<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_23_209200</id>
	<title>China Hits Back At Google</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1269338220000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="mailto:sopssa@email.com" rel="nofollow">sopssa</a> writes <i>"After Google <a href="http://search.slashdot.org/story/10/03/22/1958201/Googles-New-Approach-For-China-Is-To-Serve-From-Hong-Kong">yesterday started redirecting</a> google.cn users to their uncensored Hong Kong-based google.com.hk servers, <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/03/23/china\_moves\_to\_restrict\_google\_hong\_kong\_services/">the Chinese government has now hit back at Google</a> by <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/24/technology/24google.html?hp">restricting access to Google's Hong Kong servers</a>. 'On Tuesday mainland China users could not see uncensored Hong Kong-based content after the government either disabled certain searches or blocked links to results.' China Mobile, the largest wireless carrier in the country, has also been approached by the Chinese government to cancel a contract with Google about having google.cn on their mobile home page for search. China Unicom, the second largest carrier in China, has also either postponed or killed the launch of Android-based mobile phones in the country."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>sopssa writes " After Google yesterday started redirecting google.cn users to their uncensored Hong Kong-based google.com.hk servers , the Chinese government has now hit back at Google by restricting access to Google 's Hong Kong servers .
'On Tuesday mainland China users could not see uncensored Hong Kong-based content after the government either disabled certain searches or blocked links to results .
' China Mobile , the largest wireless carrier in the country , has also been approached by the Chinese government to cancel a contract with Google about having google.cn on their mobile home page for search .
China Unicom , the second largest carrier in China , has also either postponed or killed the launch of Android-based mobile phones in the country .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>sopssa writes "After Google yesterday started redirecting google.cn users to their uncensored Hong Kong-based google.com.hk servers, the Chinese government has now hit back at Google by restricting access to Google's Hong Kong servers.
'On Tuesday mainland China users could not see uncensored Hong Kong-based content after the government either disabled certain searches or blocked links to results.
' China Mobile, the largest wireless carrier in the country, has also been approached by the Chinese government to cancel a contract with Google about having google.cn on their mobile home page for search.
China Unicom, the second largest carrier in China, has also either postponed or killed the launch of Android-based mobile phones in the country.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592382</id>
	<title>Re:Let me be the first to say</title>
	<author>guyminuslife</author>
	<datestamp>1269353700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I consider that in no government power can be abused long. Mankind will not bear it. If a sovereign oppresses his people to a great degree, they will rise and cut off his head. There is a remedy in human nature against tyranny, that will keep us safe under every form of government.</p></div><p>I'm wondering how many millennia of human history dispute that claim.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I consider that in no government power can be abused long .
Mankind will not bear it .
If a sovereign oppresses his people to a great degree , they will rise and cut off his head .
There is a remedy in human nature against tyranny , that will keep us safe under every form of government.I 'm wondering how many millennia of human history dispute that claim .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I consider that in no government power can be abused long.
Mankind will not bear it.
If a sovereign oppresses his people to a great degree, they will rise and cut off his head.
There is a remedy in human nature against tyranny, that will keep us safe under every form of government.I'm wondering how many millennia of human history dispute that claim.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31599202</id>
	<title>Re:Hit 'em where it hurts</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269451380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except the whole point is that the CCP doesn't want its people to have access to information it doesn't like.  Much better to force a company to filter for you or ban them entirely, from an economic standpoint.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except the whole point is that the CCP does n't want its people to have access to information it does n't like .
Much better to force a company to filter for you or ban them entirely , from an economic standpoint .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except the whole point is that the CCP doesn't want its people to have access to information it doesn't like.
Much better to force a company to filter for you or ban them entirely, from an economic standpoint.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590258</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31597652</id>
	<title>Re:And let the war begin</title>
	<author>ElectricTurtle</author>
	<datestamp>1269445680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't think you're qualified to talk about China's 'historical context'.<p><div class="quote"><p>The relative political stability of the past 60 years is pretty much unprecedented.</p></div><p>Uh, what about Kangxi and Qianlong of the Qing? Mu and Ping of Zhou? Wu of Han? Chongzong and Renzong of Western Xia?
<br> <br>
China's history is extremely mixed. For every bloody revolution there have been several bloodless (or relatively so) palace coups. It's just that the latter don't get noticed so much. It is however a gross oversimplification to categorize China's history of political change as one huge bloodbath.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think you 're qualified to talk about China 's 'historical context'.The relative political stability of the past 60 years is pretty much unprecedented.Uh , what about Kangxi and Qianlong of the Qing ?
Mu and Ping of Zhou ?
Wu of Han ?
Chongzong and Renzong of Western Xia ?
China 's history is extremely mixed .
For every bloody revolution there have been several bloodless ( or relatively so ) palace coups .
It 's just that the latter do n't get noticed so much .
It is however a gross oversimplification to categorize China 's history of political change as one huge bloodbath .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think you're qualified to talk about China's 'historical context'.The relative political stability of the past 60 years is pretty much unprecedented.Uh, what about Kangxi and Qianlong of the Qing?
Mu and Ping of Zhou?
Wu of Han?
Chongzong and Renzong of Western Xia?
China's history is extremely mixed.
For every bloody revolution there have been several bloodless (or relatively so) palace coups.
It's just that the latter don't get noticed so much.
It is however a gross oversimplification to categorize China's history of political change as one huge bloodbath.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590680</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590398</id>
	<title>Re:Google needs to pull out.</title>
	<author>shoehornjob</author>
	<datestamp>1269344040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>MONEY GREED MARKETSHARE umm...does that answer your question?</htmltext>
<tokenext>MONEY GREED MARKETSHARE umm...does that answer your question ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MONEY GREED MARKETSHARE umm...does that answer your question?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590292</id>
	<title>Re:Google needs to pull out.</title>
	<author>MattskEE</author>
	<datestamp>1269343500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I'm not sure how in the hell capitalists here in the U.S. decided we could do <b>fair</b> business with a totalitarian communist nation.</p></div> </blockquote><p>Who cares about fair?  As long as US businesses can do <b>profitable</b> business with a totalitarian communist nation then they will.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure how in the hell capitalists here in the U.S. decided we could do fair business with a totalitarian communist nation .
Who cares about fair ?
As long as US businesses can do profitable business with a totalitarian communist nation then they will .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure how in the hell capitalists here in the U.S. decided we could do fair business with a totalitarian communist nation.
Who cares about fair?
As long as US businesses can do profitable business with a totalitarian communist nation then they will.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590314</id>
	<title>Re:Drawing politcal blood</title>
	<author>MightyMartian</author>
	<datestamp>1269343620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem with governmental systems like China's is that there isn't just one player.  While Western democratic systems tend to have a clear line of authority, inevitably civilian in nature (except in Constitutional Monarchies, where the executive is essentially above the political fray), in China you have a queer duck that is part civilian or semi-civilian Party (Communist Party) and partially military (the PRC).  This is not much different than how the Soviet system worked, though the Chinese Ministry of State Security is not nearly the independent player that the KGB was.  Still, the fact remains that in such a system, even if the bulk of one part of the power structure is unhappy with a policy, the requirement that consensus always be maintained often renders reformist movements within the power structure impotent.  In such a system, change can only happen slowly.  The PRC has basically backed away from stopping economic reforms (though, in fact, it and its leadership have considerable investments, so it remains a key beneficiary of China's economic growth), but political reform is a whole other beast, and even if the Party itself felt some need at meaningful reforms, the PRC would have to be in agreement.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem with governmental systems like China 's is that there is n't just one player .
While Western democratic systems tend to have a clear line of authority , inevitably civilian in nature ( except in Constitutional Monarchies , where the executive is essentially above the political fray ) , in China you have a queer duck that is part civilian or semi-civilian Party ( Communist Party ) and partially military ( the PRC ) .
This is not much different than how the Soviet system worked , though the Chinese Ministry of State Security is not nearly the independent player that the KGB was .
Still , the fact remains that in such a system , even if the bulk of one part of the power structure is unhappy with a policy , the requirement that consensus always be maintained often renders reformist movements within the power structure impotent .
In such a system , change can only happen slowly .
The PRC has basically backed away from stopping economic reforms ( though , in fact , it and its leadership have considerable investments , so it remains a key beneficiary of China 's economic growth ) , but political reform is a whole other beast , and even if the Party itself felt some need at meaningful reforms , the PRC would have to be in agreement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem with governmental systems like China's is that there isn't just one player.
While Western democratic systems tend to have a clear line of authority, inevitably civilian in nature (except in Constitutional Monarchies, where the executive is essentially above the political fray), in China you have a queer duck that is part civilian or semi-civilian Party (Communist Party) and partially military (the PRC).
This is not much different than how the Soviet system worked, though the Chinese Ministry of State Security is not nearly the independent player that the KGB was.
Still, the fact remains that in such a system, even if the bulk of one part of the power structure is unhappy with a policy, the requirement that consensus always be maintained often renders reformist movements within the power structure impotent.
In such a system, change can only happen slowly.
The PRC has basically backed away from stopping economic reforms (though, in fact, it and its leadership have considerable investments, so it remains a key beneficiary of China's economic growth), but political reform is a whole other beast, and even if the Party itself felt some need at meaningful reforms, the PRC would have to be in agreement.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590144</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590222</id>
	<title>Who didn't see this coming?</title>
	<author>www.sorehands.com</author>
	<datestamp>1269343260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am surprised that it took this long for China to block the latest trick by Google.  Who didn't see this coming the moment it was mentioned in the press?</p><p>Of course this is or would become a cat and mouse game. China blocks, Google counters,  China counters Google's counter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am surprised that it took this long for China to block the latest trick by Google .
Who did n't see this coming the moment it was mentioned in the press ? Of course this is or would become a cat and mouse game .
China blocks , Google counters , China counters Google 's counter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am surprised that it took this long for China to block the latest trick by Google.
Who didn't see this coming the moment it was mentioned in the press?Of course this is or would become a cat and mouse game.
China blocks, Google counters,  China counters Google's counter.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591238</id>
	<title>Re:Google needs to pull out.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269347340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You need to re-read your own comment.  Since when do capitalist care about workers rights, free speech or a fair marketplace, these are things typically valued by a democracy not capitalism.</p><p>When was the last time you heard of a monopoly voluntarily breaking it's self up because it thought that would make a fairer marketplace?  Or giving pay rises because they value there workers?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You need to re-read your own comment .
Since when do capitalist care about workers rights , free speech or a fair marketplace , these are things typically valued by a democracy not capitalism.When was the last time you heard of a monopoly voluntarily breaking it 's self up because it thought that would make a fairer marketplace ?
Or giving pay rises because they value there workers ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You need to re-read your own comment.
Since when do capitalist care about workers rights, free speech or a fair marketplace, these are things typically valued by a democracy not capitalism.When was the last time you heard of a monopoly voluntarily breaking it's self up because it thought that would make a fairer marketplace?
Or giving pay rises because they value there workers?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590300</id>
	<title>And now ladies and gentlemen...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269343500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's a big fucking deal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a big fucking deal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a big fucking deal.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31593568</id>
	<title>Re:Ping Pong</title>
	<author>Kingrames</author>
	<datestamp>1269362400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you really want to offend China, just say this:<br>
Japanda.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you really want to offend China , just say this : Japanda .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you really want to offend China, just say this:
Japanda.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590108</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31593462</id>
	<title>Re:OMG</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269361500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They were all censored by China.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They were all censored by China .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They were all censored by China.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589888</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590050</id>
	<title>Re:And let the war begin</title>
	<author>Toze</author>
	<datestamp>1269342540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I remember when reading cyberpunk novels felt like escapism.</p><p>:T</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember when reading cyberpunk novels felt like escapism .
: T</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember when reading cyberpunk novels felt like escapism.
:T</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589914</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592410</id>
	<title>Need more search engines</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269353940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google? eh, so what.. can't we just use another search engine and another adwords provider?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. oh, thats right... everyone else went out of business...</p><p>The trouble with google (and microsoft) is that they're "too big to fail". Can you imagine a world where microsoft or google closes their doors? what would happen? will they need to bail them out some 20 years from now, after google is running every "e"-thing?</p><p>We need about 200 search engines, let China keep up with that...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google ?
eh , so what.. ca n't we just use another search engine and another adwords provider ?
.. oh , thats right... everyone else went out of business...The trouble with google ( and microsoft ) is that they 're " too big to fail " .
Can you imagine a world where microsoft or google closes their doors ?
what would happen ?
will they need to bail them out some 20 years from now , after google is running every " e " -thing ? We need about 200 search engines , let China keep up with that.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google?
eh, so what.. can't we just use another search engine and another adwords provider?
.. oh, thats right... everyone else went out of business...The trouble with google (and microsoft) is that they're "too big to fail".
Can you imagine a world where microsoft or google closes their doors?
what would happen?
will they need to bail them out some 20 years from now, after google is running every "e"-thing?We need about 200 search engines, let China keep up with that...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591052</id>
	<title>More than censoring, China is being spiteful!</title>
	<author>erroneus</author>
	<datestamp>1269346560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is much better than just censoring content.  This goes to show what all companies doing business in China can expect.  This kind of anti-chinese information just can't be made-up.  I wonder what company will be next to pull out of China?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is much better than just censoring content .
This goes to show what all companies doing business in China can expect .
This kind of anti-chinese information just ca n't be made-up .
I wonder what company will be next to pull out of China ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is much better than just censoring content.
This goes to show what all companies doing business in China can expect.
This kind of anti-chinese information just can't be made-up.
I wonder what company will be next to pull out of China?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590414</id>
	<title>Re:Google needs to pull out.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269344100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Workers' rights are a diminishing phenomenon in good ol' capitalist USA these days.</p><p>Imho, you can only make money by exploiting someone. Be it the buyer paying enough to make you profit, or kids in a sneaker factory in China, it's how you make money. Capitalists, I'm sure, on the whole, have no problem doing either.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Workers ' rights are a diminishing phenomenon in good ol ' capitalist USA these days.Imho , you can only make money by exploiting someone .
Be it the buyer paying enough to make you profit , or kids in a sneaker factory in China , it 's how you make money .
Capitalists , I 'm sure , on the whole , have no problem doing either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Workers' rights are a diminishing phenomenon in good ol' capitalist USA these days.Imho, you can only make money by exploiting someone.
Be it the buyer paying enough to make you profit, or kids in a sneaker factory in China, it's how you make money.
Capitalists, I'm sure, on the whole, have no problem doing either.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591996</id>
	<title>Re:Google needs to pull out.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269351180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm not sure how in the hell capitalists here in the U.S. decided we could do fair business with a totalitarian communist nation.</p><p>They don't value workers rights, free speech, or even a fair marketplace.</p></div><p>I'm...totally confused.  Why would people who don't care about workers rights, free speech and a fair marketplace be unable to do business with people who don't care about workers rights, free speech and a fair marketplace?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure how in the hell capitalists here in the U.S. decided we could do fair business with a totalitarian communist nation.They do n't value workers rights , free speech , or even a fair marketplace.I 'm...totally confused .
Why would people who do n't care about workers rights , free speech and a fair marketplace be unable to do business with people who do n't care about workers rights , free speech and a fair marketplace ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure how in the hell capitalists here in the U.S. decided we could do fair business with a totalitarian communist nation.They don't value workers rights, free speech, or even a fair marketplace.I'm...totally confused.
Why would people who don't care about workers rights, free speech and a fair marketplace be unable to do business with people who don't care about workers rights, free speech and a fair marketplace?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589906</id>
	<title>Ping Pong</title>
	<author>WrongSizeGlass</author>
	<datestamp>1269341940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Google, it's your turn<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... <br> <br>
This will end when Google is completely blocked (or 'filtered') by China. I really don't see any other outcome. China will never budge on these issues (at least not in my lifetime) and Google has already burned some of its bridges to China.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google , it 's your turn .. . This will end when Google is completely blocked ( or 'filtered ' ) by China .
I really do n't see any other outcome .
China will never budge on these issues ( at least not in my lifetime ) and Google has already burned some of its bridges to China .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google, it's your turn ...  
This will end when Google is completely blocked (or 'filtered') by China.
I really don't see any other outcome.
China will never budge on these issues (at least not in my lifetime) and Google has already burned some of its bridges to China.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590000</id>
	<title>Actually...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269342300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google philosophy is just not compatible with chineese, whatever it is, so they finally don't like themselves. Then, Who Cares? I see that google probably doesn't really like this, as they are losing ~15\% of potential GMinion population; but this is the only disadvantaged side I can imagine.</p><p>(btw., news from friends from china - google services are usually easily available via commonly known proxies...so it's probably not that hard at all)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google philosophy is just not compatible with chineese , whatever it is , so they finally do n't like themselves .
Then , Who Cares ?
I see that google probably does n't really like this , as they are losing ~ 15 \ % of potential GMinion population ; but this is the only disadvantaged side I can imagine .
( btw. , news from friends from china - google services are usually easily available via commonly known proxies...so it 's probably not that hard at all )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google philosophy is just not compatible with chineese, whatever it is, so they finally don't like themselves.
Then, Who Cares?
I see that google probably doesn't really like this, as they are losing ~15\% of potential GMinion population; but this is the only disadvantaged side I can imagine.
(btw., news from friends from china - google services are usually easily available via commonly known proxies...so it's probably not that hard at all)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590108</id>
	<title>Re:Ping Pong</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269342780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wonder if Slashdot is blocked?
<ul>
<li>Tiananmen Square</li>
<li>Falun Gong</li>
<li>Free Tibet!</li>
<li>Zhen-Shan-Ren is Buddha law</li>
<li>Thoughts after reading Nine Commentaries on the Communist Party</li>
<li>tyranny</li>
<li>deceit</li>
<li>history of killing</li>
<li>depravity</li>
<li>Liu Binyan</li>
<li>Liu Xiaobo</li>
<li>Dalai Lama</li>
<li>cat abuse</li>
<li>cashfiesta</li>
<li>buy corpses</li>
<li>mascot (yeah, <i>mascot</i>)</li>
</ul><p>
Yup, I guess so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder if Slashdot is blocked ?
Tiananmen Square Falun Gong Free Tibet !
Zhen-Shan-Ren is Buddha law Thoughts after reading Nine Commentaries on the Communist Party tyranny deceit history of killing depravity Liu Binyan Liu Xiaobo Dalai Lama cat abuse cashfiesta buy corpses mascot ( yeah , mascot ) Yup , I guess so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder if Slashdot is blocked?
Tiananmen Square
Falun Gong
Free Tibet!
Zhen-Shan-Ren is Buddha law
Thoughts after reading Nine Commentaries on the Communist Party
tyranny
deceit
history of killing
depravity
Liu Binyan
Liu Xiaobo
Dalai Lama
cat abuse
cashfiesta
buy corpses
mascot (yeah, mascot)

Yup, I guess so.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591062</id>
	<title>Re:Google needs to pull out.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269346620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Capitalists, as a class, aren't particularly known for being supporters of workers rights, free speech, or a fair marketplace.</p></div><p>Go away, you communist.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Capitalists , as a class , are n't particularly known for being supporters of workers rights , free speech , or a fair marketplace.Go away , you communist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Capitalists, as a class, aren't particularly known for being supporters of workers rights, free speech, or a fair marketplace.Go away, you communist.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590056</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591552</id>
	<title>Re:Let me be the first to say</title>
	<author>phantomfive</author>
	<datestamp>1269348720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The key is you have to keep most of the people relatively satisfied.  Based on latin american dictatorships, if you can maintain a base of 30\% that actively supports you, plus another 50\% that is indifferent, then you can maintain power, even if the remainder are dying miserable deaths.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The key is you have to keep most of the people relatively satisfied .
Based on latin american dictatorships , if you can maintain a base of 30 \ % that actively supports you , plus another 50 \ % that is indifferent , then you can maintain power , even if the remainder are dying miserable deaths .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The key is you have to keep most of the people relatively satisfied.
Based on latin american dictatorships, if you can maintain a base of 30\% that actively supports you, plus another 50\% that is indifferent, then you can maintain power, even if the remainder are dying miserable deaths.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590646</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589972</id>
	<title>T-Based?</title>
	<author>eldavojohn</author>
	<datestamp>1269342240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>their uncensored Hong Kong-<b>tbased</b> google.com.hk servers</p></div><p>If I know anything about genetics there <b>must</b> be some cytosine base servers directly opposite these servers.  Can they start redirecting traffic there?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>their uncensored Hong Kong-tbased google.com.hk serversIf I know anything about genetics there must be some cytosine base servers directly opposite these servers .
Can they start redirecting traffic there ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>their uncensored Hong Kong-tbased google.com.hk serversIf I know anything about genetics there must be some cytosine base servers directly opposite these servers.
Can they start redirecting traffic there?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31593494</id>
	<title>google.cn</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269361860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>is working fine this morning of Wednesday 24th (using China Unicom 3G), not sure what drugs the OP is on...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>is working fine this morning of Wednesday 24th ( using China Unicom 3G ) , not sure what drugs the OP is on.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is working fine this morning of Wednesday 24th (using China Unicom 3G), not sure what drugs the OP is on...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590264</id>
	<title>Whoops!</title>
	<author>copponex</author>
	<datestamp>1269343380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You made the assumption that the US government would allow such a move. We have several client states that would revolt if we provided democratizing influences like free access to information. These states include: Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Syria, Egypt, Jordan, Turkey...</p><p>The US Government would now allow such a move against China either, since they are our most lucrative trading partner, and damn close to becoming more than that. Money matters to us a hell of a lot more than freedom.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You made the assumption that the US government would allow such a move .
We have several client states that would revolt if we provided democratizing influences like free access to information .
These states include : Saudi Arabia , Pakistan , Syria , Egypt , Jordan , Turkey...The US Government would now allow such a move against China either , since they are our most lucrative trading partner , and damn close to becoming more than that .
Money matters to us a hell of a lot more than freedom .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You made the assumption that the US government would allow such a move.
We have several client states that would revolt if we provided democratizing influences like free access to information.
These states include: Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Syria, Egypt, Jordan, Turkey...The US Government would now allow such a move against China either, since they are our most lucrative trading partner, and damn close to becoming more than that.
Money matters to us a hell of a lot more than freedom.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590016</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589888</id>
	<title>OMG</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269341880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>WHY are there NO comments for this yet?!??!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>WHY are there NO comments for this yet ? ! ? ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WHY are there NO comments for this yet?!??
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591070</id>
	<title>Re:Hit 'em where it hurts</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269346620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google's main product is the search... block the indexing... take and not give.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google 's main product is the search... block the indexing... take and not give .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google's main product is the search... block the indexing... take and not give.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590258</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31593500</id>
	<title>Google will never win</title>
	<author>superyanthrax</author>
	<datestamp>1269361860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They will follow our laws, or they won't be doing business in our country. If they want to leave their 30\% market share behind, don't let the door hit you on the way out. Baidu has the other 70\% and will gladly take the 30\%.
<br> <br>
If they want to holler "human rights" and make up random junk about hackers, then they can GTFO. We will not knuckle under to a foreign corporation and give them extraterritoriality. The time for that has passed by more than 60 years.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They will follow our laws , or they wo n't be doing business in our country .
If they want to leave their 30 \ % market share behind , do n't let the door hit you on the way out .
Baidu has the other 70 \ % and will gladly take the 30 \ % .
If they want to holler " human rights " and make up random junk about hackers , then they can GTFO .
We will not knuckle under to a foreign corporation and give them extraterritoriality .
The time for that has passed by more than 60 years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They will follow our laws, or they won't be doing business in our country.
If they want to leave their 30\% market share behind, don't let the door hit you on the way out.
Baidu has the other 70\% and will gladly take the 30\%.
If they want to holler "human rights" and make up random junk about hackers, then they can GTFO.
We will not knuckle under to a foreign corporation and give them extraterritoriality.
The time for that has passed by more than 60 years.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590204</id>
	<title>Re:Google's war with China</title>
	<author>jamesyouwish</author>
	<datestamp>1269343200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Google can partner with Gates and his new mini Nuclear Reactors.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google can partner with Gates and his new mini Nuclear Reactors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google can partner with Gates and his new mini Nuclear Reactors.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590072</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591094</id>
	<title>Re:And let the war begin</title>
	<author>groovyPost</author>
	<datestamp>1269346740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This war could be really hard. But in the end, it's the Chinese people who lose, not Google nor the Chinese "government".</p></div><p>Nah... Google loses period.  The Chinese people will find a way to the data and sites they want to get to.  Google on the other hand will lose out in Revenue.  For instance, from the article it says contracts are already being canceled and the android roll out will be canceled.  Yup, google loses.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This war could be really hard .
But in the end , it 's the Chinese people who lose , not Google nor the Chinese " government " .Nah... Google loses period .
The Chinese people will find a way to the data and sites they want to get to .
Google on the other hand will lose out in Revenue .
For instance , from the article it says contracts are already being canceled and the android roll out will be canceled .
Yup , google loses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This war could be really hard.
But in the end, it's the Chinese people who lose, not Google nor the Chinese "government".Nah... Google loses period.
The Chinese people will find a way to the data and sites they want to get to.
Google on the other hand will lose out in Revenue.
For instance, from the article it says contracts are already being canceled and the android roll out will be canceled.
Yup, google loses.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589914</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590872</id>
	<title>China's dillema</title>
	<author>pearl298</author>
	<datestamp>1269345900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>At some point China (and any other country which restricts free speech) must either (1) degrade their Internet service severely or (2) allow a "leaky wall"

Option 1 means that they will inevitably fall behind the rest of the world in areas like science and commerce which they care about. If that process is continued long enough they become irrelevant - like the notion of Somalia invading the US.

Option 2 means that they will have to live with losing all control over the information they most want to suppress.

This is one area where a democracy is far better equipped to deal with than any totalitarian government.</htmltext>
<tokenext>At some point China ( and any other country which restricts free speech ) must either ( 1 ) degrade their Internet service severely or ( 2 ) allow a " leaky wall " Option 1 means that they will inevitably fall behind the rest of the world in areas like science and commerce which they care about .
If that process is continued long enough they become irrelevant - like the notion of Somalia invading the US .
Option 2 means that they will have to live with losing all control over the information they most want to suppress .
This is one area where a democracy is far better equipped to deal with than any totalitarian government .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At some point China (and any other country which restricts free speech) must either (1) degrade their Internet service severely or (2) allow a "leaky wall"

Option 1 means that they will inevitably fall behind the rest of the world in areas like science and commerce which they care about.
If that process is continued long enough they become irrelevant - like the notion of Somalia invading the US.
Option 2 means that they will have to live with losing all control over the information they most want to suppress.
This is one area where a democracy is far better equipped to deal with than any totalitarian government.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591080</id>
	<title>Re:Next move</title>
	<author>Jedi Alec</author>
	<datestamp>1269346680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>The next obvious move for Google is to launch their own satellites and provide free satellite internet access for everyone in the world.</i></p><p>I was going to say that if you really want to piss off China you want to set up a major shop in Taiwan, but apparently Google already has offices there anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The next obvious move for Google is to launch their own satellites and provide free satellite internet access for everyone in the world.I was going to say that if you really want to piss off China you want to set up a major shop in Taiwan , but apparently Google already has offices there anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The next obvious move for Google is to launch their own satellites and provide free satellite internet access for everyone in the world.I was going to say that if you really want to piss off China you want to set up a major shop in Taiwan, but apparently Google already has offices there anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590016</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31595130</id>
	<title>Google should retaliate by filtering China!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269427560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think Google should retaliate by filtering China!</p><p>So whenever anyone tries to search for anything about Chinese companies, Chinese manufacturing or Chinese products, it's filtered...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think Google should retaliate by filtering China ! So whenever anyone tries to search for anything about Chinese companies , Chinese manufacturing or Chinese products , it 's filtered.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think Google should retaliate by filtering China!So whenever anyone tries to search for anything about Chinese companies, Chinese manufacturing or Chinese products, it's filtered...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590966</id>
	<title>Re:Google needs to pull out.</title>
	<author>rolfwind</author>
	<datestamp>1269346200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A good \% of people's priorities in buying is the price tag.  Sure, consumer A may buy a Mac (or other perceived premium brand) in consideration of the service or other desirable feature, but at the same time they'll be willing to settle for the cheapest broom/plates and other commodities like the rest of the population.  "Capitalists"/Business\_Owners usually cut the costs they can so they can provide stuff as cheap as possible, especially with competition around.  As for providing benefits, they like keeping the status quo (or cheaper) unless forced to otherwise.</p><p>It's not the business owners that are the sole bad guys.  They all didn't move to China at once.  Business owner A saw that he could make his product cheaper in China, so he moved his factory there.  He made more sales at the expense of business owners B, C, D, and E.  Now B, C, D, and E have to reconsider their strategy and possibly make the same move.</p><p>If the people, many of whom are also regular working folks, stuck with the products of business owners B, C, D, and E -- they wouldn't be supporting the strategies of A and would retain more jobs here.  So placing the blame on the business owners alone is quite wrong.</p><p>China was not the first move to a global marketplace.  After the war, Germany and Japan were our Chinas.  Then Hong Kong and Taiwan and Singapore later on as the first two became too expensive.  Now it's China and India.  Maybe the African countries will be next.</p><p>Unless the government starts putting some type of tariff on Chinese originated goods, though, this will continue until their standard of living or income is roughly comparable to ours or 1/2 of that or some significant fraction.</p><p>The problem is that the population of India and China are so huge... compared to Japan, Germany, Singapore, Taiwan, Hong Kong.... that we may well go broke before that happens.  Even if we don't, they'll consume such resources, and the world is becoming so small, that there will be another resource race before long.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A good \ % of people 's priorities in buying is the price tag .
Sure , consumer A may buy a Mac ( or other perceived premium brand ) in consideration of the service or other desirable feature , but at the same time they 'll be willing to settle for the cheapest broom/plates and other commodities like the rest of the population .
" Capitalists " /Business \ _Owners usually cut the costs they can so they can provide stuff as cheap as possible , especially with competition around .
As for providing benefits , they like keeping the status quo ( or cheaper ) unless forced to otherwise.It 's not the business owners that are the sole bad guys .
They all did n't move to China at once .
Business owner A saw that he could make his product cheaper in China , so he moved his factory there .
He made more sales at the expense of business owners B , C , D , and E. Now B , C , D , and E have to reconsider their strategy and possibly make the same move.If the people , many of whom are also regular working folks , stuck with the products of business owners B , C , D , and E -- they would n't be supporting the strategies of A and would retain more jobs here .
So placing the blame on the business owners alone is quite wrong.China was not the first move to a global marketplace .
After the war , Germany and Japan were our Chinas .
Then Hong Kong and Taiwan and Singapore later on as the first two became too expensive .
Now it 's China and India .
Maybe the African countries will be next.Unless the government starts putting some type of tariff on Chinese originated goods , though , this will continue until their standard of living or income is roughly comparable to ours or 1/2 of that or some significant fraction.The problem is that the population of India and China are so huge... compared to Japan , Germany , Singapore , Taiwan , Hong Kong.... that we may well go broke before that happens .
Even if we do n't , they 'll consume such resources , and the world is becoming so small , that there will be another resource race before long .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A good \% of people's priorities in buying is the price tag.
Sure, consumer A may buy a Mac (or other perceived premium brand) in consideration of the service or other desirable feature, but at the same time they'll be willing to settle for the cheapest broom/plates and other commodities like the rest of the population.
"Capitalists"/Business\_Owners usually cut the costs they can so they can provide stuff as cheap as possible, especially with competition around.
As for providing benefits, they like keeping the status quo (or cheaper) unless forced to otherwise.It's not the business owners that are the sole bad guys.
They all didn't move to China at once.
Business owner A saw that he could make his product cheaper in China, so he moved his factory there.
He made more sales at the expense of business owners B, C, D, and E.  Now B, C, D, and E have to reconsider their strategy and possibly make the same move.If the people, many of whom are also regular working folks, stuck with the products of business owners B, C, D, and E -- they wouldn't be supporting the strategies of A and would retain more jobs here.
So placing the blame on the business owners alone is quite wrong.China was not the first move to a global marketplace.
After the war, Germany and Japan were our Chinas.
Then Hong Kong and Taiwan and Singapore later on as the first two became too expensive.
Now it's China and India.
Maybe the African countries will be next.Unless the government starts putting some type of tariff on Chinese originated goods, though, this will continue until their standard of living or income is roughly comparable to ours or 1/2 of that or some significant fraction.The problem is that the population of India and China are so huge... compared to Japan, Germany, Singapore, Taiwan, Hong Kong.... that we may well go broke before that happens.
Even if we don't, they'll consume such resources, and the world is becoming so small, that there will be another resource race before long.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590056</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590056</id>
	<title>Re:Google needs to pull out.</title>
	<author>DragonWriter</author>
	<datestamp>1269342600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I'm not sure how in the hell capitalists here in the U.S. decided we could do fair business with a totalitarian communist nation. They don't value workers rights, free speech, or even a fair marketplace.</p></div></blockquote><p>Capitalists, as a class, aren't particularly known for being supporters of workers rights, free speech, or a fair marketplace. In fact, they are the class against whom advocates of workers rights are usually struggling, the class that seeks to suppress negative comments on their products through the legal system, and a class that seeks to lobby government to protect their own interests by creating barriers to entry to the markets in which they have established themselves.</p><p>I'm not saying those things are true of <i>Google</i>'s owners, in particular, but certainly the idea that <i>capitalists</i> wouldn't deal with people for the reasons you describe is, well, hard to reconcile with most of the history of capitalists.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure how in the hell capitalists here in the U.S. decided we could do fair business with a totalitarian communist nation .
They do n't value workers rights , free speech , or even a fair marketplace.Capitalists , as a class , are n't particularly known for being supporters of workers rights , free speech , or a fair marketplace .
In fact , they are the class against whom advocates of workers rights are usually struggling , the class that seeks to suppress negative comments on their products through the legal system , and a class that seeks to lobby government to protect their own interests by creating barriers to entry to the markets in which they have established themselves.I 'm not saying those things are true of Google 's owners , in particular , but certainly the idea that capitalists would n't deal with people for the reasons you describe is , well , hard to reconcile with most of the history of capitalists .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure how in the hell capitalists here in the U.S. decided we could do fair business with a totalitarian communist nation.
They don't value workers rights, free speech, or even a fair marketplace.Capitalists, as a class, aren't particularly known for being supporters of workers rights, free speech, or a fair marketplace.
In fact, they are the class against whom advocates of workers rights are usually struggling, the class that seeks to suppress negative comments on their products through the legal system, and a class that seeks to lobby government to protect their own interests by creating barriers to entry to the markets in which they have established themselves.I'm not saying those things are true of Google's owners, in particular, but certainly the idea that capitalists wouldn't deal with people for the reasons you describe is, well, hard to reconcile with most of the history of capitalists.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590136</id>
	<title>Re:Google needs to pull out.</title>
	<author>kindbud</author>
	<datestamp>1269342900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i> They don't value workers rights, free speech, or even a fair marketplace.</i></p><p>Yeah, but which one are you talking about, the communists or the capitalists?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They do n't value workers rights , free speech , or even a fair marketplace.Yeah , but which one are you talking about , the communists or the capitalists ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> They don't value workers rights, free speech, or even a fair marketplace.Yeah, but which one are you talking about, the communists or the capitalists?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589958</id>
	<title>Well,</title>
	<author>JNSL</author>
	<datestamp>1269342180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>China hits like a girl.</htmltext>
<tokenext>China hits like a girl .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>China hits like a girl.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31596668</id>
	<title>Re:Let me be the first to say</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269440820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sometimes it takes a thousand years but history begs to differ change WILL COME</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sometimes it takes a thousand years but history begs to differ change WILL COME</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sometimes it takes a thousand years but history begs to differ change WILL COME</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590646</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31654728</id>
	<title>Hello</title>
	<author>popsnake</author>
	<datestamp>1269859380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Great article</htmltext>
<tokenext>Great article</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Great article</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592772</id>
	<title>Lets keep an eye on MS / Yahoo / Nokia</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269356220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nice opportunity for Microsoft and Yahoo to show how much committed to freedom of information they are. Lets keep our eyes open and see whether MS/Yahoo/Nokia will react. Whether they will pick up the mobile contracts or not.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nice opportunity for Microsoft and Yahoo to show how much committed to freedom of information they are .
Lets keep our eyes open and see whether MS/Yahoo/Nokia will react .
Whether they will pick up the mobile contracts or not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nice opportunity for Microsoft and Yahoo to show how much committed to freedom of information they are.
Lets keep our eyes open and see whether MS/Yahoo/Nokia will react.
Whether they will pick up the mobile contracts or not.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591904</id>
	<title>Google's 'guilt on suspision' standards are a</title>
	<author>doug20r</author>
	<datestamp>1269350520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>disgace.  Google have still not provided any evidence, have not withdraw the allegation or apologized to the Chinese government, yet they charge on causing damage.  There should really be a law against what Google are doing, certainly not socially acceptable.</htmltext>
<tokenext>disgace .
Google have still not provided any evidence , have not withdraw the allegation or apologized to the Chinese government , yet they charge on causing damage .
There should really be a law against what Google are doing , certainly not socially acceptable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>disgace.
Google have still not provided any evidence, have not withdraw the allegation or apologized to the Chinese government, yet they charge on causing damage.
There should really be a law against what Google are doing, certainly not socially acceptable.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590016</id>
	<title>Next move</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269342420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The next obvious move for Google is to launch their own satellites and provide free satellite internet access for everyone in the world.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The next obvious move for Google is to launch their own satellites and provide free satellite internet access for everyone in the world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The next obvious move for Google is to launch their own satellites and provide free satellite internet access for everyone in the world.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590998</id>
	<title>Country Vs. Company</title>
	<author>cyberzephyr</author>
	<datestamp>1269346320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Where's William Gibson when you need him!</p><p>I detect "Neuromancer" type stuff happening.</p><p>Shhhhh.  The Yakuza might get you!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Where 's William Gibson when you need him ! I detect " Neuromancer " type stuff happening.Shhhhh .
The Yakuza might get you !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where's William Gibson when you need him!I detect "Neuromancer" type stuff happening.Shhhhh.
The Yakuza might get you!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31593310</id>
	<title>For the moment, no censorship on google</title>
	<author>GPLHost-Thomas</author>
	<datestamp>1269360180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>2010-03-24 11am gmt+8 (beijing time), google.cn continues to redirect to google.com.hk. From Shanghai ADSL, a request for "tian an men" on google.com.hk is not blocked (in chinese or english), doing the same request on images.google.com.hk shows that famous photo of the student blocking the tank. I wonder what request exactly is blocked here!</htmltext>
<tokenext>2010-03-24 11am gmt + 8 ( beijing time ) , google.cn continues to redirect to google.com.hk .
From Shanghai ADSL , a request for " tian an men " on google.com.hk is not blocked ( in chinese or english ) , doing the same request on images.google.com.hk shows that famous photo of the student blocking the tank .
I wonder what request exactly is blocked here !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>2010-03-24 11am gmt+8 (beijing time), google.cn continues to redirect to google.com.hk.
From Shanghai ADSL, a request for "tian an men" on google.com.hk is not blocked (in chinese or english), doing the same request on images.google.com.hk shows that famous photo of the student blocking the tank.
I wonder what request exactly is blocked here!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31593826</id>
	<title>Chinese very hypocritical here</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269364560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just day's ago the Chinese government were criticizing Google that they were linked together with the US government, and took their decisions from them.</p><p>At the end of the day though, it's plain for all to see how the corporate China takes direction from the Chinese government, and really China's distrust of Google on this just comes from the experience within itself.</p><p>cfm.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just day 's ago the Chinese government were criticizing Google that they were linked together with the US government , and took their decisions from them.At the end of the day though , it 's plain for all to see how the corporate China takes direction from the Chinese government , and really China 's distrust of Google on this just comes from the experience within itself.cfm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just day's ago the Chinese government were criticizing Google that they were linked together with the US government, and took their decisions from them.At the end of the day though, it's plain for all to see how the corporate China takes direction from the Chinese government, and really China's distrust of Google on this just comes from the experience within itself.cfm.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591804</id>
	<title>Re:Ping Pong</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269350040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>China will never budge on these issues (at least not in my lifetime)</p></div></blockquote><p>I think you're being overly pessimistic. The Soviet Union only lasted from 1922 to 1991. Everyone born during that period who's still alive today outlived it, including some people who were born before its inception. The People's Republic of China was only founded in 1949. Again, I think it's quite likely that a large proportion of people alive today will outlive it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>China will never budge on these issues ( at least not in my lifetime ) I think you 're being overly pessimistic .
The Soviet Union only lasted from 1922 to 1991 .
Everyone born during that period who 's still alive today outlived it , including some people who were born before its inception .
The People 's Republic of China was only founded in 1949 .
Again , I think it 's quite likely that a large proportion of people alive today will outlive it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>China will never budge on these issues (at least not in my lifetime)I think you're being overly pessimistic.
The Soviet Union only lasted from 1922 to 1991.
Everyone born during that period who's still alive today outlived it, including some people who were born before its inception.
The People's Republic of China was only founded in 1949.
Again, I think it's quite likely that a large proportion of people alive today will outlive it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590596</id>
	<title>Re:Google needs to pull out.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269344760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What makes you think capitalists value workers rights and free speech? The free market is about beating your competition. A monopoly is victory. Trampling your workers for an edge is fair game. Trampling free speech for an edge is fair game.</p><p>Capitalists in the US knew full well that business in China could end up not being fair. It was a risk worth taking. To google, knowing that its email service can and is being hacked is a much bigger risk to its brand than losing China (at least for now...).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What makes you think capitalists value workers rights and free speech ?
The free market is about beating your competition .
A monopoly is victory .
Trampling your workers for an edge is fair game .
Trampling free speech for an edge is fair game.Capitalists in the US knew full well that business in China could end up not being fair .
It was a risk worth taking .
To google , knowing that its email service can and is being hacked is a much bigger risk to its brand than losing China ( at least for now... ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What makes you think capitalists value workers rights and free speech?
The free market is about beating your competition.
A monopoly is victory.
Trampling your workers for an edge is fair game.
Trampling free speech for an edge is fair game.Capitalists in the US knew full well that business in China could end up not being fair.
It was a risk worth taking.
To google, knowing that its email service can and is being hacked is a much bigger risk to its brand than losing China (at least for now...).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591394</id>
	<title>Re:I'm a Little More Concerned About</title>
	<author>Aladrin</author>
	<datestamp>1269347880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Note that Google didn't decide to make their Google.cn people break the law by uncensoring results.  Instead, they took the traffic away from China's servers and sent it to Hong Kong instead.</p><p>I don't know if that gets their Chinese employees fully in the clear (because China can make anything illegal simply because they're having a bad day) but it does make sure that nobody -in- China had anything to do with any already-illegal activities.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Note that Google did n't decide to make their Google.cn people break the law by uncensoring results .
Instead , they took the traffic away from China 's servers and sent it to Hong Kong instead.I do n't know if that gets their Chinese employees fully in the clear ( because China can make anything illegal simply because they 're having a bad day ) but it does make sure that nobody -in- China had anything to do with any already-illegal activities .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Note that Google didn't decide to make their Google.cn people break the law by uncensoring results.
Instead, they took the traffic away from China's servers and sent it to Hong Kong instead.I don't know if that gets their Chinese employees fully in the clear (because China can make anything illegal simply because they're having a bad day) but it does make sure that nobody -in- China had anything to do with any already-illegal activities.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31594826</id>
	<title>It's all about porn...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269463440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>As far as I know, google makes money with ads, and porn based ads are what we see most often. The matter here is that China government censors porn, and google can't publish porn based ads, so they left using the hack as an excuse, and will come back when China goverment allows porn.

In the end, ABBA is always right ( you know : money, money, money...).</htmltext>
<tokenext>As far as I know , google makes money with ads , and porn based ads are what we see most often .
The matter here is that China government censors porn , and google ca n't publish porn based ads , so they left using the hack as an excuse , and will come back when China goverment allows porn .
In the end , ABBA is always right ( you know : money , money , money... ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As far as I know, google makes money with ads, and porn based ads are what we see most often.
The matter here is that China government censors porn, and google can't publish porn based ads, so they left using the hack as an excuse, and will come back when China goverment allows porn.
In the end, ABBA is always right ( you know : money, money, money...).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31593426</id>
	<title>Win Win or back room dealing</title>
	<author>hhawk</author>
	<datestamp>1269361260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This seems like a back room deal. Google unfilters (and moves to Hong Kong, which is still China), and China blocks traffic to the main land as it so decides with its great firewall.. the net result is the same as before and both sides win.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This seems like a back room deal .
Google unfilters ( and moves to Hong Kong , which is still China ) , and China blocks traffic to the main land as it so decides with its great firewall.. the net result is the same as before and both sides win .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This seems like a back room deal.
Google unfilters (and moves to Hong Kong, which is still China), and China blocks traffic to the main land as it so decides with its great firewall.. the net result is the same as before and both sides win.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590320</id>
	<title>Re:Google needs to pull out.</title>
	<author>fysdt</author>
	<datestamp>1269343680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who cares about ethics anyway....
<br> <br>
*ducks*</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who cares about ethics anyway... . * ducks *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who cares about ethics anyway....
 
*ducks*</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590424</id>
	<title>Re:Is this really that surprising?</title>
	<author>phantomfive</author>
	<datestamp>1269344100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/china/2010-03/24/c\_13222165.htm" title="xinhuanet.com">And here is  the propaganda</a> [xinhuanet.com].  It basically says Google should abide by the customs of whatever country they operate in.  It completely ignores the Hong Kong issue.  An earlier editorial claimed that Google had broken their written agreement.  They seem a bit annoyed that they couldn't accuse Google of breaking the law.<br> <br>
My favorite quote from the article, from Premier Wen Jiabao:<p><div class="quote"><p>"The Chinese government will create opportunities for you, and ask you not to lose the opportunities," Wen said.</p></div><p>A mob boss couldn't have said it better.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And here is the propaganda [ xinhuanet.com ] .
It basically says Google should abide by the customs of whatever country they operate in .
It completely ignores the Hong Kong issue .
An earlier editorial claimed that Google had broken their written agreement .
They seem a bit annoyed that they could n't accuse Google of breaking the law .
My favorite quote from the article , from Premier Wen Jiabao : " The Chinese government will create opportunities for you , and ask you not to lose the opportunities , " Wen said.A mob boss could n't have said it better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And here is  the propaganda [xinhuanet.com].
It basically says Google should abide by the customs of whatever country they operate in.
It completely ignores the Hong Kong issue.
An earlier editorial claimed that Google had broken their written agreement.
They seem a bit annoyed that they couldn't accuse Google of breaking the law.
My favorite quote from the article, from Premier Wen Jiabao:"The Chinese government will create opportunities for you, and ask you not to lose the opportunities," Wen said.A mob boss couldn't have said it better.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589984</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590150</id>
	<title>Re:Well,</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269342960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's Chun-Li kicking M. Bison's ass.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's Chun-Li kicking M. Bison 's ass .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's Chun-Li kicking M. Bison's ass.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589958</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31594732</id>
	<title>Re:And let the war begin</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269461760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>China has a long history of extremely violent and bloody revolutions. The relative political stability of the past 60 years is pretty much unprecedented. If the past is any indication, the transformation to complete freedom in China is not likely to go as peacefully as it did with the Soviet Union.

Sudden change in China usually results in the deaths of millions. They have little history of peaceful change. The government has an obligation to tread cautiously.</p></div><p>Though oddly enough, the "relative political stability of the past 60 years" in China has <em>also</em> resulted in the deaths of millions....
</p><p>The PRC government may trot out "stability" as a justification for their authoritarian policies, but if push comes to shove, there's little doubt they're quite willing to sacrifice large numbers of their populace to stay in power.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>China has a long history of extremely violent and bloody revolutions .
The relative political stability of the past 60 years is pretty much unprecedented .
If the past is any indication , the transformation to complete freedom in China is not likely to go as peacefully as it did with the Soviet Union .
Sudden change in China usually results in the deaths of millions .
They have little history of peaceful change .
The government has an obligation to tread cautiously.Though oddly enough , the " relative political stability of the past 60 years " in China has also resulted in the deaths of millions... . The PRC government may trot out " stability " as a justification for their authoritarian policies , but if push comes to shove , there 's little doubt they 're quite willing to sacrifice large numbers of their populace to stay in power .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>China has a long history of extremely violent and bloody revolutions.
The relative political stability of the past 60 years is pretty much unprecedented.
If the past is any indication, the transformation to complete freedom in China is not likely to go as peacefully as it did with the Soviet Union.
Sudden change in China usually results in the deaths of millions.
They have little history of peaceful change.
The government has an obligation to tread cautiously.Though oddly enough, the "relative political stability of the past 60 years" in China has also resulted in the deaths of millions....
The PRC government may trot out "stability" as a justification for their authoritarian policies, but if push comes to shove, there's little doubt they're quite willing to sacrifice large numbers of their populace to stay in power.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590680</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590020</id>
	<title>Good for China!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269342420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google watches literally EVERYTHING you do.  Google has used its dominance to attack and undermine Apple, and has tried to kill off the iPhone (for example).  I think it is a good thing that China is not allowing these shenanigans to continue and are being brave enough to stand up to the most evil company in the world.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google watches literally EVERYTHING you do .
Google has used its dominance to attack and undermine Apple , and has tried to kill off the iPhone ( for example ) .
I think it is a good thing that China is not allowing these shenanigans to continue and are being brave enough to stand up to the most evil company in the world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google watches literally EVERYTHING you do.
Google has used its dominance to attack and undermine Apple, and has tried to kill off the iPhone (for example).
I think it is a good thing that China is not allowing these shenanigans to continue and are being brave enough to stand up to the most evil company in the world.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31594372</id>
	<title>Re:Ping Pong</title>
	<author>magores</author>
	<datestamp>1269369780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In Beijing right now.  No, it's not.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In Beijing right now .
No , it 's not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Beijing right now.
No, it's not.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590108</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590260</id>
	<title>Re:Google needs to pull out.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269343320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm not sure how in the hell capitalists here in the U.S. decided we could do fair business with a totalitarian communist nation.</p><p>They don't value workers rights, free speech, or even a fair marketplace.</p></div><p>And neither do the capitalists here in the States.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure how in the hell capitalists here in the U.S. decided we could do fair business with a totalitarian communist nation.They do n't value workers rights , free speech , or even a fair marketplace.And neither do the capitalists here in the States .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure how in the hell capitalists here in the U.S. decided we could do fair business with a totalitarian communist nation.They don't value workers rights, free speech, or even a fair marketplace.And neither do the capitalists here in the States.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591768</id>
	<title>Not that bizarre.</title>
	<author>Kittenman</author>
	<datestamp>1269349920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext> I just read in the NZ Media that Bill Gates will be building Nuclear plants in the near future.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I just read in the NZ Media that Bill Gates will be building Nuclear plants in the near future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> I just read in the NZ Media that Bill Gates will be building Nuclear plants in the near future.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590016</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590308</id>
	<title>Re:Google needs to pull out.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269343560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>LOL you're kidding, right? You think US capitalists value those things? You don't have to go to China to see the flaw in that argument, but the paradox should have given you a clue.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>LOL you 're kidding , right ?
You think US capitalists value those things ?
You do n't have to go to China to see the flaw in that argument , but the paradox should have given you a clue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>LOL you're kidding, right?
You think US capitalists value those things?
You don't have to go to China to see the flaw in that argument, but the paradox should have given you a clue.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31594890</id>
	<title>The earth is trembling</title>
	<author>SpaghettiPattern</author>
	<datestamp>1269421440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The earth is trembling. I bet those Luddites at Google didn't think of that! Ha! Distinguished engineer Ken, changed the CS world with his buddy Dennis, but I bet he didn't see this coming!<br> <br>

Kidding aside, grab a deck chair and enjoy -well, appreciate- the spectacle unfold.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The earth is trembling .
I bet those Luddites at Google did n't think of that !
Ha ! Distinguished engineer Ken , changed the CS world with his buddy Dennis , but I bet he did n't see this coming !
Kidding aside , grab a deck chair and enjoy -well , appreciate- the spectacle unfold .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The earth is trembling.
I bet those Luddites at Google didn't think of that!
Ha! Distinguished engineer Ken, changed the CS world with his buddy Dennis, but I bet he didn't see this coming!
Kidding aside, grab a deck chair and enjoy -well, appreciate- the spectacle unfold.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31593522</id>
	<title>Re:Next move</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269362100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Like this one? http://www.o3bnetworks.com/</p><p>According to their homepage animation, it almost reaches the latitude line of Korea. Their about page says south of 45degrees, which is everything but the northernmost portions. And everyone thought it was for Africa...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Like this one ?
http : //www.o3bnetworks.com/According to their homepage animation , it almost reaches the latitude line of Korea .
Their about page says south of 45degrees , which is everything but the northernmost portions .
And everyone thought it was for Africa.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like this one?
http://www.o3bnetworks.com/According to their homepage animation, it almost reaches the latitude line of Korea.
Their about page says south of 45degrees, which is everything but the northernmost portions.
And everyone thought it was for Africa...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590016</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590908</id>
	<title>Re:Let me be the first to say</title>
	<author>Thinboy00</author>
	<datestamp>1269345960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They might just wait for him to die and <i>then</i> overthrow the government.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They might just wait for him to die and then overthrow the government .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They might just wait for him to die and then overthrow the government.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590646</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590952</id>
	<title>Re:Hit 'em where it hurts</title>
	<author>517714</author>
	<datestamp>1269346140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Maybe Google realized that selling ads in China was a little like peddling refrigerators to eskimos ^h^h^h^h^h^h indigenous peoples of the Arctic and Sub-Arctic.  The real money is selling Chinese products to the rest of the world.  Google will act duly repentant to the Chinese Geovernment and proceed unhindered with business that is aligned with the interests of the Chinese Government.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe Google realized that selling ads in China was a little like peddling refrigerators to eskimos ^ h ^ h ^ h ^ h ^ h ^ h indigenous peoples of the Arctic and Sub-Arctic .
The real money is selling Chinese products to the rest of the world .
Google will act duly repentant to the Chinese Geovernment and proceed unhindered with business that is aligned with the interests of the Chinese Government .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe Google realized that selling ads in China was a little like peddling refrigerators to eskimos ^h^h^h^h^h^h indigenous peoples of the Arctic and Sub-Arctic.
The real money is selling Chinese products to the rest of the world.
Google will act duly repentant to the Chinese Geovernment and proceed unhindered with business that is aligned with the interests of the Chinese Government.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590258</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31595482</id>
	<title>Re:Google needs to pull out.</title>
	<author>The Loony Monk</author>
	<datestamp>1269431640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"When goods do not cross borders, soldiers will." - Bastiat

I think that is the crux of the reason why business is done with China<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... you cannot change an entity with wich you do not interact.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" When goods do not cross borders , soldiers will .
" - Bastiat I think that is the crux of the reason why business is done with China ... you can not change an entity with wich you do not interact .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"When goods do not cross borders, soldiers will.
" - Bastiat

I think that is the crux of the reason why business is done with China ... you cannot change an entity with wich you do not interact.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592454</id>
	<title>Re:OMG</title>
	<author>tqk</author>
	<datestamp>1269354360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>WHY are there NO comments for this yet?!??!</p></div></blockquote><p>Have you heard of censorship?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)  Sorry, that's just a flippant way to answer, speaking to the situation.  My, what a comment that was of yours.  Not.</p><p>The funniest part of this battle is when you look at Baidu's "Business Overview."  It strives to serve Chinese web pages.  That's it.  Google gave Chinese businesses, students, scientists,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... access to foreign buyers, markets, and information.</p><p>To keep the former away from *one* of the latter (information), the PRC cuts them off from all three.  How to shoot yourselves in the foot, PRC!  Totalitarian idiots.</p><p>Good job on this one Google and Sergey.  I'm liking you a lot more today.  Thanks.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>WHY are there NO comments for this yet ? ! ? ?
! Have you heard of censorship ?
: - ) Sorry , that 's just a flippant way to answer , speaking to the situation .
My , what a comment that was of yours .
Not.The funniest part of this battle is when you look at Baidu 's " Business Overview .
" It strives to serve Chinese web pages .
That 's it .
Google gave Chinese businesses , students , scientists , ... access to foreign buyers , markets , and information.To keep the former away from * one * of the latter ( information ) , the PRC cuts them off from all three .
How to shoot yourselves in the foot , PRC !
Totalitarian idiots.Good job on this one Google and Sergey .
I 'm liking you a lot more today .
Thanks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WHY are there NO comments for this yet?!??
!Have you heard of censorship?
:-)  Sorry, that's just a flippant way to answer, speaking to the situation.
My, what a comment that was of yours.
Not.The funniest part of this battle is when you look at Baidu's "Business Overview.
"  It strives to serve Chinese web pages.
That's it.
Google gave Chinese businesses, students, scientists, ... access to foreign buyers, markets, and information.To keep the former away from *one* of the latter (information), the PRC cuts them off from all three.
How to shoot yourselves in the foot, PRC!
Totalitarian idiots.Good job on this one Google and Sergey.
I'm liking you a lot more today.
Thanks.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589888</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31598008</id>
	<title>Re:Ping Pong</title>
	<author>Yvanhoe</author>
	<datestamp>1269447180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They should open Tor gateways in Hong Kong. We could do with a few more Gb/s of bandwidth.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They should open Tor gateways in Hong Kong .
We could do with a few more Gb/s of bandwidth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They should open Tor gateways in Hong Kong.
We could do with a few more Gb/s of bandwidth.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591040</id>
	<title>Google should go to war</title>
	<author>yelirekim</author>
	<datestamp>1269346500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They should task all of the potentially soon to be laid off workers with the new full time goal of dismantling internet censorship in China.  I for one would welcome WWIII at their hands.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They should task all of the potentially soon to be laid off workers with the new full time goal of dismantling internet censorship in China .
I for one would welcome WWIII at their hands .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They should task all of the potentially soon to be laid off workers with the new full time goal of dismantling internet censorship in China.
I for one would welcome WWIII at their hands.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589908</id>
	<title>Let the games begin</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269341940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is going to be a long battle with everyone loosing in the end.  Now they are removing Android Phones from China.  I wish Google luck and hope they stick to it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is going to be a long battle with everyone loosing in the end .
Now they are removing Android Phones from China .
I wish Google luck and hope they stick to it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is going to be a long battle with everyone loosing in the end.
Now they are removing Android Phones from China.
I wish Google luck and hope they stick to it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591156</id>
	<title>Re:Hit 'em where it hurts</title>
	<author>groovyPost</author>
	<datestamp>1269346980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you really want to hurt Google, don't completely block access... just filter out all their ads.</p></div><p>Awesome!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you really want to hurt Google , do n't completely block access... just filter out all their ads.Awesome !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you really want to hurt Google, don't completely block access... just filter out all their ads.Awesome!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590258</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591658</id>
	<title>Re:Is this really that surprising?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269349380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Everyone expected China to do this. It also means that they are saying that the Chinese in HK are different from the rest of China. I wonder if that will affect anything. Not to be cynical, but I am sure the propaganda machine will go on overdrive to put a spin on it.</p></div></blockquote><p>Why would it affect anything, or require extra propaganda? In many ways HK is like a different country, with its own judicial system, police force, passports, currency, border crossings, etc. And it's not exactly a big secret in China that the Chinese in HK are treated very differently from those in the mainland.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Everyone expected China to do this .
It also means that they are saying that the Chinese in HK are different from the rest of China .
I wonder if that will affect anything .
Not to be cynical , but I am sure the propaganda machine will go on overdrive to put a spin on it.Why would it affect anything , or require extra propaganda ?
In many ways HK is like a different country , with its own judicial system , police force , passports , currency , border crossings , etc .
And it 's not exactly a big secret in China that the Chinese in HK are treated very differently from those in the mainland .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everyone expected China to do this.
It also means that they are saying that the Chinese in HK are different from the rest of China.
I wonder if that will affect anything.
Not to be cynical, but I am sure the propaganda machine will go on overdrive to put a spin on it.Why would it affect anything, or require extra propaganda?
In many ways HK is like a different country, with its own judicial system, police force, passports, currency, border crossings, etc.
And it's not exactly a big secret in China that the Chinese in HK are treated very differently from those in the mainland.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589984</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590706</id>
	<title>Re:Google needs to pull out.</title>
	<author>TheSync</author>
	<datestamp>1269345240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Capitalists, as a class, aren't particularly known for being supporters of workers rights, free speech, or a fair marketplace.</i></p><p>Slashdot posters, as a class, are particularly known for making sweeping abstract generalizations with no data to support them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Capitalists , as a class , are n't particularly known for being supporters of workers rights , free speech , or a fair marketplace.Slashdot posters , as a class , are particularly known for making sweeping abstract generalizations with no data to support them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Capitalists, as a class, aren't particularly known for being supporters of workers rights, free speech, or a fair marketplace.Slashdot posters, as a class, are particularly known for making sweeping abstract generalizations with no data to support them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590056</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31594554</id>
	<title>Re:Google needs to pull out.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269372600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yo hit the nail right on the head there Beezlebud. Especially with the lack of enforcement of intellecual property protection laws.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yo hit the nail right on the head there Beezlebud .
Especially with the lack of enforcement of intellecual property protection laws .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yo hit the nail right on the head there Beezlebud.
Especially with the lack of enforcement of intellecual property protection laws.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589984</id>
	<title>Is this really that surprising?</title>
	<author>vivin</author>
	<datestamp>1269342240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everyone expected China to do this. It also means that they are saying that the Chinese in HK are different from the rest of China. I wonder if that will affect anything. Not to be cynical, but I am sure the propaganda machine will go on overdrive to put a spin on it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everyone expected China to do this .
It also means that they are saying that the Chinese in HK are different from the rest of China .
I wonder if that will affect anything .
Not to be cynical , but I am sure the propaganda machine will go on overdrive to put a spin on it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everyone expected China to do this.
It also means that they are saying that the Chinese in HK are different from the rest of China.
I wonder if that will affect anything.
Not to be cynical, but I am sure the propaganda machine will go on overdrive to put a spin on it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592366</id>
	<title>Morals or Money</title>
	<author>asamad</author>
	<datestamp>1269353580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So it comes down to doing the right thing or going for the money.</p><p>My Guess in the long run, bad for Google.  China will at some point of time outstrip the US, specially when they don't open up their markets for example the pegged rmb.  Some company will fill the gap in China and they will grow bigger than Google.  Look at the telco how big are they<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>This presumes that India take quite a while to come on line - which it looks like they are slow to get the ball rolling.</p><p>But cudos to Google, they are doing the right thing which is why I would/do buy from google.  and why I feel like I can trust google, keep it up guys you have my support<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So it comes down to doing the right thing or going for the money.My Guess in the long run , bad for Google .
China will at some point of time outstrip the US , specially when they do n't open up their markets for example the pegged rmb .
Some company will fill the gap in China and they will grow bigger than Google .
Look at the telco how big are they : ) This presumes that India take quite a while to come on line - which it looks like they are slow to get the ball rolling.But cudos to Google , they are doing the right thing which is why I would/do buy from google .
and why I feel like I can trust google , keep it up guys you have my support : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So it comes down to doing the right thing or going for the money.My Guess in the long run, bad for Google.
China will at some point of time outstrip the US, specially when they don't open up their markets for example the pegged rmb.
Some company will fill the gap in China and they will grow bigger than Google.
Look at the telco how big are they :)This presumes that India take quite a while to come on line - which it looks like they are slow to get the ball rolling.But cudos to Google, they are doing the right thing which is why I would/do buy from google.
and why I feel like I can trust google, keep it up guys you have my support :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591072</id>
	<title>Re:OMG</title>
	<author>groovyPost</author>
	<datestamp>1269346620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>WHY are there NO comments for this yet?!??!</p></div><p>Not very interesting.  China says play by our rules or get out.  Google needs China more than China needs google.  IMOP, this is just one way China get's to squash western competition from entering into China in the search space.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>WHY are there NO comments for this yet ? ! ? ?
! Not very interesting .
China says play by our rules or get out .
Google needs China more than China needs google .
IMOP , this is just one way China get 's to squash western competition from entering into China in the search space .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WHY are there NO comments for this yet?!??
!Not very interesting.
China says play by our rules or get out.
Google needs China more than China needs google.
IMOP, this is just one way China get's to squash western competition from entering into China in the search space.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589888</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31593964</id>
	<title>Re:Next move</title>
	<author>mahadiga</author>
	<datestamp>1269365640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590016</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590276</id>
	<title>Well let me say this...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269343440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Supplies!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Supplies !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Supplies!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31605352</id>
	<title>Re:Chinese protectionism</title>
	<author>jwhitener</author>
	<datestamp>1269433740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, and it doesn't help that our tariff on chinese goods is basically zero percent while their tariff on our goods range from 60\% to 10\%.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , and it does n't help that our tariff on chinese goods is basically zero percent while their tariff on our goods range from 60 \ % to 10 \ % .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, and it doesn't help that our tariff on chinese goods is basically zero percent while their tariff on our goods range from 60\% to 10\%.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592058</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590944</id>
	<title>Re:Google needs to pull out.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269346140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What do you mean "as a class"? "As a class" has absolutly no fucking meaning. Stop doing that. Capitalism == free market place. FULL STOP. Worker's rights (yeah right, what rights?) and free speach have really nothing to do with capitalism. And by the way, the US is *not* a capatilist country, contrarily to what many believe. Get your facts straight before you start to preach.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What do you mean " as a class " ?
" As a class " has absolutly no fucking meaning .
Stop doing that .
Capitalism = = free market place .
FULL STOP .
Worker 's rights ( yeah right , what rights ?
) and free speach have really nothing to do with capitalism .
And by the way , the US is * not * a capatilist country , contrarily to what many believe .
Get your facts straight before you start to preach .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What do you mean "as a class"?
"As a class" has absolutly no fucking meaning.
Stop doing that.
Capitalism == free market place.
FULL STOP.
Worker's rights (yeah right, what rights?
) and free speach have really nothing to do with capitalism.
And by the way, the US is *not* a capatilist country, contrarily to what many believe.
Get your facts straight before you start to preach.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590056</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592058</id>
	<title>Chinese protectionism</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269351540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>China has worked out how to be protectionist without being <i>provably protectionist</i> to the WTO.  So, rather than offer an (illegal) export subsidy to it's manufacturers, it lowers its currency by regulation to give the same mathematical effect without allowing retaliation from other WTO countries.  Rather than applying illegal tax or tariff penalties on foreign corporation, it uses clandestine hacking attempts, trumped up charges tried in closed courts (eg, Rio Tinto), and creates an environment where anybody could be arrested at any time at the government's whim, to make life uncomfortable for foreign corporations on its shores, while cosseting its own companies that have close ties to the government.</p><p>And, sadly, Obama, Brown, and other western leaders just play along, making comments like "we mustn't go down the seductive but damaging path of protectionism", not realising that their largest trading partner has already run gleefully down the path of protectionism and the west has just been too blind to notice.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>China has worked out how to be protectionist without being provably protectionist to the WTO .
So , rather than offer an ( illegal ) export subsidy to it 's manufacturers , it lowers its currency by regulation to give the same mathematical effect without allowing retaliation from other WTO countries .
Rather than applying illegal tax or tariff penalties on foreign corporation , it uses clandestine hacking attempts , trumped up charges tried in closed courts ( eg , Rio Tinto ) , and creates an environment where anybody could be arrested at any time at the government 's whim , to make life uncomfortable for foreign corporations on its shores , while cosseting its own companies that have close ties to the government.And , sadly , Obama , Brown , and other western leaders just play along , making comments like " we must n't go down the seductive but damaging path of protectionism " , not realising that their largest trading partner has already run gleefully down the path of protectionism and the west has just been too blind to notice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>China has worked out how to be protectionist without being provably protectionist to the WTO.
So, rather than offer an (illegal) export subsidy to it's manufacturers, it lowers its currency by regulation to give the same mathematical effect without allowing retaliation from other WTO countries.
Rather than applying illegal tax or tariff penalties on foreign corporation, it uses clandestine hacking attempts, trumped up charges tried in closed courts (eg, Rio Tinto), and creates an environment where anybody could be arrested at any time at the government's whim, to make life uncomfortable for foreign corporations on its shores, while cosseting its own companies that have close ties to the government.And, sadly, Obama, Brown, and other western leaders just play along, making comments like "we mustn't go down the seductive but damaging path of protectionism", not realising that their largest trading partner has already run gleefully down the path of protectionism and the west has just been too blind to notice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590412</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592832</id>
	<title>No ground gained</title>
	<author>sixknowspring</author>
	<datestamp>1269356640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is just going to be a back and forth thing. I don't think this battle over censorship is going to go anywhere. Google is losing it's China market, and, well, China is still going to be censoring everything.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is just going to be a back and forth thing .
I do n't think this battle over censorship is going to go anywhere .
Google is losing it 's China market , and , well , China is still going to be censoring everything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is just going to be a back and forth thing.
I don't think this battle over censorship is going to go anywhere.
Google is losing it's China market, and, well, China is still going to be censoring everything.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590124</id>
	<title>Re:Well,</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269342900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You mean, histerically? Or like a totalitarian regime? Please be more precise when refering to girls...</htmltext>
<tokenext>You mean , histerically ?
Or like a totalitarian regime ?
Please be more precise when refering to girls.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You mean, histerically?
Or like a totalitarian regime?
Please be more precise when refering to girls...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589958</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592222</id>
	<title>Re:And let the war begin</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269352620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>60 years? You might want to read up on the period known as the Cultural Revolution.</p><p>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural\_revolution</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>60 years ?
You might want to read up on the period known as the Cultural Revolution.http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural \ _revolution</tokentext>
<sentencetext>60 years?
You might want to read up on the period known as the Cultural Revolution.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural\_revolution</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590680</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590464</id>
	<title>Re:Ping Pong</title>
	<author>Charliemopps</author>
	<datestamp>1269344280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or Google could start redirecting users to random proxy services.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or Google could start redirecting users to random proxy services .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or Google could start redirecting users to random proxy services.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590746</id>
	<title>Re:Let the games begin</title>
	<author>GetTragic</author>
	<datestamp>1269345360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>i wish china would "loose in the end"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>i wish china would " loose in the end "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i wish china would "loose in the end"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589908</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590248</id>
	<title>In communist China...</title>
	<author>paxcoder</author>
	<datestamp>1269343320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>web crawlers help you not find content.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>web crawlers help you not find content .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>web crawlers help you not find content.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590650</id>
	<title>Re:Google needs to pull out.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269345000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Quite the opposite here. You chose a word and then brought things forward that are avid in modern day China.</p><p>Obama policy has been labeled as totalitarian due to the illicit use of authority and enforcement. Remember that it was not quite legal to tap with Bush W.</p><p>This is about fair business here - for Google at least. Not cool to rape with any kind of hate that they are finding in China.</p><p>With rights, speech, and fairness, this was so overdone that today you have a Readers' Digest in Chinese that is published in many places world wide.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Quite the opposite here .
You chose a word and then brought things forward that are avid in modern day China.Obama policy has been labeled as totalitarian due to the illicit use of authority and enforcement .
Remember that it was not quite legal to tap with Bush W.This is about fair business here - for Google at least .
Not cool to rape with any kind of hate that they are finding in China.With rights , speech , and fairness , this was so overdone that today you have a Readers ' Digest in Chinese that is published in many places world wide .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Quite the opposite here.
You chose a word and then brought things forward that are avid in modern day China.Obama policy has been labeled as totalitarian due to the illicit use of authority and enforcement.
Remember that it was not quite legal to tap with Bush W.This is about fair business here - for Google at least.
Not cool to rape with any kind of hate that they are finding in China.With rights, speech, and fairness, this was so overdone that today you have a Readers' Digest in Chinese that is published in many places world wide.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590018</id>
	<title>Re:Google needs to pull out.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269342420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pull out?</p><p>No need, China baby. You see, you can't get in trouble the first you do it; the seed of democracy won't be planted the first time.  After the first time, we'll have to pull out. That is unless we do it standing up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pull out ? No need , China baby .
You see , you ca n't get in trouble the first you do it ; the seed of democracy wo n't be planted the first time .
After the first time , we 'll have to pull out .
That is unless we do it standing up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pull out?No need, China baby.
You see, you can't get in trouble the first you do it; the seed of democracy won't be planted the first time.
After the first time, we'll have to pull out.
That is unless we do it standing up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591906</id>
	<title>Re:Ping Pong</title>
	<author>GlassHeart</author>
	<datestamp>1269350520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>China will never budge on these issues (at least not in my lifetime)</p></div></blockquote><p>I don't know how old you are, but 100 years ago today China was a monarchy - the real kind that people had to revolt to overthrow. In 1949 it split into two pieces, and today in Taiwan (which calls itself the Republic of China) you can observe a loud, obnoxious, but vibrant democracy, even though martial law was not lifted until 1987. China, on the other hand, lost decades to the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution, and in many ways is 20 years behind Taiwan, going through their rapid economic rise just like Taiwan did in the 80s. In the 90s, the Taiwanese were rich enough and began paying more attention to government, and in 2000 threw out the long-ruling KMT party in elections.</p><p>So if you have another 30 years to live, I'd be cautiously optimistic.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>China will never budge on these issues ( at least not in my lifetime ) I do n't know how old you are , but 100 years ago today China was a monarchy - the real kind that people had to revolt to overthrow .
In 1949 it split into two pieces , and today in Taiwan ( which calls itself the Republic of China ) you can observe a loud , obnoxious , but vibrant democracy , even though martial law was not lifted until 1987 .
China , on the other hand , lost decades to the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution , and in many ways is 20 years behind Taiwan , going through their rapid economic rise just like Taiwan did in the 80s .
In the 90s , the Taiwanese were rich enough and began paying more attention to government , and in 2000 threw out the long-ruling KMT party in elections.So if you have another 30 years to live , I 'd be cautiously optimistic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>China will never budge on these issues (at least not in my lifetime)I don't know how old you are, but 100 years ago today China was a monarchy - the real kind that people had to revolt to overthrow.
In 1949 it split into two pieces, and today in Taiwan (which calls itself the Republic of China) you can observe a loud, obnoxious, but vibrant democracy, even though martial law was not lifted until 1987.
China, on the other hand, lost decades to the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution, and in many ways is 20 years behind Taiwan, going through their rapid economic rise just like Taiwan did in the 80s.
In the 90s, the Taiwanese were rich enough and began paying more attention to government, and in 2000 threw out the long-ruling KMT party in elections.So if you have another 30 years to live, I'd be cautiously optimistic.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590316</id>
	<title>Here we go...</title>
	<author>jaxtherat</author>
	<datestamp>1269343620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let the great pissing contest of 2010 begin...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let the great pissing contest of 2010 begin.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let the great pissing contest of 2010 begin...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31593542</id>
	<title>Re:And let the war begin</title>
	<author>tokenshi</author>
	<datestamp>1269362220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wong wong wong... I mean wrong.</p><p>China had a republic for a few years after the end of the Qing dynasty (1912-1949 to be exact.)  Had they stayed with it, this conversation probably would not even be happening right now.</p><p>The revolution was violent sure... But far less people died overthrowing the Qing than have been killed by the Communist Government in even the last 20 years (Uygurs, Tibetans, Zhuang, Falun Gong, etc. have all been victimized by the government in all manner of ways including straight up murder.)</p><p>China's current political stability is a ruse, nothing more, you go into southern China (Guangxi, Yunnan) and it's basically the wild west right now.</p><p>I lived in Yangshuo (Guangxi) for almost three years, and Beijing for one year, and lost count of how many times I saw government personal of one for or the other behaving like heshehui (mafia.)  I can elaborate more if people care, the point is, the China's government is hurting its people.</p><p>Google isn't exactly doing right by them, but at least they're taking a moral stand.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wong wong wong... I mean wrong.China had a republic for a few years after the end of the Qing dynasty ( 1912-1949 to be exact .
) Had they stayed with it , this conversation probably would not even be happening right now.The revolution was violent sure... But far less people died overthrowing the Qing than have been killed by the Communist Government in even the last 20 years ( Uygurs , Tibetans , Zhuang , Falun Gong , etc .
have all been victimized by the government in all manner of ways including straight up murder .
) China 's current political stability is a ruse , nothing more , you go into southern China ( Guangxi , Yunnan ) and it 's basically the wild west right now.I lived in Yangshuo ( Guangxi ) for almost three years , and Beijing for one year , and lost count of how many times I saw government personal of one for or the other behaving like heshehui ( mafia .
) I can elaborate more if people care , the point is , the China 's government is hurting its people.Google is n't exactly doing right by them , but at least they 're taking a moral stand .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wong wong wong... I mean wrong.China had a republic for a few years after the end of the Qing dynasty (1912-1949 to be exact.
)  Had they stayed with it, this conversation probably would not even be happening right now.The revolution was violent sure... But far less people died overthrowing the Qing than have been killed by the Communist Government in even the last 20 years (Uygurs, Tibetans, Zhuang, Falun Gong, etc.
have all been victimized by the government in all manner of ways including straight up murder.
)China's current political stability is a ruse, nothing more, you go into southern China (Guangxi, Yunnan) and it's basically the wild west right now.I lived in Yangshuo (Guangxi) for almost three years, and Beijing for one year, and lost count of how many times I saw government personal of one for or the other behaving like heshehui (mafia.
)  I can elaborate more if people care, the point is, the China's government is hurting its people.Google isn't exactly doing right by them, but at least they're taking a moral stand.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590680</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592934</id>
	<title>Re:And let the war begin</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1269357420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It didn't go peacefully in the USSR, either. For one thing, you might have noticed that there's no such country, anymore. And then there were:</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumgait\_pogrom" title="wikipedia.org">Sumgait massacre</a> [wikipedia.org]<br><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nagorno-Karabakh\_War" title="wikipedia.org">War in Nagorno-Karabakh</a> [wikipedia.org]<br><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991&ndash;1992\_South\_Ossetia\_War" title="wikipedia.org">War in South Ossetia</a> [wikipedia.org]<br><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War\_in\_Abkhazia\_(1992&ndash;1993)" title="wikipedia.org">War in Abkhazia</a> [wikipedia.org]<br><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War\_of\_Transnistria" title="wikipedia.org">War in Transnistria</a> [wikipedia.org]<br><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tajikistan\_civil\_war" title="wikipedia.org">Civil war in Tajikistan</a> [wikipedia.org]<br>and many more.</p><p>War in Chechnya is also, to large extent, a legacy of the Soviet collapse.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It did n't go peacefully in the USSR , either .
For one thing , you might have noticed that there 's no such country , anymore .
And then there were : Sumgait massacre [ wikipedia.org ] War in Nagorno-Karabakh [ wikipedia.org ] War in South Ossetia [ wikipedia.org ] War in Abkhazia [ wikipedia.org ] War in Transnistria [ wikipedia.org ] Civil war in Tajikistan [ wikipedia.org ] and many more.War in Chechnya is also , to large extent , a legacy of the Soviet collapse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It didn't go peacefully in the USSR, either.
For one thing, you might have noticed that there's no such country, anymore.
And then there were:Sumgait massacre [wikipedia.org]War in Nagorno-Karabakh [wikipedia.org]War in South Ossetia [wikipedia.org]War in Abkhazia [wikipedia.org]War in Transnistria [wikipedia.org]Civil war in Tajikistan [wikipedia.org]and many more.War in Chechnya is also, to large extent, a legacy of the Soviet collapse.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590680</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591770</id>
	<title>US Gov. backs Google.</title>
	<author>doug20r</author>
	<datestamp>1269349920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Interesting how closely the US Government backs Google in this dispute.  They recently stated that this shows it is too difficult to do business in China.  Clearly just propaganda as this dispute has nothing to do with difficulty doing business, Google are immaturely pushing a political agenda or a PR stunt and were already able to comply with the Chinese laws.  I don't consider Google a force for good in the free world, quite the opposite.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Interesting how closely the US Government backs Google in this dispute .
They recently stated that this shows it is too difficult to do business in China .
Clearly just propaganda as this dispute has nothing to do with difficulty doing business , Google are immaturely pushing a political agenda or a PR stunt and were already able to comply with the Chinese laws .
I do n't consider Google a force for good in the free world , quite the opposite .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interesting how closely the US Government backs Google in this dispute.
They recently stated that this shows it is too difficult to do business in China.
Clearly just propaganda as this dispute has nothing to do with difficulty doing business, Google are immaturely pushing a political agenda or a PR stunt and were already able to comply with the Chinese laws.
I don't consider Google a force for good in the free world, quite the opposite.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590846</id>
	<title>Re:And let the war begin</title>
	<author>Bugamn</author>
	<datestamp>1269345780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This Spring, in the Cinemas:

China vs. Google:

It doesn't matter who wins, the chinese loses.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This Spring , in the Cinemas : China vs. Google : It does n't matter who wins , the chinese loses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This Spring, in the Cinemas:

China vs. Google:

It doesn't matter who wins, the chinese loses.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589914</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590290</id>
	<title>U.S. Dollars</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269343500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Google's pull-out or not will have exactly zero effect on the amount of U.S. dollars flooding into China. Why would the Chinese govt. care in the least if google leaves.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google 's pull-out or not will have exactly zero effect on the amount of U.S. dollars flooding into China .
Why would the Chinese govt .
care in the least if google leaves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google's pull-out or not will have exactly zero effect on the amount of U.S. dollars flooding into China.
Why would the Chinese govt.
care in the least if google leaves.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590258</id>
	<title>Hit 'em where it hurts</title>
	<author>Locke2005</author>
	<datestamp>1269343320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you really want to hurt Google, don't completely block access... just filter out all their ads.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you really want to hurt Google , do n't completely block access... just filter out all their ads .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you really want to hurt Google, don't completely block access... just filter out all their ads.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591396</id>
	<title>Re:Google needs to pull out.</title>
	<author>gangien</author>
	<datestamp>1269347880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>not directly.  But thanks to the fact that in a free market, a worker can choose to work where he or she wants, guess what happens?  the employers have to care about their employees, or else they'll leave.  Good lord, look at all the people on slashdot, benefiting from technology, one of the places where capitalism has been allowed to thrive.  What do we bitch about? meetings, coffee not being warm?  booo fucking hoo.</p><p>Or let's look at hong kong.  a place where government did very little.  in 50 years, less than a life time, they went from being third world, to being among the richest.</p><p>So in reality, they care about the workers, because they want the most of the workers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>not directly .
But thanks to the fact that in a free market , a worker can choose to work where he or she wants , guess what happens ?
the employers have to care about their employees , or else they 'll leave .
Good lord , look at all the people on slashdot , benefiting from technology , one of the places where capitalism has been allowed to thrive .
What do we bitch about ?
meetings , coffee not being warm ?
booo fucking hoo.Or let 's look at hong kong .
a place where government did very little .
in 50 years , less than a life time , they went from being third world , to being among the richest.So in reality , they care about the workers , because they want the most of the workers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>not directly.
But thanks to the fact that in a free market, a worker can choose to work where he or she wants, guess what happens?
the employers have to care about their employees, or else they'll leave.
Good lord, look at all the people on slashdot, benefiting from technology, one of the places where capitalism has been allowed to thrive.
What do we bitch about?
meetings, coffee not being warm?
booo fucking hoo.Or let's look at hong kong.
a place where government did very little.
in 50 years, less than a life time, they went from being third world, to being among the richest.So in reality, they care about the workers, because they want the most of the workers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590056</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592944</id>
	<title>Re:Let the games begin</title>
	<author>shentino</author>
	<datestamp>1269357480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why are they taking android away?</p><p>Did Google's little sneak tactic piss off Beijing and make them thunder down an ultimatum of "GTFO OR ELSE!"?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why are they taking android away ? Did Google 's little sneak tactic piss off Beijing and make them thunder down an ultimatum of " GTFO OR ELSE !
" ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why are they taking android away?Did Google's little sneak tactic piss off Beijing and make them thunder down an ultimatum of "GTFO OR ELSE!
"?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589908</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591078</id>
	<title>Re:And let the war begin</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269346680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Exactly. The most interesting part will be when western media will start blaming Google for what the Chinese government does.<br>As ridiculous as it would be, I'm sure it will happen at some point.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly .
The most interesting part will be when western media will start blaming Google for what the Chinese government does.As ridiculous as it would be , I 'm sure it will happen at some point .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly.
The most interesting part will be when western media will start blaming Google for what the Chinese government does.As ridiculous as it would be, I'm sure it will happen at some point.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589914</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31595022</id>
	<title>and the winner is...</title>
	<author>GNUPublicLicense</author>
	<datestamp>1269426120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That war between google and China is non-sense... it does too much favor a company that sells locked-closed sources operating systems. Fishy. Are they behind all this?</htmltext>
<tokenext>That war between google and China is non-sense... it does too much favor a company that sells locked-closed sources operating systems .
Fishy. Are they behind all this ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That war between google and China is non-sense... it does too much favor a company that sells locked-closed sources operating systems.
Fishy. Are they behind all this?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590072</id>
	<title>Google's war with China</title>
	<author>yorgasor</author>
	<datestamp>1269342660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The war between China and Google will certainly become more interesting when Google develops its own nuclear weapons.  They probably have all the information they need to complete them, all they have to do is... google it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The war between China and Google will certainly become more interesting when Google develops its own nuclear weapons .
They probably have all the information they need to complete them , all they have to do is... google it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The war between China and Google will certainly become more interesting when Google develops its own nuclear weapons.
They probably have all the information they need to complete them, all they have to do is... google it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590412</id>
	<title>Re:Google needs to pull out.</title>
	<author>khallow</author>
	<datestamp>1269344100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>They don't value workers rights, free speech, or even a fair marketplace.</p></div><p>Nah, the real problem is that the Chinese government keeps changing the rules. Every business there is doing something illegal, due to the complexity and arbitrariness of the Chinese regulatory environment. That means any time the government wants to, it can squeeze them or drive them out of China. On top of that, some government agency can just make up rules on the spot and crush a business on that basis alone. And you can't count on the bureaucrats to stay bought. Well, maybe local Chinese businesses can, but not the foreign ones that are getting shafted here.<br> <br>

Business thrives in a world where the rules are constant. Either government is fair and consistent or when it's bought, it stays bought. Uncertainty like this kills the ability of business to predict what it should do in the future. Even if you don't get mugged by the Chinese government, you still need to take them into account.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They do n't value workers rights , free speech , or even a fair marketplace.Nah , the real problem is that the Chinese government keeps changing the rules .
Every business there is doing something illegal , due to the complexity and arbitrariness of the Chinese regulatory environment .
That means any time the government wants to , it can squeeze them or drive them out of China .
On top of that , some government agency can just make up rules on the spot and crush a business on that basis alone .
And you ca n't count on the bureaucrats to stay bought .
Well , maybe local Chinese businesses can , but not the foreign ones that are getting shafted here .
Business thrives in a world where the rules are constant .
Either government is fair and consistent or when it 's bought , it stays bought .
Uncertainty like this kills the ability of business to predict what it should do in the future .
Even if you do n't get mugged by the Chinese government , you still need to take them into account .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They don't value workers rights, free speech, or even a fair marketplace.Nah, the real problem is that the Chinese government keeps changing the rules.
Every business there is doing something illegal, due to the complexity and arbitrariness of the Chinese regulatory environment.
That means any time the government wants to, it can squeeze them or drive them out of China.
On top of that, some government agency can just make up rules on the spot and crush a business on that basis alone.
And you can't count on the bureaucrats to stay bought.
Well, maybe local Chinese businesses can, but not the foreign ones that are getting shafted here.
Business thrives in a world where the rules are constant.
Either government is fair and consistent or when it's bought, it stays bought.
Uncertainty like this kills the ability of business to predict what it should do in the future.
Even if you don't get mugged by the Chinese government, you still need to take them into account.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590422</id>
	<title>Re:Google needs to pull out.</title>
	<author>Xemu</author>
	<datestamp>1269344100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I'm not sure how in the hell capitalists here in the U.S. decided we could do fair business with a totalitarian communist nation. They don't value workers rights, free speech, or even a fair marketplace.</p></div></blockquote><p>The US capitalists shouldn't worry: the totalitarian communist nation don't put a lot of value into those things either.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure how in the hell capitalists here in the U.S. decided we could do fair business with a totalitarian communist nation .
They do n't value workers rights , free speech , or even a fair marketplace.The US capitalists should n't worry : the totalitarian communist nation do n't put a lot of value into those things either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure how in the hell capitalists here in the U.S. decided we could do fair business with a totalitarian communist nation.
They don't value workers rights, free speech, or even a fair marketplace.The US capitalists shouldn't worry: the totalitarian communist nation don't put a lot of value into those things either.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589904</id>
	<title>Let me be the first to say</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269341940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Owned. No one can win against the chinese government, unfortunately.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Owned .
No one can win against the chinese government , unfortunately .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Owned.
No one can win against the chinese government, unfortunately.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590436</id>
	<title>Re:Ping Pong</title>
	<author>kvezach</author>
	<datestamp>1269344160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As far as I understand, the kind of filtering China is doing here is based on URLs, so that the firewalls don't have to be too stateful. That's why people in China can contact Google HK just fine, but when they try to search for "tiananmen" or "tank man", boom, timeout.<br> <br>

However, when using SSL, the URLs aren't actually transmitted in plaintext; it would take China a CPU-intensive man-in-the-middle attack to break it. So why can't Google just retaliate by redirecting <a href="http://google.com.hk/" title="google.com.hk">http://google.com.hk/</a> [google.com.hk] to a special <a href="https://google.com.hk/" title="google.com.hk">https://google.com.hk/</a> [google.com.hk] or something to that effect? Further blocking would become cat-and-mouse, and would require China to block Google outright.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As far as I understand , the kind of filtering China is doing here is based on URLs , so that the firewalls do n't have to be too stateful .
That 's why people in China can contact Google HK just fine , but when they try to search for " tiananmen " or " tank man " , boom , timeout .
However , when using SSL , the URLs are n't actually transmitted in plaintext ; it would take China a CPU-intensive man-in-the-middle attack to break it .
So why ca n't Google just retaliate by redirecting http : //google.com.hk/ [ google.com.hk ] to a special https : //google.com.hk/ [ google.com.hk ] or something to that effect ?
Further blocking would become cat-and-mouse , and would require China to block Google outright .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As far as I understand, the kind of filtering China is doing here is based on URLs, so that the firewalls don't have to be too stateful.
That's why people in China can contact Google HK just fine, but when they try to search for "tiananmen" or "tank man", boom, timeout.
However, when using SSL, the URLs aren't actually transmitted in plaintext; it would take China a CPU-intensive man-in-the-middle attack to break it.
So why can't Google just retaliate by redirecting http://google.com.hk/ [google.com.hk] to a special https://google.com.hk/ [google.com.hk] or something to that effect?
Further blocking would become cat-and-mouse, and would require China to block Google outright.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31594642</id>
	<title>Collective response</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269373980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think the 'solution' is simple: In US and EU, start blocking incoming http requests from China. Let them suffer from not being able to access the information on the internet. Start blocking facebook, wikipedia, youtube, yahoo, live, blogger, msn, twitter, wordpress, amazon, myspace, microsoft, bing, ebay, linkedin, rapidshare, craigslist, imdb, bbc, orkut, cnn.... need I go on?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the 'solution ' is simple : In US and EU , start blocking incoming http requests from China .
Let them suffer from not being able to access the information on the internet .
Start blocking facebook , wikipedia , youtube , yahoo , live , blogger , msn , twitter , wordpress , amazon , myspace , microsoft , bing , ebay , linkedin , rapidshare , craigslist , imdb , bbc , orkut , cnn.... need I go on ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the 'solution' is simple: In US and EU, start blocking incoming http requests from China.
Let them suffer from not being able to access the information on the internet.
Start blocking facebook, wikipedia, youtube, yahoo, live, blogger, msn, twitter, wordpress, amazon, myspace, microsoft, bing, ebay, linkedin, rapidshare, craigslist, imdb, bbc, orkut, cnn.... need I go on?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590694</id>
	<title>Re:Let me be the first to say</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269345180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course he was wrong. As long as there are enough people who are still comfortable enough  or feel they have too much to lose  the they will put up with almost anything. The US illustrates this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course he was wrong .
As long as there are enough people who are still comfortable enough or feel they have too much to lose the they will put up with almost anything .
The US illustrates this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course he was wrong.
As long as there are enough people who are still comfortable enough  or feel they have too much to lose  the they will put up with almost anything.
The US illustrates this.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589928</id>
	<title>I'm a Little More Concerned About</title>
	<author>eldavojohn</author>
	<datestamp>1269342060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>

The Chinese citizen employees at Google.cn.  My thoughts are with them if they are experiencing anything negative other than unemployment from their parent company's decision to thumb their nose at the Chinese government.  <br> <br>

Let's hope that working for Google.cn doesn't leave them with a social stigma or government imposed sanction or -- far worse -- bodily harm to them and their families.  Hopefully their red society didn't give them a scarlet letter.  <br> <br>

That said, the Chinese people have little to look forward to with Baidu in such a dominating lead they can stagnate back to the stone age and people won't have much of a choice.  It'll be interesting to see how much of Google.cn's 35\% marketshare Bing manages to snag.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Chinese citizen employees at Google.cn .
My thoughts are with them if they are experiencing anything negative other than unemployment from their parent company 's decision to thumb their nose at the Chinese government .
Let 's hope that working for Google.cn does n't leave them with a social stigma or government imposed sanction or -- far worse -- bodily harm to them and their families .
Hopefully their red society did n't give them a scarlet letter .
That said , the Chinese people have little to look forward to with Baidu in such a dominating lead they can stagnate back to the stone age and people wo n't have much of a choice .
It 'll be interesting to see how much of Google.cn 's 35 \ % marketshare Bing manages to snag .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>

The Chinese citizen employees at Google.cn.
My thoughts are with them if they are experiencing anything negative other than unemployment from their parent company's decision to thumb their nose at the Chinese government.
Let's hope that working for Google.cn doesn't leave them with a social stigma or government imposed sanction or -- far worse -- bodily harm to them and their families.
Hopefully their red society didn't give them a scarlet letter.
That said, the Chinese people have little to look forward to with Baidu in such a dominating lead they can stagnate back to the stone age and people won't have much of a choice.
It'll be interesting to see how much of Google.cn's 35\% marketshare Bing manages to snag.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592298</id>
	<title>Re:OMG</title>
	<author>xQx</author>
	<datestamp>1269353100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why is it that we get upset with a company (association) like the MPAA or RIAA strong-arm national governments to push their agenda, but all cheer on Google when they use their international power to corrupt the policies of a sovereign country?<br><br>Just food for thought?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I mean, who are we to say giving people unrestricted access to information is not evil? Even if you disagree, can't you see the logic behind an argument that #1. Maybe the world would be a better place if the detailed instructions for weapons of mas destruction weren't easily avaliable to every psychopath, and #2, People are happier in an oppressive society if they don't KNOW they are oppressed because they are not EXPOSED to the truth?<br><br>PS: Don't worry, I'm on the other side of this issue - I hope Google sticks it to those oppressive Chinese government types, and I hope it sets a precedent for Stephen Conroy (Australia) and I hope the MPAA and RIAA burn in hell - but you do have to recognise the double standard in this... and probably admit that Google did deserve this retaliation.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is it that we get upset with a company ( association ) like the MPAA or RIAA strong-arm national governments to push their agenda , but all cheer on Google when they use their international power to corrupt the policies of a sovereign country ? Just food for thought ?
... I mean , who are we to say giving people unrestricted access to information is not evil ?
Even if you disagree , ca n't you see the logic behind an argument that # 1 .
Maybe the world would be a better place if the detailed instructions for weapons of mas destruction were n't easily avaliable to every psychopath , and # 2 , People are happier in an oppressive society if they do n't KNOW they are oppressed because they are not EXPOSED to the truth ? PS : Do n't worry , I 'm on the other side of this issue - I hope Google sticks it to those oppressive Chinese government types , and I hope it sets a precedent for Stephen Conroy ( Australia ) and I hope the MPAA and RIAA burn in hell - but you do have to recognise the double standard in this... and probably admit that Google did deserve this retaliation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is it that we get upset with a company (association) like the MPAA or RIAA strong-arm national governments to push their agenda, but all cheer on Google when they use their international power to corrupt the policies of a sovereign country?Just food for thought?
... I mean, who are we to say giving people unrestricted access to information is not evil?
Even if you disagree, can't you see the logic behind an argument that #1.
Maybe the world would be a better place if the detailed instructions for weapons of mas destruction weren't easily avaliable to every psychopath, and #2, People are happier in an oppressive society if they don't KNOW they are oppressed because they are not EXPOSED to the truth?PS: Don't worry, I'm on the other side of this issue - I hope Google sticks it to those oppressive Chinese government types, and I hope it sets a precedent for Stephen Conroy (Australia) and I hope the MPAA and RIAA burn in hell - but you do have to recognise the double standard in this... and probably admit that Google did deserve this retaliation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589888</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590636</id>
	<title>Re:Hit 'em where it hurts</title>
	<author>getNewNickName</author>
	<datestamp>1269344880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why would the Chinese government take the chance to allow information to roam free just to make Google lose a bit of revenue?  Whereas the control over information is price-less to them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would the Chinese government take the chance to allow information to roam free just to make Google lose a bit of revenue ?
Whereas the control over information is price-less to them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would the Chinese government take the chance to allow information to roam free just to make Google lose a bit of revenue?
Whereas the control over information is price-less to them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590258</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591846</id>
	<title>Re:Drawing politcal blood</title>
	<author>IorDMUX</author>
	<datestamp>1269350280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I find it hard to believe there is no descension among the party.</p></div><p>I would presume that there would be plenty of descension in the party, given the number of skyscrapers in Beijing and the likelihood of someone getting canned for this.<br> <br>Dissension, on the other hand?  Probably not so much.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I find it hard to believe there is no descension among the party.I would presume that there would be plenty of descension in the party , given the number of skyscrapers in Beijing and the likelihood of someone getting canned for this .
Dissension , on the other hand ?
Probably not so much .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find it hard to believe there is no descension among the party.I would presume that there would be plenty of descension in the party, given the number of skyscrapers in Beijing and the likelihood of someone getting canned for this.
Dissension, on the other hand?
Probably not so much.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590144</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590286</id>
	<title>Re:Drawing politcal blood</title>
	<author>cpghost</author>
	<datestamp>1269343500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They learned the lesson from the Soviet communists: as soon as they start <b>political</b> reforms (they were the first to start economic reforms, so they're not totally averse to reforms per se), they won't be able to keep their firm grip on their population. So they agree to keep going, hoping they'll remain in power for as long as possible.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They learned the lesson from the Soviet communists : as soon as they start political reforms ( they were the first to start economic reforms , so they 're not totally averse to reforms per se ) , they wo n't be able to keep their firm grip on their population .
So they agree to keep going , hoping they 'll remain in power for as long as possible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They learned the lesson from the Soviet communists: as soon as they start political reforms (they were the first to start economic reforms, so they're not totally averse to reforms per se), they won't be able to keep their firm grip on their population.
So they agree to keep going, hoping they'll remain in power for as long as possible.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590144</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590378</id>
	<title>Re:And let the war begin</title>
	<author>Idiomatick</author>
	<datestamp>1269343920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Agreed that the Chinese people lose. But.... So does the Chinese government and so does Google. Google is throwing away MANY MANY millions of dollars maybe billions to do what they think is right. And China is getting a fuck ton of bad press, and their science industry is hurt by this, hurting the people does hurt the goverment.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed that the Chinese people lose .
But.... So does the Chinese government and so does Google .
Google is throwing away MANY MANY millions of dollars maybe billions to do what they think is right .
And China is getting a fuck ton of bad press , and their science industry is hurt by this , hurting the people does hurt the goverment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed that the Chinese people lose.
But.... So does the Chinese government and so does Google.
Google is throwing away MANY MANY millions of dollars maybe billions to do what they think is right.
And China is getting a fuck ton of bad press, and their science industry is hurt by this, hurting the people does hurt the goverment.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589914</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590350</id>
	<title>Re:Let me be the first to say</title>
	<author>Darkness404</author>
	<datestamp>1269343800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Lets see here, 1.1 billion people against a few million in government. <br> <br>

I think this quote from Samuel Johnson basically sums it up <br> <br>

I consider that in no government power can be abused long. Mankind will not bear it. If a sovereign oppresses his people to a great degree, they will rise and cut off his head. There is a remedy in human nature against tyranny, that will keep us safe under every form of government.  <p>

The masses of China are all dirt poor, they don't know what they are missing. Those privileged few with access to the internet either A) Are underground so Western media doesn't know about them B) Realize that under this oppressive system they can enjoy wealth while others starve and so long as its working for them, why change or C) Don't think China is evil. By censoring they start waking up group C, the natural progress of technology is going to soon give -everyone- in China access to the internet. If they keep showing that they censor, people are going to wake up and overthrow the government. It will happen once technology has improved and the quality of living gives the average Chinese citizen internet access and the knowledge that they won't be starving.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Lets see here , 1.1 billion people against a few million in government .
I think this quote from Samuel Johnson basically sums it up I consider that in no government power can be abused long .
Mankind will not bear it .
If a sovereign oppresses his people to a great degree , they will rise and cut off his head .
There is a remedy in human nature against tyranny , that will keep us safe under every form of government .
The masses of China are all dirt poor , they do n't know what they are missing .
Those privileged few with access to the internet either A ) Are underground so Western media does n't know about them B ) Realize that under this oppressive system they can enjoy wealth while others starve and so long as its working for them , why change or C ) Do n't think China is evil .
By censoring they start waking up group C , the natural progress of technology is going to soon give -everyone- in China access to the internet .
If they keep showing that they censor , people are going to wake up and overthrow the government .
It will happen once technology has improved and the quality of living gives the average Chinese citizen internet access and the knowledge that they wo n't be starving .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lets see here, 1.1 billion people against a few million in government.
I think this quote from Samuel Johnson basically sums it up  

I consider that in no government power can be abused long.
Mankind will not bear it.
If a sovereign oppresses his people to a great degree, they will rise and cut off his head.
There is a remedy in human nature against tyranny, that will keep us safe under every form of government.
The masses of China are all dirt poor, they don't know what they are missing.
Those privileged few with access to the internet either A) Are underground so Western media doesn't know about them B) Realize that under this oppressive system they can enjoy wealth while others starve and so long as its working for them, why change or C) Don't think China is evil.
By censoring they start waking up group C, the natural progress of technology is going to soon give -everyone- in China access to the internet.
If they keep showing that they censor, people are going to wake up and overthrow the government.
It will happen once technology has improved and the quality of living gives the average Chinese citizen internet access and the knowledge that they won't be starving.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589904</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590192</id>
	<title>PR Stunt</title>
	<author>oldhack</author>
	<datestamp>1269343140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The whole thing smells like a PR stunt.  Google still maintains sales office and R&amp;D center in China.  What, those won't get hacked by the Chinese?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The whole thing smells like a PR stunt .
Google still maintains sales office and R&amp;D center in China .
What , those wo n't get hacked by the Chinese ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The whole thing smells like a PR stunt.
Google still maintains sales office and R&amp;D center in China.
What, those won't get hacked by the Chinese?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31593728</id>
	<title>Re:Conspiracy theory anyone?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269363840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, the entire planet and all events thereupon revolves around the USA getting the sort of health care the rest of us take for granted.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , the entire planet and all events thereupon revolves around the USA getting the sort of health care the rest of us take for granted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, the entire planet and all events thereupon revolves around the USA getting the sort of health care the rest of us take for granted.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590852</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590078</id>
	<title>Chinese Gov Doesn't Get It.</title>
	<author>pubwvj</author>
	<datestamp>1269342660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Chinese government doesn't seem to understand that it is very easy to circumvent their great wall of censorship. They merely hurt themselves and their own people. Of course, what this does is give a competitive advantage to people smart enough to get around the government - a bit of evolution in action.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Chinese government does n't seem to understand that it is very easy to circumvent their great wall of censorship .
They merely hurt themselves and their own people .
Of course , what this does is give a competitive advantage to people smart enough to get around the government - a bit of evolution in action .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Chinese government doesn't seem to understand that it is very easy to circumvent their great wall of censorship.
They merely hurt themselves and their own people.
Of course, what this does is give a competitive advantage to people smart enough to get around the government - a bit of evolution in action.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590158</id>
	<title>Over-underestimator.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269342960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This war could be really hard. But in the end, it's the Chinese people who lose, not Google nor the Chinese "government".</p></div><p>You grossly overestimate Google's importance.</p><p>You grossly underestimate the Chinese people.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This war could be really hard .
But in the end , it 's the Chinese people who lose , not Google nor the Chinese " government " .You grossly overestimate Google 's importance.You grossly underestimate the Chinese people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This war could be really hard.
But in the end, it's the Chinese people who lose, not Google nor the Chinese "government".You grossly overestimate Google's importance.You grossly underestimate the Chinese people.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589914</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590144</id>
	<title>Drawing politcal blood</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269342960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think Google and everyone else knew this was a losing battle. The point however was to call the CCP out in the open and force them to bleed a little. The blood is fresh, but will anyone from the inside the party attempt reform? I find it hard to believe there is no descension among the party. Question is, how many and do they have the courage and fortitude to see this through?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think Google and everyone else knew this was a losing battle .
The point however was to call the CCP out in the open and force them to bleed a little .
The blood is fresh , but will anyone from the inside the party attempt reform ?
I find it hard to believe there is no descension among the party .
Question is , how many and do they have the courage and fortitude to see this through ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think Google and everyone else knew this was a losing battle.
The point however was to call the CCP out in the open and force them to bleed a little.
The blood is fresh, but will anyone from the inside the party attempt reform?
I find it hard to believe there is no descension among the party.
Question is, how many and do they have the courage and fortitude to see this through?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31594634</id>
	<title>Re:And let the war begin</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269373740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How many revolutions did France have when osilating between democracy/republic and empire (a la Napoleon)? Quite a few.</p><p>Many countries' histories are filled with violence. It is not a valid excuse to deny freedoms.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How many revolutions did France have when osilating between democracy/republic and empire ( a la Napoleon ) ?
Quite a few.Many countries ' histories are filled with violence .
It is not a valid excuse to deny freedoms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many revolutions did France have when osilating between democracy/republic and empire (a la Napoleon)?
Quite a few.Many countries' histories are filled with violence.
It is not a valid excuse to deny freedoms.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590680</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31594260</id>
	<title>Re:Ping Pong</title>
	<author>Colz Grigor</author>
	<datestamp>1269368700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Google, it's your turn<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></div><p>"Turn"?  You make it sound like this is a game.  Why does Google have to do something, now?  Google's goal was to stop censoring their results in China, which they've succeeded in.  If it was ever a game, it's pretty much over, now.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google , it 's your turn ... " Turn " ?
You make it sound like this is a game .
Why does Google have to do something , now ?
Google 's goal was to stop censoring their results in China , which they 've succeeded in .
If it was ever a game , it 's pretty much over , now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google, it's your turn ..."Turn"?
You make it sound like this is a game.
Why does Google have to do something, now?
Google's goal was to stop censoring their results in China, which they've succeeded in.
If it was ever a game, it's pretty much over, now.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591158</id>
	<title>Re:Next move</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269346980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Satellites? You mean, the kind of thing China proved earlier that it can shoot down (and doesn't mind leaving wreckage in important orbits either)?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Satellites ?
You mean , the kind of thing China proved earlier that it can shoot down ( and does n't mind leaving wreckage in important orbits either ) ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Satellites?
You mean, the kind of thing China proved earlier that it can shoot down (and doesn't mind leaving wreckage in important orbits either)?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590016</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31594714</id>
	<title>Jamming?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269461580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Satellite signals are quite easily jammed as was demonstrated lately with gps.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Satellite signals are quite easily jammed as was demonstrated lately with gps .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Satellite signals are quite easily jammed as was demonstrated lately with gps.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590016</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31593734</id>
	<title>Re:Whoops!</title>
	<author>celle</author>
	<datestamp>1269363960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Money matters to us a hell of a lot more than freedom."</p><p>Yes, sickening isn't it?!! Just a bunch of spoiled brat pussies who would sell out to anyone for a price.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Money matters to us a hell of a lot more than freedom .
" Yes , sickening is n't it ? ! !
Just a bunch of spoiled brat pussies who would sell out to anyone for a price .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Money matters to us a hell of a lot more than freedom.
"Yes, sickening isn't it?!!
Just a bunch of spoiled brat pussies who would sell out to anyone for a price.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590264</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31593838</id>
	<title>Re:Whoops!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269364680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wouldn't really list Turkey with those other nations. First, it is a secular government. Second, they recently withdrew their ambassador. Third, they are contemplating shutting down a US airbase in Incirlik. Finally, Turkey is a republic with democratic values including free information access. I wouldn't go as far as calling the easily offended Turks a client state. You take them for granted.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would n't really list Turkey with those other nations .
First , it is a secular government .
Second , they recently withdrew their ambassador .
Third , they are contemplating shutting down a US airbase in Incirlik .
Finally , Turkey is a republic with democratic values including free information access .
I would n't go as far as calling the easily offended Turks a client state .
You take them for granted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wouldn't really list Turkey with those other nations.
First, it is a secular government.
Second, they recently withdrew their ambassador.
Third, they are contemplating shutting down a US airbase in Incirlik.
Finally, Turkey is a republic with democratic values including free information access.
I wouldn't go as far as calling the easily offended Turks a client state.
You take them for granted.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590264</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590038</id>
	<title>China will come to regret this</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269342480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It may be an hour later, or a year later, but China will be hungry for Google again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It may be an hour later , or a year later , but China will be hungry for Google again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It may be an hour later, or a year later, but China will be hungry for Google again.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590948</id>
	<title>Re:Hit 'em where it hurts</title>
	<author>eulernet</author>
	<datestamp>1269346140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The other solution is to ban all Android based phones.</p><p>This will hurt Google a lot more in the long term.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The other solution is to ban all Android based phones.This will hurt Google a lot more in the long term .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The other solution is to ban all Android based phones.This will hurt Google a lot more in the long term.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590258</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31594828</id>
	<title>Let's outsource there!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269463500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have an idea!  Let's outsource even more of our manufacturing and engineering to China.  Once we've exported away the little advantages we still have, China can become the dominant world power and I'm sure they'll act responsibly then.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have an idea !
Let 's outsource even more of our manufacturing and engineering to China .
Once we 've exported away the little advantages we still have , China can become the dominant world power and I 'm sure they 'll act responsibly then .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have an idea!
Let's outsource even more of our manufacturing and engineering to China.
Once we've exported away the little advantages we still have, China can become the dominant world power and I'm sure they'll act responsibly then.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590852</id>
	<title>Conspiracy theory anyone?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269345780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google founders are fairly liberal (they donated money to the No on 8 campaign in California, for example), so I wouldn't be surprised if they had a fondness for Obama and his health care plan. The decision to redirect google.cn to the HK version came a few weeks after the initial announcement, but exactly the day after the passing of the health care bill. This would certainly distract some attention away from the right wing scaremongers at FOX and others, which would in turn help the democrats. The timing is just too neat to be casual. Is it?</p><p>PS: Nothing that there's anything wrong with the move, should it be like this. Just idly speculating...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google founders are fairly liberal ( they donated money to the No on 8 campaign in California , for example ) , so I would n't be surprised if they had a fondness for Obama and his health care plan .
The decision to redirect google.cn to the HK version came a few weeks after the initial announcement , but exactly the day after the passing of the health care bill .
This would certainly distract some attention away from the right wing scaremongers at FOX and others , which would in turn help the democrats .
The timing is just too neat to be casual .
Is it ? PS : Nothing that there 's anything wrong with the move , should it be like this .
Just idly speculating.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google founders are fairly liberal (they donated money to the No on 8 campaign in California, for example), so I wouldn't be surprised if they had a fondness for Obama and his health care plan.
The decision to redirect google.cn to the HK version came a few weeks after the initial announcement, but exactly the day after the passing of the health care bill.
This would certainly distract some attention away from the right wing scaremongers at FOX and others, which would in turn help the democrats.
The timing is just too neat to be casual.
Is it?PS: Nothing that there's anything wrong with the move, should it be like this.
Just idly speculating...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590680</id>
	<title>Re:And let the war begin</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269345120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This war could be really hard. But in the end, it's the Chinese people who lose, not Google nor the Chinese "government".</p></div><p>
In historical context the Chinese people are currently relative winners.
<br> <br>
China has a long history of extremely violent and bloody revolutions. The relative political stability of the past 60 years is pretty much unprecedented. If the past is any indication, the transformation to complete freedom in China is not likely to go as peacefully as it did with the Soviet Union.
<br> <br>
Sudden change in China usually results in the deaths of millions. They have little history of peaceful change. The government has an obligation to tread cautiously.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This war could be really hard .
But in the end , it 's the Chinese people who lose , not Google nor the Chinese " government " .
In historical context the Chinese people are currently relative winners .
China has a long history of extremely violent and bloody revolutions .
The relative political stability of the past 60 years is pretty much unprecedented .
If the past is any indication , the transformation to complete freedom in China is not likely to go as peacefully as it did with the Soviet Union .
Sudden change in China usually results in the deaths of millions .
They have little history of peaceful change .
The government has an obligation to tread cautiously .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This war could be really hard.
But in the end, it's the Chinese people who lose, not Google nor the Chinese "government".
In historical context the Chinese people are currently relative winners.
China has a long history of extremely violent and bloody revolutions.
The relative political stability of the past 60 years is pretty much unprecedented.
If the past is any indication, the transformation to complete freedom in China is not likely to go as peacefully as it did with the Soviet Union.
Sudden change in China usually results in the deaths of millions.
They have little history of peaceful change.
The government has an obligation to tread cautiously.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589914</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592918</id>
	<title>Over/Under on # years before US is in shooting war</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269357300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>with China?</p><p>Fuck China. Why Chinese people allow for this kind of oppression to exist is beyond me...</p><p>If our own government wasn't bought and paid for by our own corporate interests, we'd be telling China to go fuck themselves in a number of areas.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>with China ? Fuck China .
Why Chinese people allow for this kind of oppression to exist is beyond me...If our own government was n't bought and paid for by our own corporate interests , we 'd be telling China to go fuck themselves in a number of areas .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>with China?Fuck China.
Why Chinese people allow for this kind of oppression to exist is beyond me...If our own government wasn't bought and paid for by our own corporate interests, we'd be telling China to go fuck themselves in a number of areas.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31594506</id>
	<title>Just wait until Australia's filter comes online!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269371700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Love all the talk about China and its filters... Hmmm... I remember reading somewhere that our wonderful 'free' and democratic government in Australia is looking at introducing the same thing. I wonder how long it will take for Google and good ol' Oz to have a falling out?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Love all the talk about China and its filters... Hmmm... I remember reading somewhere that our wonderful 'free ' and democratic government in Australia is looking at introducing the same thing .
I wonder how long it will take for Google and good ol ' Oz to have a falling out ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Love all the talk about China and its filters... Hmmm... I remember reading somewhere that our wonderful 'free' and democratic government in Australia is looking at introducing the same thing.
I wonder how long it will take for Google and good ol' Oz to have a falling out?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589914</id>
	<title>And let the war begin</title>
	<author>courteaudotbiz</author>
	<datestamp>1269342000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>This war could be really hard. But in the end, it's the Chinese people who lose, not Google nor the Chinese "government".</htmltext>
<tokenext>This war could be really hard .
But in the end , it 's the Chinese people who lose , not Google nor the Chinese " government " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This war could be really hard.
But in the end, it's the Chinese people who lose, not Google nor the Chinese "government".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31595694</id>
	<title>Re:Chinese protectionism</title>
	<author>Philip\_the\_physicist</author>
	<datestamp>1269433860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And, sadly, Obama, Brown, and other western leaders just play along, making comments like "we mustn't go down the seductive but damaging path of protectionism", not realising that their largest trading partner has already run gleefully down the path of protectionism and the west has just been too blind to notice.</p></div><p>...or too well bribed by their old school-friends in big business to notice.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And , sadly , Obama , Brown , and other western leaders just play along , making comments like " we must n't go down the seductive but damaging path of protectionism " , not realising that their largest trading partner has already run gleefully down the path of protectionism and the west has just been too blind to notice....or too well bribed by their old school-friends in big business to notice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And, sadly, Obama, Brown, and other western leaders just play along, making comments like "we mustn't go down the seductive but damaging path of protectionism", not realising that their largest trading partner has already run gleefully down the path of protectionism and the west has just been too blind to notice....or too well bribed by their old school-friends in big business to notice.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592058</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590184</id>
	<title>Re:Ping Pong</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269343080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's why I completely don't understand Google's actions. They're only getting themselves blocked. If they wanted to do some good in the world, they could have given the EFF free political ads on their platform, or advertise Pirate Parties during elections on \http://google.*/, or something like that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's why I completely do n't understand Google 's actions .
They 're only getting themselves blocked .
If they wanted to do some good in the world , they could have given the EFF free political ads on their platform , or advertise Pirate Parties during elections on \ http : //google .
* / , or something like that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's why I completely don't understand Google's actions.
They're only getting themselves blocked.
If they wanted to do some good in the world, they could have given the EFF free political ads on their platform, or advertise Pirate Parties during elections on \http://google.
*/, or something like that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590442</id>
	<title>Re:Drawing politcal blood</title>
	<author>dragisha</author>
	<datestamp>1269344220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google si important thing, but Google works on money. Unless they are subsidized by US gov for losses they get for this... behaviour... they are ones being hit hard here. For Chinese people, they are just-another-internet-search and/or just-another-mobile-vendor... Winner is probably MS - US company always playing "nice". and Chinese gov is bussiness-as-usual.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google si important thing , but Google works on money .
Unless they are subsidized by US gov for losses they get for this... behaviour... they are ones being hit hard here .
For Chinese people , they are just-another-internet-search and/or just-another-mobile-vendor... Winner is probably MS - US company always playing " nice " .
and Chinese gov is bussiness-as-usual .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google si important thing, but Google works on money.
Unless they are subsidized by US gov for losses they get for this... behaviour... they are ones being hit hard here.
For Chinese people, they are just-another-internet-search and/or just-another-mobile-vendor... Winner is probably MS - US company always playing "nice".
and Chinese gov is bussiness-as-usual.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590144</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924</id>
	<title>Google needs to pull out.</title>
	<author>Beelzebud</author>
	<datestamp>1269342060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm not sure how in the hell capitalists here in the U.S. decided we could do fair business with a totalitarian communist nation.

They don't value workers rights, free speech, or even a fair marketplace.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure how in the hell capitalists here in the U.S. decided we could do fair business with a totalitarian communist nation .
They do n't value workers rights , free speech , or even a fair marketplace .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure how in the hell capitalists here in the U.S. decided we could do fair business with a totalitarian communist nation.
They don't value workers rights, free speech, or even a fair marketplace.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591104</id>
	<title>Overdrive not needed</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269346740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I believe their propaganda machine is strong enough, it doesn't need overdrive for little disturbances like this. It smoothed out, tidied up national memories of Tiananmen, something like this is peanuts compared to that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe their propaganda machine is strong enough , it does n't need overdrive for little disturbances like this .
It smoothed out , tidied up national memories of Tiananmen , something like this is peanuts compared to that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe their propaganda machine is strong enough, it doesn't need overdrive for little disturbances like this.
It smoothed out, tidied up national memories of Tiananmen, something like this is peanuts compared to that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589984</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31594494</id>
	<title>How many times do we have to re-iterate this?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269371460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1) The Chinese government did nothing. The HK version of Google (as all non CN versions) have always been keyword censored. Nothing new here.</p><p>2) Google never seriously expected to be allowed to operate uncensored. It makes no sense for Google to be uncensored if the resulting websites are still blocked.</p><p>3) Censorship in China is slowly lifted as more people become tech savvy and wealthy allowing them to bypass blocks. Commercial VPN services are rarely blocked, unless they give out free account which reach a too wide audience too fast. I you've ever been to China, you know that dropping censorship overnight is like handing knifes to toddlers. Censorship has to come down, and it will, but it's not something you can expect to do overnight with a population that has been censored and programmed since birth.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) The Chinese government did nothing .
The HK version of Google ( as all non CN versions ) have always been keyword censored .
Nothing new here.2 ) Google never seriously expected to be allowed to operate uncensored .
It makes no sense for Google to be uncensored if the resulting websites are still blocked.3 ) Censorship in China is slowly lifted as more people become tech savvy and wealthy allowing them to bypass blocks .
Commercial VPN services are rarely blocked , unless they give out free account which reach a too wide audience too fast .
I you 've ever been to China , you know that dropping censorship overnight is like handing knifes to toddlers .
Censorship has to come down , and it will , but it 's not something you can expect to do overnight with a population that has been censored and programmed since birth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1) The Chinese government did nothing.
The HK version of Google (as all non CN versions) have always been keyword censored.
Nothing new here.2) Google never seriously expected to be allowed to operate uncensored.
It makes no sense for Google to be uncensored if the resulting websites are still blocked.3) Censorship in China is slowly lifted as more people become tech savvy and wealthy allowing them to bypass blocks.
Commercial VPN services are rarely blocked, unless they give out free account which reach a too wide audience too fast.
I you've ever been to China, you know that dropping censorship overnight is like handing knifes to toddlers.
Censorship has to come down, and it will, but it's not something you can expect to do overnight with a population that has been censored and programmed since birth.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592528</id>
	<title>Re:Well,</title>
	<author>MadUndergrad</author>
	<datestamp>1269354600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&amp;id=1786#comic" title="smbc-comics.com">http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&amp;id=1786#comic</a> [smbc-comics.com]</p><p>This comic seems appropriate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.smbc-comics.com/index.php ? db = comics&amp;id = 1786 # comic [ smbc-comics.com ] This comic seems appropriate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&amp;id=1786#comic [smbc-comics.com]This comic seems appropriate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589958</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590646</id>
	<title>Re:Let me be the first to say</title>
	<author>CohibaVancouver</author>
	<datestamp>1269344940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I consider that in no government power can be abused long. Mankind will not bear it. If a sovereign oppresses his people to a great degree, they will rise and cut off his head.</i> </p><p>While I generally agree with this (witness the former Soviet Bloc, the American South etc.) I sometimes wonder if it always applies.  For example, the conditions in North Korea have been appalling for 50+ years.  How much longer before the people rise up and cut off the sovereign's head?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I consider that in no government power can be abused long .
Mankind will not bear it .
If a sovereign oppresses his people to a great degree , they will rise and cut off his head .
While I generally agree with this ( witness the former Soviet Bloc , the American South etc .
) I sometimes wonder if it always applies .
For example , the conditions in North Korea have been appalling for 50 + years .
How much longer before the people rise up and cut off the sovereign 's head ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I consider that in no government power can be abused long.
Mankind will not bear it.
If a sovereign oppresses his people to a great degree, they will rise and cut off his head.
While I generally agree with this (witness the former Soviet Bloc, the American South etc.
) I sometimes wonder if it always applies.
For example, the conditions in North Korea have been appalling for 50+ years.
How much longer before the people rise up and cut off the sovereign's head?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590042</id>
	<title>Now...</title>
	<author>Trayal</author>
	<datestamp>1269342540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>... we shall see how much money google can make over VPN only traffic!</htmltext>
<tokenext>... we shall see how much money google can make over VPN only traffic !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... we shall see how much money google can make over VPN only traffic!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590476</id>
	<title>For the glorious revolution against the communits!</title>
	<author>TiggertheMad</author>
	<datestamp>1269344340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>China will never budge on these issues (at least not in my lifetime)</i>
<br> <br>
The Chinese government will budge if they think they are about to be lined up and shot by the enraged population. Each time they do something that irks the 'masses' they are one step closer to this end. this might happen next year, it might happen next century. The only thing I can say is that Google leaving China isn't a net plus for the communist government.</htmltext>
<tokenext>China will never budge on these issues ( at least not in my lifetime ) The Chinese government will budge if they think they are about to be lined up and shot by the enraged population .
Each time they do something that irks the 'masses ' they are one step closer to this end .
this might happen next year , it might happen next century .
The only thing I can say is that Google leaving China is n't a net plus for the communist government .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>China will never budge on these issues (at least not in my lifetime)
 
The Chinese government will budge if they think they are about to be lined up and shot by the enraged population.
Each time they do something that irks the 'masses' they are one step closer to this end.
this might happen next year, it might happen next century.
The only thing I can say is that Google leaving China isn't a net plus for the communist government.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589906</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590016
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591768
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590706
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589984
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591658
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589888
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591072
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589908
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590746
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589914
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591078
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591238
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591906
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590136
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590016
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31593522
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589888
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592454
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590016
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31594714
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590636
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590016
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590264
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31593734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592058
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31595694
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590422
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590016
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591080
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591062
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590260
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591996
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591156
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589914
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590680
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31594732
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590144
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592058
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31605352
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590464
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592382
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589908
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592944
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591394
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590072
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590204
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590016
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591158
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590108
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31594372
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590320
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589914
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590378
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590144
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590314
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590966
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589958
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590150
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589914
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590680
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31593542
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589888
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592298
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590596
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590650
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590944
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590018
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589914
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591094
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589984
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591104
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590952
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589914
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590158
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589914
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31599202
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589914
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590680
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31597652
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590436
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31594260
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589984
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590424
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590308
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590292
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31595482
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31596668
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589958
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590124
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590694
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589914
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590680
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31594634
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590476
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590016
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31593964
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31598008
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591552
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589914
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590050
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591804
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589958
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592528
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589914
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590680
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592934
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590108
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31593568
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590852
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31593728
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591070
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590144
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590442
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590184
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590144
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590286
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31594554
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590414
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589914
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590680
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592222
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590016
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590264
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31593838
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_209200_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589888
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31593462
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_209200.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590020
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_209200.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589984
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591104
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591658
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590424
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_209200.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590222
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_209200.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590852
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31593728
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_209200.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589908
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590746
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592944
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_209200.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590072
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590204
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_209200.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590000
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_209200.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589904
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590350
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590646
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591552
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31596668
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590908
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590694
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592382
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_209200.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590016
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591080
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31594714
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590264
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31593734
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31593838
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591768
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31593964
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591158
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31593522
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_209200.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589972
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_209200.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590258
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31599202
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590952
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591070
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590948
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590636
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591156
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_209200.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590290
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_209200.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589958
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592528
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590150
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590124
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_209200.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589914
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590846
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590378
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591078
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591094
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590680
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31594634
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31597652
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592222
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31593542
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31594732
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592934
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590050
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590158
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_209200.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591052
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_209200.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589906
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590184
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31594260
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591804
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591906
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590464
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31598008
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590436
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590476
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590108
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31593568
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31594372
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_209200.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31594642
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_209200.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592410
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_209200.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590038
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_209200.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589888
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31593462
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592298
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591072
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592454
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_209200.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589924
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590260
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590398
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590292
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591238
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590056
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591062
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590944
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590706
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590966
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591396
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590320
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591996
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31594554
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590596
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31595482
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590414
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590308
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590018
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590412
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31592058
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31595694
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31605352
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590650
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590136
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590422
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_209200.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31589928
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591394
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_209200.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590144
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590314
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590286
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590442
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31591846
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_209200.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_209200.31590078
</commentlist>
</conversation>
