way to use software as a competitive differentiator is to develop it internally , keep it closed , do n't sell it , and pay the high cost of developing for a single customer - yourself.In economic terms , software is a complementary good .
Intel sells processors , which are not useful without software .
But every dollar spent on software is a dollar that is n't spent on processors .
Red Hat is in a similar situation ; they sell support , not software , and giving away software makes money available for support.The economics are simple .
Any software that has a large enough base to support sales in binary form has a large enough base to support shared development under open source licenses with a lower overhead .
Selling binaries is a temporary aberration caused by network effects during the initial growth of the market .
As the market matures , sales of mass market software will decline .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's the point - bypass the middleman's sales overhead and profit.On one hand, Company A buys software from Company B, indirectly funding the development of the software.
If Company A wants changes or new features, they can beg and plead for them, and they might get them.
Company A will indirectly pay for development at Company B whether or not they get the changes they want.
Company B will then sell the software, possibly incorporating Company A's ideas and improvements, to all of Company A's competitors.
Company B's customers pay the cost of the development, plus the cost of sales (marketing, commissions, etc.
), plus a markup.On the other hand, Company A hires developers to improve software that others have made freely available.
They get exactly the changes they want.
Company A's competitors also get those changes, but the reverse is true: Company A gets Company C's improvements.
Both companies find this agreeable because neither can gain an advantage through the software, and both have reduced the cost of developing it.
Company A has cut out the middlemen, avoiding the cost of sales and profits extracted by Company B.You can't gain an advantage over your competition by buying your software from a third party, because your competitor can buy it, too.
You can't gain an advantage over your competition by hiring developers to write open source software, because your competitor can dowload it, too.
There's no difference between open source software and third party commercial closed source software as far as advantage over a competitor.
The only way to use software as a competitive differentiator is to develop it internally, keep it closed, don't sell it, and pay the high cost of developing for a single customer - yourself.In economic terms, software is a complementary good.
Intel sells processors, which are not useful without software.
But every dollar spent on software is a dollar that isn't spent on processors.
Red Hat is in a similar situation; they sell support, not software, and giving away software makes money available for support.The economics are simple.
Any software that has a large enough base to support sales in binary form has a large enough base to support shared development under open source licenses with a lower overhead.
Selling binaries is a temporary aberration caused by network effects during the initial growth of the market.
As the market matures, sales of mass market software will decline.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854088</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30877520</id>
	<title>Anxiety over Commercial Involvement Well Placed</title>
	<author>tstravist</author>
	<datestamp>1264339500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In my mind the anxiety about commercial interests in open source, and as by product the paying of developers, is not misplaced. Plenty of good things have been turned to shit once business was introduced. Anyone with half a brain can observed that the idea of capitalist competition spurring development is more the exception than the rule. Companies soon catch on that its easier to FUD, lie, distort, lock-in, lock-out, patent harass, sue etc etc than actually compete by developing better products in the spirit of capitalist competition theory. The more dominated by devious profit-is-king sell-your-mother-for-a-percentage minded capitalist stakeholders in the open source eco-system the more risk to open source from its toxic ideology ie Tivoisation, trusted computing, DRM, software patent.</p><p>Anxiety can be a good motivator but paranoia leads to disaster. It is observably true that, while not there at the start, capitalist institutions have pushed forward the quality and quantity of open source by pouring in the massive resources they have. However so far no death blow perversion to open source has been struck. So we must ask what would be the death blow? Specifically who knows but generally anything that effectively denies open source freedom! Its all about freedom, freedom, freedom! Capitalist agendas can and should be allowed to embrace open source but never at the risk of the core freedom loving ideas that birthed the movement. If one doesn't understand those fundamental freedoms that created the open source movement then of course one could easily play a part in killing the golden goose. The only thing that the open source 'community' needs to survive is a freedom loving pulse and, I'm sorry to say, capitalism isn't historically known for this and wage enslaved employees aren't, by definition, in a position to dictate policy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In my mind the anxiety about commercial interests in open source , and as by product the paying of developers , is not misplaced .
Plenty of good things have been turned to shit once business was introduced .
Anyone with half a brain can observed that the idea of capitalist competition spurring development is more the exception than the rule .
Companies soon catch on that its easier to FUD , lie , distort , lock-in , lock-out , patent harass , sue etc etc than actually compete by developing better products in the spirit of capitalist competition theory .
The more dominated by devious profit-is-king sell-your-mother-for-a-percentage minded capitalist stakeholders in the open source eco-system the more risk to open source from its toxic ideology ie Tivoisation , trusted computing , DRM , software patent.Anxiety can be a good motivator but paranoia leads to disaster .
It is observably true that , while not there at the start , capitalist institutions have pushed forward the quality and quantity of open source by pouring in the massive resources they have .
However so far no death blow perversion to open source has been struck .
So we must ask what would be the death blow ?
Specifically who knows but generally anything that effectively denies open source freedom !
Its all about freedom , freedom , freedom !
Capitalist agendas can and should be allowed to embrace open source but never at the risk of the core freedom loving ideas that birthed the movement .
If one does n't understand those fundamental freedoms that created the open source movement then of course one could easily play a part in killing the golden goose .
The only thing that the open source 'community ' needs to survive is a freedom loving pulse and , I 'm sorry to say , capitalism is n't historically known for this and wage enslaved employees are n't , by definition , in a position to dictate policy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my mind the anxiety about commercial interests in open source, and as by product the paying of developers, is not misplaced.
Plenty of good things have been turned to shit once business was introduced.
Anyone with half a brain can observed that the idea of capitalist competition spurring development is more the exception than the rule.
Companies soon catch on that its easier to FUD, lie, distort, lock-in, lock-out, patent harass, sue etc etc than actually compete by developing better products in the spirit of capitalist competition theory.
The more dominated by devious profit-is-king sell-your-mother-for-a-percentage minded capitalist stakeholders in the open source eco-system the more risk to open source from its toxic ideology ie Tivoisation, trusted computing, DRM, software patent.Anxiety can be a good motivator but paranoia leads to disaster.
It is observably true that, while not there at the start, capitalist institutions have pushed forward the quality and quantity of open source by pouring in the massive resources they have.
However so far no death blow perversion to open source has been struck.
So we must ask what would be the death blow?
Specifically who knows but generally anything that effectively denies open source freedom!
Its all about freedom, freedom, freedom!
Capitalist agendas can and should be allowed to embrace open source but never at the risk of the core freedom loving ideas that birthed the movement.
If one doesn't understand those fundamental freedoms that created the open source movement then of course one could easily play a part in killing the golden goose.
The only thing that the open source 'community' needs to survive is a freedom loving pulse and, I'm sorry to say, capitalism isn't historically known for this and wage enslaved employees aren't, by definition, in a position to dictate policy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857612</id>
	<title>Great,</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264156740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>now if you could start paying the other 25\% you could technically start firing them for writing bad code and slowing everyone else down.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>now if you could start paying the other 25 \ % you could technically start firing them for writing bad code and slowing everyone else down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>now if you could start paying the other 25\% you could technically start firing them for writing bad code and slowing everyone else down.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853564</id>
	<title>"community" doesn't mean "unpaid"</title>
	<author>Mr. Slippery</author>
	<datestamp>1264075680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There seems to be some assumption that "community" means "unpaid". Not at all. The Free Software community includes a whole lot of people who get paid to use software to meet the needs of  employers. If meeting those needs involves improving bits of Free Software, the employer benefits from having those contributions integrated into the product.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There seems to be some assumption that " community " means " unpaid " .
Not at all .
The Free Software community includes a whole lot of people who get paid to use software to meet the needs of employers .
If meeting those needs involves improving bits of Free Software , the employer benefits from having those contributions integrated into the product .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There seems to be some assumption that "community" means "unpaid".
Not at all.
The Free Software community includes a whole lot of people who get paid to use software to meet the needs of  employers.
If meeting those needs involves improving bits of Free Software, the employer benefits from having those contributions integrated into the product.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854100</id>
	<title>Re:pay?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264077900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"volunteers ahoy!" vs. "pay me for joy!"<br>"volunteers hurray!" vs. "where's my pay?"<br>"volunteers galore!" vs. "cash, cash, cash, I want more!"<br>"volunteers engage!" vs. "I want my wage!"<br>etc.</p><p>WTF kind of retard is the author of TFA for failing to come up with a suitable rhyme?!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" volunteers ahoy !
" vs. " pay me for joy !
" " volunteers hurray !
" vs. " where 's my pay ?
" " volunteers galore !
" vs. " cash , cash , cash , I want more !
" " volunteers engage !
" vs. " I want my wage !
" etc.WTF kind of retard is the author of TFA for failing to come up with a suitable rhyme ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"volunteers ahoy!
" vs. "pay me for joy!
""volunteers hurray!
" vs. "where's my pay?
""volunteers galore!
" vs. "cash, cash, cash, I want more!
""volunteers engage!
" vs. "I want my wage!
"etc.WTF kind of retard is the author of TFA for failing to come up with a suitable rhyme?
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853652</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855372</id>
	<title>Re:So much for "free software", eh?</title>
	<author>Runaway1956</author>
	<datestamp>1264086120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is "free", and there is "free".</p><p>Linux always has been, and always will be "free", as in "Freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom to change the code to fit your needs."</p><p>Linux always has been, and probably always will be "free", as in "No charge to download and use the code".</p><p>Nowhere in that concept is the idea of payment for work and services precluded.  Face it - professionals are generally better than enthusiasts in any field.  Even when the enthusiasts are just as good as the pros, the volunteers can't always spend the time necessary to complete the job like an employee can.</p><p>Linux is free.  That doesn't mean that Joe Blow can't start a business installing Linux on new and used computers, selling those computers to the Sixpacks of the world, then charge for ongoing support.  There IS money to be made with Linux.  It's not some communist plot to undermine American business.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is " free " , and there is " free " .Linux always has been , and always will be " free " , as in " Freedom of speech , freedom of thought , freedom to change the code to fit your needs .
" Linux always has been , and probably always will be " free " , as in " No charge to download and use the code " .Nowhere in that concept is the idea of payment for work and services precluded .
Face it - professionals are generally better than enthusiasts in any field .
Even when the enthusiasts are just as good as the pros , the volunteers ca n't always spend the time necessary to complete the job like an employee can.Linux is free .
That does n't mean that Joe Blow ca n't start a business installing Linux on new and used computers , selling those computers to the Sixpacks of the world , then charge for ongoing support .
There IS money to be made with Linux .
It 's not some communist plot to undermine American business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is "free", and there is "free".Linux always has been, and always will be "free", as in "Freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom to change the code to fit your needs.
"Linux always has been, and probably always will be "free", as in "No charge to download and use the code".Nowhere in that concept is the idea of payment for work and services precluded.
Face it - professionals are generally better than enthusiasts in any field.
Even when the enthusiasts are just as good as the pros, the volunteers can't always spend the time necessary to complete the job like an employee can.Linux is free.
That doesn't mean that Joe Blow can't start a business installing Linux on new and used computers, selling those computers to the Sixpacks of the world, then charge for ongoing support.
There IS money to be made with Linux.
It's not some communist plot to undermine American business.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853450</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855190</id>
	<title>Re:Statistics</title>
	<author>GaryPatterson</author>
	<datestamp>1264084740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>And if we wait another 100 years, then 100\% of Linux code will be written by historians</i></p><p>Can someone tell me what this means? Code is being updated by historians? How old does the code have to be before the history department of the university takes it from the computer science department? Do history professors have to get qualifications in programming languages?</p><p>It's complete nonsense, as far as I can tell.</p><p><i>That's the power of statistics</i></p><p>No, that's the sort of thing people write while off their face on some drug. Of course, if you get enough of them, they'll become a statistic.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And if we wait another 100 years , then 100 \ % of Linux code will be written by historiansCan someone tell me what this means ?
Code is being updated by historians ?
How old does the code have to be before the history department of the university takes it from the computer science department ?
Do history professors have to get qualifications in programming languages ? It 's complete nonsense , as far as I can tell.That 's the power of statisticsNo , that 's the sort of thing people write while off their face on some drug .
Of course , if you get enough of them , they 'll become a statistic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And if we wait another 100 years, then 100\% of Linux code will be written by historiansCan someone tell me what this means?
Code is being updated by historians?
How old does the code have to be before the history department of the university takes it from the computer science department?
Do history professors have to get qualifications in programming languages?It's complete nonsense, as far as I can tell.That's the power of statisticsNo, that's the sort of thing people write while off their face on some drug.
Of course, if you get enough of them, they'll become a statistic.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853772</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30861496</id>
	<title>Not really suprising...</title>
	<author>HalAtWork</author>
	<datestamp>1264186020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most Linux end users are more likely to contribute to applications, translations, documentation, art, sounds, music, not the kernel.  The Linux kernel itself is probably more intersting to those closer to the bare metal, which would be administrators or hardware developers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most Linux end users are more likely to contribute to applications , translations , documentation , art , sounds , music , not the kernel .
The Linux kernel itself is probably more intersting to those closer to the bare metal , which would be administrators or hardware developers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most Linux end users are more likely to contribute to applications, translations, documentation, art, sounds, music, not the kernel.
The Linux kernel itself is probably more intersting to those closer to the bare metal, which would be administrators or hardware developers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853544</id>
	<title>Re:I'll be the first to say...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264075620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lines of code written for money are evil and execute more slowly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lines of code written for money are evil and execute more slowly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lines of code written for money are evil and execute more slowly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853458</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853558</id>
	<title>Good.  Glad to Hear It.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264075620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I rely upon Linux for my business.  If something isn't all it should be, or developments don't happen as fast as they could, I'm gratified to know that money is changing hands and somebody might get canned and replaced by another, better professional.</p><p>If Linux wants to sit at the adults' table -- and it clearly has the depth and breadth of functionality to do so -- then there needs to be the kind of professional accountability in its developers that only a paycheck can engender.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I rely upon Linux for my business .
If something is n't all it should be , or developments do n't happen as fast as they could , I 'm gratified to know that money is changing hands and somebody might get canned and replaced by another , better professional.If Linux wants to sit at the adults ' table -- and it clearly has the depth and breadth of functionality to do so -- then there needs to be the kind of professional accountability in its developers that only a paycheck can engender .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I rely upon Linux for my business.
If something isn't all it should be, or developments don't happen as fast as they could, I'm gratified to know that money is changing hands and somebody might get canned and replaced by another, better professional.If Linux wants to sit at the adults' table -- and it clearly has the depth and breadth of functionality to do so -- then there needs to be the kind of professional accountability in its developers that only a paycheck can engender.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30858400</id>
	<title>How about the money companies save?</title>
	<author>viraltus</author>
	<datestamp>1264167960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The title of the article make it sound like if Linux was receiving and giving nothing in return. Many of these companies would not even have a chance to decently survive without Linux, and they would  become just Microsoft puppets.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The title of the article make it sound like if Linux was receiving and giving nothing in return .
Many of these companies would not even have a chance to decently survive without Linux , and they would become just Microsoft puppets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The title of the article make it sound like if Linux was receiving and giving nothing in return.
Many of these companies would not even have a chance to decently survive without Linux, and they would  become just Microsoft puppets.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855420</id>
	<title>Open Source != Contributed Effort</title>
	<author>woboyle</author>
	<datestamp>1264086660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just because a significant portion of Linux and open source software is developed pro-bono by the contributed efforts of many people, it does not mean that no one is paid to develop this body of work. Monetary contributions are made, people are paid so they can make a living. This is good and correct. Folks who think that all efforts toward the public good should be done for free should get their heads out of their nether regions.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just because a significant portion of Linux and open source software is developed pro-bono by the contributed efforts of many people , it does not mean that no one is paid to develop this body of work .
Monetary contributions are made , people are paid so they can make a living .
This is good and correct .
Folks who think that all efforts toward the public good should be done for free should get their heads out of their nether regions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just because a significant portion of Linux and open source software is developed pro-bono by the contributed efforts of many people, it does not mean that no one is paid to develop this body of work.
Monetary contributions are made, people are paid so they can make a living.
This is good and correct.
Folks who think that all efforts toward the public good should be done for free should get their heads out of their nether regions.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853876</id>
	<title>Lottery?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264076880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've always wondered if a geek or anti-IP person won a substantial lottery.  Wouldn't we hear about it?  Are there any open source coders happily contributing away, having won the lottery?  You'd have some example of a free game, music, or movie by such a person.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've always wondered if a geek or anti-IP person won a substantial lottery .
Would n't we hear about it ?
Are there any open source coders happily contributing away , having won the lottery ?
You 'd have some example of a free game , music , or movie by such a person .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've always wondered if a geek or anti-IP person won a substantial lottery.
Wouldn't we hear about it?
Are there any open source coders happily contributing away, having won the lottery?
You'd have some example of a free game, music, or movie by such a person.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854910</id>
	<title>Beer/speech</title>
	<author>Thinboy00</author>
	<datestamp>1264082460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're a troll so I won't go into details.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're a troll so I wo n't go into details .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're a troll so I won't go into details.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853450</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30863382</id>
	<title>That's a nice turn-around</title>
	<author>hazydave</author>
	<datestamp>1264154160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was at a set-top box company, based in Germany, in the late 1990s. We had every intention of building out multimedia set-top box on Linux, even though that wasn't as doable as it is with today's modern Linux kernel (and, well, faster CPUs doesn't hurt, either). The big problem: finding anyone who knew Linux and wanted to actually get paid. We advertised, we attended Linux shows, etc... no go. Might have been practical if we were based in California, but at the time, there was a real issue among many Linux hackers of working for pay. So we wound up using OS/2 on the same hardware. I was largely the hardware boss, but I also wrote some drivers -- tragically, one place Linux was way ahead (physical drivers had to be written in 16-bit code under OS/2, at least at the time).</p><p>Nice to see things change. Not that spare time, hobby, educational, etc. contributions are a bad thing at all. But commercial concerns doing all that work is a strong indicator that lots more work is being done. They also sometimes have a better sense of finishing a project. Not always, but sometimes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was at a set-top box company , based in Germany , in the late 1990s .
We had every intention of building out multimedia set-top box on Linux , even though that was n't as doable as it is with today 's modern Linux kernel ( and , well , faster CPUs does n't hurt , either ) .
The big problem : finding anyone who knew Linux and wanted to actually get paid .
We advertised , we attended Linux shows , etc... no go .
Might have been practical if we were based in California , but at the time , there was a real issue among many Linux hackers of working for pay .
So we wound up using OS/2 on the same hardware .
I was largely the hardware boss , but I also wrote some drivers -- tragically , one place Linux was way ahead ( physical drivers had to be written in 16-bit code under OS/2 , at least at the time ) .Nice to see things change .
Not that spare time , hobby , educational , etc .
contributions are a bad thing at all .
But commercial concerns doing all that work is a strong indicator that lots more work is being done .
They also sometimes have a better sense of finishing a project .
Not always , but sometimes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was at a set-top box company, based in Germany, in the late 1990s.
We had every intention of building out multimedia set-top box on Linux, even though that wasn't as doable as it is with today's modern Linux kernel (and, well, faster CPUs doesn't hurt, either).
The big problem: finding anyone who knew Linux and wanted to actually get paid.
We advertised, we attended Linux shows, etc... no go.
Might have been practical if we were based in California, but at the time, there was a real issue among many Linux hackers of working for pay.
So we wound up using OS/2 on the same hardware.
I was largely the hardware boss, but I also wrote some drivers -- tragically, one place Linux was way ahead (physical drivers had to be written in 16-bit code under OS/2, at least at the time).Nice to see things change.
Not that spare time, hobby, educational, etc.
contributions are a bad thing at all.
But commercial concerns doing all that work is a strong indicator that lots more work is being done.
They also sometimes have a better sense of finishing a project.
Not always, but sometimes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30858918</id>
	<title>Re:But are they in the software business?</title>
	<author>sorak</author>
	<datestamp>1264173180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>On the other hand, Company A hires developers to improve software that others have made freely available. They get exactly the changes they want. Company A's competitors also get those changes, but the reverse is true: Company A gets Company C's improvements. Both companies find this agreeable because neither can gain an advantage through the software, and both have reduced the cost of developing it. Company A has cut out the middlemen, avoiding the cost of sales and profits extracted by Company B.</p></div><p>It seems like there would also be a company D, who benefits from companies A and C, but who does not contribute back. (I mention this, because it is a drawback. It happens.)</p><p>But company C gets free assistance in testing and development of their in-house product, they can also leverage their status as the experts in product X to get support contracts and consultation fees.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>On the other hand , Company A hires developers to improve software that others have made freely available .
They get exactly the changes they want .
Company A 's competitors also get those changes , but the reverse is true : Company A gets Company C 's improvements .
Both companies find this agreeable because neither can gain an advantage through the software , and both have reduced the cost of developing it .
Company A has cut out the middlemen , avoiding the cost of sales and profits extracted by Company B.It seems like there would also be a company D , who benefits from companies A and C , but who does not contribute back .
( I mention this , because it is a drawback .
It happens .
) But company C gets free assistance in testing and development of their in-house product , they can also leverage their status as the experts in product X to get support contracts and consultation fees .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On the other hand, Company A hires developers to improve software that others have made freely available.
They get exactly the changes they want.
Company A's competitors also get those changes, but the reverse is true: Company A gets Company C's improvements.
Both companies find this agreeable because neither can gain an advantage through the software, and both have reduced the cost of developing it.
Company A has cut out the middlemen, avoiding the cost of sales and profits extracted by Company B.It seems like there would also be a company D, who benefits from companies A and C, but who does not contribute back.
(I mention this, because it is a drawback.
It happens.
)But company C gets free assistance in testing and development of their in-house product, they can also leverage their status as the experts in product X to get support contracts and consultation fees.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854996</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30864268</id>
	<title>Re:Good. Glad to Hear It.</title>
	<author>npsimons</author>
	<datestamp>1264158540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Billions lost on failed UK IT projects by the 'adults' with developers receiving very fat paycheques shows it guarantees neither success of the project nor accountability within it.</p></div></blockquote><p>Yeah, don't even get me started on such "adult" software as VxWorks, where $30k will get you "oops, we released a version of our compiler and stdc library that didn't close a C namespace in a header, thereby breaking any C++ code you include it in."  Stuff *beginners* would be chided for.  Stuff that would have *easily* been caught by unit or regression tests, which scares me further still because it means they probably don't have them.</p><p>Here's a hint to all the FOSS haters: most FOSS is not developed by inexperienced "gee, let's see what I can do with a computer!" types, even the unpaid stuff.  The large majority of FOSS (especially the large successful projects) is developed by people who develop software for a living.  The only difference between them and other paid programmers is that instead of having a hobby like golf or fantasy football, they go home and work on software that scratches a personal itch (assuming they aren't getting paid to work on it already).  Now, let's just think about this: which software would you trust more: something written by someone who is just there to punch the clock and spends his breaks thinking about Paris Hilton, or someone who loves making software so much they can't keep their hands off a keyboard for more than a few hours?  You can scream "boring nerd with no life" all you want, but the simple fact that most FOSS developers are professional coders, added to the fact that they work on software more than other devs, plus the fact that they decided to share the fruits of (some) of their labors with the world puts their software head and shoulders above most "paycheck only" software.</p><p>BTW, many FOSS coders I know of have other hobbies (and families); it just seems like they are able to pack so much more into a day than most people, it amazes me.  Maybe they code faster; they are, by definition good coders, otherwise I probably wouldn't have heard of them.  Or maybe they just don't waste so much time on things like TV.  But just jump on <a href="http://planet.debian.org/" title="debian.org">Planet Debian</a> [debian.org] and you will find scuba divers, cyclists, hikers, runners, community activists, etc, etc . . . </p><p>Also, I'm not slagging \_all\_ non-FOSS coders (technically, I am currently one . . . ).  It just seems that where the source isn't available, and people aren't scratching their own itches that software generally sucks more.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Billions lost on failed UK IT projects by the 'adults ' with developers receiving very fat paycheques shows it guarantees neither success of the project nor accountability within it.Yeah , do n't even get me started on such " adult " software as VxWorks , where $ 30k will get you " oops , we released a version of our compiler and stdc library that did n't close a C namespace in a header , thereby breaking any C + + code you include it in .
" Stuff * beginners * would be chided for .
Stuff that would have * easily * been caught by unit or regression tests , which scares me further still because it means they probably do n't have them.Here 's a hint to all the FOSS haters : most FOSS is not developed by inexperienced " gee , let 's see what I can do with a computer !
" types , even the unpaid stuff .
The large majority of FOSS ( especially the large successful projects ) is developed by people who develop software for a living .
The only difference between them and other paid programmers is that instead of having a hobby like golf or fantasy football , they go home and work on software that scratches a personal itch ( assuming they are n't getting paid to work on it already ) .
Now , let 's just think about this : which software would you trust more : something written by someone who is just there to punch the clock and spends his breaks thinking about Paris Hilton , or someone who loves making software so much they ca n't keep their hands off a keyboard for more than a few hours ?
You can scream " boring nerd with no life " all you want , but the simple fact that most FOSS developers are professional coders , added to the fact that they work on software more than other devs , plus the fact that they decided to share the fruits of ( some ) of their labors with the world puts their software head and shoulders above most " paycheck only " software.BTW , many FOSS coders I know of have other hobbies ( and families ) ; it just seems like they are able to pack so much more into a day than most people , it amazes me .
Maybe they code faster ; they are , by definition good coders , otherwise I probably would n't have heard of them .
Or maybe they just do n't waste so much time on things like TV .
But just jump on Planet Debian [ debian.org ] and you will find scuba divers , cyclists , hikers , runners , community activists , etc , etc .
. .
Also , I 'm not slagging \ _all \ _ non-FOSS coders ( technically , I am currently one .
. .
) . It just seems that where the source is n't available , and people are n't scratching their own itches that software generally sucks more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Billions lost on failed UK IT projects by the 'adults' with developers receiving very fat paycheques shows it guarantees neither success of the project nor accountability within it.Yeah, don't even get me started on such "adult" software as VxWorks, where $30k will get you "oops, we released a version of our compiler and stdc library that didn't close a C namespace in a header, thereby breaking any C++ code you include it in.
"  Stuff *beginners* would be chided for.
Stuff that would have *easily* been caught by unit or regression tests, which scares me further still because it means they probably don't have them.Here's a hint to all the FOSS haters: most FOSS is not developed by inexperienced "gee, let's see what I can do with a computer!
" types, even the unpaid stuff.
The large majority of FOSS (especially the large successful projects) is developed by people who develop software for a living.
The only difference between them and other paid programmers is that instead of having a hobby like golf or fantasy football, they go home and work on software that scratches a personal itch (assuming they aren't getting paid to work on it already).
Now, let's just think about this: which software would you trust more: something written by someone who is just there to punch the clock and spends his breaks thinking about Paris Hilton, or someone who loves making software so much they can't keep their hands off a keyboard for more than a few hours?
You can scream "boring nerd with no life" all you want, but the simple fact that most FOSS developers are professional coders, added to the fact that they work on software more than other devs, plus the fact that they decided to share the fruits of (some) of their labors with the world puts their software head and shoulders above most "paycheck only" software.BTW, many FOSS coders I know of have other hobbies (and families); it just seems like they are able to pack so much more into a day than most people, it amazes me.
Maybe they code faster; they are, by definition good coders, otherwise I probably wouldn't have heard of them.
Or maybe they just don't waste so much time on things like TV.
But just jump on Planet Debian [debian.org] and you will find scuba divers, cyclists, hikers, runners, community activists, etc, etc .
. .
Also, I'm not slagging \_all\_ non-FOSS coders (technically, I am currently one .
. .
).  It just seems that where the source isn't available, and people aren't scratching their own itches that software generally sucks more.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853838</id>
	<title>It's the real world</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264076700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm a professional I get paid to code whatever problem is placed in front of me Windows, Unix etc its just code to me. I do however try to do my best on All code because that's my job satisfaction.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a professional I get paid to code whatever problem is placed in front of me Windows , Unix etc its just code to me .
I do however try to do my best on All code because that 's my job satisfaction .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a professional I get paid to code whatever problem is placed in front of me Windows, Unix etc its just code to me.
I do however try to do my best on All code because that's my job satisfaction.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854456</id>
	<title>Re:Good. Glad to Hear It.</title>
	<author>horza</author>
	<datestamp>1264079760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>If Linux wants to sit at the adults' table -- and it clearly has the depth and breadth of functionality to do so -- then there needs to be the kind of professional accountability in its developers that only a paycheck can engender.</i></p><p>Billions lost on failed UK IT projects by the 'adults' with developers receiving very fat paycheques shows it guarantees neither success of the project nor accountability within it.</p><p>Phillip.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If Linux wants to sit at the adults ' table -- and it clearly has the depth and breadth of functionality to do so -- then there needs to be the kind of professional accountability in its developers that only a paycheck can engender.Billions lost on failed UK IT projects by the 'adults ' with developers receiving very fat paycheques shows it guarantees neither success of the project nor accountability within it.Phillip .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Linux wants to sit at the adults' table -- and it clearly has the depth and breadth of functionality to do so -- then there needs to be the kind of professional accountability in its developers that only a paycheck can engender.Billions lost on failed UK IT projects by the 'adults' with developers receiving very fat paycheques shows it guarantees neither success of the project nor accountability within it.Phillip.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853558</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854178</id>
	<title>Open Source is not about money</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264078260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>So who decided that the Open Source movement was about *not* making money?  I thought it was about enlightened self-interest.  If we make the source of today's apps available to the coders of tomorrow, everyone wins.  Up-and-comers get a chance to see real-world (and sometimes, cutting-edge) code - and the community (of software developers) gets new devs who show up already knowing some of the things *we* had to figure out the hard way.  <br> <br>The new guys get the benefit of our experience and in ten years, we get to hire better new guys.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So who decided that the Open Source movement was about * not * making money ?
I thought it was about enlightened self-interest .
If we make the source of today 's apps available to the coders of tomorrow , everyone wins .
Up-and-comers get a chance to see real-world ( and sometimes , cutting-edge ) code - and the community ( of software developers ) gets new devs who show up already knowing some of the things * we * had to figure out the hard way .
The new guys get the benefit of our experience and in ten years , we get to hire better new guys .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So who decided that the Open Source movement was about *not* making money?
I thought it was about enlightened self-interest.
If we make the source of today's apps available to the coders of tomorrow, everyone wins.
Up-and-comers get a chance to see real-world (and sometimes, cutting-edge) code - and the community (of software developers) gets new devs who show up already knowing some of the things *we* had to figure out the hard way.
The new guys get the benefit of our experience and in ten years, we get to hire better new guys.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855074</id>
	<title>Tux is NOT a bitch!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264083840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I HATE that "tux as a bitch in a suit" icon!   Turns my stomach.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I HATE that " tux as a bitch in a suit " icon !
Turns my stomach .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I HATE that "tux as a bitch in a suit" icon!
Turns my stomach.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30858670</id>
	<title>Noone else deserves to pay more.</title>
	<author>unity100</author>
	<datestamp>1264171200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A person who works on something that s/he has a burning passion.</p><p>this is the type of people who made scientific revolution, industrial age, digital age possible. this is the way it should be.</p><p>not to mention that most of those current paid developers probably went out to linux on a passion, either during or after college or without college education, knowing that they could hurt their chances of getting a job in a traditional company. ie they basically jumped into life blindfold, armed with only passion. now, through passion and perseverance, most of them have become top notch developers in linux.</p><p>and, behold, linux can pay people now. why it shouldnt ? how many of you would be courageous enough to go all out on your passion like that ? granted, now there is actually a chance that you will find a job with linux after you graduate from college, if thats your field, but it is now. most of the people who are employed for some time in linux jobs were studying in college at a time when linux was just something microsoft could laugh about. i knew some people from CS department, going all out on linux by those times. a lot of people thought they were burning their future. a lot of people couldnt muster the guts to go for their passion. those people did.</p><p>again, i emphasize ; noone else but such people deserve being paid, and being paid more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A person who works on something that s/he has a burning passion.this is the type of people who made scientific revolution , industrial age , digital age possible .
this is the way it should be.not to mention that most of those current paid developers probably went out to linux on a passion , either during or after college or without college education , knowing that they could hurt their chances of getting a job in a traditional company .
ie they basically jumped into life blindfold , armed with only passion .
now , through passion and perseverance , most of them have become top notch developers in linux.and , behold , linux can pay people now .
why it shouldnt ?
how many of you would be courageous enough to go all out on your passion like that ?
granted , now there is actually a chance that you will find a job with linux after you graduate from college , if thats your field , but it is now .
most of the people who are employed for some time in linux jobs were studying in college at a time when linux was just something microsoft could laugh about .
i knew some people from CS department , going all out on linux by those times .
a lot of people thought they were burning their future .
a lot of people couldnt muster the guts to go for their passion .
those people did.again , i emphasize ; noone else but such people deserve being paid , and being paid more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A person who works on something that s/he has a burning passion.this is the type of people who made scientific revolution, industrial age, digital age possible.
this is the way it should be.not to mention that most of those current paid developers probably went out to linux on a passion, either during or after college or without college education, knowing that they could hurt their chances of getting a job in a traditional company.
ie they basically jumped into life blindfold, armed with only passion.
now, through passion and perseverance, most of them have become top notch developers in linux.and, behold, linux can pay people now.
why it shouldnt ?
how many of you would be courageous enough to go all out on your passion like that ?
granted, now there is actually a chance that you will find a job with linux after you graduate from college, if thats your field, but it is now.
most of the people who are employed for some time in linux jobs were studying in college at a time when linux was just something microsoft could laugh about.
i knew some people from CS department, going all out on linux by those times.
a lot of people thought they were burning their future.
a lot of people couldnt muster the guts to go for their passion.
those people did.again, i emphasize ; noone else but such people deserve being paid, and being paid more.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855846</id>
	<title>Re:Lottery?</title>
	<author>maxume</author>
	<datestamp>1264090200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's Ubuntu.</p><p>(Selling a business isn't quite a lottery, but lots of things have to go right to build a $500 million business in 5 years)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's Ubuntu .
( Selling a business is n't quite a lottery , but lots of things have to go right to build a $ 500 million business in 5 years )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's Ubuntu.
(Selling a business isn't quite a lottery, but lots of things have to go right to build a $500 million business in 5 years)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853876</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853458</id>
	<title>I'll be the first to say...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264075320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's wrong with that?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's wrong with that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's wrong with that?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855064</id>
	<title>Re:pay?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264083720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let me guess. You're 16 to 25 or not that much out of school yet, right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let me guess .
You 're 16 to 25 or not that much out of school yet , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let me guess.
You're 16 to 25 or not that much out of school yet, right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853652</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854620</id>
	<title>Re:What about Google?</title>
	<author>pnewhook</author>
	<datestamp>1264080780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> Seriously, how much kernel development needs to be done?  The OS kernel is the foundation for everything else.  If it needs major development, then the project is not very stable by definition.
</p><p>Given that Linux has been around for many years, it should be stable and hence need little if any changes.  The majority of development should be on the application side.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , how much kernel development needs to be done ?
The OS kernel is the foundation for everything else .
If it needs major development , then the project is not very stable by definition .
Given that Linux has been around for many years , it should be stable and hence need little if any changes .
The majority of development should be on the application side .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Seriously, how much kernel development needs to be done?
The OS kernel is the foundation for everything else.
If it needs major development, then the project is not very stable by definition.
Given that Linux has been around for many years, it should be stable and hence need little if any changes.
The majority of development should be on the application side.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853808</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853622</id>
	<title>Perceived conflict between ideals and money...</title>
	<author>stagg</author>
	<datestamp>1264075860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You see the same thing in academic publishing. There seems to be a sentiment that getting paid for an article would somehow compromise the objectivity of the writer. However, people contributing these articles are doing it in fields they study professionally, and it is often essential resume building work.


This is not a situation I'd like to see mirrored in the computer world.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You see the same thing in academic publishing .
There seems to be a sentiment that getting paid for an article would somehow compromise the objectivity of the writer .
However , people contributing these articles are doing it in fields they study professionally , and it is often essential resume building work .
This is not a situation I 'd like to see mirrored in the computer world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You see the same thing in academic publishing.
There seems to be a sentiment that getting paid for an article would somehow compromise the objectivity of the writer.
However, people contributing these articles are doing it in fields they study professionally, and it is often essential resume building work.
This is not a situation I'd like to see mirrored in the computer world.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854412</id>
	<title>Re:So much for "free software", eh?</title>
	<author>Gerzel</author>
	<datestamp>1264079520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Free as in price and use.  Since there are many many businesses that benefit greatly from Linux why is it so surprising that such businesses would pay to develop it further?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Free as in price and use .
Since there are many many businesses that benefit greatly from Linux why is it so surprising that such businesses would pay to develop it further ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Free as in price and use.
Since there are many many businesses that benefit greatly from Linux why is it so surprising that such businesses would pay to develop it further?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853450</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855160</id>
	<title>It's not clear from the summary</title>
	<author>ClosedSource</author>
	<datestamp>1264084560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>why anyone should perceive a connection between having high ideals and this story.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>why anyone should perceive a connection between having high ideals and this story .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>why anyone should perceive a connection between having high ideals and this story.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854088</id>
	<title>But are they in the software business?</title>
	<author>ClosedSource</author>
	<datestamp>1264077840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What percentage of these paid developers work for a company that derives its revenue primarily from software development?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What percentage of these paid developers work for a company that derives its revenue primarily from software development ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What percentage of these paid developers work for a company that derives its revenue primarily from software development?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854298</id>
	<title>because the one who pays is the one who controls</title>
	<author>Akoman</author>
	<datestamp>1264078920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because you're employed by a business which is more interested in itself than the broader linux community. The patches you create may be of a use to the broader community, but business priorities will generally come first. Now, it is a given that some (perhaps even a significant portion) of these developers are given a long leash, but the reality is the leash is always there. The resignation of Con Kolivas is a good example of why extensive corporate interest is bad: see <a href="http://apcmag.com/why\_i\_quit\_kernel\_developer\_con\_kolivas.htm" title="apcmag.com" rel="nofollow">http://apcmag.com/why\_i\_quit\_kernel\_developer\_con\_kolivas.htm</a> [apcmag.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because you 're employed by a business which is more interested in itself than the broader linux community .
The patches you create may be of a use to the broader community , but business priorities will generally come first .
Now , it is a given that some ( perhaps even a significant portion ) of these developers are given a long leash , but the reality is the leash is always there .
The resignation of Con Kolivas is a good example of why extensive corporate interest is bad : see http : //apcmag.com/why \ _i \ _quit \ _kernel \ _developer \ _con \ _kolivas.htm [ apcmag.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because you're employed by a business which is more interested in itself than the broader linux community.
The patches you create may be of a use to the broader community, but business priorities will generally come first.
Now, it is a given that some (perhaps even a significant portion) of these developers are given a long leash, but the reality is the leash is always there.
The resignation of Con Kolivas is a good example of why extensive corporate interest is bad: see http://apcmag.com/why\_i\_quit\_kernel\_developer\_con\_kolivas.htm [apcmag.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853458</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30856696</id>
	<title>Re:Open Source is not about money</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264099620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>enlightened self-interest</p></div><p>Ideally this is what individualism is meant to be, and I think was what people had in mind when promoting this kind of idea in the US. You do what you can do and you get what you want, which BTW is also a fundamental idea of communism. GPL doesn't deal with compensation for work, and doesn't conflict with self-interest if you understand its POV (understanding others' POVV seems to be absent in modern times<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D). So, there is nothing wrong with taking money for doing work on Linux. It just happens so that the programmer's labour is not hidden.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>enlightened self-interestIdeally this is what individualism is meant to be , and I think was what people had in mind when promoting this kind of idea in the US .
You do what you can do and you get what you want , which BTW is also a fundamental idea of communism .
GPL does n't deal with compensation for work , and does n't conflict with self-interest if you understand its POV ( understanding others ' POVV seems to be absent in modern times : D ) .
So , there is nothing wrong with taking money for doing work on Linux .
It just happens so that the programmer 's labour is not hidden .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>enlightened self-interestIdeally this is what individualism is meant to be, and I think was what people had in mind when promoting this kind of idea in the US.
You do what you can do and you get what you want, which BTW is also a fundamental idea of communism.
GPL doesn't deal with compensation for work, and doesn't conflict with self-interest if you understand its POV (understanding others' POVV seems to be absent in modern times :D).
So, there is nothing wrong with taking money for doing work on Linux.
It just happens so that the programmer's labour is not hidden.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854178</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853450</id>
	<title>So much for "free software", eh?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264075260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yep, I said it. You can't un-read it!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yep , I said it .
You ca n't un-read it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yep, I said it.
You can't un-read it!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855150</id>
	<title>This means  ...</title>
	<author>PPH</author>
	<datestamp>1264084440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... businesses are learning that contributing to a shared resource has value. And that efforts made to monopolize resources (like patents do) aren't as valuable as was assumed in the past.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... businesses are learning that contributing to a shared resource has value .
And that efforts made to monopolize resources ( like patents do ) are n't as valuable as was assumed in the past .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... businesses are learning that contributing to a shared resource has value.
And that efforts made to monopolize resources (like patents do) aren't as valuable as was assumed in the past.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853556</id>
	<title>And this is a bad thing?!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264075620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The Linux world makes much of its community roots, but when it comes to developing the kernel of the operating system, it's less a case of 'volunteers ahoy!' and more a case of 'where's my pay?'</p></div><p>Since when does community == volunteers?</p><p>That large, well funded corporations are now contributing members of the linux community is a Good Thing.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Linux world makes much of its community roots , but when it comes to developing the kernel of the operating system , it 's less a case of 'volunteers ahoy !
' and more a case of 'where 's my pay ?
'Since when does community = = volunteers ? That large , well funded corporations are now contributing members of the linux community is a Good Thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Linux world makes much of its community roots, but when it comes to developing the kernel of the operating system, it's less a case of 'volunteers ahoy!
' and more a case of 'where's my pay?
'Since when does community == volunteers?That large, well funded corporations are now contributing members of the linux community is a Good Thing.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30856018</id>
	<title>Re:Open Source is not about money</title>
	<author>Angst Badger</author>
	<datestamp>1264091880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So who decided that the Open Source movement was about *not* making money? I thought it was about enlightened self-interest.</p></div><p>If you're talking about Open Source in contradistinction to Free Software, you're quite right. That is a major part of the distinction between the two ideological camps, and as near as I can tell, Linus Torvalds has always been squarely on the ESR/Open Source side of the fence.</p><p>Nor is there anything wrong with that, in and of itself, and I say that as someone who is just as squarely on the RMS/Free Software side of the fence, though of course <i>my</i> main motivator isn't enlightened self-interest as much as it is that I believe I have an ethical obligation to share and not to profit from artificial scarcity. There's room for both camps, and more overlap than the acrimony between prominent ideologues would have you believe.</p><p>And there's certainly room for businesses to contribute as long as they play by the rules which, it would seem, most of them actually do in this case. At the end of the day, I don't think most <i>users</i> care why the developers are sharing.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So who decided that the Open Source movement was about * not * making money ?
I thought it was about enlightened self-interest.If you 're talking about Open Source in contradistinction to Free Software , you 're quite right .
That is a major part of the distinction between the two ideological camps , and as near as I can tell , Linus Torvalds has always been squarely on the ESR/Open Source side of the fence.Nor is there anything wrong with that , in and of itself , and I say that as someone who is just as squarely on the RMS/Free Software side of the fence , though of course my main motivator is n't enlightened self-interest as much as it is that I believe I have an ethical obligation to share and not to profit from artificial scarcity .
There 's room for both camps , and more overlap than the acrimony between prominent ideologues would have you believe.And there 's certainly room for businesses to contribute as long as they play by the rules which , it would seem , most of them actually do in this case .
At the end of the day , I do n't think most users care why the developers are sharing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So who decided that the Open Source movement was about *not* making money?
I thought it was about enlightened self-interest.If you're talking about Open Source in contradistinction to Free Software, you're quite right.
That is a major part of the distinction between the two ideological camps, and as near as I can tell, Linus Torvalds has always been squarely on the ESR/Open Source side of the fence.Nor is there anything wrong with that, in and of itself, and I say that as someone who is just as squarely on the RMS/Free Software side of the fence, though of course my main motivator isn't enlightened self-interest as much as it is that I believe I have an ethical obligation to share and not to profit from artificial scarcity.
There's room for both camps, and more overlap than the acrimony between prominent ideologues would have you believe.And there's certainly room for businesses to contribute as long as they play by the rules which, it would seem, most of them actually do in this case.
At the end of the day, I don't think most users care why the developers are sharing.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854178</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854594</id>
	<title>LInux is dead</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264080660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This article proves it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This article proves it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This article proves it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855740</id>
	<title>Re:What about Google?</title>
	<author>Mage Powers</author>
	<datestamp>1264089420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google does that summer of code thing, and they spend a fair amount of cash on it too.<br>Also they're working towards having what they run on their servers be closer to stock by submitting the scheduler that gives even priority to all processes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google does that summer of code thing , and they spend a fair amount of cash on it too.Also they 're working towards having what they run on their servers be closer to stock by submitting the scheduler that gives even priority to all processes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google does that summer of code thing, and they spend a fair amount of cash on it too.Also they're working towards having what they run on their servers be closer to stock by submitting the scheduler that gives even priority to all processes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853808</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857034</id>
	<title>Re:Software is grown on trees</title>
	<author>ProfMobius</author>
	<datestamp>1264190760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Have you ever done something for free just for the pleasure of doing so ? You know, there are other rewards in live than money. Try to do a PhD thesis for example. It is not really rewarding in term of money, but much more in not physical terms. I like to code just because I like to code, and I don't mind contributing my code back to the community when I can. This kind of thinking can also be applied to other form of activities, like writing, painting, finding rare coins, etc. You don't have to be paid to do stuff.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you ever done something for free just for the pleasure of doing so ?
You know , there are other rewards in live than money .
Try to do a PhD thesis for example .
It is not really rewarding in term of money , but much more in not physical terms .
I like to code just because I like to code , and I do n't mind contributing my code back to the community when I can .
This kind of thinking can also be applied to other form of activities , like writing , painting , finding rare coins , etc .
You do n't have to be paid to do stuff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you ever done something for free just for the pleasure of doing so ?
You know, there are other rewards in live than money.
Try to do a PhD thesis for example.
It is not really rewarding in term of money, but much more in not physical terms.
I like to code just because I like to code, and I don't mind contributing my code back to the community when I can.
This kind of thinking can also be applied to other form of activities, like writing, painting, finding rare coins, etc.
You don't have to be paid to do stuff.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857250</id>
	<title>Empire stuff, lots of Empire stuff...</title>
	<author>damburger</author>
	<datestamp>1264193580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I question the metric they used for this.</p><p>Seems they are counting lines of code written and equating that directly to 'contribution'. This has several obvious problems:</p><p>1. I really hope he wasn't counting comments. Documentation is important, but is a separate task from coding./p&gt;
</p><p>2. Its possible to write the exact same code in a different number of lines (things like 'if' statements spring immediately to mind. Was he counting lines in the files, or being counting statements?</p><p>3. Not all lines of code are of equal value.</p><p>4. There are many ways to solve the same problem, some with more lines than others. This doesn't always correlate with speed of efficiency.</p><p>5. If the line managers of the people doing corporate Linux kernel contributions are using the same metric, then those contributors are going to make damn sure they produce the longest code possible that does the job they've been tasked with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I question the metric they used for this.Seems they are counting lines of code written and equating that directly to 'contribution' .
This has several obvious problems : 1 .
I really hope he was n't counting comments .
Documentation is important , but is a separate task from coding./p &gt; 2 .
Its possible to write the exact same code in a different number of lines ( things like 'if ' statements spring immediately to mind .
Was he counting lines in the files , or being counting statements ? 3 .
Not all lines of code are of equal value.4 .
There are many ways to solve the same problem , some with more lines than others .
This does n't always correlate with speed of efficiency.5 .
If the line managers of the people doing corporate Linux kernel contributions are using the same metric , then those contributors are going to make damn sure they produce the longest code possible that does the job they 've been tasked with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I question the metric they used for this.Seems they are counting lines of code written and equating that directly to 'contribution'.
This has several obvious problems:1.
I really hope he wasn't counting comments.
Documentation is important, but is a separate task from coding./p&gt;
2.
Its possible to write the exact same code in a different number of lines (things like 'if' statements spring immediately to mind.
Was he counting lines in the files, or being counting statements?3.
Not all lines of code are of equal value.4.
There are many ways to solve the same problem, some with more lines than others.
This doesn't always correlate with speed of efficiency.5.
If the line managers of the people doing corporate Linux kernel contributions are using the same metric, then those contributors are going to make damn sure they produce the longest code possible that does the job they've been tasked with.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857582</id>
	<title>Re:Good. Glad to Hear It.</title>
	<author>Dr\_Barnowl</author>
	<datestamp>1264156080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Failures in gov.uk IT projects are down to antiquated software development methods.</p><p>Only in software development is a 34\% success rate (in 2004) <a href="http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000588.html" title="codinghorror.com">considered a vast improvement</a> [codinghorror.com] (100\%) over a decade previously.</p><p>What are rather ambitious projects are persistently entrusted to the waterfall method of development ; the first problem being that people seem to just smunge the first three steps into one and have subject-matter experts produce a handful of word documents describing what they think is the best technical architecture.</p><p>And then wonder why they don't get something that works. The second problem being using the waterfall method at all. I don't think I've yet seen a successful project that used it for anything more complex than a glorified file download service.</p><p>I guess waterfall persists because it allows people to get the design phase out of the way and then go back to being terribly busy with their existing non-optimized tools and process. Iterative methods mean those nasty developer people popping up all the time and asking questions that are too hard for a Monday morning ; and you can't even get rid of them when the software has been delivered!</p><p>But government likes a process consisting of clearly delineated steps. Heck, they <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRINCE2" title="wikipedia.org">even invented one</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Failures in gov.uk IT projects are down to antiquated software development methods.Only in software development is a 34 \ % success rate ( in 2004 ) considered a vast improvement [ codinghorror.com ] ( 100 \ % ) over a decade previously.What are rather ambitious projects are persistently entrusted to the waterfall method of development ; the first problem being that people seem to just smunge the first three steps into one and have subject-matter experts produce a handful of word documents describing what they think is the best technical architecture.And then wonder why they do n't get something that works .
The second problem being using the waterfall method at all .
I do n't think I 've yet seen a successful project that used it for anything more complex than a glorified file download service.I guess waterfall persists because it allows people to get the design phase out of the way and then go back to being terribly busy with their existing non-optimized tools and process .
Iterative methods mean those nasty developer people popping up all the time and asking questions that are too hard for a Monday morning ; and you ca n't even get rid of them when the software has been delivered ! But government likes a process consisting of clearly delineated steps .
Heck , they even invented one [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Failures in gov.uk IT projects are down to antiquated software development methods.Only in software development is a 34\% success rate (in 2004) considered a vast improvement [codinghorror.com] (100\%) over a decade previously.What are rather ambitious projects are persistently entrusted to the waterfall method of development ; the first problem being that people seem to just smunge the first three steps into one and have subject-matter experts produce a handful of word documents describing what they think is the best technical architecture.And then wonder why they don't get something that works.
The second problem being using the waterfall method at all.
I don't think I've yet seen a successful project that used it for anything more complex than a glorified file download service.I guess waterfall persists because it allows people to get the design phase out of the way and then go back to being terribly busy with their existing non-optimized tools and process.
Iterative methods mean those nasty developer people popping up all the time and asking questions that are too hard for a Monday morning ; and you can't even get rid of them when the software has been delivered!But government likes a process consisting of clearly delineated steps.
Heck, they even invented one [wikipedia.org].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854320</id>
	<title>Re:What about Google?</title>
	<author>Shikaku</author>
	<datestamp>1264079040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know that thing called the GPL?  If you distribute binaries outside you must distribute the source code?</p><p>Google doesn't distribute outside.  So while they ARE involved in Linux development, they keep things internal and send what code they want to send.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know that thing called the GPL ?
If you distribute binaries outside you must distribute the source code ? Google does n't distribute outside .
So while they ARE involved in Linux development , they keep things internal and send what code they want to send .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know that thing called the GPL?
If you distribute binaries outside you must distribute the source code?Google doesn't distribute outside.
So while they ARE involved in Linux development, they keep things internal and send what code they want to send.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853808</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855356</id>
	<title>Re:I'll be the first to say...</title>
	<author>tftp</author>
	<datestamp>1264086000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>I like the second option better!</i>
</p><p>
And like many commons, it won't last. Someone, somewhere must pay the developer, because <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness" title="wikipedia.org">people who choose to live for free</a> [wikipedia.org] are not likely to contribute much to Linux or to anything else.
</p><p>
This can be swept under the rug if the volume of freely given software is small. If I'm employeed by Ty Coon Corp. 40 hours per week, I can afford to spend 1-2 hours per week to develop something and release it under some open source license. But if the work requires 30 hours per week, I need to make it my primary job, and then who is going to keep the lights on? Obviously at that level of involvement some business model is required; RH, for example, has one, and other players also found something that works.
</p><p>
The sad truth is that any good software requires a lot of effort, and that means either money or time. For some time OSS developers chose the time, thus dragging projects for years (while competing commercial jobs were done in months.) I'm not going to complain if some developers now can shorten the development process by spending money on it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I like the second option better !
And like many commons , it wo n't last .
Someone , somewhere must pay the developer , because people who choose to live for free [ wikipedia.org ] are not likely to contribute much to Linux or to anything else .
This can be swept under the rug if the volume of freely given software is small .
If I 'm employeed by Ty Coon Corp. 40 hours per week , I can afford to spend 1-2 hours per week to develop something and release it under some open source license .
But if the work requires 30 hours per week , I need to make it my primary job , and then who is going to keep the lights on ?
Obviously at that level of involvement some business model is required ; RH , for example , has one , and other players also found something that works .
The sad truth is that any good software requires a lot of effort , and that means either money or time .
For some time OSS developers chose the time , thus dragging projects for years ( while competing commercial jobs were done in months .
) I 'm not going to complain if some developers now can shorten the development process by spending money on it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> I like the second option better!
And like many commons, it won't last.
Someone, somewhere must pay the developer, because people who choose to live for free [wikipedia.org] are not likely to contribute much to Linux or to anything else.
This can be swept under the rug if the volume of freely given software is small.
If I'm employeed by Ty Coon Corp. 40 hours per week, I can afford to spend 1-2 hours per week to develop something and release it under some open source license.
But if the work requires 30 hours per week, I need to make it my primary job, and then who is going to keep the lights on?
Obviously at that level of involvement some business model is required; RH, for example, has one, and other players also found something that works.
The sad truth is that any good software requires a lot of effort, and that means either money or time.
For some time OSS developers chose the time, thus dragging projects for years (while competing commercial jobs were done in months.
) I'm not going to complain if some developers now can shorten the development process by spending money on it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854884</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857216</id>
	<title>Re:So much for "free software", eh?</title>
	<author>damburger</author>
	<datestamp>1264192980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Precisely. What this 75\% represent is still voluntary contributions - its just voluntary contributions by businesses instead of individuals. It's actually a sign that the principles behind Linux are catching on; people who aren't coders are seeing the benefits of putting into the community, and are hiring people with the skills to do it on their behalf.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Precisely .
What this 75 \ % represent is still voluntary contributions - its just voluntary contributions by businesses instead of individuals .
It 's actually a sign that the principles behind Linux are catching on ; people who are n't coders are seeing the benefits of putting into the community , and are hiring people with the skills to do it on their behalf .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Precisely.
What this 75\% represent is still voluntary contributions - its just voluntary contributions by businesses instead of individuals.
It's actually a sign that the principles behind Linux are catching on; people who aren't coders are seeing the benefits of putting into the community, and are hiring people with the skills to do it on their behalf.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854412</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854918</id>
	<title>Re:I'll be the first to say...</title>
	<author>Thinboy00</author>
	<datestamp>1264082520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://codeoffsets.com/" title="codeoffsets.com">Well that won't do!</a> [codeoffsets.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well that wo n't do !
[ codeoffsets.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well that won't do!
[codeoffsets.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853544</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857726</id>
	<title>Re:And this is a bad thing?!</title>
	<author>houghi</author>
	<datestamp>1264158600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Free as in speech, not as in beer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Free as in speech , not as in beer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Free as in speech, not as in beer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854314</id>
	<title>Re:Lottery?</title>
	<author>Taikutusu</author>
	<datestamp>1264078980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The thing is, if you're a coder, you're also probably good at math. You can thus calculate the odds of winning said lottery, and promptly decide "I'm not going to waste my money on that".</p><p>People who play the lottery would be a pretty biased sample of the population I'd imagine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The thing is , if you 're a coder , you 're also probably good at math .
You can thus calculate the odds of winning said lottery , and promptly decide " I 'm not going to waste my money on that " .People who play the lottery would be a pretty biased sample of the population I 'd imagine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The thing is, if you're a coder, you're also probably good at math.
You can thus calculate the odds of winning said lottery, and promptly decide "I'm not going to waste my money on that".People who play the lottery would be a pretty biased sample of the population I'd imagine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853876</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853798</id>
	<title>first code, then pay</title>
	<author>SMOKEING</author>
	<datestamp>1264076520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In most things open source (at least, open source by birth, less so originally proprietary projects that get eventually opensourced) you first get that itch to scratch, and then -- given you do it better than others -- you find there are people willing to pay you for that.</p><p>It's not like you first find yourself needing money, and then consider getting into an open-source project for a pay in preference to other means and wages.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In most things open source ( at least , open source by birth , less so originally proprietary projects that get eventually opensourced ) you first get that itch to scratch , and then -- given you do it better than others -- you find there are people willing to pay you for that.It 's not like you first find yourself needing money , and then consider getting into an open-source project for a pay in preference to other means and wages .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In most things open source (at least, open source by birth, less so originally proprietary projects that get eventually opensourced) you first get that itch to scratch, and then -- given you do it better than others -- you find there are people willing to pay you for that.It's not like you first find yourself needing money, and then consider getting into an open-source project for a pay in preference to other means and wages.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853472</id>
	<title>Missing critical information...</title>
	<author>creimer</author>
	<datestamp>1264075380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How much does a line of code cost?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How much does a line of code cost ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How much does a line of code cost?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857702</id>
	<title>Re:Good. Glad to Hear It.</title>
	<author>RAMMS+EIN</author>
	<datestamp>1264158180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Billions lost on failed UK IT projects by the 'adults' with developers receiving very fat paycheques shows it guarantees neither success of the project nor accountability within it.</p></div><p>That, and if you look at Unix-like systems, you will see that all of them are dead or dying, except for those that are being carried by volunteers (BSD, GNU, Darwin (mostly BSD), and perhaps OpenSolaris). If "the kind of professional accountability in its developers that only a paycheck can engender" is what a software project needs to "sit at the adults' table", then maybe sitting at the adults' table is not what you really want for your project. After all, all those adults are now either dead or on life support.</p><p>To stay with the analogy, perhaps what a project needs to thrive is not to become an adult, but to stay a child.</p><p>And it makes sense, too: projects supported by the flow of money will wither when the money flow stops. This in addition to the argument that it always worth keeping in mind: profit-driven companies will do what maximizes profits, not necessarily what is best for the world. These two things often align, but not always and never completely.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Billions lost on failed UK IT projects by the 'adults ' with developers receiving very fat paycheques shows it guarantees neither success of the project nor accountability within it.That , and if you look at Unix-like systems , you will see that all of them are dead or dying , except for those that are being carried by volunteers ( BSD , GNU , Darwin ( mostly BSD ) , and perhaps OpenSolaris ) .
If " the kind of professional accountability in its developers that only a paycheck can engender " is what a software project needs to " sit at the adults ' table " , then maybe sitting at the adults ' table is not what you really want for your project .
After all , all those adults are now either dead or on life support.To stay with the analogy , perhaps what a project needs to thrive is not to become an adult , but to stay a child.And it makes sense , too : projects supported by the flow of money will wither when the money flow stops .
This in addition to the argument that it always worth keeping in mind : profit-driven companies will do what maximizes profits , not necessarily what is best for the world .
These two things often align , but not always and never completely .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Billions lost on failed UK IT projects by the 'adults' with developers receiving very fat paycheques shows it guarantees neither success of the project nor accountability within it.That, and if you look at Unix-like systems, you will see that all of them are dead or dying, except for those that are being carried by volunteers (BSD, GNU, Darwin (mostly BSD), and perhaps OpenSolaris).
If "the kind of professional accountability in its developers that only a paycheck can engender" is what a software project needs to "sit at the adults' table", then maybe sitting at the adults' table is not what you really want for your project.
After all, all those adults are now either dead or on life support.To stay with the analogy, perhaps what a project needs to thrive is not to become an adult, but to stay a child.And it makes sense, too: projects supported by the flow of money will wither when the money flow stops.
This in addition to the argument that it always worth keeping in mind: profit-driven companies will do what maximizes profits, not necessarily what is best for the world.
These two things often align, but not always and never completely.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855440</id>
	<title>Paid to do what you enjoy</title>
	<author>bug1</author>
	<datestamp>1264086900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>It's not clear from the article why anyone should perceive a contradiction between having high ideals and getting paid to do something you enjoy.</i></p><p>One day a situation will arise when you will be expected to do something you dont enjoy.</p><p>You will choose between love and money, you will begin to discover how much your high ideals are worth.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not clear from the article why anyone should perceive a contradiction between having high ideals and getting paid to do something you enjoy.One day a situation will arise when you will be expected to do something you dont enjoy.You will choose between love and money , you will begin to discover how much your high ideals are worth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not clear from the article why anyone should perceive a contradiction between having high ideals and getting paid to do something you enjoy.One day a situation will arise when you will be expected to do something you dont enjoy.You will choose between love and money, you will begin to discover how much your high ideals are worth.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855600</id>
	<title>Re:What about Google?</title>
	<author>zifferent</author>
	<datestamp>1264088100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was about to complain about the idiocy of your statement considering the constant press of new hardware and capabilities, but then again I was outdone by idiocy and irony (see above comment.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was about to complain about the idiocy of your statement considering the constant press of new hardware and capabilities , but then again I was outdone by idiocy and irony ( see above comment .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was about to complain about the idiocy of your statement considering the constant press of new hardware and capabilities, but then again I was outdone by idiocy and irony (see above comment.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854620</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854970</id>
	<title>Re:Good. Glad to Hear It.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264082880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Accountability? Have you looked at an EULA lately? You forfeit any kind of accountability the moment you accept these license terms. And sometimes you have to pay in First Born Children, too. Adult's table indeed.</p><p>The only kind of convenience that gives you is knowing where to knock to beg for support. Or you can pay them extra for that (i.e. additional contracts and rights and all). But wait, there are companies like Red Hat that'll do that, too. And that tells us this kind of service is not necessarily tied to software development. The only way to get your kind of "professional accountability" is to employ those developers yourself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Accountability ?
Have you looked at an EULA lately ?
You forfeit any kind of accountability the moment you accept these license terms .
And sometimes you have to pay in First Born Children , too .
Adult 's table indeed.The only kind of convenience that gives you is knowing where to knock to beg for support .
Or you can pay them extra for that ( i.e .
additional contracts and rights and all ) .
But wait , there are companies like Red Hat that 'll do that , too .
And that tells us this kind of service is not necessarily tied to software development .
The only way to get your kind of " professional accountability " is to employ those developers yourself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Accountability?
Have you looked at an EULA lately?
You forfeit any kind of accountability the moment you accept these license terms.
And sometimes you have to pay in First Born Children, too.
Adult's table indeed.The only kind of convenience that gives you is knowing where to knock to beg for support.
Or you can pay them extra for that (i.e.
additional contracts and rights and all).
But wait, there are companies like Red Hat that'll do that, too.
And that tells us this kind of service is not necessarily tied to software development.
The only way to get your kind of "professional accountability" is to employ those developers yourself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853558</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854884</id>
	<title>Re:I'll be the first to say...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264082160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There's a difference: We (the public) pay MS and Apple to give us Windows/leopard. (we're buying them lunch)
 Their (Intel, Oracle, IBM, Novell, and Redhat)support of Linux/open source, is buying us lunch. I like the second option better!</htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a difference : We ( the public ) pay MS and Apple to give us Windows/leopard .
( we 're buying them lunch ) Their ( Intel , Oracle , IBM , Novell , and Redhat ) support of Linux/open source , is buying us lunch .
I like the second option better !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a difference: We (the public) pay MS and Apple to give us Windows/leopard.
(we're buying them lunch)
 Their (Intel, Oracle, IBM, Novell, and Redhat)support of Linux/open source, is buying us lunch.
I like the second option better!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853544</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854824</id>
	<title>Re:Statistics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264081800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And if we wait another 100 years, then 100\% of Linux code will be written by historians. That's the power of statistics.</p></div><p>What the hell are you talking about? Historians are people that study the past, not lived in the past.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Linux is a mature project, amounts of code written today have a minuscule impact on the overall project compared with amounts of code written in the late 90s.</p></div><p>Linux kernel 2.2.19 (2001):  1.8M SLOC<br>Linux kernel 2.6.32 (2009): 12.6M SLOC</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Nothing to see here. Linux is as much a volunteer project as it has ever been.</p></div><p>So if something was started by volunteers, it'll always be a volunteer project even though those writing code are no longer volunteers? Or did you not RTFHeadline?</p><p>Sometimes slashdot really could use a "-1, Nonsense" moderation...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And if we wait another 100 years , then 100 \ % of Linux code will be written by historians .
That 's the power of statistics.What the hell are you talking about ?
Historians are people that study the past , not lived in the past.Linux is a mature project , amounts of code written today have a minuscule impact on the overall project compared with amounts of code written in the late 90s.Linux kernel 2.2.19 ( 2001 ) : 1.8M SLOCLinux kernel 2.6.32 ( 2009 ) : 12.6M SLOCNothing to see here .
Linux is as much a volunteer project as it has ever been.So if something was started by volunteers , it 'll always be a volunteer project even though those writing code are no longer volunteers ?
Or did you not RTFHeadline ? Sometimes slashdot really could use a " -1 , Nonsense " moderation.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And if we wait another 100 years, then 100\% of Linux code will be written by historians.
That's the power of statistics.What the hell are you talking about?
Historians are people that study the past, not lived in the past.Linux is a mature project, amounts of code written today have a minuscule impact on the overall project compared with amounts of code written in the late 90s.Linux kernel 2.2.19 (2001):  1.8M SLOCLinux kernel 2.6.32 (2009): 12.6M SLOCNothing to see here.
Linux is as much a volunteer project as it has ever been.So if something was started by volunteers, it'll always be a volunteer project even though those writing code are no longer volunteers?
Or did you not RTFHeadline?Sometimes slashdot really could use a "-1, Nonsense" moderation...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853772</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857178</id>
	<title>Really impressive that 25\% do it for free</title>
	<author>LostMyBeaver</author>
	<datestamp>1264192440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I hate statistics that are produced but read incorrectly. It's fine to gather data to prove your point about something, but in reality, these stats are talking about a downturn in community support. I'd say that it's a show of a much higher level of community support.<br><br>Except with rare exceptions a volunteer developer that does it purely in their spare time might be able to contribute 1/4 to 1/2 the time of a full time paid developer. Given the "hacker factor" many of the paid developers are working greater than 40 hours a week by a considerable margin. That means that either there's a HUGE number of volunteer developers or that the ones that are there are producing a great deal more than the paid developers in the same period of time. This is more likely since volunteer developers are more likely to work on what interests them and given that, will be more motivated and move more rapidly.<br><br>Also keep in mind that a commitment on this scale from volunteers if doubly impressive since given that there are SOOOO many paid developers producing SOOOO much code, these guys (gals inclusive in the masculine form) are still pumping out so much even though they probably don't have to.<br><br>The downside of course is that there's a possibility that the volunteer developers have become counter-productive to the project since companies don't find a need to finance a commitment of 10 developers, 2 documenters and 5 testers on a project because some guy in his basement is hacking on it at home while munching Doritos and sucking down The Dew.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hate statistics that are produced but read incorrectly .
It 's fine to gather data to prove your point about something , but in reality , these stats are talking about a downturn in community support .
I 'd say that it 's a show of a much higher level of community support.Except with rare exceptions a volunteer developer that does it purely in their spare time might be able to contribute 1/4 to 1/2 the time of a full time paid developer .
Given the " hacker factor " many of the paid developers are working greater than 40 hours a week by a considerable margin .
That means that either there 's a HUGE number of volunteer developers or that the ones that are there are producing a great deal more than the paid developers in the same period of time .
This is more likely since volunteer developers are more likely to work on what interests them and given that , will be more motivated and move more rapidly.Also keep in mind that a commitment on this scale from volunteers if doubly impressive since given that there are SOOOO many paid developers producing SOOOO much code , these guys ( gals inclusive in the masculine form ) are still pumping out so much even though they probably do n't have to.The downside of course is that there 's a possibility that the volunteer developers have become counter-productive to the project since companies do n't find a need to finance a commitment of 10 developers , 2 documenters and 5 testers on a project because some guy in his basement is hacking on it at home while munching Doritos and sucking down The Dew .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hate statistics that are produced but read incorrectly.
It's fine to gather data to prove your point about something, but in reality, these stats are talking about a downturn in community support.
I'd say that it's a show of a much higher level of community support.Except with rare exceptions a volunteer developer that does it purely in their spare time might be able to contribute 1/4 to 1/2 the time of a full time paid developer.
Given the "hacker factor" many of the paid developers are working greater than 40 hours a week by a considerable margin.
That means that either there's a HUGE number of volunteer developers or that the ones that are there are producing a great deal more than the paid developers in the same period of time.
This is more likely since volunteer developers are more likely to work on what interests them and given that, will be more motivated and move more rapidly.Also keep in mind that a commitment on this scale from volunteers if doubly impressive since given that there are SOOOO many paid developers producing SOOOO much code, these guys (gals inclusive in the masculine form) are still pumping out so much even though they probably don't have to.The downside of course is that there's a possibility that the volunteer developers have become counter-productive to the project since companies don't find a need to finance a commitment of 10 developers, 2 documenters and 5 testers on a project because some guy in his basement is hacking on it at home while munching Doritos and sucking down The Dew.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30876754</id>
	<title>Money</title>
	<author>madduff</author>
	<datestamp>1264325160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nothing motivates people more than money. Good to see some are being paid for their efforts.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nothing motivates people more than money .
Good to see some are being paid for their efforts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nothing motivates people more than money.
Good to see some are being paid for their efforts.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853652</id>
	<title>pay?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264075980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>...it's less a case of 'volunteers ahoy!' and more a case of 'where's my pay?'"</i></p><p>I'd say its more a case of "I get paid to do this? who-hoo".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...it 's less a case of 'volunteers ahoy !
' and more a case of 'where 's my pay ?
' " I 'd say its more a case of " I get paid to do this ?
who-hoo " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...it's less a case of 'volunteers ahoy!
' and more a case of 'where's my pay?
'"I'd say its more a case of "I get paid to do this?
who-hoo".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853698</id>
	<title>Hmmm...</title>
	<author>kclittle</author>
	<datestamp>1264076160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>&gt; It's not clear from the article why anyone should perceive a contradiction between having high ideals and getting paid to do something you enjoy.<br> <br>
Sure, it's cool to be able to say that you're paid to work on the Linux kernel. But how many of that paid 75\% would do it for free? How many would have to do something else to put food on the table if there were not a corporation to pay them?<br> <br>What I take away from this is the fact that the Linux "community" is dominated by corporations. In many cases (but not all), for-profit corporations, all trying to compete against several other for-profit corporations named Microsoft, Apple, Google, Oracle, etc.</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; It 's not clear from the article why anyone should perceive a contradiction between having high ideals and getting paid to do something you enjoy .
Sure , it 's cool to be able to say that you 're paid to work on the Linux kernel .
But how many of that paid 75 \ % would do it for free ?
How many would have to do something else to put food on the table if there were not a corporation to pay them ?
What I take away from this is the fact that the Linux " community " is dominated by corporations .
In many cases ( but not all ) , for-profit corporations , all trying to compete against several other for-profit corporations named Microsoft , Apple , Google , Oracle , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; It's not clear from the article why anyone should perceive a contradiction between having high ideals and getting paid to do something you enjoy.
Sure, it's cool to be able to say that you're paid to work on the Linux kernel.
But how many of that paid 75\% would do it for free?
How many would have to do something else to put food on the table if there were not a corporation to pay them?
What I take away from this is the fact that the Linux "community" is dominated by corporations.
In many cases (but not all), for-profit corporations, all trying to compete against several other for-profit corporations named Microsoft, Apple, Google, Oracle, etc.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30858994</id>
	<title>Wow</title>
	<author>jrowlingson</author>
	<datestamp>1264173480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Developers getting paid to do work? I thought we were smarter than that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Developers getting paid to do work ?
I thought we were smarter than that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Developers getting paid to do work?
I thought we were smarter than that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853970</id>
	<title>Re:I'll be the first to say...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264077240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everyone agrees that there's nothing wrong with getting paid to develop the Linux code.</p><p>However, what I do fear is, what will happen after Linus? I fear that the reason there's no clash between the different goals is because the people who are leading do a proper job of choosing what gets into the code. Hopefully someone with a proven history will be the current maintainer but, if for any reason, the wrong person takes the lead, kernel development would take a serious blow. Sure you can say 'fork it' but the truth is that this would create a mess, even if development is reorganized.</p><p>It all boils down to the people who have the power, as anything else in the human world. Admitedly, given it's decentralized nature, Linux development is less at risk than propietary kernels of going in the wrong direction. But it could still happen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everyone agrees that there 's nothing wrong with getting paid to develop the Linux code.However , what I do fear is , what will happen after Linus ?
I fear that the reason there 's no clash between the different goals is because the people who are leading do a proper job of choosing what gets into the code .
Hopefully someone with a proven history will be the current maintainer but , if for any reason , the wrong person takes the lead , kernel development would take a serious blow .
Sure you can say 'fork it ' but the truth is that this would create a mess , even if development is reorganized.It all boils down to the people who have the power , as anything else in the human world .
Admitedly , given it 's decentralized nature , Linux development is less at risk than propietary kernels of going in the wrong direction .
But it could still happen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everyone agrees that there's nothing wrong with getting paid to develop the Linux code.However, what I do fear is, what will happen after Linus?
I fear that the reason there's no clash between the different goals is because the people who are leading do a proper job of choosing what gets into the code.
Hopefully someone with a proven history will be the current maintainer but, if for any reason, the wrong person takes the lead, kernel development would take a serious blow.
Sure you can say 'fork it' but the truth is that this would create a mess, even if development is reorganized.It all boils down to the people who have the power, as anything else in the human world.
Admitedly, given it's decentralized nature, Linux development is less at risk than propietary kernels of going in the wrong direction.
But it could still happen.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853458</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854164</id>
	<title>Re:Missing critical information...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264078200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bad lines of code are worth <a href="http://www.codeoffsets.com/" title="codeoffsets.com" rel="nofollow">$0.50 each</a> [codeoffsets.com].  If good lines of code are worth 5 times as much as bad lines of code, then good lines are worth $2.50 each.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bad lines of code are worth $ 0.50 each [ codeoffsets.com ] .
If good lines of code are worth 5 times as much as bad lines of code , then good lines are worth $ 2.50 each .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bad lines of code are worth $0.50 each [codeoffsets.com].
If good lines of code are worth 5 times as much as bad lines of code, then good lines are worth $2.50 each.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853472</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30856036</id>
	<title>And this is a GNU thing?!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264092000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Paging Richard Stallman! Paging Richard Stallman! Line one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Paging Richard Stallman !
Paging Richard Stallman !
Line one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Paging Richard Stallman!
Paging Richard Stallman!
Line one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855120</id>
	<title>Linux IS the adults table</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264084200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>"If Linux wants to sit at the adults' table<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..."</p></div></blockquote><p>Linux <b> <i>is</i></b>  the adults table.  The adults all sit at it.  You've heard of Google, IBM, Sun, Oracle, Novell?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" If Linux wants to sit at the adults ' table ... " Linux is the adults table .
The adults all sit at it .
You 've heard of Google , IBM , Sun , Oracle , Novell ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"If Linux wants to sit at the adults' table ..."Linux  is  the adults table.
The adults all sit at it.
You've heard of Google, IBM, Sun, Oracle, Novell?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853558</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855302</id>
	<title>Re:And this is a bad thing?!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264085460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, I guess that's like the difference between companies and non-profit organizations. The fact that they are non-profit, doesn't mean people doesn't get paid.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , I guess that 's like the difference between companies and non-profit organizations .
The fact that they are non-profit , does n't mean people does n't get paid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, I guess that's like the difference between companies and non-profit organizations.
The fact that they are non-profit, doesn't mean people doesn't get paid.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855438</id>
	<title>Re:But are they in the software business?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264086840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Red Hat 11.2\%<br>Novell 8.9\%<br>Linux Foundation 2.6\%<br>Oracle 1.3\%</p><p>(among others)</p><p>Source: <a href="https://www.linuxfoundation.org/publications/linuxkerneldevelopment.php" title="linuxfoundation.org">https://www.linuxfoundation.org/publications/linuxkerneldevelopment.php</a> [linuxfoundation.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Red Hat 11.2 \ % Novell 8.9 \ % Linux Foundation 2.6 \ % Oracle 1.3 \ % ( among others ) Source : https : //www.linuxfoundation.org/publications/linuxkerneldevelopment.php [ linuxfoundation.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Red Hat 11.2\%Novell 8.9\%Linux Foundation 2.6\%Oracle 1.3\%(among others)Source: https://www.linuxfoundation.org/publications/linuxkerneldevelopment.php [linuxfoundation.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854088</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853708</id>
	<title>Re:And this is a bad thing?!</title>
	<author>nine-times</author>
	<datestamp>1264076220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good point.  In a sense, you could say that these companies are "volunteers".  They're each a group of people who are "scratching their own itch" and donating their resulting work back to the rest of the community.
</p><p>And even if 75\% of Linux code is contributed by these companies, that still leaves 25\% which isn't.  If you think about it, that's actually kind of impressive.  You have all these huge companies paying very good developers to build a robust professional-level kernel-- heavyweight companies like Intel, Oracle, IBM, Novell, and Redhat-- and still 25\% of the code comes from individual unpaid developers?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good point .
In a sense , you could say that these companies are " volunteers " .
They 're each a group of people who are " scratching their own itch " and donating their resulting work back to the rest of the community .
And even if 75 \ % of Linux code is contributed by these companies , that still leaves 25 \ % which is n't .
If you think about it , that 's actually kind of impressive .
You have all these huge companies paying very good developers to build a robust professional-level kernel-- heavyweight companies like Intel , Oracle , IBM , Novell , and Redhat-- and still 25 \ % of the code comes from individual unpaid developers ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good point.
In a sense, you could say that these companies are "volunteers".
They're each a group of people who are "scratching their own itch" and donating their resulting work back to the rest of the community.
And even if 75\% of Linux code is contributed by these companies, that still leaves 25\% which isn't.
If you think about it, that's actually kind of impressive.
You have all these huge companies paying very good developers to build a robust professional-level kernel-- heavyweight companies like Intel, Oracle, IBM, Novell, and Redhat-- and still 25\% of the code comes from individual unpaid developers?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853556</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30863792</id>
	<title>Re:Motives?</title>
	<author>farble1670</author>
	<datestamp>1264156440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>it doesn't (shouldn't) matter. OSS is about giving and receiving. for contributing resources to open source, a company gets word of mouth press, free beta testers, input on features, and maybe even someone that doesn't work for them contributing code to their product.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it does n't ( should n't ) matter .
OSS is about giving and receiving .
for contributing resources to open source , a company gets word of mouth press , free beta testers , input on features , and maybe even someone that does n't work for them contributing code to their product .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it doesn't (shouldn't) matter.
OSS is about giving and receiving.
for contributing resources to open source, a company gets word of mouth press, free beta testers, input on features, and maybe even someone that doesn't work for them contributing code to their product.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854748</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854748</id>
	<title>Motives?</title>
	<author>spun</author>
	<datestamp>1264081380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To what extent do contributing companies have the same motives as contributing individuals? To what extent do these, possibly disparate, motivations coincide with the needs of end users? I think this is the underlying question inherent in this article, but I don't really have any firm answers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To what extent do contributing companies have the same motives as contributing individuals ?
To what extent do these , possibly disparate , motivations coincide with the needs of end users ?
I think this is the underlying question inherent in this article , but I do n't really have any firm answers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To what extent do contributing companies have the same motives as contributing individuals?
To what extent do these, possibly disparate, motivations coincide with the needs of end users?
I think this is the underlying question inherent in this article, but I don't really have any firm answers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853600</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30863600</id>
	<title>Re:Statistics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264155600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>And if we wait another 100 years, then 100\% of Linux code will be written by historians. That's the power of statistics.</p></div><p>What the hell are you talking about? Historians are people that study the past, not lived in the past.</p></div><p>Maybe he meant archaeologists, as in experimental archaeology?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And if we wait another 100 years , then 100 \ % of Linux code will be written by historians .
That 's the power of statistics.What the hell are you talking about ?
Historians are people that study the past , not lived in the past.Maybe he meant archaeologists , as in experimental archaeology ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And if we wait another 100 years, then 100\% of Linux code will be written by historians.
That's the power of statistics.What the hell are you talking about?
Historians are people that study the past, not lived in the past.Maybe he meant archaeologists, as in experimental archaeology?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854824</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857162</id>
	<title>Re:Statistics</title>
	<author>Idiot with a gun</author>
	<datestamp>1264192260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You have the unmistakable stench of someone who judges from a high chair. Did you try Linux in the late 90's? Have you been running it since then? I hopped in in around 2006, and let me tell you that device support has changed drastically. And IMHO, device support is one of the most significant parts of a kernel (and the surrounding projects). Because who cares about an OS if it doesn't work on your machine?</htmltext>
<tokenext>You have the unmistakable stench of someone who judges from a high chair .
Did you try Linux in the late 90 's ?
Have you been running it since then ?
I hopped in in around 2006 , and let me tell you that device support has changed drastically .
And IMHO , device support is one of the most significant parts of a kernel ( and the surrounding projects ) .
Because who cares about an OS if it does n't work on your machine ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have the unmistakable stench of someone who judges from a high chair.
Did you try Linux in the late 90's?
Have you been running it since then?
I hopped in in around 2006, and let me tell you that device support has changed drastically.
And IMHO, device support is one of the most significant parts of a kernel (and the surrounding projects).
Because who cares about an OS if it doesn't work on your machine?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853772</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855418</id>
	<title>They have to pay people now</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264086600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So they have to <i>pay</i> people to work on linux now, things must be really going downhill.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So they have to pay people to work on linux now , things must be really going downhill .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So they have to pay people to work on linux now, things must be really going downhill.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30858044</id>
	<title>Re:Because It Makes A Mockery Of Everything Held H</title>
	<author>ciderVisor</author>
	<datestamp>1264163040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>They couldn't possibly compete with the Million Eyes ensuring bugfree open source software.</p></div><p>"A pile of shit has a thousand eyes." - Teddy Duchamp.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They could n't possibly compete with the Million Eyes ensuring bugfree open source software .
" A pile of shit has a thousand eyes .
" - Teddy Duchamp .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They couldn't possibly compete with the Million Eyes ensuring bugfree open source software.
"A pile of shit has a thousand eyes.
" - Teddy Duchamp.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853818</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855550</id>
	<title>Re:Motives?</title>
	<author>jlarocco</author>
	<datestamp>1264087800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
If it matters, and I would say it doesn't, I would guess the companies have exactly the same motivation as any other contributor.  Specifically, they want a feature implemented which currently isn't.
</p><p>
The ability to modify software to fit your needs is the biggest benefit of using open source software.  It's kinda silly to think companies wouldn't take advantage of it.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If it matters , and I would say it does n't , I would guess the companies have exactly the same motivation as any other contributor .
Specifically , they want a feature implemented which currently is n't .
The ability to modify software to fit your needs is the biggest benefit of using open source software .
It 's kinda silly to think companies would n't take advantage of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
If it matters, and I would say it doesn't, I would guess the companies have exactly the same motivation as any other contributor.
Specifically, they want a feature implemented which currently isn't.
The ability to modify software to fit your needs is the biggest benefit of using open source software.
It's kinda silly to think companies wouldn't take advantage of it.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854748</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854836</id>
	<title>Re:What about Google?</title>
	<author>exomondo</author>
	<datestamp>1264081860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They are fairly involved and they are committing patches that they make to the kernel in their use of it but just because they don't need to make that many modifications for it to work effectively doesn't mean they aren't contributing and just because they use linux doesn't mean they are going to donate developers to work on features that they don't need.

Google are doing a lot of good in the open source community contributing to projects that they themselves use, just because you think their relative size doesn't match their contribution doesn't mean they aren't helping out.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They are fairly involved and they are committing patches that they make to the kernel in their use of it but just because they do n't need to make that many modifications for it to work effectively does n't mean they are n't contributing and just because they use linux does n't mean they are going to donate developers to work on features that they do n't need .
Google are doing a lot of good in the open source community contributing to projects that they themselves use , just because you think their relative size does n't match their contribution does n't mean they are n't helping out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They are fairly involved and they are committing patches that they make to the kernel in their use of it but just because they don't need to make that many modifications for it to work effectively doesn't mean they aren't contributing and just because they use linux doesn't mean they are going to donate developers to work on features that they don't need.
Google are doing a lot of good in the open source community contributing to projects that they themselves use, just because you think their relative size doesn't match their contribution doesn't mean they aren't helping out.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853808</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853614</id>
	<title>Re:Missing critical information...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264075860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>varies with the line.</p><p>base cost is the the coderss hourly wage. if a coder earning $50/hour codes 10 lines in an hour, cost is $5/line.</p><p>now, for difficult lines, if he takes half an hour to finish the line, the cost for that one is $25.</p><p>of course, theres more people involved in the process than just  one coder.</p><p>but the basics are the same.</p><p>cost per line = (sum of all employees wages * time spent to code X lines ) / number of lines writen</p><p>this will give you an average for the whole project.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>varies with the line.base cost is the the coderss hourly wage .
if a coder earning $ 50/hour codes 10 lines in an hour , cost is $ 5/line.now , for difficult lines , if he takes half an hour to finish the line , the cost for that one is $ 25.of course , theres more people involved in the process than just one coder.but the basics are the same.cost per line = ( sum of all employees wages * time spent to code X lines ) / number of lines writenthis will give you an average for the whole project .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>varies with the line.base cost is the the coderss hourly wage.
if a coder earning $50/hour codes 10 lines in an hour, cost is $5/line.now, for difficult lines, if he takes half an hour to finish the line, the cost for that one is $25.of course, theres more people involved in the process than just  one coder.but the basics are the same.cost per line = (sum of all employees wages * time spent to code X lines ) / number of lines writenthis will give you an average for the whole project.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853472</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854626</id>
	<title>Re:Hmmm...</title>
	<author>horza</author>
	<datestamp>1264080780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Sure, it's cool to be able to say that you're paid to work on the Linux kernel.</i></p><p>Certainly is. I'd decided at the age of 8yrs old the first company I was going to work for was Acorn. And it was. My friend loves Linux and so picks jobs where he gets to play with top end Linux clusters. Previously at CERN and now a top Swiss bank. For a real techie the work is more important than the size of the pay cheque.</p><p><i>But how many of that paid 75\% would do it for free?</i></p><p>Depends what the code being contributed is. IBM is porting Linux to its high-end mainframes, but your average enthusiast doesn't have a $1M mainframe in his basement and so no incentive to write Linux drivers for one. I bet a large \% of the paid developers are contributing code that is pretty useless to the home desktop user.</p><p><i>How many would have to do something else to put food on the table if there were not a corporation to pay them?</i></p><p>Those working on the kernel are a tiny fraction of OS developers. Around 99\% of us do something else to put food on the table.</p><p><i>What I take away from this is the fact that the Linux "community" is dominated by corporations. In many cases (but not all), for-profit corporations, all trying to compete against several other for-profit corporations named Microsoft, Apple, Google, Oracle, etc.</i></p><p>What I take away is that common sense is actually working. The Linux "massively scalable cloud community" and the Linux "big iron community" will be dominated by corporations. And maybe some of the contributions will trickle back and be useful to the rest of us. I can't see who is losing in that scenario.</p><p>Phillip.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure , it 's cool to be able to say that you 're paid to work on the Linux kernel.Certainly is .
I 'd decided at the age of 8yrs old the first company I was going to work for was Acorn .
And it was .
My friend loves Linux and so picks jobs where he gets to play with top end Linux clusters .
Previously at CERN and now a top Swiss bank .
For a real techie the work is more important than the size of the pay cheque.But how many of that paid 75 \ % would do it for free ? Depends what the code being contributed is .
IBM is porting Linux to its high-end mainframes , but your average enthusiast does n't have a $ 1M mainframe in his basement and so no incentive to write Linux drivers for one .
I bet a large \ % of the paid developers are contributing code that is pretty useless to the home desktop user.How many would have to do something else to put food on the table if there were not a corporation to pay them ? Those working on the kernel are a tiny fraction of OS developers .
Around 99 \ % of us do something else to put food on the table.What I take away from this is the fact that the Linux " community " is dominated by corporations .
In many cases ( but not all ) , for-profit corporations , all trying to compete against several other for-profit corporations named Microsoft , Apple , Google , Oracle , etc.What I take away is that common sense is actually working .
The Linux " massively scalable cloud community " and the Linux " big iron community " will be dominated by corporations .
And maybe some of the contributions will trickle back and be useful to the rest of us .
I ca n't see who is losing in that scenario.Phillip .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure, it's cool to be able to say that you're paid to work on the Linux kernel.Certainly is.
I'd decided at the age of 8yrs old the first company I was going to work for was Acorn.
And it was.
My friend loves Linux and so picks jobs where he gets to play with top end Linux clusters.
Previously at CERN and now a top Swiss bank.
For a real techie the work is more important than the size of the pay cheque.But how many of that paid 75\% would do it for free?Depends what the code being contributed is.
IBM is porting Linux to its high-end mainframes, but your average enthusiast doesn't have a $1M mainframe in his basement and so no incentive to write Linux drivers for one.
I bet a large \% of the paid developers are contributing code that is pretty useless to the home desktop user.How many would have to do something else to put food on the table if there were not a corporation to pay them?Those working on the kernel are a tiny fraction of OS developers.
Around 99\% of us do something else to put food on the table.What I take away from this is the fact that the Linux "community" is dominated by corporations.
In many cases (but not all), for-profit corporations, all trying to compete against several other for-profit corporations named Microsoft, Apple, Google, Oracle, etc.What I take away is that common sense is actually working.
The Linux "massively scalable cloud community" and the Linux "big iron community" will be dominated by corporations.
And maybe some of the contributions will trickle back and be useful to the rest of us.
I can't see who is losing in that scenario.Phillip.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853698</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855208</id>
	<title>Re:Statistics</title>
	<author>dbIII</author>
	<datestamp>1264084800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Here's the reality:<br>A company wants one thing to work with another to support their core business.  Somebody has written something to work with something similar.  Instead of reinventing the wheel they use and adapt the original.  Most of these places don't sell software so why not just give it away?  You lose nothing, generate goodwill and it's very rare that you would have any sort of competitve advantage by keeping it secret.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's the reality : A company wants one thing to work with another to support their core business .
Somebody has written something to work with something similar .
Instead of reinventing the wheel they use and adapt the original .
Most of these places do n't sell software so why not just give it away ?
You lose nothing , generate goodwill and it 's very rare that you would have any sort of competitve advantage by keeping it secret .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's the reality:A company wants one thing to work with another to support their core business.
Somebody has written something to work with something similar.
Instead of reinventing the wheel they use and adapt the original.
Most of these places don't sell software so why not just give it away?
You lose nothing, generate goodwill and it's very rare that you would have any sort of competitve advantage by keeping it secret.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853772</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30859700</id>
	<title>Misrepresented?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264177260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No it's more of a case of developers starting or working on a project, then getting hired by a company and being allowed to continue work on the project.</p><p>Think about it. If you are developing code that a lot of people use, you have a proven track record, and you produce, it makes you look very attractive as an employee. If you get hired by a company such as red hat, they will see features they want added to open source projects. If the features get approved by the project then you are paid to work on open source.</p><p>The circumstances of how and why people get paid to work on open source has been misrepresented a little here.</p><p>The moral of the story is if you are a developer it's good to work on community code. Eventually someone will hire and pay you for it if you are good at it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No it 's more of a case of developers starting or working on a project , then getting hired by a company and being allowed to continue work on the project.Think about it .
If you are developing code that a lot of people use , you have a proven track record , and you produce , it makes you look very attractive as an employee .
If you get hired by a company such as red hat , they will see features they want added to open source projects .
If the features get approved by the project then you are paid to work on open source.The circumstances of how and why people get paid to work on open source has been misrepresented a little here.The moral of the story is if you are a developer it 's good to work on community code .
Eventually someone will hire and pay you for it if you are good at it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No it's more of a case of developers starting or working on a project, then getting hired by a company and being allowed to continue work on the project.Think about it.
If you are developing code that a lot of people use, you have a proven track record, and you produce, it makes you look very attractive as an employee.
If you get hired by a company such as red hat, they will see features they want added to open source projects.
If the features get approved by the project then you are paid to work on open source.The circumstances of how and why people get paid to work on open source has been misrepresented a little here.The moral of the story is if you are a developer it's good to work on community code.
Eventually someone will hire and pay you for it if you are good at it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853846</id>
	<title>Software is grown on trees</title>
	<author>lostinspace2011</author>
	<datestamp>1264076760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>It is a known fact that open source software grows on trees and that's why it is available for free. All other commercial software is developed by skilled engineers who are fed on grown open source vegetables. I find it strange that people think that developers have lots of time on their hand and generally don't have a live and nothing better to do then to write perfect code every time all day long. Developers should be paid, and in my opinion paid a lot. Expecting other people to work for free and expect some SLA on quality is just not realistic.

Open Source is about creating quality product by allowing other to review the code and contribute. It's not about making software free, that's just a by product.

Don't really understand why this is news, but nice to see that 75\% of developers get a reward for their efforts. Still makes we wonder if the other 25\% are independently rich or are just millionaires to be able to afford spending their time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is a known fact that open source software grows on trees and that 's why it is available for free .
All other commercial software is developed by skilled engineers who are fed on grown open source vegetables .
I find it strange that people think that developers have lots of time on their hand and generally do n't have a live and nothing better to do then to write perfect code every time all day long .
Developers should be paid , and in my opinion paid a lot .
Expecting other people to work for free and expect some SLA on quality is just not realistic .
Open Source is about creating quality product by allowing other to review the code and contribute .
It 's not about making software free , that 's just a by product .
Do n't really understand why this is news , but nice to see that 75 \ % of developers get a reward for their efforts .
Still makes we wonder if the other 25 \ % are independently rich or are just millionaires to be able to afford spending their time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is a known fact that open source software grows on trees and that's why it is available for free.
All other commercial software is developed by skilled engineers who are fed on grown open source vegetables.
I find it strange that people think that developers have lots of time on their hand and generally don't have a live and nothing better to do then to write perfect code every time all day long.
Developers should be paid, and in my opinion paid a lot.
Expecting other people to work for free and expect some SLA on quality is just not realistic.
Open Source is about creating quality product by allowing other to review the code and contribute.
It's not about making software free, that's just a by product.
Don't really understand why this is news, but nice to see that 75\% of developers get a reward for their efforts.
Still makes we wonder if the other 25\% are independently rich or are just millionaires to be able to afford spending their time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857030</id>
	<title>Re:Statistics</title>
	<author>nametaken</author>
	<datestamp>1264190700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The fun is in figuring out if they're retarded, trolling or 11 years old.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The fun is in figuring out if they 're retarded , trolling or 11 years old .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The fun is in figuring out if they're retarded, trolling or 11 years old.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854824</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855376</id>
	<title>Re:I'll be the first to say...</title>
	<author>TapeCutter</author>
	<datestamp>1264086180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>*adjusts tinfoil hat* - Open your eyes sheeple!!! There's no such thing as linux. The illuminati are behind this New Web Order.</htmltext>
<tokenext>* adjusts tinfoil hat * - Open your eyes sheeple ! ! !
There 's no such thing as linux .
The illuminati are behind this New Web Order .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>*adjusts tinfoil hat* - Open your eyes sheeple!!!
There's no such thing as linux.
The illuminati are behind this New Web Order.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853544</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854162</id>
	<title>Re:Good. Glad to Hear It.</title>
	<author>chromatic</author>
	<datestamp>1264078200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr><em>... professional accountability...</em></p></div> </blockquote><p>In software?  Where?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>... professional accountability... In software ?
Where ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ... professional accountability... In software?
Where?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853558</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30856864</id>
	<title>Re:I'll be the first to say...</title>
	<author>jpkotta</author>
	<datestamp>1264101840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The article itself basically presents the facts, but it does mention that it's interesting that a bunch of companies that otherwise compete with each other are in fact cooperating to develop Linux.</p></div><p>They've solved the Prisoners' Dilemma for software.  I like to think that this is due to the GPL, but it could also be because it's just easier to put the changes back in mainline rather than try to maintain a patch.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The article itself basically presents the facts , but it does mention that it 's interesting that a bunch of companies that otherwise compete with each other are in fact cooperating to develop Linux.They 've solved the Prisoners ' Dilemma for software .
I like to think that this is due to the GPL , but it could also be because it 's just easier to put the changes back in mainline rather than try to maintain a patch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The article itself basically presents the facts, but it does mention that it's interesting that a bunch of companies that otherwise compete with each other are in fact cooperating to develop Linux.They've solved the Prisoners' Dilemma for software.
I like to think that this is due to the GPL, but it could also be because it's just easier to put the changes back in mainline rather than try to maintain a patch.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853600</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853744</id>
	<title>Start for free, get paid later</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264076340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It happened in many cases that someone would start contributing code to the kernel, someone working for a company (possibly developing code, possibly not) would see their name on the kernel mailing list, and would get them hired on by the company, for the purposes of contributing to the kernel, certain patches the company wanted.  They would be kept on to continue developing code (its likely that the company is using Linux in one or more places and they are happy contributing the cost of 1 developer, as its cheaper than paying for 100 licenses of some other software, and they can also audit code quality (not possible with the other stuff).  You get to see what you are using, you don't have to just accept what they give you and say thankyou, here's my money, with Linux you can look it all over and determine the value before using it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It happened in many cases that someone would start contributing code to the kernel , someone working for a company ( possibly developing code , possibly not ) would see their name on the kernel mailing list , and would get them hired on by the company , for the purposes of contributing to the kernel , certain patches the company wanted .
They would be kept on to continue developing code ( its likely that the company is using Linux in one or more places and they are happy contributing the cost of 1 developer , as its cheaper than paying for 100 licenses of some other software , and they can also audit code quality ( not possible with the other stuff ) .
You get to see what you are using , you do n't have to just accept what they give you and say thankyou , here 's my money , with Linux you can look it all over and determine the value before using it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It happened in many cases that someone would start contributing code to the kernel, someone working for a company (possibly developing code, possibly not) would see their name on the kernel mailing list, and would get them hired on by the company, for the purposes of contributing to the kernel, certain patches the company wanted.
They would be kept on to continue developing code (its likely that the company is using Linux in one or more places and they are happy contributing the cost of 1 developer, as its cheaper than paying for 100 licenses of some other software, and they can also audit code quality (not possible with the other stuff).
You get to see what you are using, you don't have to just accept what they give you and say thankyou, here's my money, with Linux you can look it all over and determine the value before using it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854910
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853458
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857194
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854088
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855438
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30861120
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853652
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855064
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853808
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854620
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855600
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853458
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853600
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854748
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30863792
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853458
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853970
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853458
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853600
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855788
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854088
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855422
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853458
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854038
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854088
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30858918
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853772
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857030
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853458
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854298
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30856036
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853876
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853876
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854314
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853808
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854836
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30861146
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853458
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853600
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854748
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855550
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30870144
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854164
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853808
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854320
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853772
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30863600
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853458
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854424
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853558
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857582
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853614
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853558
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855120
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857108
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30867994
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855596
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853772
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855190
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853558
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857008
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857034
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854178
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30856696
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854178
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30856546
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853458
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30858044
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855372
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853558
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854970
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854178
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30856018
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853808
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855740
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853698
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855154
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853558
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855120
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30856824
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855302
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853458
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853600
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30856864
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853772
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853458
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853600
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30859634
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853772
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857162
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853458
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855376
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854178
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855202
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855260
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853458
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30856178
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853558
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30864268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853652
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854100
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853558
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854162
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853458
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854918
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853698
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854626
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857726
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853558
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857702
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_21_230201_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_21_230201.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853876
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854314
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855846
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_21_230201.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854088
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855438
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30861120
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855422
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854996
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30858918
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_21_230201.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853652
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854100
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855064
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_21_230201.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853846
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857034
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_21_230201.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853698
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854626
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855154
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_21_230201.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854178
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30856696
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30856018
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855202
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30856546
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_21_230201.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854292
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_21_230201.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853564
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_21_230201.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855848
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_21_230201.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853558
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854162
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857008
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854970
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854456
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857582
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30864268
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857702
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855120
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857108
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30867994
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30856824
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_21_230201.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853450
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855260
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854412
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857216
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855372
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854910
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_21_230201.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853472
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854164
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854112
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30861146
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853614
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_21_230201.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855350
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_21_230201.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853556
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853794
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855596
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857726
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855302
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30856036
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853708
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30870144
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_21_230201.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853830
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_21_230201.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853808
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854320
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854836
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855740
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854620
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855600
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_21_230201.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30859694
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_21_230201.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853458
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853924
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854038
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853600
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855788
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30859634
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30856864
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854748
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30863792
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855550
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853818
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30858044
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857194
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854424
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854298
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853970
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853544
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854884
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855356
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30856178
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855376
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854918
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_21_230201.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30853772
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855190
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30855208
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857162
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30854824
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30857030
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_21_230201.30863600
</commentlist>
</conversation>
