<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_16_205232</id>
	<title>Researchers Build a Browser-Based Darknet</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1245145680000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>ancientribe writes <i>"At Black Hat USA next month, researchers will demonstrate a way to <a href="http://www.darkreading.com/security/encryption/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=217801293">use modern browsers to more easily build darknets</a> &mdash; underground private Internet communities where users can share content and ideas securely and anonymously. HP's Billy Hoffman and Matt Wood have created Veiled, a proof-of-concept darknet that only requires participants have an HTML 5-based browser to join. No special software or configuration is necessary, unlike with darknets such as Tor. Veiled is basically a 'zero footprint' network, in which groups can rapidly form and disappear without a trace. The researchers admit darknets are attractive to bad guys, too, but they say they think these more easily set-up and dismantled nets will be more popular for mainstream (and legit) users."</i> In somewhat related news, reader cheesethegreat informs us that <a href="http://freenetproject.org/">version 0.7.5 of FreeNet</a> has hit the tubes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>ancientribe writes " At Black Hat USA next month , researchers will demonstrate a way to use modern browsers to more easily build darknets    underground private Internet communities where users can share content and ideas securely and anonymously .
HP 's Billy Hoffman and Matt Wood have created Veiled , a proof-of-concept darknet that only requires participants have an HTML 5-based browser to join .
No special software or configuration is necessary , unlike with darknets such as Tor .
Veiled is basically a 'zero footprint ' network , in which groups can rapidly form and disappear without a trace .
The researchers admit darknets are attractive to bad guys , too , but they say they think these more easily set-up and dismantled nets will be more popular for mainstream ( and legit ) users .
" In somewhat related news , reader cheesethegreat informs us that version 0.7.5 of FreeNet has hit the tubes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ancientribe writes "At Black Hat USA next month, researchers will demonstrate a way to use modern browsers to more easily build darknets — underground private Internet communities where users can share content and ideas securely and anonymously.
HP's Billy Hoffman and Matt Wood have created Veiled, a proof-of-concept darknet that only requires participants have an HTML 5-based browser to join.
No special software or configuration is necessary, unlike with darknets such as Tor.
Veiled is basically a 'zero footprint' network, in which groups can rapidly form and disappear without a trace.
The researchers admit darknets are attractive to bad guys, too, but they say they think these more easily set-up and dismantled nets will be more popular for mainstream (and legit) users.
" In somewhat related news, reader cheesethegreat informs us that version 0.7.5 of FreeNet has hit the tubes.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355485</id>
	<title>Re:Attractive to bad guys?</title>
	<author>selven</author>
	<datestamp>1245156420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.dhmo.org/" title="dhmo.org">Dihydrogen monoxide</a> [dhmo.org] is the correct answer.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dihydrogen monoxide [ dhmo.org ] is the correct answer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dihydrogen monoxide [dhmo.org] is the correct answer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354995</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28356947</id>
	<title>Dark reading indeed</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245166380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I had to turn off the stylesheet to be able to read TFA. That site is broken in all browsers except IE. And they want to be HTML5 advocates?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had to turn off the stylesheet to be able to read TFA .
That site is broken in all browsers except IE .
And they want to be HTML5 advocates ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had to turn off the stylesheet to be able to read TFA.
That site is broken in all browsers except IE.
And they want to be HTML5 advocates?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28356737</id>
	<title>A Seriously Important Requirement</title>
	<author>Nom du Keyboard</author>
	<datestamp>1245164640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A seriously important requirement for any darknet is the ability to conceal your IP address from the other participants. I don't yet see how that happens here.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A seriously important requirement for any darknet is the ability to conceal your IP address from the other participants .
I do n't yet see how that happens here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A seriously important requirement for any darknet is the ability to conceal your IP address from the other participants.
I don't yet see how that happens here.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28361395</id>
	<title>Re:Worried, maybe.</title>
	<author>Attila Dimedici</author>
	<datestamp>1245253080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The correct response to this attack (as several posters further down point out indirectly) is to respond that they want to criminalize this type of thing as the first step to converting to an oppressive government. Make the argument that the reason the government is prosecuting you is because they can't monitor your communication and they want to be able to monitor your communication in order to be able to prevent you from coordinating opposition to government programs.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The correct response to this attack ( as several posters further down point out indirectly ) is to respond that they want to criminalize this type of thing as the first step to converting to an oppressive government .
Make the argument that the reason the government is prosecuting you is because they ca n't monitor your communication and they want to be able to monitor your communication in order to be able to prevent you from coordinating opposition to government programs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The correct response to this attack (as several posters further down point out indirectly) is to respond that they want to criminalize this type of thing as the first step to converting to an oppressive government.
Make the argument that the reason the government is prosecuting you is because they can't monitor your communication and they want to be able to monitor your communication in order to be able to prevent you from coordinating opposition to government programs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354903</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354245</id>
	<title>Iran? China?</title>
	<author>davidwr</author>
	<datestamp>1245149580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is anyone in Iran reading this right now?  OK, don't respond but do pass it on to your friends.</p><p>Ditto China.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is anyone in Iran reading this right now ?
OK , do n't respond but do pass it on to your friends.Ditto China .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is anyone in Iran reading this right now?
OK, don't respond but do pass it on to your friends.Ditto China.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354363</id>
	<title>0.7.5 of FreeNet? Pah! 0.7.4 of I2P is better!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245150120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sod it - I've got karma to buuuurn!</p><p>(Ok I checked the anon button...)</p><p>BUT seriously folks, I've been <a href="http://www.i2p2.de/" title="i2p2.de" rel="nofollow">using I2P</a> [i2p2.de] for a year now (just upgraded to 0.7.4 seconds before I read this post) and it blows the crap out of FreeNet for sheer speed and ease of use. Just make sure to have a lot of RAM on your machine and crank the bandwidth up real good. The more the give, the more you get!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sod it - I 've got karma to buuuurn !
( Ok I checked the anon button... ) BUT seriously folks , I 've been using I2P [ i2p2.de ] for a year now ( just upgraded to 0.7.4 seconds before I read this post ) and it blows the crap out of FreeNet for sheer speed and ease of use .
Just make sure to have a lot of RAM on your machine and crank the bandwidth up real good .
The more the give , the more you get !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sod it - I've got karma to buuuurn!
(Ok I checked the anon button...)BUT seriously folks, I've been using I2P [i2p2.de] for a year now (just upgraded to 0.7.4 seconds before I read this post) and it blows the crap out of FreeNet for sheer speed and ease of use.
Just make sure to have a lot of RAM on your machine and crank the bandwidth up real good.
The more the give, the more you get!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28357103</id>
	<title>fuck a fUcker</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245167640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">If you Have</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you Have [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you Have [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355187</id>
	<title>Re:Attractive to bad guys?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245154860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Many crimes are committed by criminals who take off their pants, therefore, we should make it harder for everyone to remove them!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Many crimes are committed by criminals who take off their pants , therefore , we should make it harder for everyone to remove them !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Many crimes are committed by criminals who take off their pants, therefore, we should make it harder for everyone to remove them!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354995</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354313</id>
	<title>You mean?</title>
	<author>bigattichouse</author>
	<datestamp>1245149940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>So legitimate users in Iran or China might be able to hook into a darknet that has a portal to the real world outside?  Kinda like good old packet HAM radio used to.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So legitimate users in Iran or China might be able to hook into a darknet that has a portal to the real world outside ?
Kinda like good old packet HAM radio used to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So legitimate users in Iran or China might be able to hook into a darknet that has a portal to the real world outside?
Kinda like good old packet HAM radio used to.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354449</id>
	<title>Easier is better</title>
	<author>tnk1</author>
	<datestamp>1245150600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If its easier to use, you will definitely see more people using it who are legitimate.  Tor and other darknets are a pain in the ass to use, and they clearly have a larger proportion of people using it for more nefarious purposes.  The reason is simple: they *need* to use it because they are bad guys.  Good guys, unless they fully comprehend the threats against them, are less likely to go to the effort.  Hopefully this works out and is secure.  It would be a big plus for people who don't want to deal with the hassle, not to mention, they don't want instantly incriminating software on their machine.  My guess is that the Chinese and Iranian government minders don't like you if they see you getting your hands on anything like a Tor/Freenet software package.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If its easier to use , you will definitely see more people using it who are legitimate .
Tor and other darknets are a pain in the ass to use , and they clearly have a larger proportion of people using it for more nefarious purposes .
The reason is simple : they * need * to use it because they are bad guys .
Good guys , unless they fully comprehend the threats against them , are less likely to go to the effort .
Hopefully this works out and is secure .
It would be a big plus for people who do n't want to deal with the hassle , not to mention , they do n't want instantly incriminating software on their machine .
My guess is that the Chinese and Iranian government minders do n't like you if they see you getting your hands on anything like a Tor/Freenet software package .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If its easier to use, you will definitely see more people using it who are legitimate.
Tor and other darknets are a pain in the ass to use, and they clearly have a larger proportion of people using it for more nefarious purposes.
The reason is simple: they *need* to use it because they are bad guys.
Good guys, unless they fully comprehend the threats against them, are less likely to go to the effort.
Hopefully this works out and is secure.
It would be a big plus for people who don't want to deal with the hassle, not to mention, they don't want instantly incriminating software on their machine.
My guess is that the Chinese and Iranian government minders don't like you if they see you getting your hands on anything like a Tor/Freenet software package.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355821</id>
	<title>Small-P2P-clouds have arrived</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245158400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You guys seen Opera Unite? It's kinda like that I think. The only parts missing are the crypto design.</p><p>The point being that darknets and p2p small-clouds are here. They are here.</p><p>What will The Powers That Be do? Outlaw html? Outlaw crypto? You can't. Crypto is mathematics. There's no way you can outlaw math or science. Unless they want the Middle Ages back - and some politicians in Europe (particularly UK and Germany) and the US would like that very much.</p><p>What worries me is the well-meaning politician (who doesn't want to protect children, right? Or people against terrorism?) who is a moron in tech terms and thinks such things are feasible. No they aren't. Unless you take my right to write (source code, maths, etc.)</p><p>But beware. Knowledge is to be outlawed in the near future. They have tried this before with Phillip Zimmerman's PGP. They will do it again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You guys seen Opera Unite ?
It 's kinda like that I think .
The only parts missing are the crypto design.The point being that darknets and p2p small-clouds are here .
They are here.What will The Powers That Be do ?
Outlaw html ?
Outlaw crypto ?
You ca n't .
Crypto is mathematics .
There 's no way you can outlaw math or science .
Unless they want the Middle Ages back - and some politicians in Europe ( particularly UK and Germany ) and the US would like that very much.What worries me is the well-meaning politician ( who does n't want to protect children , right ?
Or people against terrorism ?
) who is a moron in tech terms and thinks such things are feasible .
No they are n't .
Unless you take my right to write ( source code , maths , etc .
) But beware .
Knowledge is to be outlawed in the near future .
They have tried this before with Phillip Zimmerman 's PGP .
They will do it again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You guys seen Opera Unite?
It's kinda like that I think.
The only parts missing are the crypto design.The point being that darknets and p2p small-clouds are here.
They are here.What will The Powers That Be do?
Outlaw html?
Outlaw crypto?
You can't.
Crypto is mathematics.
There's no way you can outlaw math or science.
Unless they want the Middle Ages back - and some politicians in Europe (particularly UK and Germany) and the US would like that very much.What worries me is the well-meaning politician (who doesn't want to protect children, right?
Or people against terrorism?
) who is a moron in tech terms and thinks such things are feasible.
No they aren't.
Unless you take my right to write (source code, maths, etc.
)But beware.
Knowledge is to be outlawed in the near future.
They have tried this before with Phillip Zimmerman's PGP.
They will do it again.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355125</id>
	<title>Very Useful</title>
	<author>jefu</author>
	<datestamp>1245154440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Currently to do shared chat/video chat/audio/documents... most systems are dependent on servers of one sort or another.    Making something that could work on a more peer-to-peer level would be very useful indeed as it would help alleviate (though probably not entirely eliminate) the reliance on servers that are often under someone else's control.   If you doubt the usefulness of this, just look at what is happening in Iran right now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Currently to do shared chat/video chat/audio/documents... most systems are dependent on servers of one sort or another .
Making something that could work on a more peer-to-peer level would be very useful indeed as it would help alleviate ( though probably not entirely eliminate ) the reliance on servers that are often under someone else 's control .
If you doubt the usefulness of this , just look at what is happening in Iran right now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Currently to do shared chat/video chat/audio/documents... most systems are dependent on servers of one sort or another.
Making something that could work on a more peer-to-peer level would be very useful indeed as it would help alleviate (though probably not entirely eliminate) the reliance on servers that are often under someone else's control.
If you doubt the usefulness of this, just look at what is happening in Iran right now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354361</id>
	<title>Sounds like it uses a centralized web server?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245150120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FTA: "It connects the user's HTML 5-based browser to a single PHP file[...]"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FTA : " It connects the user 's HTML 5-based browser to a single PHP file [ ... ] "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FTA: "It connects the user's HTML 5-based browser to a single PHP file[...]"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354995</id>
	<title>Re:Attractive to bad guys?</title>
	<author>Arthur B.</author>
	<datestamp>1245153780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pants. My favorite example is pants. Many crimes are very hard to commit without pants.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pants .
My favorite example is pants .
Many crimes are very hard to commit without pants .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pants.
My favorite example is pants.
Many crimes are very hard to commit without pants.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354685</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28362439</id>
	<title>Re:Bad Guys</title>
	<author>/.Rooster</author>
	<datestamp>1245258240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>*sighs* Please look up such quotes before quoting them. It was Thomas Jefferson who said</p><p>"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty. "</p><p>He also said a great many other good things that it is quite inspiring to think what an enlightened attitude was present in the Americas.</p><p>As you might guess, I am not even American but a Brit. Which means for what he says to have relevance to me is actually very extraordinary.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>* sighs * Please look up such quotes before quoting them .
It was Thomas Jefferson who said " When the people fear their government , there is tyranny ; when the government fears the people , there is liberty .
" He also said a great many other good things that it is quite inspiring to think what an enlightened attitude was present in the Americas.As you might guess , I am not even American but a Brit .
Which means for what he says to have relevance to me is actually very extraordinary .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>*sighs* Please look up such quotes before quoting them.
It was Thomas Jefferson who said"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.
"He also said a great many other good things that it is quite inspiring to think what an enlightened attitude was present in the Americas.As you might guess, I am not even American but a Brit.
Which means for what he says to have relevance to me is actually very extraordinary.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354941</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355395</id>
	<title>Re:But what about the quality?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245155880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A huge percentage of the Tor exit nodes out there are run by government organizations.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A huge percentage of the Tor exit nodes out there are run by government organizations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A huge percentage of the Tor exit nodes out there are run by government organizations.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354443</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354941</id>
	<title>Re:Bad Guys</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1245153480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have something to hide. It's called my private life and it's nobody's business. Not yours, not some company's and most certainly not my government's.</p><p>I think it was Franklin who said, if the people fear the government, it's a tyranny, if the government fears its people, it's liberty. I think the US (and a good portion of the rest of the planet) would need a few leaders like the founding fathers of the US. If they could see what came to their dream, what they fought for, died for and had others die for, I think they'd get fed up enough to start over.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have something to hide .
It 's called my private life and it 's nobody 's business .
Not yours , not some company 's and most certainly not my government 's.I think it was Franklin who said , if the people fear the government , it 's a tyranny , if the government fears its people , it 's liberty .
I think the US ( and a good portion of the rest of the planet ) would need a few leaders like the founding fathers of the US .
If they could see what came to their dream , what they fought for , died for and had others die for , I think they 'd get fed up enough to start over .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have something to hide.
It's called my private life and it's nobody's business.
Not yours, not some company's and most certainly not my government's.I think it was Franklin who said, if the people fear the government, it's a tyranny, if the government fears its people, it's liberty.
I think the US (and a good portion of the rest of the planet) would need a few leaders like the founding fathers of the US.
If they could see what came to their dream, what they fought for, died for and had others die for, I think they'd get fed up enough to start over.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354351</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354353</id>
	<title>Re:Worried, maybe.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245150120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, darknet is attractive to bad guys but so is expectation of privacy in general.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , darknet is attractive to bad guys but so is expectation of privacy in general .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, darknet is attractive to bad guys but so is expectation of privacy in general.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355117</id>
	<title>Re:Easier is better</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245154440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Good" guys need to use it too, they just don't know why yet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Good " guys need to use it too , they just do n't know why yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Good" guys need to use it too, they just don't know why yet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354449</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354295</id>
	<title>Not surprising -- browsers are basically OSes</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245149820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not surprised that this functionality is able to be implemented.  Essentially, Web browsers are operating systems that not just parse HTML and render that, but pass a lot of items off to subsystems to execute, such as Java, Flash, Google Gears, or other plugins.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not surprised that this functionality is able to be implemented .
Essentially , Web browsers are operating systems that not just parse HTML and render that , but pass a lot of items off to subsystems to execute , such as Java , Flash , Google Gears , or other plugins .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not surprised that this functionality is able to be implemented.
Essentially, Web browsers are operating systems that not just parse HTML and render that, but pass a lot of items off to subsystems to execute, such as Java, Flash, Google Gears, or other plugins.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354217</id>
	<title>Worried, maybe.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245149400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The researchers admit darknets are attractive to bad guys, too.</p></div><p>
Yeah, I would be worried about all those sock hat wearing pedophiles out there.
<br> <br>

Of course maybe Craigslist could use it to advertise their wares.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The researchers admit darknets are attractive to bad guys , too .
Yeah , I would be worried about all those sock hat wearing pedophiles out there .
Of course maybe Craigslist could use it to advertise their wares .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The researchers admit darknets are attractive to bad guys, too.
Yeah, I would be worried about all those sock hat wearing pedophiles out there.
Of course maybe Craigslist could use it to advertise their wares.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28357313</id>
	<title>Re:Worried, maybe.</title>
	<author>BountyX</author>
	<datestamp>1245169680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In this situation, I think you would be considered an ISP/content provider, because others are connecting through you. That means they would have to serve you a DMCA notice first. This is currently the protection leveraged by Tor exit node operators, it has worked for me so far.  If you were actually liable for facilitating the spread of pedophilia, it would be a legal can of worms, since the ISP would be liable, etc. If such liability existed the internet would collapse under it's own weight because it would be too much of a liability to provide content. Think about it, if you sent child porn through gmail to your friend, then google would be liable for 'facilitating the spread of pedophilia'. Gmail type service, furthermore, the internet, cannot, or would not exist under those circumstances.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In this situation , I think you would be considered an ISP/content provider , because others are connecting through you .
That means they would have to serve you a DMCA notice first .
This is currently the protection leveraged by Tor exit node operators , it has worked for me so far .
If you were actually liable for facilitating the spread of pedophilia , it would be a legal can of worms , since the ISP would be liable , etc .
If such liability existed the internet would collapse under it 's own weight because it would be too much of a liability to provide content .
Think about it , if you sent child porn through gmail to your friend , then google would be liable for 'facilitating the spread of pedophilia' .
Gmail type service , furthermore , the internet , can not , or would not exist under those circumstances .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In this situation, I think you would be considered an ISP/content provider, because others are connecting through you.
That means they would have to serve you a DMCA notice first.
This is currently the protection leveraged by Tor exit node operators, it has worked for me so far.
If you were actually liable for facilitating the spread of pedophilia, it would be a legal can of worms, since the ISP would be liable, etc.
If such liability existed the internet would collapse under it's own weight because it would be too much of a liability to provide content.
Think about it, if you sent child porn through gmail to your friend, then google would be liable for 'facilitating the spread of pedophilia'.
Gmail type service, furthermore, the internet, cannot, or would not exist under those circumstances.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354903</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355775</id>
	<title>Tomatoes are way more dangerous than darknets</title>
	<author>Rick Bentley</author>
	<datestamp>1245158040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ninety-two point four per cent of juvenile delinquents have eaten tomatoes.<br> <br>
Eighty-seven point one per cent of the adult criminals in penitentiaries throughout
the United States have eaten tomatoes.<br> <br>

Informers reliably inform that of all known American Communists ninety-two point
three percent have eaten tomatoes.<br> <br>

Eighty-four per cent of all people killed in automobile accidents during the year
2004 had eaten tomatoes.<br> <br>

Those who object to singling out specific groups for statistical proofs require
measurements within in the total. Of those people born before the year 1850,
regardless of race, color, creed or caste, and known to have eaten tomatoes,
there has been one hundred per cent mortality!<br> <br>

In spite of their dread addiction, a few tomato eaters born between 1850
and 1900 still manage to survive, but the clinical picture is poor-their
bones are brittle, their movements feeble, their skin seamed and wrinkled,
their eyesight failing, hair falling, and frequently they have lost all their
teeth.<br> <br>

Those born between 1900 and 1950 number somewhat more survivors,
but the overt signs of the addiction's dread effects differ not in kind but
only in degree of deterioration. Prognostication is not hopeful.<br> <br>

Exhaustive experiment shows that when tomatoes are withheld from an
addict, invariably his cravings will cause him to turn to substitutes-such
as oranges, or steak and potatoes. If both tomatoes and all substitutes are
persistently withheld-death invariably results within a short time!<br> <br>

The skeptic of apocryphal statistics, or the stubborn nonconformist who
will not accept the clearly proved conclusions of others may conduct his
own experiment. <br> <br>

Obtain two dozen tomatoes-they may actually be purchased within a block
of some high schools, or discovered growing in a respected neighbor's
back yard! - crush them to a pulp in exactly the state they would have if
introduced into the stomach, pour the vile juice into a bowl, and place a
goldfish therein. Within minutes the goldfish will be dead!<br> <br>

Those who argue that what affects a goldfish might not apply to a human
being may, at their own choice, wish to conduct a direct experiment by
fully immersing a live human head* into the mixture for a full five minutes. <br> <br>


* It is suggested that best results will be obtained by using an experimental
subject who is thoroughly familiar with and frequently uses the logical
methods demonstrated herein, such as: <br> <br>
(a) The average politician. Extremely unavailable to the average citizen
except during the short open season before election. <br> <br>

(b) The advertising copywriter. Extremely wary and hard to catch due to
his experience with many lawsuits for fraudulent claims. <br> <br>

(c) The dedicated moralist. Extremely plentiful in supply, and the experimenter
might even obtain a bounty on each from a grateful community.<br> <br>
<br> <br> <br> <br>

THE DREAD TOMATO ADDICTION
Mark Clifton
This essay originally appeared in the February 1958 edition of Astounding.
The dates in this version have been modified (all dates plus 50 years).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ninety-two point four per cent of juvenile delinquents have eaten tomatoes .
Eighty-seven point one per cent of the adult criminals in penitentiaries throughout the United States have eaten tomatoes .
Informers reliably inform that of all known American Communists ninety-two point three percent have eaten tomatoes .
Eighty-four per cent of all people killed in automobile accidents during the year 2004 had eaten tomatoes .
Those who object to singling out specific groups for statistical proofs require measurements within in the total .
Of those people born before the year 1850 , regardless of race , color , creed or caste , and known to have eaten tomatoes , there has been one hundred per cent mortality !
In spite of their dread addiction , a few tomato eaters born between 1850 and 1900 still manage to survive , but the clinical picture is poor-their bones are brittle , their movements feeble , their skin seamed and wrinkled , their eyesight failing , hair falling , and frequently they have lost all their teeth .
Those born between 1900 and 1950 number somewhat more survivors , but the overt signs of the addiction 's dread effects differ not in kind but only in degree of deterioration .
Prognostication is not hopeful .
Exhaustive experiment shows that when tomatoes are withheld from an addict , invariably his cravings will cause him to turn to substitutes-such as oranges , or steak and potatoes .
If both tomatoes and all substitutes are persistently withheld-death invariably results within a short time !
The skeptic of apocryphal statistics , or the stubborn nonconformist who will not accept the clearly proved conclusions of others may conduct his own experiment .
Obtain two dozen tomatoes-they may actually be purchased within a block of some high schools , or discovered growing in a respected neighbor 's back yard !
- crush them to a pulp in exactly the state they would have if introduced into the stomach , pour the vile juice into a bowl , and place a goldfish therein .
Within minutes the goldfish will be dead !
Those who argue that what affects a goldfish might not apply to a human being may , at their own choice , wish to conduct a direct experiment by fully immersing a live human head * into the mixture for a full five minutes .
* It is suggested that best results will be obtained by using an experimental subject who is thoroughly familiar with and frequently uses the logical methods demonstrated herein , such as : ( a ) The average politician .
Extremely unavailable to the average citizen except during the short open season before election .
( b ) The advertising copywriter .
Extremely wary and hard to catch due to his experience with many lawsuits for fraudulent claims .
( c ) The dedicated moralist .
Extremely plentiful in supply , and the experimenter might even obtain a bounty on each from a grateful community .
THE DREAD TOMATO ADDICTION Mark Clifton This essay originally appeared in the February 1958 edition of Astounding .
The dates in this version have been modified ( all dates plus 50 years ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ninety-two point four per cent of juvenile delinquents have eaten tomatoes.
Eighty-seven point one per cent of the adult criminals in penitentiaries throughout
the United States have eaten tomatoes.
Informers reliably inform that of all known American Communists ninety-two point
three percent have eaten tomatoes.
Eighty-four per cent of all people killed in automobile accidents during the year
2004 had eaten tomatoes.
Those who object to singling out specific groups for statistical proofs require
measurements within in the total.
Of those people born before the year 1850,
regardless of race, color, creed or caste, and known to have eaten tomatoes,
there has been one hundred per cent mortality!
In spite of their dread addiction, a few tomato eaters born between 1850
and 1900 still manage to survive, but the clinical picture is poor-their
bones are brittle, their movements feeble, their skin seamed and wrinkled,
their eyesight failing, hair falling, and frequently they have lost all their
teeth.
Those born between 1900 and 1950 number somewhat more survivors,
but the overt signs of the addiction's dread effects differ not in kind but
only in degree of deterioration.
Prognostication is not hopeful.
Exhaustive experiment shows that when tomatoes are withheld from an
addict, invariably his cravings will cause him to turn to substitutes-such
as oranges, or steak and potatoes.
If both tomatoes and all substitutes are
persistently withheld-death invariably results within a short time!
The skeptic of apocryphal statistics, or the stubborn nonconformist who
will not accept the clearly proved conclusions of others may conduct his
own experiment.
Obtain two dozen tomatoes-they may actually be purchased within a block
of some high schools, or discovered growing in a respected neighbor's
back yard!
- crush them to a pulp in exactly the state they would have if
introduced into the stomach, pour the vile juice into a bowl, and place a
goldfish therein.
Within minutes the goldfish will be dead!
Those who argue that what affects a goldfish might not apply to a human
being may, at their own choice, wish to conduct a direct experiment by
fully immersing a live human head* into the mixture for a full five minutes.
* It is suggested that best results will be obtained by using an experimental
subject who is thoroughly familiar with and frequently uses the logical
methods demonstrated herein, such as:  
(a) The average politician.
Extremely unavailable to the average citizen
except during the short open season before election.
(b) The advertising copywriter.
Extremely wary and hard to catch due to
his experience with many lawsuits for fraudulent claims.
(c) The dedicated moralist.
Extremely plentiful in supply, and the experimenter
might even obtain a bounty on each from a grateful community.
THE DREAD TOMATO ADDICTION
Mark Clifton
This essay originally appeared in the February 1958 edition of Astounding.
The dates in this version have been modified (all dates plus 50 years).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354685</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28357949</id>
	<title>Re:Bad Guys</title>
	<author>anarche</author>
	<datestamp>1245176820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I have something to hide. It's called my private life and it's nobody's business. Not yours, not some company's and most certainly not my government's.</p></div><p>Really, and what do you do in your private life?<br> <i>Watch illegally dl'd movies:</i> someone else's business<br>
<i>Smack your children a little too hard</i>: somebody else's business

Do I need to go on?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>I think it was Franklin who said, if the people fear the government, it's a tyranny, if the government fears its people, it's liberty. I think the US (and a good portion of the rest of the planet) would need a few leaders like the founding fathers of the US. If they could see what came to their dream, what they fought for, died for and had others die for, I think they'd get fed up enough to start over.</p></div><p>"I had the best laid plans since the start of America" - Robert Smith<br> <br>I do agree that we need better leaders in the western world.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have something to hide .
It 's called my private life and it 's nobody 's business .
Not yours , not some company 's and most certainly not my government 's.Really , and what do you do in your private life ?
Watch illegally dl 'd movies : someone else 's business Smack your children a little too hard : somebody else 's business Do I need to go on ? I think it was Franklin who said , if the people fear the government , it 's a tyranny , if the government fears its people , it 's liberty .
I think the US ( and a good portion of the rest of the planet ) would need a few leaders like the founding fathers of the US .
If they could see what came to their dream , what they fought for , died for and had others die for , I think they 'd get fed up enough to start over .
" I had the best laid plans since the start of America " - Robert Smith I do agree that we need better leaders in the western world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have something to hide.
It's called my private life and it's nobody's business.
Not yours, not some company's and most certainly not my government's.Really, and what do you do in your private life?
Watch illegally dl'd movies: someone else's business
Smack your children a little too hard: somebody else's business

Do I need to go on?I think it was Franklin who said, if the people fear the government, it's a tyranny, if the government fears its people, it's liberty.
I think the US (and a good portion of the rest of the planet) would need a few leaders like the founding fathers of the US.
If they could see what came to their dream, what they fought for, died for and had others die for, I think they'd get fed up enough to start over.
"I had the best laid plans since the start of America" - Robert Smith I do agree that we need better leaders in the western world.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354941</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28360827</id>
	<title>Re:Worried, maybe.</title>
	<author>stonewallred</author>
	<datestamp>1245249960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sad that it is true, and will probably be used to shut one down, as we must always "Think of the Children."  Sad what this once proud nation of freedom has descended to with the advent of the nanny state.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sad that it is true , and will probably be used to shut one down , as we must always " Think of the Children .
" Sad what this once proud nation of freedom has descended to with the advent of the nanny state .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sad that it is true, and will probably be used to shut one down, as we must always "Think of the Children.
"  Sad what this once proud nation of freedom has descended to with the advent of the nanny state.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354903</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28356459</id>
	<title>Re:You mean?</title>
	<author>MentlFlos</author>
	<datestamp>1245162900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Kinda like good old packet HAM radio used to.</p></div><p>mmmmmmmmmmmmmm, ham<nobr> <wbr></nobr>::drool::</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Kinda like good old packet HAM radio used to.mmmmmmmmmmmmmm , ham : : drool : :</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Kinda like good old packet HAM radio used to.mmmmmmmmmmmmmm, ham ::drool::
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354313</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355617</id>
	<title>Re:HTML5</title>
	<author>miruku</author>
	<datestamp>1245157260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"While the entire  HTML 5 standard is years or more from adoption, there are many powerful features available in browsers today. In fact, five key next-generation features are already available in the latest (sometimes experimental) browser builds from Firefox, Opera, Safari, and Google Chrome. (Microsoft has announced that it will support HTML 5, and as Vic noted, "We eagerly await evidence of that.") Here's Vic's HTML 5 scorecard:</p><p><a href="http://radar.oreilly.com/upload/2009/05/html5.png" title="oreilly.com" rel="nofollow">http://radar.oreilly.com/upload/2009/05/html5.png</a> [oreilly.com] "</p><p><a href="http://radar.oreilly.com/2009/05/google-bets-big-on-html-5.html" title="oreilly.com" rel="nofollow">http://radar.oreilly.com/2009/05/google-bets-big-on-html-5.html</a> [oreilly.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" While the entire HTML 5 standard is years or more from adoption , there are many powerful features available in browsers today .
In fact , five key next-generation features are already available in the latest ( sometimes experimental ) browser builds from Firefox , Opera , Safari , and Google Chrome .
( Microsoft has announced that it will support HTML 5 , and as Vic noted , " We eagerly await evidence of that .
" ) Here 's Vic 's HTML 5 scorecard : http : //radar.oreilly.com/upload/2009/05/html5.png [ oreilly.com ] " http : //radar.oreilly.com/2009/05/google-bets-big-on-html-5.html [ oreilly.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"While the entire  HTML 5 standard is years or more from adoption, there are many powerful features available in browsers today.
In fact, five key next-generation features are already available in the latest (sometimes experimental) browser builds from Firefox, Opera, Safari, and Google Chrome.
(Microsoft has announced that it will support HTML 5, and as Vic noted, "We eagerly await evidence of that.
") Here's Vic's HTML 5 scorecard:http://radar.oreilly.com/upload/2009/05/html5.png [oreilly.com] "http://radar.oreilly.com/2009/05/google-bets-big-on-html-5.html [oreilly.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354365</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354595</id>
	<title>i allready have a darknet</title>
	<author>FudRucker</author>
	<datestamp>1245151440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>just ctrl alt backspace and type in lynx<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>just ctrl alt backspace and type in lynx : D</tokentext>
<sentencetext>just ctrl alt backspace and type in lynx :D</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354903</id>
	<title>Re:Worried, maybe.</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1245153240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And that's exactly the reason why this will be outlawed immediately as soon as a sizable portion of the population (in the western world, folks, I'm not talking about Iran, China and Burma here) uses it to circumvent the governmental snooping that's running rampart.</p><p>Can't outlaw it, you say? Because we're in a free world and thus they can't just simply outlaw encryption?</p><p>Ok, they won't. What we'll get is a law that makes you liable if you "faciliate the spread of pedophilia". After all, if you help a pedo you're in the wrong as well, ain't you? Since you can't really determine what kind of data you roll around in a darknet (it would kinda defeat the purpose if you could), darknet proponents would get their IP sniffed and law enforcement would download any kind of kiddy porn they could find in the darknet. As soon as the IP of a proponent can be linked to the porn (say, a chunk came from him because it was stored at his part of the cloud), the trap closes, the law enforcement can "prove" that darknet proponents are "only" in for the kiddy porn and thus darknet is an evil tool of child exploitation.</p><p>Gimme a single reason to believe this won't happen, I beg you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And that 's exactly the reason why this will be outlawed immediately as soon as a sizable portion of the population ( in the western world , folks , I 'm not talking about Iran , China and Burma here ) uses it to circumvent the governmental snooping that 's running rampart.Ca n't outlaw it , you say ?
Because we 're in a free world and thus they ca n't just simply outlaw encryption ? Ok , they wo n't .
What we 'll get is a law that makes you liable if you " faciliate the spread of pedophilia " .
After all , if you help a pedo you 're in the wrong as well , ai n't you ?
Since you ca n't really determine what kind of data you roll around in a darknet ( it would kinda defeat the purpose if you could ) , darknet proponents would get their IP sniffed and law enforcement would download any kind of kiddy porn they could find in the darknet .
As soon as the IP of a proponent can be linked to the porn ( say , a chunk came from him because it was stored at his part of the cloud ) , the trap closes , the law enforcement can " prove " that darknet proponents are " only " in for the kiddy porn and thus darknet is an evil tool of child exploitation.Gim me a single reason to believe this wo n't happen , I beg you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And that's exactly the reason why this will be outlawed immediately as soon as a sizable portion of the population (in the western world, folks, I'm not talking about Iran, China and Burma here) uses it to circumvent the governmental snooping that's running rampart.Can't outlaw it, you say?
Because we're in a free world and thus they can't just simply outlaw encryption?Ok, they won't.
What we'll get is a law that makes you liable if you "faciliate the spread of pedophilia".
After all, if you help a pedo you're in the wrong as well, ain't you?
Since you can't really determine what kind of data you roll around in a darknet (it would kinda defeat the purpose if you could), darknet proponents would get their IP sniffed and law enforcement would download any kind of kiddy porn they could find in the darknet.
As soon as the IP of a proponent can be linked to the porn (say, a chunk came from him because it was stored at his part of the cloud), the trap closes, the law enforcement can "prove" that darknet proponents are "only" in for the kiddy porn and thus darknet is an evil tool of child exploitation.Gimme a single reason to believe this won't happen, I beg you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354861</id>
	<title>Re:HTML5</title>
	<author>tholomyes</author>
	<datestamp>1245153060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here's the details on which browsers support what parts of the new features of HTML5 thus far: <a href="http://www.quirksmode.org/dom/html5.html" title="quirksmode.org">http://www.quirksmode.org/dom/html5.html</a> [quirksmode.org].  </p><p>According to quirksmode, it appears that Safari 4.0 has the most complete support, followed by FF 3.5b and IE8.  Chrome and Opera do not appear to, at least as far as supporting the new features is concerned.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's the details on which browsers support what parts of the new features of HTML5 thus far : http : //www.quirksmode.org/dom/html5.html [ quirksmode.org ] .
According to quirksmode , it appears that Safari 4.0 has the most complete support , followed by FF 3.5b and IE8 .
Chrome and Opera do not appear to , at least as far as supporting the new features is concerned .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's the details on which browsers support what parts of the new features of HTML5 thus far: http://www.quirksmode.org/dom/html5.html [quirksmode.org].
According to quirksmode, it appears that Safari 4.0 has the most complete support, followed by FF 3.5b and IE8.
Chrome and Opera do not appear to, at least as far as supporting the new features is concerned.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354365</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355739</id>
	<title>If smth like Opera Unite...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245157920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If something like Opera Unite or Azureus jump on this particular privacy/security bandwagon, then you will have gazillions users on the darknets doing the same non-pedophilic things they do.</p><p>It would be very hard to push the case for dealing in child porn.</p><p>I don't understand the technology correctly, but if it's anything like Freenet or i2p you only would carry the porn bits ocasionaly, that is, at random, because you are just a carrier for something you don't even know what it is because it's encrypted to your eyes and system. Pushing a court case like that is fucking crazy. Just throw away Western civilization for the last 200 years...Well, Bush tried...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If something like Opera Unite or Azureus jump on this particular privacy/security bandwagon , then you will have gazillions users on the darknets doing the same non-pedophilic things they do.It would be very hard to push the case for dealing in child porn.I do n't understand the technology correctly , but if it 's anything like Freenet or i2p you only would carry the porn bits ocasionaly , that is , at random , because you are just a carrier for something you do n't even know what it is because it 's encrypted to your eyes and system .
Pushing a court case like that is fucking crazy .
Just throw away Western civilization for the last 200 years...Well , Bush tried.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If something like Opera Unite or Azureus jump on this particular privacy/security bandwagon, then you will have gazillions users on the darknets doing the same non-pedophilic things they do.It would be very hard to push the case for dealing in child porn.I don't understand the technology correctly, but if it's anything like Freenet or i2p you only would carry the porn bits ocasionaly, that is, at random, because you are just a carrier for something you don't even know what it is because it's encrypted to your eyes and system.
Pushing a court case like that is fucking crazy.
Just throw away Western civilization for the last 200 years...Well, Bush tried...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354903</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28356541</id>
	<title>Re:Bad Guys</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245163320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd have to say you got your tin foil on a little tight. The sheer volume of information you claim is being archived would be impractical to impossible to keep, even with storage space prices plummeting. You really think they are so out to get you that they are spending trillions to record everything forever? Sure it is stored temporarily. It has to in order to get it to you, but logs and cache gets flushed unless there is a reason to keep it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd have to say you got your tin foil on a little tight .
The sheer volume of information you claim is being archived would be impractical to impossible to keep , even with storage space prices plummeting .
You really think they are so out to get you that they are spending trillions to record everything forever ?
Sure it is stored temporarily .
It has to in order to get it to you , but logs and cache gets flushed unless there is a reason to keep it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd have to say you got your tin foil on a little tight.
The sheer volume of information you claim is being archived would be impractical to impossible to keep, even with storage space prices plummeting.
You really think they are so out to get you that they are spending trillions to record everything forever?
Sure it is stored temporarily.
It has to in order to get it to you, but logs and cache gets flushed unless there is a reason to keep it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354351</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354589</id>
	<title>Late April Fools' joke?</title>
	<author>castrox</author>
	<datestamp>1245151440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is this a late April Fools' joke? How does this supposed system work? It seems there must be a hosted PHP file somewhere - that server needs to have logs, at least if it's inside the EU and however you slice that you're toast.</p><p>Basically it seems to work sort of like a BitTorrent tracker that directs your client to other clients. So by what mechanism do you choose who to include in the "net"? If I understand correctly you sort of create channels for different purposes or groups. By using a introductory key? And how do you communicate that key? By encrypted e-mail? So any agencies that listen in on you very easily can see who you communicated with prior to your request for so and so domain holding the darknet PHP file? And how tough is that encryption? Ordinary SSL?</p><p><div class="quote"><p> It connects the user's HTML 5-based browser to a single PHP file, which downloads some JavaScript code into the browser. Pieces of the file are spread among the members of the Veiled darknet. It's not peer-to-peer, but rather a chain of "repeaters" of the PHP file, the researchers say.</p></div><p>Spreads the file onto multiple peers? Is it possible for this file to run out of entropy in any way??</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is this a late April Fools ' joke ?
How does this supposed system work ?
It seems there must be a hosted PHP file somewhere - that server needs to have logs , at least if it 's inside the EU and however you slice that you 're toast.Basically it seems to work sort of like a BitTorrent tracker that directs your client to other clients .
So by what mechanism do you choose who to include in the " net " ?
If I understand correctly you sort of create channels for different purposes or groups .
By using a introductory key ?
And how do you communicate that key ?
By encrypted e-mail ?
So any agencies that listen in on you very easily can see who you communicated with prior to your request for so and so domain holding the darknet PHP file ?
And how tough is that encryption ?
Ordinary SSL ?
It connects the user 's HTML 5-based browser to a single PHP file , which downloads some JavaScript code into the browser .
Pieces of the file are spread among the members of the Veiled darknet .
It 's not peer-to-peer , but rather a chain of " repeaters " of the PHP file , the researchers say.Spreads the file onto multiple peers ?
Is it possible for this file to run out of entropy in any way ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is this a late April Fools' joke?
How does this supposed system work?
It seems there must be a hosted PHP file somewhere - that server needs to have logs, at least if it's inside the EU and however you slice that you're toast.Basically it seems to work sort of like a BitTorrent tracker that directs your client to other clients.
So by what mechanism do you choose who to include in the "net"?
If I understand correctly you sort of create channels for different purposes or groups.
By using a introductory key?
And how do you communicate that key?
By encrypted e-mail?
So any agencies that listen in on you very easily can see who you communicated with prior to your request for so and so domain holding the darknet PHP file?
And how tough is that encryption?
Ordinary SSL?
It connects the user's HTML 5-based browser to a single PHP file, which downloads some JavaScript code into the browser.
Pieces of the file are spread among the members of the Veiled darknet.
It's not peer-to-peer, but rather a chain of "repeaters" of the PHP file, the researchers say.Spreads the file onto multiple peers?
Is it possible for this file to run out of entropy in any way?
?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354365</id>
	<title>HTML5</title>
	<author>Amazing Quantum Man</author>
	<datestamp>1245150120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Which browsers (please include note if it's beta) support HTML 5?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Which browsers ( please include note if it 's beta ) support HTML 5 ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which browsers (please include note if it's beta) support HTML 5?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28362907</id>
	<title>Re:Bad Guys</title>
	<author>digitalsushi</author>
	<datestamp>1245260520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I think the US (and a good portion of the rest of the planet) would need a few leaders like the founding fathers of the US.</i></p><p>The founding fathers of the USA would be locked up if they could tour today.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the US ( and a good portion of the rest of the planet ) would need a few leaders like the founding fathers of the US.The founding fathers of the USA would be locked up if they could tour today .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the US (and a good portion of the rest of the planet) would need a few leaders like the founding fathers of the US.The founding fathers of the USA would be locked up if they could tour today.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354941</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28356477</id>
	<title>HOW?</title>
	<author>rosvall</author>
	<datestamp>1245162960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since there are zero details in TFA, i'm just going to speculate that one of three things is going on, in order of increasing probability:<br>1. HTML 5 creates all sorts of fantastic new ways to communicate anonymously through a central server. In that case, please fill me in. In genuinely interested.<br>2. The researchers have implemented something like the dining cryptographers protocol in js and php.<br>3. TFA is utter bullshit</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since there are zero details in TFA , i 'm just going to speculate that one of three things is going on , in order of increasing probability : 1 .
HTML 5 creates all sorts of fantastic new ways to communicate anonymously through a central server .
In that case , please fill me in .
In genuinely interested.2 .
The researchers have implemented something like the dining cryptographers protocol in js and php.3 .
TFA is utter bullshit</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since there are zero details in TFA, i'm just going to speculate that one of three things is going on, in order of increasing probability:1.
HTML 5 creates all sorts of fantastic new ways to communicate anonymously through a central server.
In that case, please fill me in.
In genuinely interested.2.
The researchers have implemented something like the dining cryptographers protocol in js and php.3.
TFA is utter bullshit</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354677</id>
	<title>Re:HTML5</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245151980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Which browsers (please include note if it's beta) support HTML 5?</p></div><p>Opera has supported it the longest; the newer (or newest) versions of Firefox and Chrome are also supporting most (if not all) of it.</p><p>IE is falling far behind, but that may change with the release of their next version.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Which browsers ( please include note if it 's beta ) support HTML 5 ? Opera has supported it the longest ; the newer ( or newest ) versions of Firefox and Chrome are also supporting most ( if not all ) of it.IE is falling far behind , but that may change with the release of their next version .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which browsers (please include note if it's beta) support HTML 5?Opera has supported it the longest; the newer (or newest) versions of Firefox and Chrome are also supporting most (if not all) of it.IE is falling far behind, but that may change with the release of their next version.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354365</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28358045</id>
	<title>Cool</title>
	<author>guliverk</author>
	<datestamp>1245178200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Cool !!11!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Cool ! ! 11 !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cool !!11!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355171</id>
	<title>Re:Attractive to bad guys?</title>
	<author>nausea\_malvarma</author>
	<datestamp>1245154740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not all crimes require pants. What about streaking?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not all crimes require pants .
What about streaking ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not all crimes require pants.
What about streaking?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354995</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355247</id>
	<title>The "boundary" between the good and bad guys is</title>
	<author>Klistvud</author>
	<datestamp>1245155160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>an artificial one. The main job of every efficient government is to make us ALL feel guilty and scared. In other words, to make us all "bad guys", so they can legally go after us and manipulate us at will.</p><p>The efficiency of a government is strongly related to the number of citizens it perceives as the "bad guys", such as "copyright violators, patent infringers, software pirates, tax evaders, road speeders, people parking wrongly, walkers on grass, flashers, hackers, elevator farters"... The more categories of such "outlaws" a government can come up with, the more efficient it is.</p><p>Modern governments have become quite cunning in that they will consistently deny all that: they will explicitly assert that they are furthering feelings of pride and civil courage as opposed to feelings of guilt and fear, and they will try to hide behind memes such as "rule of law" or "democracy". But words are easy. We should always judge them by their deeds.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>an artificial one .
The main job of every efficient government is to make us ALL feel guilty and scared .
In other words , to make us all " bad guys " , so they can legally go after us and manipulate us at will.The efficiency of a government is strongly related to the number of citizens it perceives as the " bad guys " , such as " copyright violators , patent infringers , software pirates , tax evaders , road speeders , people parking wrongly , walkers on grass , flashers , hackers , elevator farters " ... The more categories of such " outlaws " a government can come up with , the more efficient it is.Modern governments have become quite cunning in that they will consistently deny all that : they will explicitly assert that they are furthering feelings of pride and civil courage as opposed to feelings of guilt and fear , and they will try to hide behind memes such as " rule of law " or " democracy " .
But words are easy .
We should always judge them by their deeds .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>an artificial one.
The main job of every efficient government is to make us ALL feel guilty and scared.
In other words, to make us all "bad guys", so they can legally go after us and manipulate us at will.The efficiency of a government is strongly related to the number of citizens it perceives as the "bad guys", such as "copyright violators, patent infringers, software pirates, tax evaders, road speeders, people parking wrongly, walkers on grass, flashers, hackers, elevator farters"... The more categories of such "outlaws" a government can come up with, the more efficient it is.Modern governments have become quite cunning in that they will consistently deny all that: they will explicitly assert that they are furthering feelings of pride and civil courage as opposed to feelings of guilt and fear, and they will try to hide behind memes such as "rule of law" or "democracy".
But words are easy.
We should always judge them by their deeds.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354351</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28361065</id>
	<title>Re:Bad Guys</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1245251280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Double<strong>plus</strong>good, or double<strong>minus</strong>good?</p><p>Whatever... it almost tastes like meat.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Doubleplusgood , or doubleminusgood ? Whatever... it almost tastes like meat .
: P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doubleplusgood, or doubleminusgood?Whatever... it almost tastes like meat.
:P</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354351</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354443</id>
	<title>But what about the quality?</title>
	<author>jd</author>
	<datestamp>1245150540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd (almost) rather use a darknet built over SMTP than use Freenet, which is horribly, horribly, painfuly, agonizingly sloooooow!</p><p>TOR, to me, seems to be about the right sort of level of speed and security. I know of no obvious problems with it (other than you can't use applets that call home). This is not to say it's perfect, or that people shouldn't do research, but if there is a benchmark that systems should reach or exceed, I'd consider TOR to be the one to beat, not Freenet.</p><p>There are other overnets and underlays which, if you added encryption and randomized routing, would become darknets. Very interesting stuff and very useful in this paranoid age.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd ( almost ) rather use a darknet built over SMTP than use Freenet , which is horribly , horribly , painfuly , agonizingly sloooooow ! TOR , to me , seems to be about the right sort of level of speed and security .
I know of no obvious problems with it ( other than you ca n't use applets that call home ) .
This is not to say it 's perfect , or that people should n't do research , but if there is a benchmark that systems should reach or exceed , I 'd consider TOR to be the one to beat , not Freenet.There are other overnets and underlays which , if you added encryption and randomized routing , would become darknets .
Very interesting stuff and very useful in this paranoid age .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd (almost) rather use a darknet built over SMTP than use Freenet, which is horribly, horribly, painfuly, agonizingly sloooooow!TOR, to me, seems to be about the right sort of level of speed and security.
I know of no obvious problems with it (other than you can't use applets that call home).
This is not to say it's perfect, or that people shouldn't do research, but if there is a benchmark that systems should reach or exceed, I'd consider TOR to be the one to beat, not Freenet.There are other overnets and underlays which, if you added encryption and randomized routing, would become darknets.
Very interesting stuff and very useful in this paranoid age.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354627</id>
	<title>combined with Opera Unite!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245151560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, according to The Fine Article, you need to share a PHP file between members of the ephemeral darknet. Now, where did I read about sharing files between peers easily???.... Yes, of course, it was Opera Unite, released just today! Plus Opera 10 supports HTML 5.</p><p>So Opera Unite + HTML5 + this technique = immediate and easy darknet</p><p>Much easier that setting up TOR if you asked me.</p><p>AC</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , according to The Fine Article , you need to share a PHP file between members of the ephemeral darknet .
Now , where did I read about sharing files between peers easily ? ? ? ... .
Yes , of course , it was Opera Unite , released just today !
Plus Opera 10 supports HTML 5.So Opera Unite + HTML5 + this technique = immediate and easy darknetMuch easier that setting up TOR if you asked me.AC</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, according to The Fine Article, you need to share a PHP file between members of the ephemeral darknet.
Now, where did I read about sharing files between peers easily???....
Yes, of course, it was Opera Unite, released just today!
Plus Opera 10 supports HTML 5.So Opera Unite + HTML5 + this technique = immediate and easy darknetMuch easier that setting up TOR if you asked me.AC</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354685</id>
	<title>Attractive to bad guys?</title>
	<author>The Archon V2.0</author>
	<datestamp>1245152040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The researchers admit darknets are attractive to bad guys, too</p></div><p>
So is encryption. So is privacy. So are knives. So is food. So is living another day. It's not wrong just because it can be used to ill ends.</p><p>

Or, to be all profound and Latin and stuff: abusus non tollit usum.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The researchers admit darknets are attractive to bad guys , too So is encryption .
So is privacy .
So are knives .
So is food .
So is living another day .
It 's not wrong just because it can be used to ill ends .
Or , to be all profound and Latin and stuff : abusus non tollit usum .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The researchers admit darknets are attractive to bad guys, too
So is encryption.
So is privacy.
So are knives.
So is food.
So is living another day.
It's not wrong just because it can be used to ill ends.
Or, to be all profound and Latin and stuff: abusus non tollit usum.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355681</id>
	<title>Let me know...</title>
	<author>actionbastard</author>
	<datestamp>1245157620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When it works with lynx.</htmltext>
<tokenext>When it works with lynx .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When it works with lynx.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355811</id>
	<title>Re:Bad Guys</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245158340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Many of the people who seek political power go into that job as they wish to gain power over others and all that power brings them. Power is the power to control others. So its no wonder these power seekers apply that same thinking to the Internet and every other aspect of life. They want to be in control. Therefore the people in power fear any information spread which undermines their chances to hold onto power.</p><p>The people in power don't care about individuals, they care about groups of people moving together. Because groups of people can stand up against political power. Also groups of people can make other people listen to them and so the groups can grow ever more powerful (if not acted against, undermined and ultimately divided). That's why the people in power use divide and conquer tactics to sow ideas of division in groups because fragmented groups are less powerful to stand against them. So they target core people in groups to discredit and appear to undermine to then fragment groups.</p><p>Which brings us to the core problem. The Internet has the power to bring groups of people together like never before in history. Therefore freedom of thought on the Internet is a direct threat to the people in power. Everyone in power, in every country. Not just police state countries. All people in power don't actually want like minded people to form into groups of people and when they do they want to monitor the groups to then be ready to undermine the groups if they need to. These groups can (and do) threaten the power grabbing schemes of the people who seek ever more ways to gain power for themselves. (Here's a good starting point to find more info on the whole (often hidden) field of political tactical undermining called "Opposition Research").<br> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposition\_research" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposition\_research</a> [wikipedia.org] </p><p>1984 was a cautionary tale about the true nature of power. Most people don't seek power, so its a cautionary tale for most people. But for the minority of people who are so driven to seek power over other people; they don't need an instruction manual. Their core psychological behavior defines why they behave the way the do. People who seek power over others, almost by definition seek to control other people, so they seek to remove choices from the people they gain power over. They don't actually want a fair world. They tell us its for our own good to help us. But its not, its to help them. They personally gain at the expense of others as they gain ever more control. These people don't want fairness and equality. They want to be in power and fear others being in power over them.</p><p>Ultimately the political elite are ending up showing us all how relentlessly driven they are to seek power for their own personal gain. So the more they clamp down on people the more they reveal their deep need for power over others and the more they make everyone ever more angry at them because they get controlled ever more. Its happened throughout history, but the people in power now have the ability to clamp down on opposition views like never before.</p><p>The control they have now is nothing compared with where the world is going in even just the next decade. We are certainly coming to the end of people leaking info on government corruption. For example, Imagine a few years from now when they can use automated profiling and data mining software to monitor and warn the people in power when anyone lower in chains of authority use words the people in power decreed are not to be allowed to use online or even just say on office phones. Soon after it'll be applied to us all. It doesn't even need to be perfect profiling. It simply needs to be warnings (or even just the treat of monitoring to silence critics). Soon people will not be able to speak openly about their thoughts and views online. Its already happening in the UK. For example within the past few months a nurse was fired for blogging about mistakes in managing the health service and even today a police detective was pu</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Many of the people who seek political power go into that job as they wish to gain power over others and all that power brings them .
Power is the power to control others .
So its no wonder these power seekers apply that same thinking to the Internet and every other aspect of life .
They want to be in control .
Therefore the people in power fear any information spread which undermines their chances to hold onto power.The people in power do n't care about individuals , they care about groups of people moving together .
Because groups of people can stand up against political power .
Also groups of people can make other people listen to them and so the groups can grow ever more powerful ( if not acted against , undermined and ultimately divided ) .
That 's why the people in power use divide and conquer tactics to sow ideas of division in groups because fragmented groups are less powerful to stand against them .
So they target core people in groups to discredit and appear to undermine to then fragment groups.Which brings us to the core problem .
The Internet has the power to bring groups of people together like never before in history .
Therefore freedom of thought on the Internet is a direct threat to the people in power .
Everyone in power , in every country .
Not just police state countries .
All people in power do n't actually want like minded people to form into groups of people and when they do they want to monitor the groups to then be ready to undermine the groups if they need to .
These groups can ( and do ) threaten the power grabbing schemes of the people who seek ever more ways to gain power for themselves .
( Here 's a good starting point to find more info on the whole ( often hidden ) field of political tactical undermining called " Opposition Research " ) .
http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposition \ _research [ wikipedia.org ] 1984 was a cautionary tale about the true nature of power .
Most people do n't seek power , so its a cautionary tale for most people .
But for the minority of people who are so driven to seek power over other people ; they do n't need an instruction manual .
Their core psychological behavior defines why they behave the way the do .
People who seek power over others , almost by definition seek to control other people , so they seek to remove choices from the people they gain power over .
They do n't actually want a fair world .
They tell us its for our own good to help us .
But its not , its to help them .
They personally gain at the expense of others as they gain ever more control .
These people do n't want fairness and equality .
They want to be in power and fear others being in power over them.Ultimately the political elite are ending up showing us all how relentlessly driven they are to seek power for their own personal gain .
So the more they clamp down on people the more they reveal their deep need for power over others and the more they make everyone ever more angry at them because they get controlled ever more .
Its happened throughout history , but the people in power now have the ability to clamp down on opposition views like never before.The control they have now is nothing compared with where the world is going in even just the next decade .
We are certainly coming to the end of people leaking info on government corruption .
For example , Imagine a few years from now when they can use automated profiling and data mining software to monitor and warn the people in power when anyone lower in chains of authority use words the people in power decreed are not to be allowed to use online or even just say on office phones .
Soon after it 'll be applied to us all .
It does n't even need to be perfect profiling .
It simply needs to be warnings ( or even just the treat of monitoring to silence critics ) .
Soon people will not be able to speak openly about their thoughts and views online .
Its already happening in the UK .
For example within the past few months a nurse was fired for blogging about mistakes in managing the health service and even today a police detective was pu</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Many of the people who seek political power go into that job as they wish to gain power over others and all that power brings them.
Power is the power to control others.
So its no wonder these power seekers apply that same thinking to the Internet and every other aspect of life.
They want to be in control.
Therefore the people in power fear any information spread which undermines their chances to hold onto power.The people in power don't care about individuals, they care about groups of people moving together.
Because groups of people can stand up against political power.
Also groups of people can make other people listen to them and so the groups can grow ever more powerful (if not acted against, undermined and ultimately divided).
That's why the people in power use divide and conquer tactics to sow ideas of division in groups because fragmented groups are less powerful to stand against them.
So they target core people in groups to discredit and appear to undermine to then fragment groups.Which brings us to the core problem.
The Internet has the power to bring groups of people together like never before in history.
Therefore freedom of thought on the Internet is a direct threat to the people in power.
Everyone in power, in every country.
Not just police state countries.
All people in power don't actually want like minded people to form into groups of people and when they do they want to monitor the groups to then be ready to undermine the groups if they need to.
These groups can (and do) threaten the power grabbing schemes of the people who seek ever more ways to gain power for themselves.
(Here's a good starting point to find more info on the whole (often hidden) field of political tactical undermining called "Opposition Research").
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposition\_research [wikipedia.org] 1984 was a cautionary tale about the true nature of power.
Most people don't seek power, so its a cautionary tale for most people.
But for the minority of people who are so driven to seek power over other people; they don't need an instruction manual.
Their core psychological behavior defines why they behave the way the do.
People who seek power over others, almost by definition seek to control other people, so they seek to remove choices from the people they gain power over.
They don't actually want a fair world.
They tell us its for our own good to help us.
But its not, its to help them.
They personally gain at the expense of others as they gain ever more control.
These people don't want fairness and equality.
They want to be in power and fear others being in power over them.Ultimately the political elite are ending up showing us all how relentlessly driven they are to seek power for their own personal gain.
So the more they clamp down on people the more they reveal their deep need for power over others and the more they make everyone ever more angry at them because they get controlled ever more.
Its happened throughout history, but the people in power now have the ability to clamp down on opposition views like never before.The control they have now is nothing compared with where the world is going in even just the next decade.
We are certainly coming to the end of people leaking info on government corruption.
For example, Imagine a few years from now when they can use automated profiling and data mining software to monitor and warn the people in power when anyone lower in chains of authority use words the people in power decreed are not to be allowed to use online or even just say on office phones.
Soon after it'll be applied to us all.
It doesn't even need to be perfect profiling.
It simply needs to be warnings (or even just the treat of monitoring to silence critics).
Soon people will not be able to speak openly about their thoughts and views online.
Its already happening in the UK.
For example within the past few months a nurse was fired for blogging about mistakes in managing the health service and even today a police detective was pu</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354351</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354351</id>
	<title>Bad Guys</title>
	<author>aaandre</author>
	<datestamp>1245150120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course secrecy is attractive to bad guys. Problem is according to current legislation we are all bad guys, always crossing some obscure irrelevant law we don't know about.</p><p>So one man's secrecy is another man's privacy and protection from overreaching criminalization.</p><p>Oh, and anything you write or view on the internet, say over the phone, purchase, sms about, dial on your phone, etc. is saved and archived forever, by default, unless you make a special effort to enforce your right of privacy. Even that special effort does not guarantee protection and furthermore, that effort is not difficult to notice, and boom, you are someone with something to hide, i.e. one of the bad guys.</p><p>War is peace. Doublegood peace.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course secrecy is attractive to bad guys .
Problem is according to current legislation we are all bad guys , always crossing some obscure irrelevant law we do n't know about.So one man 's secrecy is another man 's privacy and protection from overreaching criminalization.Oh , and anything you write or view on the internet , say over the phone , purchase , sms about , dial on your phone , etc .
is saved and archived forever , by default , unless you make a special effort to enforce your right of privacy .
Even that special effort does not guarantee protection and furthermore , that effort is not difficult to notice , and boom , you are someone with something to hide , i.e .
one of the bad guys.War is peace .
Doublegood peace .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course secrecy is attractive to bad guys.
Problem is according to current legislation we are all bad guys, always crossing some obscure irrelevant law we don't know about.So one man's secrecy is another man's privacy and protection from overreaching criminalization.Oh, and anything you write or view on the internet, say over the phone, purchase, sms about, dial on your phone, etc.
is saved and archived forever, by default, unless you make a special effort to enforce your right of privacy.
Even that special effort does not guarantee protection and furthermore, that effort is not difficult to notice, and boom, you are someone with something to hide, i.e.
one of the bad guys.War is peace.
Doublegood peace.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28358277</id>
	<title>Re:i allready have a darknet</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245180840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>or ctrl alt F1, so gdm doesn't start X again</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>or ctrl alt F1 , so gdm does n't start X again</tokentext>
<sentencetext>or ctrl alt F1, so gdm doesn't start X again</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354595</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354247</id>
	<title>Good</title>
	<author>timpdx</author>
	<datestamp>1245149580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Now get it out to the protesters in Iran and spread it in China for that matter.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now get it out to the protesters in Iran and spread it in China for that matter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now get it out to the protesters in Iran and spread it in China for that matter.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28356281</id>
	<title>Re:Worried, maybe.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245161580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For the same reason that they haven't used this rational to defeat p2p in general.  Because in the USA, what you are describing will never hold up in court.  All it takes is a couple of technical experts willing to point out the fallacy, and the whole case falls apart.  Further, I think your tin foil hat may be on just a little too tight.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For the same reason that they have n't used this rational to defeat p2p in general .
Because in the USA , what you are describing will never hold up in court .
All it takes is a couple of technical experts willing to point out the fallacy , and the whole case falls apart .
Further , I think your tin foil hat may be on just a little too tight .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For the same reason that they haven't used this rational to defeat p2p in general.
Because in the USA, what you are describing will never hold up in court.
All it takes is a couple of technical experts willing to point out the fallacy, and the whole case falls apart.
Further, I think your tin foil hat may be on just a little too tight.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354903</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28362285</id>
	<title>Re:Attractive to bad guys?</title>
	<author>cbiltcliffe</author>
	<datestamp>1245257520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Pants. My favorite example is pants. Many crimes are very hard to commit without pants.</p></div><p>Except flashing your privates in public.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Pants .
My favorite example is pants .
Many crimes are very hard to commit without pants.Except flashing your privates in public .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pants.
My favorite example is pants.
Many crimes are very hard to commit without pants.Except flashing your privates in public.
:)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354995</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28357911</id>
	<title>Re:Not surprising -- browsers are basically OSes</title>
	<author>anarche</author>
	<datestamp>1245176580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm not surprised that this functionality is able to be implemented.  Essentially, Web browsers are operating systems that not just parse HTML and render that, but pass a lot of items off to subsystems to execute, such as Java, Flash, Google Gears, or other plugins.</p></div><p>Um, no. Browsers are nothing like operating systems. More like interdependent programs..</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not surprised that this functionality is able to be implemented .
Essentially , Web browsers are operating systems that not just parse HTML and render that , but pass a lot of items off to subsystems to execute , such as Java , Flash , Google Gears , or other plugins.Um , no .
Browsers are nothing like operating systems .
More like interdependent programs. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not surprised that this functionality is able to be implemented.
Essentially, Web browsers are operating systems that not just parse HTML and render that, but pass a lot of items off to subsystems to execute, such as Java, Flash, Google Gears, or other plugins.Um, no.
Browsers are nothing like operating systems.
More like interdependent programs..
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354295</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28360593</id>
	<title>Iran</title>
	<author>theghost</author>
	<datestamp>1245248520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If people can't see the potential value for legitimate use of such a network after witnessing the abuses of power that have been happening recently in Iran and chronically in China, then they really are hopeless.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If people ca n't see the potential value for legitimate use of such a network after witnessing the abuses of power that have been happening recently in Iran and chronically in China , then they really are hopeless .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If people can't see the potential value for legitimate use of such a network after witnessing the abuses of power that have been happening recently in Iran and chronically in China, then they really are hopeless.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_205232_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355187
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354995
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354685
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_205232_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28357911
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354295
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_205232_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355617
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354365
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_205232_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354449
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_205232_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355739
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354903
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354217
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_205232_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355171
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354995
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354685
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_205232_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28356541
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354351
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_205232_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28362439
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354941
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354351
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_205232_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355485
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354995
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354685
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_205232_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28356459
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354313
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_205232_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354365
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_205232_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28357949
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354941
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354351
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_205232_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355811
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354351
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_205232_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354353
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354217
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_205232_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28356281
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354903
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354217
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_205232_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28361395
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354903
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354217
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_205232_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28357313
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354903
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354217
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_205232_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28361065
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354351
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_205232_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354365
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_205232_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28360827
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354903
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354217
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_205232_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28358277
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354595
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_205232_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355775
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354685
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_205232_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355395
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354443
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_205232_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28362907
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354941
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354351
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_205232_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28362285
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354995
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354685
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_205232_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355247
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354351
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_16_205232.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354295
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28357911
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_16_205232.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354449
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355117
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_16_205232.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354365
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354861
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355617
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354677
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_16_205232.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354443
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355395
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_16_205232.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354685
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355775
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354995
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28362285
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355171
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355485
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355187
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_16_205232.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354217
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354353
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354903
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28357313
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28361395
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28360827
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28356281
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355739
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_16_205232.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354313
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28356459
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_16_205232.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355125
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_16_205232.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354589
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_16_205232.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354247
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_16_205232.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354351
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28361065
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355811
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28355247
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354941
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28362439
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28357949
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28362907
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28356541
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_16_205232.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28356737
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_16_205232.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354245
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_16_205232.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354595
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28358277
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_16_205232.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_205232.28354363
</commentlist>
</conversation>
