<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_18_0326221</id>
	<title>GM Working On Interactive Windshields</title>
	<author>samzenpus</author>
	<datestamp>1268916180000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>this\_boat\_is\_real writes <i>"Rather than project info onto a portion of the windshield, <a href="http://www.wired.com/autopia/2010/03/gm-next-gen-heads-up-display/">GM's latest experiment uses the entire windshield as a display</a>. Small ultraviolet lasers project data gleaned from sensors and cameras onto the glass. General Motors geeks are working alongside researchers from several universities to develop a system that integrates night vision, navigation and on-board cameras to improve our ability to see &mdash; and avoid &mdash; problems, particularly in adverse conditions like fog."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>this \ _boat \ _is \ _real writes " Rather than project info onto a portion of the windshield , GM 's latest experiment uses the entire windshield as a display .
Small ultraviolet lasers project data gleaned from sensors and cameras onto the glass .
General Motors geeks are working alongside researchers from several universities to develop a system that integrates night vision , navigation and on-board cameras to improve our ability to see    and avoid    problems , particularly in adverse conditions like fog .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this\_boat\_is\_real writes "Rather than project info onto a portion of the windshield, GM's latest experiment uses the entire windshield as a display.
Small ultraviolet lasers project data gleaned from sensors and cameras onto the glass.
General Motors geeks are working alongside researchers from several universities to develop a system that integrates night vision, navigation and on-board cameras to improve our ability to see — and avoid — problems, particularly in adverse conditions like fog.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521798</id>
	<title>Re:Great, more distractions for drivers...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268922300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Suppose it highlights a person crossing the street in darkness a mile down the road? The driver will get distracted trying to figure out what the car is warning him about.</p></div></blockquote><p>That's the idea. Being 'distracted' by things you might run into is a good thing. Danger is when you are distracted by things inside the car. Obviously noise is an issue, but it should actually be fairly easy to shut off if the noise ratio gets above a certain threshold.</p><p>And by 'easy,' I mean that this is something you won't see even on military vehicles until 2015, and won't reach consumer prices until 2025, which would also be around when I'd expect strong AI.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Suppose it highlights a person crossing the street in darkness a mile down the road ?
The driver will get distracted trying to figure out what the car is warning him about.That 's the idea .
Being 'distracted ' by things you might run into is a good thing .
Danger is when you are distracted by things inside the car .
Obviously noise is an issue , but it should actually be fairly easy to shut off if the noise ratio gets above a certain threshold.And by 'easy, ' I mean that this is something you wo n't see even on military vehicles until 2015 , and wo n't reach consumer prices until 2025 , which would also be around when I 'd expect strong AI .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Suppose it highlights a person crossing the street in darkness a mile down the road?
The driver will get distracted trying to figure out what the car is warning him about.That's the idea.
Being 'distracted' by things you might run into is a good thing.
Danger is when you are distracted by things inside the car.
Obviously noise is an issue, but it should actually be fairly easy to shut off if the noise ratio gets above a certain threshold.And by 'easy,' I mean that this is something you won't see even on military vehicles until 2015, and won't reach consumer prices until 2025, which would also be around when I'd expect strong AI.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521644</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521862</id>
	<title>Re:Driver's perspective?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268922600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe they get road crews to paint a reflective white stripe on the edge of the road that reflects light from headlights</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe they get road crews to paint a reflective white stripe on the edge of the road that reflects light from headlights</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe they get road crews to paint a reflective white stripe on the edge of the road that reflects light from headlights</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521694</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523030</id>
	<title>Re:Driver's perspective?</title>
	<author>asylumx</author>
	<datestamp>1268928060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is described in TFA in the video.  They have cameras tracking the driver and analyzing their position so that they can adjust the visuals accordingly.  What I want to know is how crazy this looks to the passengers!</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is described in TFA in the video .
They have cameras tracking the driver and analyzing their position so that they can adjust the visuals accordingly .
What I want to know is how crazy this looks to the passengers !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is described in TFA in the video.
They have cameras tracking the driver and analyzing their position so that they can adjust the visuals accordingly.
What I want to know is how crazy this looks to the passengers!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521694</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523076</id>
	<title>Re:Tron-mode?</title>
	<author>fast turtle</author>
	<datestamp>1268928300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually GM already has this available in a HUD system on High End Models. They've combined Low-Light Camera's with IR Features that activate with the headlights. It's purpose is to provide a clearer veiw of what's in front of you during the night. Guess what, it works quite well and is one hell of a safety feature that I want on all cars.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually GM already has this available in a HUD system on High End Models .
They 've combined Low-Light Camera 's with IR Features that activate with the headlights .
It 's purpose is to provide a clearer veiw of what 's in front of you during the night .
Guess what , it works quite well and is one hell of a safety feature that I want on all cars .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually GM already has this available in a HUD system on High End Models.
They've combined Low-Light Camera's with IR Features that activate with the headlights.
It's purpose is to provide a clearer veiw of what's in front of you during the night.
Guess what, it works quite well and is one hell of a safety feature that I want on all cars.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521394</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521766</id>
	<title>You mean, like the Mach Five?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268922060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pops Racer stored the plans for the engine of the Mach Five in the windshield:<br>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed\_Racer#Plot</p><p>Once again, GM is playing catch-up with Japanese innovation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pops Racer stored the plans for the engine of the Mach Five in the windshield : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed \ _Racer # PlotOnce again , GM is playing catch-up with Japanese innovation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pops Racer stored the plans for the engine of the Mach Five in the windshield:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed\_Racer#PlotOnce again, GM is playing catch-up with Japanese innovation.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31524982</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>shiftless</author>
	<datestamp>1268937240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>what makes you think that drive by wire on an automated system could be safe?</i></p><p>The fact that automakers realize the potential dangers involved and thus spend millions of dollars making damn sure there are failsafes. The odds of you dying in a car crash as the result of a drive by wire failure are incredibly, infinitesimally low.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>what makes you think that drive by wire on an automated system could be safe ? The fact that automakers realize the potential dangers involved and thus spend millions of dollars making damn sure there are failsafes .
The odds of you dying in a car crash as the result of a drive by wire failure are incredibly , infinitesimally low .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>what makes you think that drive by wire on an automated system could be safe?The fact that automakers realize the potential dangers involved and thus spend millions of dollars making damn sure there are failsafes.
The odds of you dying in a car crash as the result of a drive by wire failure are incredibly, infinitesimally low.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523176</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523396</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268930040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There are four main reasons why you don't get the fuel economy that is posted for the EPA listing.
<br> <br>
1) The EPA test is supposed to create a test for driving a car that is the same across all US sold vehicles.  It is not supposed to be a test of real world driving (they revised it a year or two ago, so it would be closer, but it is still no where perfect).  I mean when you drive on the highway who drives 45 miles an hour?  With brief stints to 60 MPH.  I mean in Indiana we have 70 MPH highways.  Heck yeah I am driving 70+.  But the EPA test does not go to 70, and when I drive for 2 hours on the interstate, I am at cruise control and the car switches to the overdrive gear at 50 MPH and is running at 2200 RPM at 70.  That is why we don't get better gas mileage on the highway (or near what is advertised there).  The EPA test for City driving has you going to 55 mph and only has a few stops.  That is not my city.  I mean I drive no more that 35 MPH and stop every 0.2 miles.
<br> <br>
2) The car companies (all, including foreign) play the MPG game.  They tune their cars to get better MPG for the test and screw what a real world driver would drive under normal conditions.  It has not been until recently that the two have been relatively close.
<br> <br>
3) The US people want one thing, more power.  They want their car to have 250 horsepower with 300 ft/lbs of torque.  Then they want 50 MPG on the highways.  There is only so much that can be done to marry the two up.  Remember those old Toyota Corollas from 1990.  They were a POS to drive but they got great gas mileage.  They had a 80 HP motor, accelerated like a snail going uphill and were as loud as a lawn mower but they got almost 60 MPG.  That is what the Europeans drive.
<br> <br>
4) The US for some reason thinks Diesel is a bad word.  They had crappy Diesel cars in the late 70's which did not work properly and were a billow of smoke which for the environmentally contentious people hated<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. because it hurt the ozone.  So now they have better Diesels.  I would love to drive a diesel.  Put it in my car right now.  But, no manufacturer will do it in the US because of the EPA, and because of many state laws about diesel purification rules.  Most other countries don't have those issues.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are four main reasons why you do n't get the fuel economy that is posted for the EPA listing .
1 ) The EPA test is supposed to create a test for driving a car that is the same across all US sold vehicles .
It is not supposed to be a test of real world driving ( they revised it a year or two ago , so it would be closer , but it is still no where perfect ) .
I mean when you drive on the highway who drives 45 miles an hour ?
With brief stints to 60 MPH .
I mean in Indiana we have 70 MPH highways .
Heck yeah I am driving 70 + .
But the EPA test does not go to 70 , and when I drive for 2 hours on the interstate , I am at cruise control and the car switches to the overdrive gear at 50 MPH and is running at 2200 RPM at 70 .
That is why we do n't get better gas mileage on the highway ( or near what is advertised there ) .
The EPA test for City driving has you going to 55 mph and only has a few stops .
That is not my city .
I mean I drive no more that 35 MPH and stop every 0.2 miles .
2 ) The car companies ( all , including foreign ) play the MPG game .
They tune their cars to get better MPG for the test and screw what a real world driver would drive under normal conditions .
It has not been until recently that the two have been relatively close .
3 ) The US people want one thing , more power .
They want their car to have 250 horsepower with 300 ft/lbs of torque .
Then they want 50 MPG on the highways .
There is only so much that can be done to marry the two up .
Remember those old Toyota Corollas from 1990 .
They were a POS to drive but they got great gas mileage .
They had a 80 HP motor , accelerated like a snail going uphill and were as loud as a lawn mower but they got almost 60 MPG .
That is what the Europeans drive .
4 ) The US for some reason thinks Diesel is a bad word .
They had crappy Diesel cars in the late 70 's which did not work properly and were a billow of smoke which for the environmentally contentious people hated .. because it hurt the ozone .
So now they have better Diesels .
I would love to drive a diesel .
Put it in my car right now .
But , no manufacturer will do it in the US because of the EPA , and because of many state laws about diesel purification rules .
Most other countries do n't have those issues .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are four main reasons why you don't get the fuel economy that is posted for the EPA listing.
1) The EPA test is supposed to create a test for driving a car that is the same across all US sold vehicles.
It is not supposed to be a test of real world driving (they revised it a year or two ago, so it would be closer, but it is still no where perfect).
I mean when you drive on the highway who drives 45 miles an hour?
With brief stints to 60 MPH.
I mean in Indiana we have 70 MPH highways.
Heck yeah I am driving 70+.
But the EPA test does not go to 70, and when I drive for 2 hours on the interstate, I am at cruise control and the car switches to the overdrive gear at 50 MPH and is running at 2200 RPM at 70.
That is why we don't get better gas mileage on the highway (or near what is advertised there).
The EPA test for City driving has you going to 55 mph and only has a few stops.
That is not my city.
I mean I drive no more that 35 MPH and stop every 0.2 miles.
2) The car companies (all, including foreign) play the MPG game.
They tune their cars to get better MPG for the test and screw what a real world driver would drive under normal conditions.
It has not been until recently that the two have been relatively close.
3) The US people want one thing, more power.
They want their car to have 250 horsepower with 300 ft/lbs of torque.
Then they want 50 MPG on the highways.
There is only so much that can be done to marry the two up.
Remember those old Toyota Corollas from 1990.
They were a POS to drive but they got great gas mileage.
They had a 80 HP motor, accelerated like a snail going uphill and were as loud as a lawn mower but they got almost 60 MPG.
That is what the Europeans drive.
4) The US for some reason thinks Diesel is a bad word.
They had crappy Diesel cars in the late 70's which did not work properly and were a billow of smoke which for the environmentally contentious people hated .. because it hurt the ozone.
So now they have better Diesels.
I would love to drive a diesel.
Put it in my car right now.
But, no manufacturer will do it in the US because of the EPA, and because of many state laws about diesel purification rules.
Most other countries don't have those issues.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521802</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31524746</id>
	<title>Yay from the Northeast</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268936340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've had to replace a windshield every year that I've lived in Vermont.  This is just what I need to triple or quadruple the cost of replacing one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've had to replace a windshield every year that I 've lived in Vermont .
This is just what I need to triple or quadruple the cost of replacing one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've had to replace a windshield every year that I've lived in Vermont.
This is just what I need to triple or quadruple the cost of replacing one.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521942</id>
	<title>Learn to drive...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268923020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here's an idea: learn how to drive. This includes adjusting your speed to the environment around you. Rain? Slow down. Fog? Slow the f**k down.</p><p>My car has fog lights for "historical" reasons--before I even knew her, my father-in-law took my wife to a dealership, and she picked every option since she wasn't paying. Now I have that car, and having driven in fog, I'll say it: the fog lights are nothing but a $300 dealer upsell.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's an idea : learn how to drive .
This includes adjusting your speed to the environment around you .
Rain ? Slow down .
Fog ? Slow the f * * k down.My car has fog lights for " historical " reasons--before I even knew her , my father-in-law took my wife to a dealership , and she picked every option since she was n't paying .
Now I have that car , and having driven in fog , I 'll say it : the fog lights are nothing but a $ 300 dealer upsell .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's an idea: learn how to drive.
This includes adjusting your speed to the environment around you.
Rain? Slow down.
Fog? Slow the f**k down.My car has fog lights for "historical" reasons--before I even knew her, my father-in-law took my wife to a dealership, and she picked every option since she wasn't paying.
Now I have that car, and having driven in fog, I'll say it: the fog lights are nothing but a $300 dealer upsell.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31525894</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1268941080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You probably won't be able to get this on any car that doesn't have adaptive cruise control with a distance sensor. It will know how fast the car ahead of you is going, including if it's stopped.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You probably wo n't be able to get this on any car that does n't have adaptive cruise control with a distance sensor .
It will know how fast the car ahead of you is going , including if it 's stopped .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You probably won't be able to get this on any car that doesn't have adaptive cruise control with a distance sensor.
It will know how fast the car ahead of you is going, including if it's stopped.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521994</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521878</id>
	<title>Re:Great, more distractions for drivers...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268922660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's she wearing?</p><p>Oh, HIS license.....as you were.</p><p>Damn</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's she wearing ? Oh , HIS license.....as you were.Damn</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's she wearing?Oh, HIS license.....as you were.Damn</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521644</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521666</id>
	<title>Still waiting...</title>
	<author>stakovahflow</author>
	<datestamp>1268921580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm still waiting for the "Back to the Future" cars to start surfacing. We were promised those cars over 20 years ago. Where are they?</p><p>Oh, and "hover boards"... Where are they? I don't see 'em...</p><p>When, GM? When will you give me what I want?!?!</p><p>No government funds for you!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm still waiting for the " Back to the Future " cars to start surfacing .
We were promised those cars over 20 years ago .
Where are they ? Oh , and " hover boards " ... Where are they ?
I do n't see 'em...When , GM ?
When will you give me what I want ? ! ?
! No government funds for you !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm still waiting for the "Back to the Future" cars to start surfacing.
We were promised those cars over 20 years ago.
Where are they?Oh, and "hover boards"... Where are they?
I don't see 'em...When, GM?
When will you give me what I want?!?
!No government funds for you!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521394</id>
	<title>Tron-mode?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268919900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As in the movie, not the BASIC command.  Seriously, that's what the mockup (I'm assuming it's a mockup) looks like...Tron-mode.</p><p>This has some real potential, I hope it isn't another bit of vaporware....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As in the movie , not the BASIC command .
Seriously , that 's what the mockup ( I 'm assuming it 's a mockup ) looks like...Tron-mode.This has some real potential , I hope it is n't another bit of vaporware... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As in the movie, not the BASIC command.
Seriously, that's what the mockup (I'm assuming it's a mockup) looks like...Tron-mode.This has some real potential, I hope it isn't another bit of vaporware....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521720</id>
	<title>One thing worries me...</title>
	<author>SharpFang</author>
	<datestamp>1268921880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It can improve safety of driving in poor weather conditions immensely comparing to current situation. But I'm afraid it will have a reverse effect in reality: increasing driver's confidence ("the HUD displays the road far ahead, so there is no danger") will result in increasing the speed in these conditions, and result in more serious accidents because the system can't foresee everything - obstacles on the road, slippery surface, other cars that don't have it and drive blindly - the kind of accidents slow and cautious driving would help against, or at least minimize impact.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It can improve safety of driving in poor weather conditions immensely comparing to current situation .
But I 'm afraid it will have a reverse effect in reality : increasing driver 's confidence ( " the HUD displays the road far ahead , so there is no danger " ) will result in increasing the speed in these conditions , and result in more serious accidents because the system ca n't foresee everything - obstacles on the road , slippery surface , other cars that do n't have it and drive blindly - the kind of accidents slow and cautious driving would help against , or at least minimize impact .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It can improve safety of driving in poor weather conditions immensely comparing to current situation.
But I'm afraid it will have a reverse effect in reality: increasing driver's confidence ("the HUD displays the road far ahead, so there is no danger") will result in increasing the speed in these conditions, and result in more serious accidents because the system can't foresee everything - obstacles on the road, slippery surface, other cars that don't have it and drive blindly - the kind of accidents slow and cautious driving would help against, or at least minimize impact.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523520</id>
	<title>Wired.com - Artifacts from the Future</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268930520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think Wired magazine covered something like this: http://www.wired.com/culture/culturereviews/magazine/16-01/found</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think Wired magazine covered something like this : http : //www.wired.com/culture/culturereviews/magazine/16-01/found</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think Wired magazine covered something like this: http://www.wired.com/culture/culturereviews/magazine/16-01/found</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522092</id>
	<title>Re:Great, more distractions for drivers...</title>
	<author>jimbolauski</author>
	<datestamp>1268923680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It will become white noise just like banner adds on web-pages before add block, road signs are off to the side and are not a primary focus point if anything it will condition people to only focus on whats directly ahead of them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It will become white noise just like banner adds on web-pages before add block , road signs are off to the side and are not a primary focus point if anything it will condition people to only focus on whats directly ahead of them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It will become white noise just like banner adds on web-pages before add block, road signs are off to the side and are not a primary focus point if anything it will condition people to only focus on whats directly ahead of them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521644</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522652</id>
	<title>Only solution</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268926200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Put a giant spike in the middle of the steering wheel, for safety reasons.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Put a giant spike in the middle of the steering wheel , for safety reasons .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Put a giant spike in the middle of the steering wheel, for safety reasons.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521720</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31524614</id>
	<title>Warning</title>
	<author>shiftless</author>
	<datestamp>1268935680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do not look into windshield with remaining eye</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do not look into windshield with remaining eye</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do not look into windshield with remaining eye</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523514</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268930460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You dont have to think of it this way.  Yes, common sense tells you not to drive and that is always the better solution.  How about thinking of this for its long term implications... say about automating driving when this type of technology proves itself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You dont have to think of it this way .
Yes , common sense tells you not to drive and that is always the better solution .
How about thinking of this for its long term implications... say about automating driving when this type of technology proves itself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You dont have to think of it this way.
Yes, common sense tells you not to drive and that is always the better solution.
How about thinking of this for its long term implications... say about automating driving when this type of technology proves itself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521994</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521860</id>
	<title>The Need for Speed</title>
	<author>ItzRobZ</author>
	<datestamp>1268922540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wonder if we will be able to play Need for Speed on the screen.

Just imagine getting kicked out of the bedroom by your wife. Instead of sleeping on the couch and watching TV till you fall asleep, why not go to your car and play some Need for Speed!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder if we will be able to play Need for Speed on the screen .
Just imagine getting kicked out of the bedroom by your wife .
Instead of sleeping on the couch and watching TV till you fall asleep , why not go to your car and play some Need for Speed !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder if we will be able to play Need for Speed on the screen.
Just imagine getting kicked out of the bedroom by your wife.
Instead of sleeping on the couch and watching TV till you fall asleep, why not go to your car and play some Need for Speed!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522618</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>ffreeloader</author>
	<datestamp>1268926140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is sort of an off topic reply, but your comment on types of fog made me think of it.  Back in the early '70's I once drove in fog where the entire highway and surrounding ground was invisible to me, but I could see for miles.</p><p>It was night time and the fog lay at ground level in a blanket about 18" deep.  There wasn't a cloud in the sky and with the full moon shining on the fog it looked like a big silver blanket covering the ground for as far as you could see.  The headlights on my car were above the fog so it just reflected the light rather than the light penetrating the fog.  It was beautiful, but I just couldn't see the road at all.</p><p>The fog was so thick that when I stopped the car and got out when I first hit the fog I couldn't see my own feet. The only way to know where the highway lay was to look at the top half of the fence posts sticking up on either side of the road and then drive as close to the middle of them as I could.  Fortunately, I was very familiar with that highway and I met no other cars in the 15 miles the ground fog existed so I could stay in the middle and not have to guess where the edges of the road were.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is sort of an off topic reply , but your comment on types of fog made me think of it .
Back in the early '70 's I once drove in fog where the entire highway and surrounding ground was invisible to me , but I could see for miles.It was night time and the fog lay at ground level in a blanket about 18 " deep .
There was n't a cloud in the sky and with the full moon shining on the fog it looked like a big silver blanket covering the ground for as far as you could see .
The headlights on my car were above the fog so it just reflected the light rather than the light penetrating the fog .
It was beautiful , but I just could n't see the road at all.The fog was so thick that when I stopped the car and got out when I first hit the fog I could n't see my own feet .
The only way to know where the highway lay was to look at the top half of the fence posts sticking up on either side of the road and then drive as close to the middle of them as I could .
Fortunately , I was very familiar with that highway and I met no other cars in the 15 miles the ground fog existed so I could stay in the middle and not have to guess where the edges of the road were .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is sort of an off topic reply, but your comment on types of fog made me think of it.
Back in the early '70's I once drove in fog where the entire highway and surrounding ground was invisible to me, but I could see for miles.It was night time and the fog lay at ground level in a blanket about 18" deep.
There wasn't a cloud in the sky and with the full moon shining on the fog it looked like a big silver blanket covering the ground for as far as you could see.
The headlights on my car were above the fog so it just reflected the light rather than the light penetrating the fog.
It was beautiful, but I just couldn't see the road at all.The fog was so thick that when I stopped the car and got out when I first hit the fog I couldn't see my own feet.
The only way to know where the highway lay was to look at the top half of the fence posts sticking up on either side of the road and then drive as close to the middle of them as I could.
Fortunately, I was very familiar with that highway and I met no other cars in the 15 miles the ground fog existed so I could stay in the middle and not have to guess where the edges of the road were.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31524026</id>
	<title>Usefull things for a Hud</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268932920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think a full screen HUD on a car could be very useful.</p><p>In particular, a little display which tells me how much time is between me and the car in front of me. Knowing I have 1 second to react versus 4 seconds makes a lot of difference.</p><p>Having indicators to tell me there is a car in my blind spot would be nice.</p><p>having my GPS turn directions actually laid on in front of me on the road would be very nice.</p><p>It seems everybody thinks of these these as being for improving visibility in adverse conditions is a great use. However I think it will prove a lot more useful for giving people information about what is going on around them under good conditions, rather trying to improve things under bad conditions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think a full screen HUD on a car could be very useful.In particular , a little display which tells me how much time is between me and the car in front of me .
Knowing I have 1 second to react versus 4 seconds makes a lot of difference.Having indicators to tell me there is a car in my blind spot would be nice.having my GPS turn directions actually laid on in front of me on the road would be very nice.It seems everybody thinks of these these as being for improving visibility in adverse conditions is a great use .
However I think it will prove a lot more useful for giving people information about what is going on around them under good conditions , rather trying to improve things under bad conditions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think a full screen HUD on a car could be very useful.In particular, a little display which tells me how much time is between me and the car in front of me.
Knowing I have 1 second to react versus 4 seconds makes a lot of difference.Having indicators to tell me there is a car in my blind spot would be nice.having my GPS turn directions actually laid on in front of me on the road would be very nice.It seems everybody thinks of these these as being for improving visibility in adverse conditions is a great use.
However I think it will prove a lot more useful for giving people information about what is going on around them under good conditions, rather trying to improve things under bad conditions.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523504</id>
	<title>Re:Driver's perspective?</title>
	<author>anexkahn</author>
	<datestamp>1268930460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Did you ever see the Wii head tracking?  It seems like a possible solution:<br>
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd3-eiid-Uw" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd3-eiid-Uw</a> [youtube.com]
<br>
Of course the other option is just a camera that does facial recognition to see where your eyes are pointed.  Mercedes has something like that to tell if you are watching the road or falling asleep.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did you ever see the Wii head tracking ?
It seems like a possible solution : http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = Jd3-eiid-Uw [ youtube.com ] Of course the other option is just a camera that does facial recognition to see where your eyes are pointed .
Mercedes has something like that to tell if you are watching the road or falling asleep .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did you ever see the Wii head tracking?
It seems like a possible solution:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd3-eiid-Uw [youtube.com]

Of course the other option is just a camera that does facial recognition to see where your eyes are pointed.
Mercedes has something like that to tell if you are watching the road or falling asleep.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521694</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522884</id>
	<title>Re:Great, more distractions for drivers...</title>
	<author>Iphtashu Fitz</author>
	<datestamp>1268927400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>That's the idea. Being 'distracted' by things you might run into is a good thing.</i></p><p>So you're driving down a street in the middle of the night and suddenly a little blue blob appears because the car has detected a person walking across the street a half a mile in front of you.  Rather than pay attention to the road directly in front of you, you start squinting at the blue blob to try to figure out what the car is warning you about, or you otherwise simply start paying more attention to the blob to see if it moves.  And as you're distracted by whatever-it-is-that-the-car-is-warning-you-about that's at least 30 seconds away from you, you're no longer paying full attention to your immediate surroundings and you start to drift off the road.  As the wheels hit the side of the road you suddenly snap back to awareness and jerk the wheel, over-correcting and crashing into a parked car, street light, etc.</p><p>Or should this system be drawing lines around all the parked cars, the street lights, the overpasses, the sides of the road, etc. as well as that person half a mile ahead of you?  That would be even more distracting IMHO.</p><p>Oh yeah, and imagine what it'd be like if it only warned you about things that are potentially an immediate concern, like anything 10 seconds away from you.  Your windshield would be constantly flashing different colored highlights at you.  As you're driving down a street you get highlights around every car that's turning in/out of the road, every person walking along the sidewalk, parked cars, road signs, etc.  Every single time you pass one of those objects it gets briefly highlighted in a different color by the car.  The constant flashing of colors highlighted on the windshield would be extremely distracting and eventually lead to being totally useless as drivers learn to ignore it all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's the idea .
Being 'distracted ' by things you might run into is a good thing.So you 're driving down a street in the middle of the night and suddenly a little blue blob appears because the car has detected a person walking across the street a half a mile in front of you .
Rather than pay attention to the road directly in front of you , you start squinting at the blue blob to try to figure out what the car is warning you about , or you otherwise simply start paying more attention to the blob to see if it moves .
And as you 're distracted by whatever-it-is-that-the-car-is-warning-you-about that 's at least 30 seconds away from you , you 're no longer paying full attention to your immediate surroundings and you start to drift off the road .
As the wheels hit the side of the road you suddenly snap back to awareness and jerk the wheel , over-correcting and crashing into a parked car , street light , etc.Or should this system be drawing lines around all the parked cars , the street lights , the overpasses , the sides of the road , etc .
as well as that person half a mile ahead of you ?
That would be even more distracting IMHO.Oh yeah , and imagine what it 'd be like if it only warned you about things that are potentially an immediate concern , like anything 10 seconds away from you .
Your windshield would be constantly flashing different colored highlights at you .
As you 're driving down a street you get highlights around every car that 's turning in/out of the road , every person walking along the sidewalk , parked cars , road signs , etc .
Every single time you pass one of those objects it gets briefly highlighted in a different color by the car .
The constant flashing of colors highlighted on the windshield would be extremely distracting and eventually lead to being totally useless as drivers learn to ignore it all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's the idea.
Being 'distracted' by things you might run into is a good thing.So you're driving down a street in the middle of the night and suddenly a little blue blob appears because the car has detected a person walking across the street a half a mile in front of you.
Rather than pay attention to the road directly in front of you, you start squinting at the blue blob to try to figure out what the car is warning you about, or you otherwise simply start paying more attention to the blob to see if it moves.
And as you're distracted by whatever-it-is-that-the-car-is-warning-you-about that's at least 30 seconds away from you, you're no longer paying full attention to your immediate surroundings and you start to drift off the road.
As the wheels hit the side of the road you suddenly snap back to awareness and jerk the wheel, over-correcting and crashing into a parked car, street light, etc.Or should this system be drawing lines around all the parked cars, the street lights, the overpasses, the sides of the road, etc.
as well as that person half a mile ahead of you?
That would be even more distracting IMHO.Oh yeah, and imagine what it'd be like if it only warned you about things that are potentially an immediate concern, like anything 10 seconds away from you.
Your windshield would be constantly flashing different colored highlights at you.
As you're driving down a street you get highlights around every car that's turning in/out of the road, every person walking along the sidewalk, parked cars, road signs, etc.
Every single time you pass one of those objects it gets briefly highlighted in a different color by the car.
The constant flashing of colors highlighted on the windshield would be extremely distracting and eventually lead to being totally useless as drivers learn to ignore it all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521798</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521962</id>
	<title>"Interactive Windshield"</title>
	<author>voodoo cheesecake</author>
	<datestamp>1268923140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When I started designing machinery, I was told to never underestimate the stupidity of the end user. So, I had to learn to idiot-proof my designs. Now so long as enough of them interact with their windshields I could actually start designing for more intelligent people before I retire. Hell, I might even open up a car lot!</htmltext>
<tokenext>When I started designing machinery , I was told to never underestimate the stupidity of the end user .
So , I had to learn to idiot-proof my designs .
Now so long as enough of them interact with their windshields I could actually start designing for more intelligent people before I retire .
Hell , I might even open up a car lot !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I started designing machinery, I was told to never underestimate the stupidity of the end user.
So, I had to learn to idiot-proof my designs.
Now so long as enough of them interact with their windshields I could actually start designing for more intelligent people before I retire.
Hell, I might even open up a car lot!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521456</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>SharpFang</author>
	<datestamp>1268920260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Depends what fog.</p><p>I faced fog that really obscured anything further than on your lane. No road signs, no turns, no edges of the road. You could still drive safely at a snail's speed, but finding the way was a real challenge. An "augmented reality" GPS display that shows where the actual road goes would be immensely helpful.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Depends what fog.I faced fog that really obscured anything further than on your lane .
No road signs , no turns , no edges of the road .
You could still drive safely at a snail 's speed , but finding the way was a real challenge .
An " augmented reality " GPS display that shows where the actual road goes would be immensely helpful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Depends what fog.I faced fog that really obscured anything further than on your lane.
No road signs, no turns, no edges of the road.
You could still drive safely at a snail's speed, but finding the way was a real challenge.
An "augmented reality" GPS display that shows where the actual road goes would be immensely helpful.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522510</id>
	<title>Re:Perfect</title>
	<author>SonnyDog09</author>
	<datestamp>1268925720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You mean it can go lower than zero? Who new.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You mean it can go lower than zero ?
Who new .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You mean it can go lower than zero?
Who new.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521814</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523718</id>
	<title>Great, Now I Can Surf The Internet</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268931540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>while driving 100 m.p.h.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>while driving 100 m.p.h .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>while driving 100 m.p.h.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31529188</id>
	<title>This is how this will play out</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268907900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>1. GM will make this a reality, offer it in some of its less-popular, sportier models<br>
2. The technology will be awesome, it will look and work great. Kinda like HUD in older supercharged Pontiacs and some Vettes.<br>
3. GM will kill the technology, or restrict it to very few models.  Possibly, it will take some patents out so that the technology cannot be used by others.<br>
<br>
This is what GM does.  It's a nonsensical company that cannot find its ass with a map and 3 GPS units.</htmltext>
<tokenext>1 .
GM will make this a reality , offer it in some of its less-popular , sportier models 2 .
The technology will be awesome , it will look and work great .
Kinda like HUD in older supercharged Pontiacs and some Vettes .
3. GM will kill the technology , or restrict it to very few models .
Possibly , it will take some patents out so that the technology can not be used by others .
This is what GM does .
It 's a nonsensical company that can not find its ass with a map and 3 GPS units .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1.
GM will make this a reality, offer it in some of its less-popular, sportier models
2.
The technology will be awesome, it will look and work great.
Kinda like HUD in older supercharged Pontiacs and some Vettes.
3. GM will kill the technology, or restrict it to very few models.
Possibly, it will take some patents out so that the technology cannot be used by others.
This is what GM does.
It's a nonsensical company that cannot find its ass with a map and 3 GPS units.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521882</id>
	<title>Re:Great, more distractions for drivers...</title>
	<author>ArtuRock</author>
	<datestamp>1268922660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm no expert, but when I think about the consequences of a pilot getting momentarily distracted, and he, say, doesn't make a turn when he otherwise would have, most of the time the result will be his aircraft will run into.... air.  This is in contrast to a driver where, most of the time, the same situation results in the vehicle running into something.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm no expert , but when I think about the consequences of a pilot getting momentarily distracted , and he , say , does n't make a turn when he otherwise would have , most of the time the result will be his aircraft will run into.... air. This is in contrast to a driver where , most of the time , the same situation results in the vehicle running into something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm no expert, but when I think about the consequences of a pilot getting momentarily distracted, and he, say, doesn't make a turn when he otherwise would have, most of the time the result will be his aircraft will run into.... air.  This is in contrast to a driver where, most of the time, the same situation results in the vehicle running into something.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521644</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522958</id>
	<title>GM's cars of tomorrow...</title>
	<author>Namlak</author>
	<datestamp>1268927640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The new GM, same as the old GM.<br>
<br>
So busy coming up with the car of tomorrow, they never have a car to sell today.<br>
<br>
Maybe GM needs to stop dreaming up laser-enhanced windshields and build... say<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... a <i> <b>Camry</b> </i>.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The new GM , same as the old GM .
So busy coming up with the car of tomorrow , they never have a car to sell today .
Maybe GM needs to stop dreaming up laser-enhanced windshields and build... say ... a Camry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The new GM, same as the old GM.
So busy coming up with the car of tomorrow, they never have a car to sell today.
Maybe GM needs to stop dreaming up laser-enhanced windshields and build... say ... a  Camry .</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523648</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>Locke2005</author>
	<datestamp>1268931180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Especially if you are on a motorcycle. I've had the experience of driving the 405 freeway in LA at night in heavy fog on a motorcycle. It is not very comforting knowing the cars behind you definitely cannot see you!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Especially if you are on a motorcycle .
I 've had the experience of driving the 405 freeway in LA at night in heavy fog on a motorcycle .
It is not very comforting knowing the cars behind you definitely can not see you !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Especially if you are on a motorcycle.
I've had the experience of driving the 405 freeway in LA at night in heavy fog on a motorcycle.
It is not very comforting knowing the cars behind you definitely cannot see you!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522280</id>
	<title>Will the gas lock on when it's crashes?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268924520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Will the gas lock on when it's crashes?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Will the gas lock on when it 's crashes ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Will the gas lock on when it's crashes?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521994</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>jimbolauski</author>
	<datestamp>1268923260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Most people with common sense know if you can't see you shouldn't drive, I know that some cases are unavoidable long bridges in Florida where you're not supposed to stop are the most obvious case.  The problem with this system is that it will give morons a sense of security, similar to dumb-asses in SUVs going way too fast in the snow, who think they are invincible because they have 4 wheel drive until they try to stop their 1 ton SUV and slam into something, every winter I see more SUV's off the road then anything else.  This has the potential to be a great innovation hopefully GM will try to moron proof it by disabling the feature when visibility is low and the car is traveling too fast.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Most people with common sense know if you ca n't see you should n't drive , I know that some cases are unavoidable long bridges in Florida where you 're not supposed to stop are the most obvious case .
The problem with this system is that it will give morons a sense of security , similar to dumb-asses in SUVs going way too fast in the snow , who think they are invincible because they have 4 wheel drive until they try to stop their 1 ton SUV and slam into something , every winter I see more SUV 's off the road then anything else .
This has the potential to be a great innovation hopefully GM will try to moron proof it by disabling the feature when visibility is low and the car is traveling too fast .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most people with common sense know if you can't see you shouldn't drive, I know that some cases are unavoidable long bridges in Florida where you're not supposed to stop are the most obvious case.
The problem with this system is that it will give morons a sense of security, similar to dumb-asses in SUVs going way too fast in the snow, who think they are invincible because they have 4 wheel drive until they try to stop their 1 ton SUV and slam into something, every winter I see more SUV's off the road then anything else.
This has the potential to be a great innovation hopefully GM will try to moron proof it by disabling the feature when visibility is low and the car is traveling too fast.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521470</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521912</id>
	<title>BMW had these for years</title>
	<author>Timo\_UK</author>
	<datestamp>1268922900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>not with lasers, but it's great for navigation commands and speed display.</htmltext>
<tokenext>not with lasers , but it 's great for navigation commands and speed display .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>not with lasers, but it's great for navigation commands and speed display.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523624</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268931060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Infra red, low light or any other type of optical enhancement won't work under extremely heavy fog or rain any better than regular vision.  You would need a radar to do that.  And I don't want them installing radar on everyone's car.  Although it would take care of the overcrouding in the citys.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Infra red , low light or any other type of optical enhancement wo n't work under extremely heavy fog or rain any better than regular vision .
You would need a radar to do that .
And I do n't want them installing radar on everyone 's car .
Although it would take care of the overcrouding in the citys .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Infra red, low light or any other type of optical enhancement won't work under extremely heavy fog or rain any better than regular vision.
You would need a radar to do that.
And I don't want them installing radar on everyone's car.
Although it would take care of the overcrouding in the citys.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522670</id>
	<title>Re:Tron-mode?</title>
	<author>Kryptonian Jor-El</author>
	<datestamp>1268926320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How is this better than, say, a few LCD screens?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How is this better than , say , a few LCD screens ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is this better than, say, a few LCD screens?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521394</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522534</id>
	<title>I've used a GM HUD</title>
	<author>coolmoose25</author>
	<datestamp>1268925840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I bought a GM car in 1998 partly because it had a heads up display.  I have to say that it was awesome.  For those that are talking about the distraction factor, you shouldn't opine unless you've used one.  My display was on a Grand Prix GTP and there isn't a day that goes by that I don't miss that car.<br> <br>
The HUD on that car was done by reflecting an LCD display into the windshield.  It displayed way more than just your speed.  It gave you the outside temperature (excellent for the season in New England where the temp would be around freezing and it was raining, snowing, or drizzling out).  It also showed you what radio station you were on, whether or not your headlights were on, and your blinkers among other things.<br> <br>
But the coolest part of it was when you drove a lonely, 2 lane road at night through the hills or the mountains.  In such cases, I would turn my dashboard lighting off completely.  I still knew my speed and other info from the HUD, and thus never had to take my eyes away from the road.<br> <br>
But more importantly, when the dashboard lights were off, and it was dark, the road and it's surroundings slowly began to illuminate for me, the same way that a dark room slowly gets brighter when you come in from bright sunlight.  After a few minutes, the otherwise completely dark SIDES of the road would begin to glow and you could see the trees and fields far better than with your dash lights on.  This saved my life one night...<br> <br>
I was driving on a back road in NH and a deer came dashing out of the woods, and crossed the road in front of me.  I was able to see the movement at the side of the road because my eyes had adjusted to the light.  I reacted by slowing down early, and this allowed the deer to cross the road before I got to it.  Had I seen it just a little later, I probably would have hit it.  Either way, at 60mph on a dark road at night, a HUD is your best friend.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I bought a GM car in 1998 partly because it had a heads up display .
I have to say that it was awesome .
For those that are talking about the distraction factor , you should n't opine unless you 've used one .
My display was on a Grand Prix GTP and there is n't a day that goes by that I do n't miss that car .
The HUD on that car was done by reflecting an LCD display into the windshield .
It displayed way more than just your speed .
It gave you the outside temperature ( excellent for the season in New England where the temp would be around freezing and it was raining , snowing , or drizzling out ) .
It also showed you what radio station you were on , whether or not your headlights were on , and your blinkers among other things .
But the coolest part of it was when you drove a lonely , 2 lane road at night through the hills or the mountains .
In such cases , I would turn my dashboard lighting off completely .
I still knew my speed and other info from the HUD , and thus never had to take my eyes away from the road .
But more importantly , when the dashboard lights were off , and it was dark , the road and it 's surroundings slowly began to illuminate for me , the same way that a dark room slowly gets brighter when you come in from bright sunlight .
After a few minutes , the otherwise completely dark SIDES of the road would begin to glow and you could see the trees and fields far better than with your dash lights on .
This saved my life one night.. . I was driving on a back road in NH and a deer came dashing out of the woods , and crossed the road in front of me .
I was able to see the movement at the side of the road because my eyes had adjusted to the light .
I reacted by slowing down early , and this allowed the deer to cross the road before I got to it .
Had I seen it just a little later , I probably would have hit it .
Either way , at 60mph on a dark road at night , a HUD is your best friend .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I bought a GM car in 1998 partly because it had a heads up display.
I have to say that it was awesome.
For those that are talking about the distraction factor, you shouldn't opine unless you've used one.
My display was on a Grand Prix GTP and there isn't a day that goes by that I don't miss that car.
The HUD on that car was done by reflecting an LCD display into the windshield.
It displayed way more than just your speed.
It gave you the outside temperature (excellent for the season in New England where the temp would be around freezing and it was raining, snowing, or drizzling out).
It also showed you what radio station you were on, whether or not your headlights were on, and your blinkers among other things.
But the coolest part of it was when you drove a lonely, 2 lane road at night through the hills or the mountains.
In such cases, I would turn my dashboard lighting off completely.
I still knew my speed and other info from the HUD, and thus never had to take my eyes away from the road.
But more importantly, when the dashboard lights were off, and it was dark, the road and it's surroundings slowly began to illuminate for me, the same way that a dark room slowly gets brighter when you come in from bright sunlight.
After a few minutes, the otherwise completely dark SIDES of the road would begin to glow and you could see the trees and fields far better than with your dash lights on.
This saved my life one night... 
I was driving on a back road in NH and a deer came dashing out of the woods, and crossed the road in front of me.
I was able to see the movement at the side of the road because my eyes had adjusted to the light.
I reacted by slowing down early, and this allowed the deer to cross the road before I got to it.
Had I seen it just a little later, I probably would have hit it.
Either way, at 60mph on a dark road at night, a HUD is your best friend.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521824</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>Dunbal</author>
	<datestamp>1268922420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>If Toyota, once the paragon of automotive quality, can bork up the drive-by-wire system,</i></p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; This is an allegation and has not been proven. In fact, the inability for any independent third party to reproduce this error after all this time makes it highly unlikely that a manufacturing/design error in fact exists. What is far more likely is that there could have been some isolated problems, and everyone else is jumping on the "ME TOO OMG FREE MONIES" bandwagon, hoping to get rich from an eventual lawsuit based on their fraudulent claims. Once again the American "jackpot justice" system is striking a blow for idiocy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If Toyota , once the paragon of automotive quality , can bork up the drive-by-wire system ,       This is an allegation and has not been proven .
In fact , the inability for any independent third party to reproduce this error after all this time makes it highly unlikely that a manufacturing/design error in fact exists .
What is far more likely is that there could have been some isolated problems , and everyone else is jumping on the " ME TOO OMG FREE MONIES " bandwagon , hoping to get rich from an eventual lawsuit based on their fraudulent claims .
Once again the American " jackpot justice " system is striking a blow for idiocy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Toyota, once the paragon of automotive quality, can bork up the drive-by-wire system,
      This is an allegation and has not been proven.
In fact, the inability for any independent third party to reproduce this error after all this time makes it highly unlikely that a manufacturing/design error in fact exists.
What is far more likely is that there could have been some isolated problems, and everyone else is jumping on the "ME TOO OMG FREE MONIES" bandwagon, hoping to get rich from an eventual lawsuit based on their fraudulent claims.
Once again the American "jackpot justice" system is striking a blow for idiocy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522224</id>
	<title>Re:Driver's perspective?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268924280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Did you not watch the video? You know, the one where they SHOW them TRACKING the drivers eyes!</p><p>GAR! SLAAAAAAAAAAAAAASHDOOOOT!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did you not watch the video ?
You know , the one where they SHOW them TRACKING the drivers eyes ! GAR !
SLAAAAAAAAAAAAAASHDOOOOT !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did you not watch the video?
You know, the one where they SHOW them TRACKING the drivers eyes!GAR!
SLAAAAAAAAAAAAAASHDOOOOT!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521694</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521898</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>Dunbal</author>
	<datestamp>1268922780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Why exactly shouldn't GM look towards the future, that's what successful companies do you know.</i></p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Yes my father still has some Moon tickets from <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan\_American\_World\_Airways" title="wikipedia.org">Pan Am</a> [wikipedia.org]. That was another company "looking towards the future". Unfortunately after Pan Am went bankrupt, no one else seems to want to honor those tickets...</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Just a little hint, "looking towards the future" does not MAKE a company successful. It's a luxury that successful companies can allow themselves in order to stay ahead of the competition. In GM's case, however, returning to PROFITABILITY should be the priority. Gambling on exotic technologies that would only marginally increase sales is not the surest path to profitability. But hey what do I care - I'm not American, it's not like I am the one footing the bill for all of this crap.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why exactly should n't GM look towards the future , that 's what successful companies do you know .
      Yes my father still has some Moon tickets from Pan Am [ wikipedia.org ] .
That was another company " looking towards the future " .
Unfortunately after Pan Am went bankrupt , no one else seems to want to honor those tickets.. .       Just a little hint , " looking towards the future " does not MAKE a company successful .
It 's a luxury that successful companies can allow themselves in order to stay ahead of the competition .
In GM 's case , however , returning to PROFITABILITY should be the priority .
Gambling on exotic technologies that would only marginally increase sales is not the surest path to profitability .
But hey what do I care - I 'm not American , it 's not like I am the one footing the bill for all of this crap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why exactly shouldn't GM look towards the future, that's what successful companies do you know.
      Yes my father still has some Moon tickets from Pan Am [wikipedia.org].
That was another company "looking towards the future".
Unfortunately after Pan Am went bankrupt, no one else seems to want to honor those tickets...
      Just a little hint, "looking towards the future" does not MAKE a company successful.
It's a luxury that successful companies can allow themselves in order to stay ahead of the competition.
In GM's case, however, returning to PROFITABILITY should be the priority.
Gambling on exotic technologies that would only marginally increase sales is not the surest path to profitability.
But hey what do I care - I'm not American, it's not like I am the one footing the bill for all of this crap.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521614</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523582</id>
	<title>"can also be used to enhance drivers experience"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268930820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At 1:18 in the video, we hear from the GM spokesman that "it can also be used to enhance the drivers experience".</p><p>I cringe whenever I hear a company use the words "enhance the [customer/driver/purchaser/...] experience"; typically, the phrase means that "we can put sponsored information right in front of the [customer/driver/purchaser/...]s eyeballs, where he<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/cant/ ignore it."</p><p>In other words, unavoidable, unstoppable, in-car advertisements to "enhance" your drive.</p><p>Imagine seeing on your windshield a building circled in green, and the words "Turn here.....  for a great Macdonalds Shake" every time you pass a certain type of fast-food restaurant, or having your windshield-display in-car navigation system direct you onto the sponsored toll-road. Or "Burma Shave" type ads superimposed onto the highway verge.</p><p>How about "The next ten miles are brought to you by.....   Microsoft Windows Galaxy".</p><p>Forgive me, but I don't want my automobile to spy on me, or cede control to someone outside my car, and I *CERTAINLY* don't want it to advertise to me, no matter *how* helpful it might be otherwise.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At 1 : 18 in the video , we hear from the GM spokesman that " it can also be used to enhance the drivers experience " .I cringe whenever I hear a company use the words " enhance the [ customer/driver/purchaser/... ] experience " ; typically , the phrase means that " we can put sponsored information right in front of the [ customer/driver/purchaser/... ] s eyeballs , where he /cant/ ignore it .
" In other words , unavoidable , unstoppable , in-car advertisements to " enhance " your drive.Imagine seeing on your windshield a building circled in green , and the words " Turn here..... for a great Macdonalds Shake " every time you pass a certain type of fast-food restaurant , or having your windshield-display in-car navigation system direct you onto the sponsored toll-road .
Or " Burma Shave " type ads superimposed onto the highway verge.How about " The next ten miles are brought to you by..... Microsoft Windows Galaxy " .Forgive me , but I do n't want my automobile to spy on me , or cede control to someone outside my car , and I * CERTAINLY * do n't want it to advertise to me , no matter * how * helpful it might be otherwise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At 1:18 in the video, we hear from the GM spokesman that "it can also be used to enhance the drivers experience".I cringe whenever I hear a company use the words "enhance the [customer/driver/purchaser/...] experience"; typically, the phrase means that "we can put sponsored information right in front of the [customer/driver/purchaser/...]s eyeballs, where he /cant/ ignore it.
"In other words, unavoidable, unstoppable, in-car advertisements to "enhance" your drive.Imagine seeing on your windshield a building circled in green, and the words "Turn here.....  for a great Macdonalds Shake" every time you pass a certain type of fast-food restaurant, or having your windshield-display in-car navigation system direct you onto the sponsored toll-road.
Or "Burma Shave" type ads superimposed onto the highway verge.How about "The next ten miles are brought to you by.....   Microsoft Windows Galaxy".Forgive me, but I don't want my automobile to spy on me, or cede control to someone outside my car, and I *CERTAINLY* don't want it to advertise to me, no matter *how* helpful it might be otherwise.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521838</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268922480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... Or snow so thick that it obscures the road and the ditch next to it...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... Or snow so thick that it obscures the road and the ditch next to it.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... Or snow so thick that it obscures the road and the ditch next to it...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521470</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522496</id>
	<title>Re:Great, more distractions for drivers...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268925660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But how else am I supposed to know whether the car behind me has their missiles locked on?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But how else am I supposed to know whether the car behind me has their missiles locked on ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But how else am I supposed to know whether the car behind me has their missiles locked on?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521644</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521818</id>
	<title>Re:Driver's perspective?</title>
	<author>FlyingBishop</author>
	<datestamp>1268922420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually that's a pretty easy problem to solve, given that there's never more than one driver. A headband would be an obvious solution, but there are at least 5 that would work fine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually that 's a pretty easy problem to solve , given that there 's never more than one driver .
A headband would be an obvious solution , but there are at least 5 that would work fine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually that's a pretty easy problem to solve, given that there's never more than one driver.
A headband would be an obvious solution, but there are at least 5 that would work fine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521694</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521978</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>icebrain</author>
	<datestamp>1268923200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's a reason more and more new production aircraft are coming out with HUD and EVS systems.  Better visibility and having data in the field of view beats not having it every day of the week.  The same can be applied to cars; having an infrared camera projecting an overlay (not a replacement image, but a transparent overlay) would increase visibility at night or in fog/rain.</p><p>Look up "gulfstream evs" on youtube for an idea.  The tracing and outlining stuff in TFA is something entirely different.</p><p>I want something like this:</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a reason more and more new production aircraft are coming out with HUD and EVS systems .
Better visibility and having data in the field of view beats not having it every day of the week .
The same can be applied to cars ; having an infrared camera projecting an overlay ( not a replacement image , but a transparent overlay ) would increase visibility at night or in fog/rain.Look up " gulfstream evs " on youtube for an idea .
The tracing and outlining stuff in TFA is something entirely different.I want something like this :</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a reason more and more new production aircraft are coming out with HUD and EVS systems.
Better visibility and having data in the field of view beats not having it every day of the week.
The same can be applied to cars; having an infrared camera projecting an overlay (not a replacement image, but a transparent overlay) would increase visibility at night or in fog/rain.Look up "gulfstream evs" on youtube for an idea.
The tracing and outlining stuff in TFA is something entirely different.I want something like this:</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31524244</id>
	<title>Re:One thing worries me...</title>
	<author>d1r3lnd</author>
	<datestamp>1268933940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Entirely possible. Seatbelts save vehicle occupants' lives, but kill pedestrians.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Entirely possible .
Seatbelts save vehicle occupants ' lives , but kill pedestrians .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Entirely possible.
Seatbelts save vehicle occupants' lives, but kill pedestrians.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521720</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522052</id>
	<title>Even better...</title>
	<author>Stenchwarrior</author>
	<datestamp>1268923500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...would be to build in network where these HUD-enabled cars can talk to each other so the car behind can be alerted of conditions or danger by the car ahead. Eventually, once enough of these are on the road, your entire route could be planned out before the trip even takes place based on information it receives from all the other vehicles.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...would be to build in network where these HUD-enabled cars can talk to each other so the car behind can be alerted of conditions or danger by the car ahead .
Eventually , once enough of these are on the road , your entire route could be planned out before the trip even takes place based on information it receives from all the other vehicles .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...would be to build in network where these HUD-enabled cars can talk to each other so the car behind can be alerted of conditions or danger by the car ahead.
Eventually, once enough of these are on the road, your entire route could be planned out before the trip even takes place based on information it receives from all the other vehicles.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521734</id>
	<title>But</title>
	<author>Dunbal</author>
	<datestamp>1268921940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I still won't buy a car from them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I still wo n't buy a car from them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I still won't buy a car from them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521968</id>
	<title>Forget the obligatory</title>
	<author>silentcoder</author>
	<datestamp>1268923140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>but does it run linux...</p><p>I want mine to run GTA<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... and witness the havoc that ensues...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>but does it run linux...I want mine to run GTA ... and witness the havoc that ensues.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but does it run linux...I want mine to run GTA ... and witness the havoc that ensues...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31524644</id>
	<title>Re:Tron-mode?</title>
	<author>shiftless</author>
	<datestamp>1268935800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is that your geek card? Hand that over this instant. Gregor will show you the door.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is that your geek card ?
Hand that over this instant .
Gregor will show you the door .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is that your geek card?
Hand that over this instant.
Gregor will show you the door.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522670</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31525614</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268940180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would think you meant 2 or 3 ton SUV.  And really I think it is inertia that takes the bigger vehicles off the road seemingly easier.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would think you meant 2 or 3 ton SUV .
And really I think it is inertia that takes the bigger vehicles off the road seemingly easier .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would think you meant 2 or 3 ton SUV.
And really I think it is inertia that takes the bigger vehicles off the road seemingly easier.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521994</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522760</id>
	<title>can't wait</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268926800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't wait to hack a big goatse across your a windshield. I'd use GM's indicator library to point to the wedding ring on his finger.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't wait to hack a big goatse across your a windshield .
I 'd use GM 's indicator library to point to the wedding ring on his finger .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't wait to hack a big goatse across your a windshield.
I'd use GM's indicator library to point to the wedding ring on his finger.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522046</id>
	<title>Difference to HUDs from BMW and Mercedes</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268923500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Where exactly in that "innovation" is the difference to the systems that BMW and Merc already sell since a few years on the market in their top cars?</p><p>i.e. 7 Series of BMW from 2008:</p><p><a href="http://www.bmw.com/com/en/newvehicles/7series/sedan/2008/allfacts/ergonomics/head\_up\_display.html" title="bmw.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.bmw.com/com/en/newvehicles/7series/sedan/2008/allfacts/ergonomics/head\_up\_display.html</a> [bmw.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Where exactly in that " innovation " is the difference to the systems that BMW and Merc already sell since a few years on the market in their top cars ? i.e .
7 Series of BMW from 2008 : http : //www.bmw.com/com/en/newvehicles/7series/sedan/2008/allfacts/ergonomics/head \ _up \ _display.html [ bmw.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where exactly in that "innovation" is the difference to the systems that BMW and Merc already sell since a few years on the market in their top cars?i.e.
7 Series of BMW from 2008:http://www.bmw.com/com/en/newvehicles/7series/sedan/2008/allfacts/ergonomics/head\_up\_display.html [bmw.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31525384</id>
	<title>Re:Perfect</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268939100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Personally, I was hoping for an app that will display point values for pedestrians, pets and other cars. Add in some facebook integration -"Anonymous Coward has just hit Neighbors yappy dog, scoring him 20 points in carmageddon!" and then the real fun will start. This is the key we need to start the era of 'party crashing' as envisioned in Chuck Palahniuk's book "Rant".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Personally , I was hoping for an app that will display point values for pedestrians , pets and other cars .
Add in some facebook integration - " Anonymous Coward has just hit Neighbors yappy dog , scoring him 20 points in carmageddon !
" and then the real fun will start .
This is the key we need to start the era of 'party crashing ' as envisioned in Chuck Palahniuk 's book " Rant " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Personally, I was hoping for an app that will display point values for pedestrians, pets and other cars.
Add in some facebook integration -"Anonymous Coward has just hit Neighbors yappy dog, scoring him 20 points in carmageddon!
" and then the real fun will start.
This is the key we need to start the era of 'party crashing' as envisioned in Chuck Palahniuk's book "Rant".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521814</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31524808</id>
	<title>All I want</title>
	<author>ThatsNotPudding</author>
	<datestamp>1268936640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>is deer-seeking missles - merely for force protection measures, mind you.</htmltext>
<tokenext>is deer-seeking missles - merely for force protection measures , mind you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is deer-seeking missles - merely for force protection measures, mind you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521794</id>
	<title>SAAB?</title>
	<author>turbotroll</author>
	<datestamp>1268922240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most likely SAAB technology.  They were first who intended to use HUD in a car, after all.</p><p>Tnx $god SAAB continues its life outside GM.  FU GM!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most likely SAAB technology .
They were first who intended to use HUD in a car , after all.Tnx $ god SAAB continues its life outside GM .
FU GM !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most likely SAAB technology.
They were first who intended to use HUD in a car, after all.Tnx $god SAAB continues its life outside GM.
FU GM!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31525360</id>
	<title>Here's an idea</title>
	<author>PPH</author>
	<datestamp>1268938980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Take the system that tracks the driver's gaze and add some logic to it to refuse to start the car if their eyes can't see over the steering wheel. Offer it first in Florida.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Take the system that tracks the driver 's gaze and add some logic to it to refuse to start the car if their eyes ca n't see over the steering wheel .
Offer it first in Florida .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Take the system that tracks the driver's gaze and add some logic to it to refuse to start the car if their eyes can't see over the steering wheel.
Offer it first in Florida.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522834</id>
	<title>Cadillac Heads Up Display</title>
	<author>TheNinjaroach</author>
	<datestamp>1268927220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Cadillac and I believe a few Buick and Oldsmobile cars have had a simpler version of this for at least a decade now.  In certain models of these cars, your direction and speed are projected onto the lower part of the windshield directly in front of the driver.  Sure it's simple, but I was actually very fond of being able to see how fast I was going without having to look down at the dashboard.  I look forward to seeing what else they can do with this as long as it doesn't become yet another distraction from the road.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Cadillac and I believe a few Buick and Oldsmobile cars have had a simpler version of this for at least a decade now .
In certain models of these cars , your direction and speed are projected onto the lower part of the windshield directly in front of the driver .
Sure it 's simple , but I was actually very fond of being able to see how fast I was going without having to look down at the dashboard .
I look forward to seeing what else they can do with this as long as it does n't become yet another distraction from the road .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cadillac and I believe a few Buick and Oldsmobile cars have had a simpler version of this for at least a decade now.
In certain models of these cars, your direction and speed are projected onto the lower part of the windshield directly in front of the driver.
Sure it's simple, but I was actually very fond of being able to see how fast I was going without having to look down at the dashboard.
I look forward to seeing what else they can do with this as long as it doesn't become yet another distraction from the road.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31525456</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1268939460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Then you wait for the police officer to explain why the wreck behind your car happened and why he or she is going to have to tell someone their mom/dad/husband/wife is dead.</p><p>Theres more to it than just pulling over.  You get OFF THE ROAD.  That doesn't mean sit on the shoulder of the road with your lights on some someone drivers right into the backend of you thinking they can follow you.</p><p>You've obviously never experienced a 'wall of water' where at 55-60 the car in front of you literally disappears instantly as it enters the rain its so thick.  If that person just 'pulls over' instantly, theres a really good chance you're eating their bumper for dinner.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Then you wait for the police officer to explain why the wreck behind your car happened and why he or she is going to have to tell someone their mom/dad/husband/wife is dead.Theres more to it than just pulling over .
You get OFF THE ROAD .
That does n't mean sit on the shoulder of the road with your lights on some someone drivers right into the backend of you thinking they can follow you.You 've obviously never experienced a 'wall of water ' where at 55-60 the car in front of you literally disappears instantly as it enters the rain its so thick .
If that person just 'pulls over ' instantly , theres a really good chance you 're eating their bumper for dinner .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then you wait for the police officer to explain why the wreck behind your car happened and why he or she is going to have to tell someone their mom/dad/husband/wife is dead.Theres more to it than just pulling over.
You get OFF THE ROAD.
That doesn't mean sit on the shoulder of the road with your lights on some someone drivers right into the backend of you thinking they can follow you.You've obviously never experienced a 'wall of water' where at 55-60 the car in front of you literally disappears instantly as it enters the rain its so thick.
If that person just 'pulls over' instantly, theres a really good chance you're eating their bumper for dinner.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522358</id>
	<title>Yup</title>
	<author>Greyfox</author>
	<datestamp>1268924940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We see that now with four wheel drive SUVs, which are inevitably the ones you see that have gone off the road when it snows because the jackasses think their four wheel drive makes them invulnerable. They quickly discover that physics is a harsh mistress.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We see that now with four wheel drive SUVs , which are inevitably the ones you see that have gone off the road when it snows because the jackasses think their four wheel drive makes them invulnerable .
They quickly discover that physics is a harsh mistress .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We see that now with four wheel drive SUVs, which are inevitably the ones you see that have gone off the road when it snows because the jackasses think their four wheel drive makes them invulnerable.
They quickly discover that physics is a harsh mistress.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521720</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521802</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>bluefoxlucid</author>
	<datestamp>1268922300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can't fuck up drive-by-wire because drive-by-wire itself is a fuck up.  Tie a bike cable to your accelerator and hook the other end to your throttle at tension.  This is the perfect throttle control system, just like 2-system hydraulics with a side-channel booster (i.e. if it fails, it no longer supplies assistance; but the hydraulics still work) is the perfect braking system (especially since if the whole engine AND electrical system AND half the braking hydraulics catastrophically fail, you can still stop).</p><p>
There's all this "efficiency" crap, about how we need drive-by-wire to tune that last little 0.1\% of fuel economy out and get better MPG.  Also we need low rolling resistance tires (and less handling and grip with the road-- sticky tires might cost you a MPG over low-grip low-rolling-resistance fuel economy tires).  EFI and electronic ignition isn't enough; we need full tank-to-air-to-cylinder fuel mix and combustion management.
</p><p>
Meanwhile the US gets the lowest fuel economy ever out of the world; everyone else has gasoline cars averaging over 30mpg for real, while we have EPA rated 36mpg cars (the Pontiac G6, which is a Chevy Cobalt which was rated for 32mpg...) but they really get 24mpg highway and 21-22mpg city.  I recall Japan averaging over 40mpg on non-hybrid petrol cars; while Europe is averaging 50-60mpg (someone I knew got 80mpg on a rental during a trip though, wtf?) in diesel cars.
</p><p>
We're doing something wrong, and putting a computer between the accelerator and the throttle isn't it.  I don't like software bugs being able to floor it for me.  And Toyota and Mercedes-Benz can go to hell with their up-and-coming Brake-by-Wire systems.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You ca n't fuck up drive-by-wire because drive-by-wire itself is a fuck up .
Tie a bike cable to your accelerator and hook the other end to your throttle at tension .
This is the perfect throttle control system , just like 2-system hydraulics with a side-channel booster ( i.e .
if it fails , it no longer supplies assistance ; but the hydraulics still work ) is the perfect braking system ( especially since if the whole engine AND electrical system AND half the braking hydraulics catastrophically fail , you can still stop ) .
There 's all this " efficiency " crap , about how we need drive-by-wire to tune that last little 0.1 \ % of fuel economy out and get better MPG .
Also we need low rolling resistance tires ( and less handling and grip with the road-- sticky tires might cost you a MPG over low-grip low-rolling-resistance fuel economy tires ) .
EFI and electronic ignition is n't enough ; we need full tank-to-air-to-cylinder fuel mix and combustion management .
Meanwhile the US gets the lowest fuel economy ever out of the world ; everyone else has gasoline cars averaging over 30mpg for real , while we have EPA rated 36mpg cars ( the Pontiac G6 , which is a Chevy Cobalt which was rated for 32mpg... ) but they really get 24mpg highway and 21-22mpg city .
I recall Japan averaging over 40mpg on non-hybrid petrol cars ; while Europe is averaging 50-60mpg ( someone I knew got 80mpg on a rental during a trip though , wtf ?
) in diesel cars .
We 're doing something wrong , and putting a computer between the accelerator and the throttle is n't it .
I do n't like software bugs being able to floor it for me .
And Toyota and Mercedes-Benz can go to hell with their up-and-coming Brake-by-Wire systems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can't fuck up drive-by-wire because drive-by-wire itself is a fuck up.
Tie a bike cable to your accelerator and hook the other end to your throttle at tension.
This is the perfect throttle control system, just like 2-system hydraulics with a side-channel booster (i.e.
if it fails, it no longer supplies assistance; but the hydraulics still work) is the perfect braking system (especially since if the whole engine AND electrical system AND half the braking hydraulics catastrophically fail, you can still stop).
There's all this "efficiency" crap, about how we need drive-by-wire to tune that last little 0.1\% of fuel economy out and get better MPG.
Also we need low rolling resistance tires (and less handling and grip with the road-- sticky tires might cost you a MPG over low-grip low-rolling-resistance fuel economy tires).
EFI and electronic ignition isn't enough; we need full tank-to-air-to-cylinder fuel mix and combustion management.
Meanwhile the US gets the lowest fuel economy ever out of the world; everyone else has gasoline cars averaging over 30mpg for real, while we have EPA rated 36mpg cars (the Pontiac G6, which is a Chevy Cobalt which was rated for 32mpg...) but they really get 24mpg highway and 21-22mpg city.
I recall Japan averaging over 40mpg on non-hybrid petrol cars; while Europe is averaging 50-60mpg (someone I knew got 80mpg on a rental during a trip though, wtf?
) in diesel cars.
We're doing something wrong, and putting a computer between the accelerator and the throttle isn't it.
I don't like software bugs being able to floor it for me.
And Toyota and Mercedes-Benz can go to hell with their up-and-coming Brake-by-Wire systems.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31528744</id>
	<title>Re:Difference to HUDs from BMW and Mercedes</title>
	<author>billybacs</author>
	<datestamp>1268906340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>GM first did it in 1988, as well as on the The <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontiac\_Grand\_Prix#Sixth\_generation\_.281997-2003.29" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Grand Prix</a> [wikipedia.org] in 2001, and the Corvette in 2001. BMW is the first <i>European</i> manufacturer to do it, though.</htmltext>
<tokenext>GM first did it in 1988 , as well as on the The Grand Prix [ wikipedia.org ] in 2001 , and the Corvette in 2001 .
BMW is the first European manufacturer to do it , though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>GM first did it in 1988, as well as on the The Grand Prix [wikipedia.org] in 2001, and the Corvette in 2001.
BMW is the first European manufacturer to do it, though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522046</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523488</id>
	<title>Re:Driver's perspective?</title>
	<author>Ksempac</author>
	<datestamp>1268930400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I guess you didn't watch the video ( nor did the guys who moded you insightful) : they do track the position of the driver's eyes with camera pointing toward him.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess you did n't watch the video ( nor did the guys who moded you insightful ) : they do track the position of the driver 's eyes with camera pointing toward him .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess you didn't watch the video ( nor did the guys who moded you insightful) : they do track the position of the driver's eyes with camera pointing toward him.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521694</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31525856</id>
	<title>Are you serious GM?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268940960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Perhaps GM should take the time to re-focus and concentrate on creating 4-wheeled vehicles that DON'T suck, instead of on technology that is likely to go unapproved by the NHTSA....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps GM should take the time to re-focus and concentrate on creating 4-wheeled vehicles that DO N'T suck , instead of on technology that is likely to go unapproved by the NHTSA... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps GM should take the time to re-focus and concentrate on creating 4-wheeled vehicles that DON'T suck, instead of on technology that is likely to go unapproved by the NHTSA....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31524506</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268935140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1 ton SUV?  That would be a pretty tiny vehicle.</p><p>Try 2.5 or 3 ton SUV.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ton SUV ?
That would be a pretty tiny vehicle.Try 2.5 or 3 ton SUV .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1 ton SUV?
That would be a pretty tiny vehicle.Try 2.5 or 3 ton SUV.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521994</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522734</id>
	<title>Amanda Seyfried/Julianne Moore love scene?  Check!</title>
	<author>Impy the Impiuos Imp</author>
	<datestamp>1268926680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; <b>GM Working On Interactive Windshields</b></p><p>We already have windshields people interact with whenever they hit a wall.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; GM Working On Interactive WindshieldsWe already have windshields people interact with whenever they hit a wall .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; GM Working On Interactive WindshieldsWe already have windshields people interact with whenever they hit a wall.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31534920</id>
	<title>Excuse for killer drivers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269005640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A HUD that allows you to go faster under weather conditions where you shouldn't be driving at all? It may show you the edge of the road, or what it thinks is the edge -- realtime image recognition is still far from perfect. It may not show you the person or animal that you're about to run over.<br>If you can't even see the edge of the road with your own eyes, slow down and pull over at the next opportunity. It's the only safe thing to do.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A HUD that allows you to go faster under weather conditions where you should n't be driving at all ?
It may show you the edge of the road , or what it thinks is the edge -- realtime image recognition is still far from perfect .
It may not show you the person or animal that you 're about to run over.If you ca n't even see the edge of the road with your own eyes , slow down and pull over at the next opportunity .
It 's the only safe thing to do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A HUD that allows you to go faster under weather conditions where you shouldn't be driving at all?
It may show you the edge of the road, or what it thinks is the edge -- realtime image recognition is still far from perfect.
It may not show you the person or animal that you're about to run over.If you can't even see the edge of the road with your own eyes, slow down and pull over at the next opportunity.
It's the only safe thing to do.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521550</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268920920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>What's wrong with driving more slowly in the fog?</p></div></blockquote><p>The people who don't, for one thing.  This system can help you avoid them, or help them avoid you.</p><blockquote><div><p>Why do I need HUD, or worse, banner ads, on my windshield?</p></div></blockquote><p>I don't think you'll see ads on your windshield.  Too distracting, there would be lawsuits and finger pointing every time such a car was involved in an accident.</p><blockquote><div><p>I don't want my windshield blue-screening on me.</p></div></blockquote><p>I'm sure they would test to make sure the system can't obscure your vision of the road.  Worst case scenario is it has a problem and turns itself off (that would be a sane course of action), and you're no worse off than you are today without such a system.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's wrong with driving more slowly in the fog ? The people who do n't , for one thing .
This system can help you avoid them , or help them avoid you.Why do I need HUD , or worse , banner ads , on my windshield ? I do n't think you 'll see ads on your windshield .
Too distracting , there would be lawsuits and finger pointing every time such a car was involved in an accident.I do n't want my windshield blue-screening on me.I 'm sure they would test to make sure the system ca n't obscure your vision of the road .
Worst case scenario is it has a problem and turns itself off ( that would be a sane course of action ) , and you 're no worse off than you are today without such a system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's wrong with driving more slowly in the fog?The people who don't, for one thing.
This system can help you avoid them, or help them avoid you.Why do I need HUD, or worse, banner ads, on my windshield?I don't think you'll see ads on your windshield.
Too distracting, there would be lawsuits and finger pointing every time such a car was involved in an accident.I don't want my windshield blue-screening on me.I'm sure they would test to make sure the system can't obscure your vision of the road.
Worst case scenario is it has a problem and turns itself off (that would be a sane course of action), and you're no worse off than you are today without such a system.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31528814</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>operagost</author>
	<datestamp>1268906580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The EPA recently tightened their MPG standards.  I think you actually have to be a leadfoot to not see the ratings they give now.  That being said, on my two most recent cars I easily met or exceeded both highway and city ratings ON REAL GAS.  If you're not getting what you expect, it's probably the ethanol.  You can expect about 5\% worse mileage on 10\% ethanol-- it's really that terrible.
<p>
I'm not sure where you got your numbers, but Europe and Japan didn't experience our SUV culture, so comparing per-capita MPG numbers just tells us that a lot of those older gas-guzzlers are still on the road.  I'm also assuming that you know how to convert their l/100km rating to our MPG.  Europeans definitely drive smaller cars: there's nothing wrong with the technology.  More weight and more surface area requires more energy.
</p><p>
About all that puzzles me is that the Geo Metro got 49 MPG in the early 1990s, while we are being told that a car with perhaps 2 more cu ft of interior space getting 35 MPG is great.  Even considering that the 1990s 49 MPG is probably 40 now, I'm not impressed.  I guess it's the weight from the safety features.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The EPA recently tightened their MPG standards .
I think you actually have to be a leadfoot to not see the ratings they give now .
That being said , on my two most recent cars I easily met or exceeded both highway and city ratings ON REAL GAS .
If you 're not getting what you expect , it 's probably the ethanol .
You can expect about 5 \ % worse mileage on 10 \ % ethanol-- it 's really that terrible .
I 'm not sure where you got your numbers , but Europe and Japan did n't experience our SUV culture , so comparing per-capita MPG numbers just tells us that a lot of those older gas-guzzlers are still on the road .
I 'm also assuming that you know how to convert their l/100km rating to our MPG .
Europeans definitely drive smaller cars : there 's nothing wrong with the technology .
More weight and more surface area requires more energy .
About all that puzzles me is that the Geo Metro got 49 MPG in the early 1990s , while we are being told that a car with perhaps 2 more cu ft of interior space getting 35 MPG is great .
Even considering that the 1990s 49 MPG is probably 40 now , I 'm not impressed .
I guess it 's the weight from the safety features .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The EPA recently tightened their MPG standards.
I think you actually have to be a leadfoot to not see the ratings they give now.
That being said, on my two most recent cars I easily met or exceeded both highway and city ratings ON REAL GAS.
If you're not getting what you expect, it's probably the ethanol.
You can expect about 5\% worse mileage on 10\% ethanol-- it's really that terrible.
I'm not sure where you got your numbers, but Europe and Japan didn't experience our SUV culture, so comparing per-capita MPG numbers just tells us that a lot of those older gas-guzzlers are still on the road.
I'm also assuming that you know how to convert their l/100km rating to our MPG.
Europeans definitely drive smaller cars: there's nothing wrong with the technology.
More weight and more surface area requires more energy.
About all that puzzles me is that the Geo Metro got 49 MPG in the early 1990s, while we are being told that a car with perhaps 2 more cu ft of interior space getting 35 MPG is great.
Even considering that the 1990s 49 MPG is probably 40 now, I'm not impressed.
I guess it's the weight from the safety features.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521802</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523182</id>
	<title>Great idea BUT....</title>
	<author>GigG</author>
	<datestamp>1268928840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How much are those going to cost to replace when a rock chips them?
<br> <br>
I just don't think that technology that will cost that much should be on a device that is called a windSHIELD for a reason.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How much are those going to cost to replace when a rock chips them ?
I just do n't think that technology that will cost that much should be on a device that is called a windSHIELD for a reason .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How much are those going to cost to replace when a rock chips them?
I just don't think that technology that will cost that much should be on a device that is called a windSHIELD for a reason.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523704</id>
	<title>192 Posts and no mention of Cannonball Run?</title>
	<author>Mad-Bassist</author>
	<datestamp>1268931480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have to say it: I always wanted night vision like Jackie Chan in that movie&mdash;hopefully with some kind of safety so it can't be used (easily) without the headlights on. Heh heh.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have to say it : I always wanted night vision like Jackie Chan in that movie    hopefully with some kind of safety so it ca n't be used ( easily ) without the headlights on .
Heh heh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have to say it: I always wanted night vision like Jackie Chan in that movie—hopefully with some kind of safety so it can't be used (easily) without the headlights on.
Heh heh.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521892</id>
	<title>Re:Driver's perspective?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268922780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>That doesn't sound very hard. You can figure out where the driver's eyes are by the orientation of the rare view and side view mirrors. On that note, since you're supposed to adjust those mirrors before you start driving, it's just one more thing to adjust before you drive off.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That does n't sound very hard .
You can figure out where the driver 's eyes are by the orientation of the rare view and side view mirrors .
On that note , since you 're supposed to adjust those mirrors before you start driving , it 's just one more thing to adjust before you drive off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That doesn't sound very hard.
You can figure out where the driver's eyes are by the orientation of the rare view and side view mirrors.
On that note, since you're supposed to adjust those mirrors before you start driving, it's just one more thing to adjust before you drive off.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521694</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523322</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>Taibhsear</author>
	<datestamp>1268929620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just a quite note, my two door coupe weighs 3000 lbs (ie 1.5 tons), an SUV weighs quite a bit more than that. Otherwise I agree with your post.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just a quite note , my two door coupe weighs 3000 lbs ( ie 1.5 tons ) , an SUV weighs quite a bit more than that .
Otherwise I agree with your post .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just a quite note, my two door coupe weighs 3000 lbs (ie 1.5 tons), an SUV weighs quite a bit more than that.
Otherwise I agree with your post.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521994</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523744</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>drsquare</author>
	<datestamp>1268931660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How would it display obstructions on the road?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How would it display obstructions on the road ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How would it display obstructions on the road?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522320</id>
	<title>Re:Great, more distractions for drivers...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268924700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Display traffic signs? Pffft. It will be for displaying ads and monetizing your travel 'experience'</p><p>Where do you want to Google today?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Display traffic signs ?
Pffft. It will be for displaying ads and monetizing your travel 'experience'Where do you want to Google today ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Display traffic signs?
Pffft. It will be for displaying ads and monetizing your travel 'experience'Where do you want to Google today?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521644</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523312</id>
	<title>Re:Tron-mode?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268929560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hope it is.  The last thing cars NEED is this.  Cars have already been over engineered in that it costs thousands of dollars to repair simple shit and hundreds of dollars a month in required insurance to to protect yourself if you have to do major car work do to some mess up (not talking about health care costs or injuries).</p><p>I'll take a more efficent car from the 60's that was easier to maintain than the motorized computers we have today.  Cars are suffering from the excess.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope it is .
The last thing cars NEED is this .
Cars have already been over engineered in that it costs thousands of dollars to repair simple shit and hundreds of dollars a month in required insurance to to protect yourself if you have to do major car work do to some mess up ( not talking about health care costs or injuries ) .I 'll take a more efficent car from the 60 's that was easier to maintain than the motorized computers we have today .
Cars are suffering from the excess .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope it is.
The last thing cars NEED is this.
Cars have already been over engineered in that it costs thousands of dollars to repair simple shit and hundreds of dollars a month in required insurance to to protect yourself if you have to do major car work do to some mess up (not talking about health care costs or injuries).I'll take a more efficent car from the 60's that was easier to maintain than the motorized computers we have today.
Cars are suffering from the excess.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521394</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31529022</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>operagost</author>
	<datestamp>1268907360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Also, diesel used to cost less than gasoline.  Now, it costs more because the state and federal governments have imposed unreasonable road taxes.  That's killing diesel more than anything.  Right now, heating oil is 50 cents less than diesel; that difference is taxes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Also , diesel used to cost less than gasoline .
Now , it costs more because the state and federal governments have imposed unreasonable road taxes .
That 's killing diesel more than anything .
Right now , heating oil is 50 cents less than diesel ; that difference is taxes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also, diesel used to cost less than gasoline.
Now, it costs more because the state and federal governments have imposed unreasonable road taxes.
That's killing diesel more than anything.
Right now, heating oil is 50 cents less than diesel; that difference is taxes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521922</id>
	<title>minus 1, Trojll)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268922960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">intentions and ME! It's officiail</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>intentions and ME !
It 's officiail [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>intentions and ME!
It's officiail [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523458</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>kimvette</author>
	<datestamp>1268930280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How hard are you driving to get below EPA ratings?</p><p>I have to drive my Saab REALLY hard to get worse than the EPA rating. When I drive conservatively I get 33mpg to 36mpg combined, and that includes city driving.  I <i>usually</i> get 26-27mpg combined though, because I like acceleration, so the turbocharger is usually spooled up, especially through onramps and offramps.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)   As far as highway mileage is concerned,  I have achieved 43mpg on a 65 mile drive from a client site in Cape Cod to Cambridge. On the highway I generally drive the speed limit, or if traffic is really moving (as in 85mph average) slightly slower than the prevailing speed.  I'm looking forward to my next vacation - I'm going to drive to see just how good economy I can achieve in that car. Is your car a Cobalt SS? If so, it has basically the same engine and turbocharger as my Saab; it just has a different ECU but mileage should not be that much worse than I am getting.</p><p>In my ZR-1 I regularly achieve 26-27mpg combined with the stock program (19-23 on the tuner's program), as high as 33-34mpg on the highway; level road, steady speeds (in sixth gear at 93mph), and about 17-20 in the city. I do not accelerate gently in that car. Also: I live just outside of Boston so I do deal with a fair bit of city traffic.</p><p>So, I would guess that you are either ignoring the maintenance schedule for your car, going &gt;95mph on the highway, or driving the car so hard you're abusing it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How hard are you driving to get below EPA ratings ? I have to drive my Saab REALLY hard to get worse than the EPA rating .
When I drive conservatively I get 33mpg to 36mpg combined , and that includes city driving .
I usually get 26-27mpg combined though , because I like acceleration , so the turbocharger is usually spooled up , especially through onramps and offramps .
: ) As far as highway mileage is concerned , I have achieved 43mpg on a 65 mile drive from a client site in Cape Cod to Cambridge .
On the highway I generally drive the speed limit , or if traffic is really moving ( as in 85mph average ) slightly slower than the prevailing speed .
I 'm looking forward to my next vacation - I 'm going to drive to see just how good economy I can achieve in that car .
Is your car a Cobalt SS ?
If so , it has basically the same engine and turbocharger as my Saab ; it just has a different ECU but mileage should not be that much worse than I am getting.In my ZR-1 I regularly achieve 26-27mpg combined with the stock program ( 19-23 on the tuner 's program ) , as high as 33-34mpg on the highway ; level road , steady speeds ( in sixth gear at 93mph ) , and about 17-20 in the city .
I do not accelerate gently in that car .
Also : I live just outside of Boston so I do deal with a fair bit of city traffic.So , I would guess that you are either ignoring the maintenance schedule for your car , going &gt; 95mph on the highway , or driving the car so hard you 're abusing it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How hard are you driving to get below EPA ratings?I have to drive my Saab REALLY hard to get worse than the EPA rating.
When I drive conservatively I get 33mpg to 36mpg combined, and that includes city driving.
I usually get 26-27mpg combined though, because I like acceleration, so the turbocharger is usually spooled up, especially through onramps and offramps.
:)   As far as highway mileage is concerned,  I have achieved 43mpg on a 65 mile drive from a client site in Cape Cod to Cambridge.
On the highway I generally drive the speed limit, or if traffic is really moving (as in 85mph average) slightly slower than the prevailing speed.
I'm looking forward to my next vacation - I'm going to drive to see just how good economy I can achieve in that car.
Is your car a Cobalt SS?
If so, it has basically the same engine and turbocharger as my Saab; it just has a different ECU but mileage should not be that much worse than I am getting.In my ZR-1 I regularly achieve 26-27mpg combined with the stock program (19-23 on the tuner's program), as high as 33-34mpg on the highway; level road, steady speeds (in sixth gear at 93mph), and about 17-20 in the city.
I do not accelerate gently in that car.
Also: I live just outside of Boston so I do deal with a fair bit of city traffic.So, I would guess that you are either ignoring the maintenance schedule for your car, going &gt;95mph on the highway, or driving the car so hard you're abusing it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521802</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31524156</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>Buelldozer</author>
	<datestamp>1268933580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A word about HUD.</p><p>I had one of these in my 2001 Pontiac Grand Prix GTP. When I first got the car I thought it was neat but gimmicky. I traded my GP for an Audi A4 late last year and I find that I miss the HUD in my GP terribly.</p><p>Why? Because of the functionality of it. In my GP's HUD I could see my speed, radio station, system messages, and other informaiton like low fuel without having to take my eyes from the road. It was very functional and it was a feature that I appreciated having.</p><p>Don't knock the functionality of a HUD until you've spent a lot of time driving a car equipped with one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A word about HUD.I had one of these in my 2001 Pontiac Grand Prix GTP .
When I first got the car I thought it was neat but gimmicky .
I traded my GP for an Audi A4 late last year and I find that I miss the HUD in my GP terribly.Why ?
Because of the functionality of it .
In my GP 's HUD I could see my speed , radio station , system messages , and other informaiton like low fuel without having to take my eyes from the road .
It was very functional and it was a feature that I appreciated having.Do n't knock the functionality of a HUD until you 've spent a lot of time driving a car equipped with one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A word about HUD.I had one of these in my 2001 Pontiac Grand Prix GTP.
When I first got the car I thought it was neat but gimmicky.
I traded my GP for an Audi A4 late last year and I find that I miss the HUD in my GP terribly.Why?
Because of the functionality of it.
In my GP's HUD I could see my speed, radio station, system messages, and other informaiton like low fuel without having to take my eyes from the road.
It was very functional and it was a feature that I appreciated having.Don't knock the functionality of a HUD until you've spent a lot of time driving a car equipped with one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521694</id>
	<title>Driver's perspective?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268921760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>How do they draw a line that represents the edge of the road without knowing the exact position of the drivers eyes? This is just half of the puzzle.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How do they draw a line that represents the edge of the road without knowing the exact position of the drivers eyes ?
This is just half of the puzzle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How do they draw a line that represents the edge of the road without knowing the exact position of the drivers eyes?
This is just half of the puzzle.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522356</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268924940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, what happens when the spammers figure out how to access your windshield?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , what happens when the spammers figure out how to access your windshield ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, what happens when the spammers figure out how to access your windshield?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522328</id>
	<title>What I would like...</title>
	<author>Jon Abbott</author>
	<datestamp>1268924760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...is for this kind of windshield display to block out oncoming headlights.  All too often, oncoming headlights are so bright that it blocks my ability to see the road in front of me.  If it was possible to selectively block out bright lights (when not near railroad crossings of course), it would be so much nicer to drive at night.  I know this will never come to market though because it is a technology that is begging to malfunction.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...is for this kind of windshield display to block out oncoming headlights .
All too often , oncoming headlights are so bright that it blocks my ability to see the road in front of me .
If it was possible to selectively block out bright lights ( when not near railroad crossings of course ) , it would be so much nicer to drive at night .
I know this will never come to market though because it is a technology that is begging to malfunction .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...is for this kind of windshield display to block out oncoming headlights.
All too often, oncoming headlights are so bright that it blocks my ability to see the road in front of me.
If it was possible to selectively block out bright lights (when not near railroad crossings of course), it would be so much nicer to drive at night.
I know this will never come to market though because it is a technology that is begging to malfunction.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521614</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>Aeros</author>
	<datestamp>1268921280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>right their going to put banner ads on your windshield.
Why exactly shouldn't GM look towards the future, that's what successful companies do you know. Just because they had some financial problems recently doesn't mean they always will.  Maybe if they come up with a new technology that really catches on they will finish paying off their loan from the government and be successful once again.  If only they had a new technology they were working on...</htmltext>
<tokenext>right their going to put banner ads on your windshield .
Why exactly should n't GM look towards the future , that 's what successful companies do you know .
Just because they had some financial problems recently does n't mean they always will .
Maybe if they come up with a new technology that really catches on they will finish paying off their loan from the government and be successful once again .
If only they had a new technology they were working on.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>right their going to put banner ads on your windshield.
Why exactly shouldn't GM look towards the future, that's what successful companies do you know.
Just because they had some financial problems recently doesn't mean they always will.
Maybe if they come up with a new technology that really catches on they will finish paying off their loan from the government and be successful once again.
If only they had a new technology they were working on...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521814</id>
	<title>Perfect</title>
	<author>elrous0</author>
	<datestamp>1268922360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Now I can install a stock market app on my windshield that lets me watch GM stock fall in real time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now I can install a stock market app on my windshield that lets me watch GM stock fall in real time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now I can install a stock market app on my windshield that lets me watch GM stock fall in real time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522756</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>westlake</author>
	<datestamp>1268926800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Hint: This is when you pull over and wait for the weather to clear before killing yourself/someone else.</i> </p><p>You don't always get the chance to safely pull over. There may be no where for you to go. You can't be seen by the cars behind you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hint : This is when you pull over and wait for the weather to clear before killing yourself/someone else .
You do n't always get the chance to safely pull over .
There may be no where for you to go .
You ca n't be seen by the cars behind you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hint: This is when you pull over and wait for the weather to clear before killing yourself/someone else.
You don't always get the chance to safely pull over.
There may be no where for you to go.
You can't be seen by the cars behind you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522304</id>
	<title>Wired had this a while back</title>
	<author>Conspiracy\_Of\_Doves</author>
	<datestamp>1268924640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wired had this in Found: Artifacts From the Future</p><p><a href="http://www.wired.com/culture/culturereviews/magazine/16-01/found" title="wired.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.wired.com/culture/culturereviews/magazine/16-01/found</a> [wired.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wired had this in Found : Artifacts From the Futurehttp : //www.wired.com/culture/culturereviews/magazine/16-01/found [ wired.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wired had this in Found: Artifacts From the Futurehttp://www.wired.com/culture/culturereviews/magazine/16-01/found [wired.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31526292</id>
	<title>Re:Still waiting...</title>
	<author>Drathos</author>
	<datestamp>1268942340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We still have 5 more years..</p><p>And who knows, MS's Project Natal might lead to what the kids were talking about with "You mean you have to use your hands?  That's like a baby's toy!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We still have 5 more years..And who knows , MS 's Project Natal might lead to what the kids were talking about with " You mean you have to use your hands ?
That 's like a baby 's toy !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We still have 5 more years..And who knows, MS's Project Natal might lead to what the kids were talking about with "You mean you have to use your hands?
That's like a baby's toy!
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521666</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521918</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268922900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>You have yet to experience driving through fog so thick you cannot see past the front hood of your car or rain pouring so quickly the wipers do nothing. </i></p><p>Hint: This is when you pull over and wait for the weather to clear before killing yourself/someone else.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You have yet to experience driving through fog so thick you can not see past the front hood of your car or rain pouring so quickly the wipers do nothing .
Hint : This is when you pull over and wait for the weather to clear before killing yourself/someone else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have yet to experience driving through fog so thick you cannot see past the front hood of your car or rain pouring so quickly the wipers do nothing.
Hint: This is when you pull over and wait for the weather to clear before killing yourself/someone else.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521470</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521776</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>confused one</author>
	<datestamp>1268922180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I for one think it would be nice to have more advance notice that there's something in front of me, in the fog or heavy rain; and, have some contextual indication of the distance.  Highlighting objects in the road at night would be nice too.  If adding an infrared sensor or two and a HUD can do that, then I want it.  I will still drive slowly, because I don't have a death wish.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I for one think it would be nice to have more advance notice that there 's something in front of me , in the fog or heavy rain ; and , have some contextual indication of the distance .
Highlighting objects in the road at night would be nice too .
If adding an infrared sensor or two and a HUD can do that , then I want it .
I will still drive slowly , because I do n't have a death wish .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I for one think it would be nice to have more advance notice that there's something in front of me, in the fog or heavy rain; and, have some contextual indication of the distance.
Highlighting objects in the road at night would be nice too.
If adding an infrared sensor or two and a HUD can do that, then I want it.
I will still drive slowly, because I don't have a death wish.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522184</id>
	<title>Re:One thing worries me...</title>
	<author>ZeroSumHappiness</author>
	<datestamp>1268924100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>+1, "I only hit him because my HUD didn't highlight him so that I could avoid him.  It's the car's fault, not mine."</htmltext>
<tokenext>+ 1 , " I only hit him because my HUD did n't highlight him so that I could avoid him .
It 's the car 's fault , not mine .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>+1, "I only hit him because my HUD didn't highlight him so that I could avoid him.
It's the car's fault, not mine.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521720</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522780</id>
	<title>Re:One thing worries me...</title>
	<author>julesh</author>
	<datestamp>1268926920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Agreed.  Also note that the "edge of road" projection from the pictures in TFA isn't exactly all that accurate.  You could easily end up going off the road if you put too much trust in it...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed .
Also note that the " edge of road " projection from the pictures in TFA is n't exactly all that accurate .
You could easily end up going off the road if you put too much trust in it.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed.
Also note that the "edge of road" projection from the pictures in TFA isn't exactly all that accurate.
You could easily end up going off the road if you put too much trust in it...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521720</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31524838</id>
	<title>Interacting with the windshield</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268936760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1) Dude, let's get drive by wire *braking* right first.</p><p>2) When I'm in an accident, the last thing I want to do is interact with my windshield. (And maybe it would be the last thing...)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) Dude , let 's get drive by wire * braking * right first.2 ) When I 'm in an accident , the last thing I want to do is interact with my windshield .
( And maybe it would be the last thing... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1) Dude, let's get drive by wire *braking* right first.2) When I'm in an accident, the last thing I want to do is interact with my windshield.
(And maybe it would be the last thing...)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523090</id>
	<title>Evolve Ultraviolot Eyes</title>
	<author>Stonesand</author>
	<datestamp>1268928360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The biggest hurdle is that GM is going is to have to get a eye-augmentation surgery figured out that enables us to see in ultraviolet.  Every new car comes with free cyborg surgery!  You too can see in ultraviolet!

Or, they could just use visible light lasers.  You know.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The biggest hurdle is that GM is going is to have to get a eye-augmentation surgery figured out that enables us to see in ultraviolet .
Every new car comes with free cyborg surgery !
You too can see in ultraviolet !
Or , they could just use visible light lasers .
You know .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The biggest hurdle is that GM is going is to have to get a eye-augmentation surgery figured out that enables us to see in ultraviolet.
Every new car comes with free cyborg surgery!
You too can see in ultraviolet!
Or, they could just use visible light lasers.
You know.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31528984</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>operagost</author>
	<datestamp>1268907240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The EPA stopped using that test two years ago.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The EPA stopped using that test two years ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The EPA stopped using that test two years ago.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521470</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>God of Lemmings</author>
	<datestamp>1268920380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You have yet to experience driving through fog so thick you cannot see past the front hood of your car or rain pouring so quickly the wipers do nothing.
<br> <br>
Yes, we need this.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You have yet to experience driving through fog so thick you can not see past the front hood of your car or rain pouring so quickly the wipers do nothing .
Yes , we need this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have yet to experience driving through fog so thick you cannot see past the front hood of your car or rain pouring so quickly the wipers do nothing.
Yes, we need this.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521866</id>
	<title>Re:Driver's perspective?</title>
	<author>Toze</author>
	<datestamp>1268922600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, since we've now got <a href="http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/10/03/17/186224/Firmware-Hack-Allows-Video-Analysis-On-a-Canon-Camera?art\_pos=17" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">cheap and easy video analysis</a> [slashdot.org], a little camera ought to be able to figure that out.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , since we 've now got cheap and easy video analysis [ slashdot.org ] , a little camera ought to be able to figure that out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, since we've now got cheap and easy video analysis [slashdot.org], a little camera ought to be able to figure that out.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521694</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523284</id>
	<title>HUD was great on 95 GrandPrix GTP</title>
	<author>edwartr</author>
	<datestamp>1268929320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't know how useful / distracting an entire interactive windshield will be, and I can easily see possible issues; but I had a 1995 Pontiac Grand Prix GTP with a true HUD that projected speed, turn indicators, etc. up on the glass. When you combined it with the radio control knobs on the steering wheel, I really only had to take my eyes off the road to look at the rear-view or side-view mirrors. It was not distracting at all even though it was directly in front of vision when looking straight out the front from the drivers seat; and it really helped / eased concentration in my opinion.
It didn't add squat to the cost of the car and the only downside was that the windshield was expensive if you had to replace - you had to use a special coated one instead of just any replacement.

Personally, I cannot figure out why all cars don't come with one.

I truly miss mine.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know how useful / distracting an entire interactive windshield will be , and I can easily see possible issues ; but I had a 1995 Pontiac Grand Prix GTP with a true HUD that projected speed , turn indicators , etc .
up on the glass .
When you combined it with the radio control knobs on the steering wheel , I really only had to take my eyes off the road to look at the rear-view or side-view mirrors .
It was not distracting at all even though it was directly in front of vision when looking straight out the front from the drivers seat ; and it really helped / eased concentration in my opinion .
It did n't add squat to the cost of the car and the only downside was that the windshield was expensive if you had to replace - you had to use a special coated one instead of just any replacement .
Personally , I can not figure out why all cars do n't come with one .
I truly miss mine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know how useful / distracting an entire interactive windshield will be, and I can easily see possible issues; but I had a 1995 Pontiac Grand Prix GTP with a true HUD that projected speed, turn indicators, etc.
up on the glass.
When you combined it with the radio control knobs on the steering wheel, I really only had to take my eyes off the road to look at the rear-view or side-view mirrors.
It was not distracting at all even though it was directly in front of vision when looking straight out the front from the drivers seat; and it really helped / eased concentration in my opinion.
It didn't add squat to the cost of the car and the only downside was that the windshield was expensive if you had to replace - you had to use a special coated one instead of just any replacement.
Personally, I cannot figure out why all cars don't come with one.
I truly miss mine.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521642</id>
	<title>Obvious drawback</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268921460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Drug runners driving at night are gonna love it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Drug runners driving at night are gon na love it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Drug runners driving at night are gonna love it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31524132</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268933460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>..until they try to stop their 1 ton SUV..</p></div></blockquote><p>I totally agree with your post but 1 ton is 2000 lb - that's pretty light for a road vehicle.  Many SUVs nowadays weigh over <b>3 tons</b>!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>..until they try to stop their 1 ton SUV..I totally agree with your post but 1 ton is 2000 lb - that 's pretty light for a road vehicle .
Many SUVs nowadays weigh over 3 tons !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>..until they try to stop their 1 ton SUV..I totally agree with your post but 1 ton is 2000 lb - that's pretty light for a road vehicle.
Many SUVs nowadays weigh over 3 tons!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521994</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521842</id>
	<title>Risk Compensation</title>
	<author>SilentResistance</author>
	<datestamp>1268922480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Allow people to better see in fog and they will drive faster.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Allow people to better see in fog and they will drive faster .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Allow people to better see in fog and they will drive faster.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522788</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>Rasperin</author>
	<datestamp>1268926920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nevermind that it is actually illegal to put any distractions on the window of a car (such as a banner ad).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nevermind that it is actually illegal to put any distractions on the window of a car ( such as a banner ad ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nevermind that it is actually illegal to put any distractions on the window of a car (such as a banner ad).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396</id>
	<title>Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>Gothmolly</author>
	<datestamp>1268919900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Given GM's historical failures, and their new immunity from market forces (thank you taxpayers), it's not the place best suited to develop this kind of tech, if indeed this tech is necessary.   What's wrong with driving more slowly in the fog?  Why do I need HUD, or worse, banner ads, on my windshield?   If Toyota, once the paragon of automotive quality, can bork up the drive-by-wire system, it doesn't bode well for GM.  I don't want my windshield blue-screening on me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Given GM 's historical failures , and their new immunity from market forces ( thank you taxpayers ) , it 's not the place best suited to develop this kind of tech , if indeed this tech is necessary .
What 's wrong with driving more slowly in the fog ?
Why do I need HUD , or worse , banner ads , on my windshield ?
If Toyota , once the paragon of automotive quality , can bork up the drive-by-wire system , it does n't bode well for GM .
I do n't want my windshield blue-screening on me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Given GM's historical failures, and their new immunity from market forces (thank you taxpayers), it's not the place best suited to develop this kind of tech, if indeed this tech is necessary.
What's wrong with driving more slowly in the fog?
Why do I need HUD, or worse, banner ads, on my windshield?
If Toyota, once the paragon of automotive quality, can bork up the drive-by-wire system, it doesn't bode well for GM.
I don't want my windshield blue-screening on me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523064</id>
	<title>Waste of Time &amp; Money</title>
	<author>Richy\_T</author>
	<datestamp>1268928180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I predict driving will be completely automated by the end of the century. The only HUD you'll need will be will be for your email (or whatever replaces it by then) notifications &amp; RSS feeds if you're watching the scenery go by.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I predict driving will be completely automated by the end of the century .
The only HUD you 'll need will be will be for your email ( or whatever replaces it by then ) notifications &amp; RSS feeds if you 're watching the scenery go by .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I predict driving will be completely automated by the end of the century.
The only HUD you'll need will be will be for your email (or whatever replaces it by then) notifications &amp; RSS feeds if you're watching the scenery go by.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521644</id>
	<title>Great, more distractions for drivers...</title>
	<author>Iphtashu Fitz</author>
	<datestamp>1268921460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unless this is done VERY carefully, I'm afraid it'll just end up distracting most drivers.  Yes, head-up displays have existed in fighter jets, etc. for decades, but those pilots are highly trained to process all the data given to them.  Throw an average driver into a car that suddenly starts highlighting road signs, etc. and you risk distracting him.  What happens if the system freaks out as you drive down a street with tons of road signs?  You could end up flooding the windshield with lots of neon lines as the system tries to highlight all of them.  And how do you decide exactly what to highlight?  Suppose it highlights a person crossing the street in darkness a mile down the road?  The driver will get distracted trying to figure out what the car is warning him about.</p><p>Now imagine all this being done with a teenager behind the wheel who just got his license...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unless this is done VERY carefully , I 'm afraid it 'll just end up distracting most drivers .
Yes , head-up displays have existed in fighter jets , etc .
for decades , but those pilots are highly trained to process all the data given to them .
Throw an average driver into a car that suddenly starts highlighting road signs , etc .
and you risk distracting him .
What happens if the system freaks out as you drive down a street with tons of road signs ?
You could end up flooding the windshield with lots of neon lines as the system tries to highlight all of them .
And how do you decide exactly what to highlight ?
Suppose it highlights a person crossing the street in darkness a mile down the road ?
The driver will get distracted trying to figure out what the car is warning him about.Now imagine all this being done with a teenager behind the wheel who just got his license.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unless this is done VERY carefully, I'm afraid it'll just end up distracting most drivers.
Yes, head-up displays have existed in fighter jets, etc.
for decades, but those pilots are highly trained to process all the data given to them.
Throw an average driver into a car that suddenly starts highlighting road signs, etc.
and you risk distracting him.
What happens if the system freaks out as you drive down a street with tons of road signs?
You could end up flooding the windshield with lots of neon lines as the system tries to highlight all of them.
And how do you decide exactly what to highlight?
Suppose it highlights a person crossing the street in darkness a mile down the road?
The driver will get distracted trying to figure out what the car is warning him about.Now imagine all this being done with a teenager behind the wheel who just got his license...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522718</id>
	<title>Yet Another distraction...</title>
	<author>HockeyPuck</author>
	<datestamp>1268926620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I live in the SanFrancisco area and I must admit the drivers out here are worse than in Boston or NewYork.  Not because they are aggressive (which they are not), but because of the distractions.  I see drivers with earbuds in, blocking their ability to hear another car and it's horn;  having to fiddle with the DVD player for the kids in the back; programming the neverlost/mapping/GPS software on their console; and trying to make a call on their hands free handset.</p><p>Shit, most drive automatics anyhow, so their left foot isn't doing anything, so you could probably hook up 1/2 of a Wii-fit board to the dead pedal and let them do that.  Display that on half of the windshield.</p><p>We've got tons of stop and go traffic during rush hour, and I absolute hate being the last car in the traffic jam, because about once a month the person behind isn't paying attention and comes screeching to a halt no matter how slowly I come to a stop.</p><p>I rather see innovations that make people better drivers, rather than a bunch of crutches or distractions.  Anybody know how to read a fucking street map anymore rather than putting in Grandma's house into the GPS to get there?  With the invention of self parking cars, that's one more skill that will be gone in a few years.  I already have friends that cannot parallel park, and they don't have this feature on their car, so we just circle the block for 45min until they can find a spot we don't have to parallel park their fucking huge SUV.</p><p>Fighter Pilots have HUDs and take massive amounts of training prior to getting into an actual plane.  We allow people to get behind the wheel as long as they have a licensed driver next to them. Can that licensed driver do anything in their Ford Festiva if the newbie gets into a problem? Nope.  Now put a HUD in front of the new driver, or any driver for that matter and you're guarantee to distract them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I live in the SanFrancisco area and I must admit the drivers out here are worse than in Boston or NewYork .
Not because they are aggressive ( which they are not ) , but because of the distractions .
I see drivers with earbuds in , blocking their ability to hear another car and it 's horn ; having to fiddle with the DVD player for the kids in the back ; programming the neverlost/mapping/GPS software on their console ; and trying to make a call on their hands free handset.Shit , most drive automatics anyhow , so their left foot is n't doing anything , so you could probably hook up 1/2 of a Wii-fit board to the dead pedal and let them do that .
Display that on half of the windshield.We 've got tons of stop and go traffic during rush hour , and I absolute hate being the last car in the traffic jam , because about once a month the person behind is n't paying attention and comes screeching to a halt no matter how slowly I come to a stop.I rather see innovations that make people better drivers , rather than a bunch of crutches or distractions .
Anybody know how to read a fucking street map anymore rather than putting in Grandma 's house into the GPS to get there ?
With the invention of self parking cars , that 's one more skill that will be gone in a few years .
I already have friends that can not parallel park , and they do n't have this feature on their car , so we just circle the block for 45min until they can find a spot we do n't have to parallel park their fucking huge SUV.Fighter Pilots have HUDs and take massive amounts of training prior to getting into an actual plane .
We allow people to get behind the wheel as long as they have a licensed driver next to them .
Can that licensed driver do anything in their Ford Festiva if the newbie gets into a problem ?
Nope. Now put a HUD in front of the new driver , or any driver for that matter and you 're guarantee to distract them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I live in the SanFrancisco area and I must admit the drivers out here are worse than in Boston or NewYork.
Not because they are aggressive (which they are not), but because of the distractions.
I see drivers with earbuds in, blocking their ability to hear another car and it's horn;  having to fiddle with the DVD player for the kids in the back; programming the neverlost/mapping/GPS software on their console; and trying to make a call on their hands free handset.Shit, most drive automatics anyhow, so their left foot isn't doing anything, so you could probably hook up 1/2 of a Wii-fit board to the dead pedal and let them do that.
Display that on half of the windshield.We've got tons of stop and go traffic during rush hour, and I absolute hate being the last car in the traffic jam, because about once a month the person behind isn't paying attention and comes screeching to a halt no matter how slowly I come to a stop.I rather see innovations that make people better drivers, rather than a bunch of crutches or distractions.
Anybody know how to read a fucking street map anymore rather than putting in Grandma's house into the GPS to get there?
With the invention of self parking cars, that's one more skill that will be gone in a few years.
I already have friends that cannot parallel park, and they don't have this feature on their car, so we just circle the block for 45min until they can find a spot we don't have to parallel park their fucking huge SUV.Fighter Pilots have HUDs and take massive amounts of training prior to getting into an actual plane.
We allow people to get behind the wheel as long as they have a licensed driver next to them.
Can that licensed driver do anything in their Ford Festiva if the newbie gets into a problem?
Nope.  Now put a HUD in front of the new driver, or any driver for that matter and you're guarantee to distract them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523176</id>
	<title>Re:Reward vs risk?</title>
	<author>kimvette</author>
	<datestamp>1268928780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Fuck drive by wire. Fly by wire works well because there is a ton of redundancy in aircraft plus a ground check is (theoretically) performed before <i>every single flight</i>. Do you think a pre-drive drive-by-wire systems check would really work? How many drivers do you see driving around on tires that are inflated so low that the sidewalls are actually folding? When people can't even be bothered to glance at their tires before driving on the highway, what makes you think that drive by wire on an automated system could be safe?</p><p>If you change human behavior, sure, it would work. However, for the many thousands of years so-called "civilization" has been in existence, people remain thoughtless, uncivilized, and lazy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Fuck drive by wire .
Fly by wire works well because there is a ton of redundancy in aircraft plus a ground check is ( theoretically ) performed before every single flight .
Do you think a pre-drive drive-by-wire systems check would really work ?
How many drivers do you see driving around on tires that are inflated so low that the sidewalls are actually folding ?
When people ca n't even be bothered to glance at their tires before driving on the highway , what makes you think that drive by wire on an automated system could be safe ? If you change human behavior , sure , it would work .
However , for the many thousands of years so-called " civilization " has been in existence , people remain thoughtless , uncivilized , and lazy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fuck drive by wire.
Fly by wire works well because there is a ton of redundancy in aircraft plus a ground check is (theoretically) performed before every single flight.
Do you think a pre-drive drive-by-wire systems check would really work?
How many drivers do you see driving around on tires that are inflated so low that the sidewalls are actually folding?
When people can't even be bothered to glance at their tires before driving on the highway, what makes you think that drive by wire on an automated system could be safe?If you change human behavior, sure, it would work.
However, for the many thousands of years so-called "civilization" has been in existence, people remain thoughtless, uncivilized, and lazy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31524156
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521694
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521470
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521994
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523322
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521644
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522046
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31528744
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521694
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523030
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521776
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521666
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31526292
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521394
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523312
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521814
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522510
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521644
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521882
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521814
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31525384
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521720
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522358
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521470
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521994
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523514
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521802
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31529022
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521802
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31528984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521394
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523076
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521644
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521394
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522670
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31524644
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521720
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31524244
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521802
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523458
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521470
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521994
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31524132
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521694
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521866
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521550
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521694
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523504
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521694
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521862
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521470
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521994
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31525614
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521802
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31528814
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521644
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521798
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522884
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521470
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523624
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521644
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522496
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521720
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522652
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521470
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31525456
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521470
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521838
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523176
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31524982
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521978
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521720
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522780
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521470
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521994
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31525894
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522618
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522788
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521470
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521694
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522224
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521694
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521892
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521824
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521720
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522184
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521898
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521644
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522320
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521470
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521994
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31524506
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521694
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523488
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521470
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522756
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_0326221_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523744
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_0326221.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521394
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523076
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522670
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31524644
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523312
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_0326221.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522834
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_0326221.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521942
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_0326221.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521734
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_0326221.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521814
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522510
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31525384
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_0326221.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522718
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_0326221.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521666
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31526292
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_0326221.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521720
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522780
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31524244
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522358
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522184
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522652
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_0326221.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521842
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_0326221.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522046
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31528744
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_0326221.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523090
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_0326221.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31524808
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_0326221.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521396
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521550
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521614
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521898
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523176
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31524982
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521978
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31524156
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521470
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521838
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521918
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523624
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522756
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31525456
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523648
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521994
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523322
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31525894
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31525614
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31524132
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31524506
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523514
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521456
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523744
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522618
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521802
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523396
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31528984
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31529022
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523458
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31528814
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521776
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521824
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522788
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_0326221.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521694
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523030
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521862
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521892
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522224
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523504
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521866
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521818
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31523488
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_0326221.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521644
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521878
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521798
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522884
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522320
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522496
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31522092
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_0326221.31521882
</commentlist>
</conversation>
