<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_26_1435209</id>
	<title>Out of Business, Clear May Sell Customer Data</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1246030800000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.itworld.com/" rel="nofollow">narramissic</a> writes <i>"Earlier this week, the Clear airport security screening service ceased operations, leaving many to wonder what would become of the personal information, including credit card numbers, fingerprints, and iris scans, of Clear's customers. And now we know. <a href="http://www.itworld.com/security/69829/out-business-clear-may-sell-customer-data">The information could be sold</a> to the provider of a similar service. Until then, Clear has erased PC hard drives at its airport screening kiosks and is wiping employee computers, but the information is retained on its central databases (managed by Lockheed Martin). Clear customer David Maynor, who is CTO with Errata Security in Atlanta, wants Clear to delete his information but that isn't happening, the company said <a href="http://www.flyclear.com/">in a note</a> posted to its Web site Thursday. 'They had your social security information, credit information, where you lived, employment history, fingerprint information,' said Maynor. 'They should be the only ones who have access to that information.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>narramissic writes " Earlier this week , the Clear airport security screening service ceased operations , leaving many to wonder what would become of the personal information , including credit card numbers , fingerprints , and iris scans , of Clear 's customers .
And now we know .
The information could be sold to the provider of a similar service .
Until then , Clear has erased PC hard drives at its airport screening kiosks and is wiping employee computers , but the information is retained on its central databases ( managed by Lockheed Martin ) .
Clear customer David Maynor , who is CTO with Errata Security in Atlanta , wants Clear to delete his information but that is n't happening , the company said in a note posted to its Web site Thursday .
'They had your social security information , credit information , where you lived , employment history , fingerprint information, ' said Maynor .
'They should be the only ones who have access to that information .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>narramissic writes "Earlier this week, the Clear airport security screening service ceased operations, leaving many to wonder what would become of the personal information, including credit card numbers, fingerprints, and iris scans, of Clear's customers.
And now we know.
The information could be sold to the provider of a similar service.
Until then, Clear has erased PC hard drives at its airport screening kiosks and is wiping employee computers, but the information is retained on its central databases (managed by Lockheed Martin).
Clear customer David Maynor, who is CTO with Errata Security in Atlanta, wants Clear to delete his information but that isn't happening, the company said in a note posted to its Web site Thursday.
'They had your social security information, credit information, where you lived, employment history, fingerprint information,' said Maynor.
'They should be the only ones who have access to that information.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28486177</id>
	<title>Re:Switch</title>
	<author>ficuscr</author>
	<datestamp>1246044360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Repeat after me, "I will not give my social security number to a private company.".  That includes block buster, old navy, clear,... etc  Unfortunately now days there are some exceptions to this - say if you want a cell phone.  Still these exceptions are few.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Repeat after me , " I will not give my social security number to a private company. " .
That includes block buster , old navy , clear,... etc Unfortunately now days there are some exceptions to this - say if you want a cell phone .
Still these exceptions are few .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Repeat after me, "I will not give my social security number to a private company.".
That includes block buster, old navy, clear,... etc  Unfortunately now days there are some exceptions to this - say if you want a cell phone.
Still these exceptions are few.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483659</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28485043</id>
	<title>Re:Switch</title>
	<author>Minwee</author>
	<datestamp>1246039860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>f they don't, I want my identity back.</p></div></blockquote><p>Well you can't have it.  Your name is Sen now, and you'd better get back to cleaning that bathtub.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>f they do n't , I want my identity back.Well you ca n't have it .
Your name is Sen now , and you 'd better get back to cleaning that bathtub .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>f they don't, I want my identity back.Well you can't have it.
Your name is Sen now, and you'd better get back to cleaning that bathtub.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483659</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28484153</id>
	<title>Re:Oh the irony</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246036680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Shouldn't the CTO of a company involved in security know better than to sign up to ANY commercial service that requires that much data?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Should n't the CTO of a company involved in security know better than to sign up to ANY commercial service that requires that much data ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shouldn't the CTO of a company involved in security know better than to sign up to ANY commercial service that requires that much data?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483643</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483611</id>
	<title>Hmmm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246034640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>More kdawson FUD?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>More kdawson FUD ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More kdawson FUD?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483629</id>
	<title>heh</title>
	<author>stoolpigeon</author>
	<datestamp>1246034700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As someone who stood in line and watched well off folks who could fork up the cash and fly by - rather than forcing the influential to face the stupidity that is the tsa so that maybe something could happen to change it - I can't say I feel too upset for them.  I saw a guy sign up for it when I flew last month- people that just forked over the $200, lost their data and never really didn't get to use the service must really be mad.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As someone who stood in line and watched well off folks who could fork up the cash and fly by - rather than forcing the influential to face the stupidity that is the tsa so that maybe something could happen to change it - I ca n't say I feel too upset for them .
I saw a guy sign up for it when I flew last month- people that just forked over the $ 200 , lost their data and never really did n't get to use the service must really be mad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As someone who stood in line and watched well off folks who could fork up the cash and fly by - rather than forcing the influential to face the stupidity that is the tsa so that maybe something could happen to change it - I can't say I feel too upset for them.
I saw a guy sign up for it when I flew last month- people that just forked over the $200, lost their data and never really didn't get to use the service must really be mad.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483645</id>
	<title>And the lesson is...</title>
	<author>bugs2squash</author>
	<datestamp>1246034760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This was a bad idea from the start and people should be doubly wary of handing over so much personal information in the future to any organization that has no good reason to exist.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This was a bad idea from the start and people should be doubly wary of handing over so much personal information in the future to any organization that has no good reason to exist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This was a bad idea from the start and people should be doubly wary of handing over so much personal information in the future to any organization that has no good reason to exist.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28484595</id>
	<title>Re:They can't sell the info to just anybody</title>
	<author>Herkum01</author>
	<datestamp>1246038240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is also, no implicit promise that the company that purchases the information will NOT sell it to others.  Just that they are in the same business.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is also , no implicit promise that the company that purchases the information will NOT sell it to others .
Just that they are in the same business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is also, no implicit promise that the company that purchases the information will NOT sell it to others.
Just that they are in the same business.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28496187</id>
	<title>surprised?</title>
	<author>Khashishi</author>
	<datestamp>1246130340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is anyone surprised at this? It seems like business as usual. I'm not sure why this exists as a news story.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is anyone surprised at this ?
It seems like business as usual .
I 'm not sure why this exists as a news story .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is anyone surprised at this?
It seems like business as usual.
I'm not sure why this exists as a news story.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28484175</id>
	<title>Contract?</title>
	<author>evil\_aar0n</author>
	<datestamp>1246036740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's the contract say?  If it says the company can do this, and you agreed to it, then where's the beef?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's the contract say ?
If it says the company can do this , and you agreed to it , then where 's the beef ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's the contract say?
If it says the company can do this, and you agreed to it, then where's the beef?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28486077</id>
	<title>Re:Oh the irony</title>
	<author>wjousts</author>
	<datestamp>1246044000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Yea in a perfect world he would've. The reality is that people don't have enough time to read all the fine print for everything ever. </p></div><p>And for 99\% of Clear's customers, I'd agree with you and sympathize with them. But this is the <b>CTO</b> of a <b>security</b> company. He should have known better that to hand out a bunch of data without any idea what would happen to it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yea in a perfect world he would 've .
The reality is that people do n't have enough time to read all the fine print for everything ever .
And for 99 \ % of Clear 's customers , I 'd agree with you and sympathize with them .
But this is the CTO of a security company .
He should have known better that to hand out a bunch of data without any idea what would happen to it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yea in a perfect world he would've.
The reality is that people don't have enough time to read all the fine print for everything ever.
And for 99\% of Clear's customers, I'd agree with you and sympathize with them.
But this is the CTO of a security company.
He should have known better that to hand out a bunch of data without any idea what would happen to it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483951</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28487937</id>
	<title>CENSUS 2010</title>
	<author>myspace-cn</author>
	<datestamp>1246009080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are you ready for the census 2010? Are you proud you legally bought your firearm and are on the registered database? What will you do when mandatory vaccinations come next (hint: <a href="http://www.naturalnews.com/z026503\_pandemic\_swine\_flu\_bioterrorism.html" title="naturalnews.com" rel="nofollow">swine flu pandemic level 6 by the WHO</a> [naturalnews.com]) and your on the list because of the census records and know to be armed because you registered your firearms? Extra credit for those who can tell us what happened last time the USA had mandatory vaccinations.</p><p>Clear is a domestic enemy.  Just like the DHS and all this other fucking bullshit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you ready for the census 2010 ?
Are you proud you legally bought your firearm and are on the registered database ?
What will you do when mandatory vaccinations come next ( hint : swine flu pandemic level 6 by the WHO [ naturalnews.com ] ) and your on the list because of the census records and know to be armed because you registered your firearms ?
Extra credit for those who can tell us what happened last time the USA had mandatory vaccinations.Clear is a domestic enemy .
Just like the DHS and all this other fucking bullshit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you ready for the census 2010?
Are you proud you legally bought your firearm and are on the registered database?
What will you do when mandatory vaccinations come next (hint: swine flu pandemic level 6 by the WHO [naturalnews.com]) and your on the list because of the census records and know to be armed because you registered your firearms?
Extra credit for those who can tell us what happened last time the USA had mandatory vaccinations.Clear is a domestic enemy.
Just like the DHS and all this other fucking bullshit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483643</id>
	<title>Oh the irony</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246034760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Clear customer David Maynor, who is CTO with Errata Security in Atlanta, wants Clear to delete his information but that isn't happening</p></div><p>Shouldn't the CTO of what I assume is a company involved in security know better? Should he have read the fine print before signing up?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Clear customer David Maynor , who is CTO with Errata Security in Atlanta , wants Clear to delete his information but that is n't happeningShould n't the CTO of what I assume is a company involved in security know better ?
Should he have read the fine print before signing up ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Clear customer David Maynor, who is CTO with Errata Security in Atlanta, wants Clear to delete his information but that isn't happeningShouldn't the CTO of what I assume is a company involved in security know better?
Should he have read the fine print before signing up?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28484501</id>
	<title>Just what did these people expect?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246038000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> You gave away information of the most sensitive kind about yourself. Information that even kids in primary school know enough not to give up. All just so you didn't have to stand in line. A few of you just so you could point and laugh at the mass of people dealing with the lines. Well I guess everyone else is laughing at you now. Dumbasses. Well hopefully this will be enough to open your eyes in the future. Makes me glad I'm on the no-fly list. Not that I would fly under the current circumstances. I just don't see myself paying to be treated like a criminal. The whole screening processes isn't too different from being admitted into prison. I can't believe people pay for that. Soon it will be extended in some manner to public transportation and for entry into malls.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You gave away information of the most sensitive kind about yourself .
Information that even kids in primary school know enough not to give up .
All just so you did n't have to stand in line .
A few of you just so you could point and laugh at the mass of people dealing with the lines .
Well I guess everyone else is laughing at you now .
Dumbasses. Well hopefully this will be enough to open your eyes in the future .
Makes me glad I 'm on the no-fly list .
Not that I would fly under the current circumstances .
I just do n't see myself paying to be treated like a criminal .
The whole screening processes is n't too different from being admitted into prison .
I ca n't believe people pay for that .
Soon it will be extended in some manner to public transportation and for entry into malls .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> You gave away information of the most sensitive kind about yourself.
Information that even kids in primary school know enough not to give up.
All just so you didn't have to stand in line.
A few of you just so you could point and laugh at the mass of people dealing with the lines.
Well I guess everyone else is laughing at you now.
Dumbasses. Well hopefully this will be enough to open your eyes in the future.
Makes me glad I'm on the no-fly list.
Not that I would fly under the current circumstances.
I just don't see myself paying to be treated like a criminal.
The whole screening processes isn't too different from being admitted into prison.
I can't believe people pay for that.
Soon it will be extended in some manner to public transportation and for entry into malls.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28487889</id>
	<title>Re:Oh the irony</title>
	<author>TubeSteak</author>
	<datestamp>1246008900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The article is not very clear that Clear is in the legal "right" here.</p></div><p>Clear's database is considered an asset.<br>And I mean that in the most literal accounting way.<br>It's as much an asset to be sold off as any chair or office desk.<br>You need to support your assertion that there is confusion over Clear's legal rights.</p><p>At least they said that if the (soon to be) sold data isn't used for traveler<br>verification, it'll be deleted, which is likely the most that any law would require.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The article is not very clear that Clear is in the legal " right " here.Clear 's database is considered an asset.And I mean that in the most literal accounting way.It 's as much an asset to be sold off as any chair or office desk.You need to support your assertion that there is confusion over Clear 's legal rights.At least they said that if the ( soon to be ) sold data is n't used for travelerverification , it 'll be deleted , which is likely the most that any law would require .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The article is not very clear that Clear is in the legal "right" here.Clear's database is considered an asset.And I mean that in the most literal accounting way.It's as much an asset to be sold off as any chair or office desk.You need to support your assertion that there is confusion over Clear's legal rights.At least they said that if the (soon to be) sold data isn't used for travelerverification, it'll be deleted, which is likely the most that any law would require.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483951</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28497617</id>
	<title>No expectation of decent privacy policy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246096500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"As long as there's a reasonable expectation of a decent privacy policy..."</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; But I DO NOT have a reasonable expectation of decent privacy policy.  It's standard procedure, when a company goes bankrupt, they sell off ALL ASSETS.  A few companies have a policy to destroy private info when they go bankrupt (and the few cos with this policy that went bankrupt have followed it.)</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Banks, credit card cos, hospitals, insurance cos, they are heavily regulated.  Everyone else?  They can do whatever they want with your info.<br>Giving that much info to a company is stupid.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" As long as there 's a reasonable expectation of a decent privacy policy... "           But I DO NOT have a reasonable expectation of decent privacy policy .
It 's standard procedure , when a company goes bankrupt , they sell off ALL ASSETS .
A few companies have a policy to destroy private info when they go bankrupt ( and the few cos with this policy that went bankrupt have followed it .
)           Banks , credit card cos , hospitals , insurance cos , they are heavily regulated .
Everyone else ?
They can do whatever they want with your info.Giving that much info to a company is stupid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"As long as there's a reasonable expectation of a decent privacy policy..."
          But I DO NOT have a reasonable expectation of decent privacy policy.
It's standard procedure, when a company goes bankrupt, they sell off ALL ASSETS.
A few companies have a policy to destroy private info when they go bankrupt (and the few cos with this policy that went bankrupt have followed it.
)
          Banks, credit card cos, hospitals, insurance cos, they are heavily regulated.
Everyone else?
They can do whatever they want with your info.Giving that much info to a company is stupid.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483951</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483885</id>
	<title>They can't sell the info to just anybody</title>
	<author>yuna49</author>
	<datestamp>1246035600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>According to the press release, and the statement on Clear's website, the information would only be sold to another company engaged in the same business as Clear and approved by the Transportation Safety Administration.  I don't know whether that was a stipulation of Clear's contract with the TSA, though I doubt Clear would tie its hands this way just out of a sense of civic duty.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>According to the press release , and the statement on Clear 's website , the information would only be sold to another company engaged in the same business as Clear and approved by the Transportation Safety Administration .
I do n't know whether that was a stipulation of Clear 's contract with the TSA , though I doubt Clear would tie its hands this way just out of a sense of civic duty .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to the press release, and the statement on Clear's website, the information would only be sold to another company engaged in the same business as Clear and approved by the Transportation Safety Administration.
I don't know whether that was a stipulation of Clear's contract with the TSA, though I doubt Clear would tie its hands this way just out of a sense of civic duty.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28486701</id>
	<title>Business Plan - Extorting Bribes from Travelers</title>
	<author>billstewart</author>
	<datestamp>1246047060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The whole business that Clear is in is basically extorting bribes from travelers.  They're not providing any actual added security by collecting the information, but the TSA folks let them wait in shorter lines and treat them more politely while still randomly searching baggage.  The TSA's not even extorting the bribes directly - they're making a wholesale sweetheart deal with a political supporter who gets to extort the bribes retail.    Brill, by the way, is one of the founders of CourtTV (aka lots of cop shows.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The whole business that Clear is in is basically extorting bribes from travelers .
They 're not providing any actual added security by collecting the information , but the TSA folks let them wait in shorter lines and treat them more politely while still randomly searching baggage .
The TSA 's not even extorting the bribes directly - they 're making a wholesale sweetheart deal with a political supporter who gets to extort the bribes retail .
Brill , by the way , is one of the founders of CourtTV ( aka lots of cop shows .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The whole business that Clear is in is basically extorting bribes from travelers.
They're not providing any actual added security by collecting the information, but the TSA folks let them wait in shorter lines and treat them more politely while still randomly searching baggage.
The TSA's not even extorting the bribes directly - they're making a wholesale sweetheart deal with a political supporter who gets to extort the bribes retail.
Brill, by the way, is one of the founders of CourtTV (aka lots of cop shows.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483629</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483631</id>
	<title>Tough.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246034700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm confident that Clear had a customer agreement.  Any idiot that would provide all of that data to an commercial entity without strict privacy rules in place deserves what they get.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm confident that Clear had a customer agreement .
Any idiot that would provide all of that data to an commercial entity without strict privacy rules in place deserves what they get .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm confident that Clear had a customer agreement.
Any idiot that would provide all of that data to an commercial entity without strict privacy rules in place deserves what they get.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28484541</id>
	<title>Privacy legislation needed</title>
	<author>Teun</author>
	<datestamp>1246038060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>This and other instances of how private data is being turned into merchandise make me very happy to live in a country where this sort of information remains the  inalienable property of the person.<p>
Surely the US can enforce similar legislation, what is so private as fingerprints should have the strongest possible protection, regardless whether it's kept by government or private institutions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This and other instances of how private data is being turned into merchandise make me very happy to live in a country where this sort of information remains the inalienable property of the person .
Surely the US can enforce similar legislation , what is so private as fingerprints should have the strongest possible protection , regardless whether it 's kept by government or private institutions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This and other instances of how private data is being turned into merchandise make me very happy to live in a country where this sort of information remains the  inalienable property of the person.
Surely the US can enforce similar legislation, what is so private as fingerprints should have the strongest possible protection, regardless whether it's kept by government or private institutions.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483665</id>
	<title>Cooperate...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246034820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do extra, voluntary action to cooperate with the police state in legitimizing the "papers please" nonsense, and get exactly what you deserve.</p><p>It started as a simple excuse to lock you into your ticket purchases.  It still has that negative effect, and not a single positive.  After all, matching ID to ticket had been done for decades leading to, and of course on, 9/11.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do extra , voluntary action to cooperate with the police state in legitimizing the " papers please " nonsense , and get exactly what you deserve.It started as a simple excuse to lock you into your ticket purchases .
It still has that negative effect , and not a single positive .
After all , matching ID to ticket had been done for decades leading to , and of course on , 9/11 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do extra, voluntary action to cooperate with the police state in legitimizing the "papers please" nonsense, and get exactly what you deserve.It started as a simple excuse to lock you into your ticket purchases.
It still has that negative effect, and not a single positive.
After all, matching ID to ticket had been done for decades leading to, and of course on, 9/11.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483737</id>
	<title>Read the contracts?</title>
	<author>skyphyr</author>
	<datestamp>1246035060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd be curious to know what exactly the contracts they had with them stipulate. My guess is it's something along the longs of we own your information once you pass it to us. Ooopppss - guess you really should read those things before signing.

Anyone actually seen it?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd be curious to know what exactly the contracts they had with them stipulate .
My guess is it 's something along the longs of we own your information once you pass it to us .
Ooopppss - guess you really should read those things before signing .
Anyone actually seen it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd be curious to know what exactly the contracts they had with them stipulate.
My guess is it's something along the longs of we own your information once you pass it to us.
Ooopppss - guess you really should read those things before signing.
Anyone actually seen it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483713</id>
	<title>CTO?  I don't think so</title>
	<author>smooth wombat</author>
	<datestamp>1246035000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If the CTO of a corporation didn't realize a private company, contracted by the government, would not delete his personal information at his request, he shouldn't be a CTO.</p><p>ALL data, in whatever form, once in the hands of the government, its entities, subsidiaries and contractors, will exist essentially forever.</p><p>Let the age of Total Information Awareness rock on!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the CTO of a corporation did n't realize a private company , contracted by the government , would not delete his personal information at his request , he should n't be a CTO.ALL data , in whatever form , once in the hands of the government , its entities , subsidiaries and contractors , will exist essentially forever.Let the age of Total Information Awareness rock on !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the CTO of a corporation didn't realize a private company, contracted by the government, would not delete his personal information at his request, he shouldn't be a CTO.ALL data, in whatever form, once in the hands of the government, its entities, subsidiaries and contractors, will exist essentially forever.Let the age of Total Information Awareness rock on!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28490539</id>
	<title>Re:Just what did these people expect?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246027080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now you piqued my interest.  How did you get on the no-fly list?  If the answer is too sensitive I understand, but if you can provide a general answer I would be happy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now you piqued my interest .
How did you get on the no-fly list ?
If the answer is too sensitive I understand , but if you can provide a general answer I would be happy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now you piqued my interest.
How did you get on the no-fly list?
If the answer is too sensitive I understand, but if you can provide a general answer I would be happy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28484501</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28484799</id>
	<title>The underlying issue</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246038840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What is much more worrying is that personal data can be sold at all. OK, so here people have given their details voluntarily. Often that is not a reasonable option, except for doing everything in cash.</p><p>What should happen is that personal data can NEVER be sold.</p><p>Obviously that can cause problems. What if the company is sold as a whole? What if the company is ripped apart by its new owner and they sell everything, except the data?<br>I would think that if it is used to continue a service or contract I previously had, then you can use that. The moment you do not provide me any service, the personal data must be 'given back' or destroyed, so it is not longer usable by the company.</p><p>Desrtuction of the data should be done in, say, one year, so the company can still try to convince you to re-start the service.</p><p>This must be obviously regulated in some way, but the principal should be that the data belongs to the person, not to the company who stores that data. You can use that data for a specific reason and nothing else.</p><p>In other words, privacy laws must become much more pointed towards the people and away from the companies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What is much more worrying is that personal data can be sold at all .
OK , so here people have given their details voluntarily .
Often that is not a reasonable option , except for doing everything in cash.What should happen is that personal data can NEVER be sold.Obviously that can cause problems .
What if the company is sold as a whole ?
What if the company is ripped apart by its new owner and they sell everything , except the data ? I would think that if it is used to continue a service or contract I previously had , then you can use that .
The moment you do not provide me any service , the personal data must be 'given back ' or destroyed , so it is not longer usable by the company.Desrtuction of the data should be done in , say , one year , so the company can still try to convince you to re-start the service.This must be obviously regulated in some way , but the principal should be that the data belongs to the person , not to the company who stores that data .
You can use that data for a specific reason and nothing else.In other words , privacy laws must become much more pointed towards the people and away from the companies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is much more worrying is that personal data can be sold at all.
OK, so here people have given their details voluntarily.
Often that is not a reasonable option, except for doing everything in cash.What should happen is that personal data can NEVER be sold.Obviously that can cause problems.
What if the company is sold as a whole?
What if the company is ripped apart by its new owner and they sell everything, except the data?I would think that if it is used to continue a service or contract I previously had, then you can use that.
The moment you do not provide me any service, the personal data must be 'given back' or destroyed, so it is not longer usable by the company.Desrtuction of the data should be done in, say, one year, so the company can still try to convince you to re-start the service.This must be obviously regulated in some way, but the principal should be that the data belongs to the person, not to the company who stores that data.
You can use that data for a specific reason and nothing else.In other words, privacy laws must become much more pointed towards the people and away from the companies.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28487469</id>
	<title>Re:heh</title>
	<author>TheGratefulNet</author>
	<datestamp>1246007040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>its an IQ test.  those that bought into this service, are now marked as 'below average IQ'.  in other words, they ARE safe in the eyes of the state.  the state likes 'em dumb.  (why do you think states tolerate organized religion?)</p><p>I'm reminded of the simpsons episode where homer drives a bunch of his clones out to a junkyard and asks if anyone remembers the way back.  those that stood up got shot; until the last smart one ID'd himself.</p><p>well, this is in reverse.  only idiots happily give away their private info to the state just to 'speed the tsa process'.</p><p>I have not flown in almost a decade now.  I boycott all but the most ugent essential travel.  all else, I just reject and refuse to play along with these stupid tsa games.  I'm hoping the US (and ROW will follow) will start to disassemble this insanity we call 'security theatre' in the next decade.  hopefully it won't take that long (but it remains to be seen).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>its an IQ test .
those that bought into this service , are now marked as 'below average IQ' .
in other words , they ARE safe in the eyes of the state .
the state likes 'em dumb .
( why do you think states tolerate organized religion ?
) I 'm reminded of the simpsons episode where homer drives a bunch of his clones out to a junkyard and asks if anyone remembers the way back .
those that stood up got shot ; until the last smart one ID 'd himself.well , this is in reverse .
only idiots happily give away their private info to the state just to 'speed the tsa process'.I have not flown in almost a decade now .
I boycott all but the most ugent essential travel .
all else , I just reject and refuse to play along with these stupid tsa games .
I 'm hoping the US ( and ROW will follow ) will start to disassemble this insanity we call 'security theatre ' in the next decade .
hopefully it wo n't take that long ( but it remains to be seen ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>its an IQ test.
those that bought into this service, are now marked as 'below average IQ'.
in other words, they ARE safe in the eyes of the state.
the state likes 'em dumb.
(why do you think states tolerate organized religion?
)I'm reminded of the simpsons episode where homer drives a bunch of his clones out to a junkyard and asks if anyone remembers the way back.
those that stood up got shot; until the last smart one ID'd himself.well, this is in reverse.
only idiots happily give away their private info to the state just to 'speed the tsa process'.I have not flown in almost a decade now.
I boycott all but the most ugent essential travel.
all else, I just reject and refuse to play along with these stupid tsa games.
I'm hoping the US (and ROW will follow) will start to disassemble this insanity we call 'security theatre' in the next decade.
hopefully it won't take that long (but it remains to be seen).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483629</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28489867</id>
	<title>Re:Oh the irony</title>
	<author>el americano</author>
	<datestamp>1246020480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is the guy who said he found a way to hack a MacBook's wireless card in under a minute. He canceled his demo at Toorcon and never did disclose enough information at the 2007 Black Hat to verify the sensational claim. He left his job after the incident and started what I assume is a two-man operation. (1 CEO and 1 CTO)</p><p>Here's David's Pwnie Award: <a href="http://pwnie-awards.org/2007/winners.html#overhypedbug" title="pwnie-awards.org">http://pwnie-awards.org/2007/winners.html#overhypedbug</a> [pwnie-awards.org]</p><p>I'm sure there's a lot more to the story, but let's not assume we're dealing with someone who would normally know better. As a security consultant, his best skill is being an alarmist. So this story was right up his ally, and another chance to be in the news.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is the guy who said he found a way to hack a MacBook 's wireless card in under a minute .
He canceled his demo at Toorcon and never did disclose enough information at the 2007 Black Hat to verify the sensational claim .
He left his job after the incident and started what I assume is a two-man operation .
( 1 CEO and 1 CTO ) Here 's David 's Pwnie Award : http : //pwnie-awards.org/2007/winners.html # overhypedbug [ pwnie-awards.org ] I 'm sure there 's a lot more to the story , but let 's not assume we 're dealing with someone who would normally know better .
As a security consultant , his best skill is being an alarmist .
So this story was right up his ally , and another chance to be in the news .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is the guy who said he found a way to hack a MacBook's wireless card in under a minute.
He canceled his demo at Toorcon and never did disclose enough information at the 2007 Black Hat to verify the sensational claim.
He left his job after the incident and started what I assume is a two-man operation.
(1 CEO and 1 CTO)Here's David's Pwnie Award: http://pwnie-awards.org/2007/winners.html#overhypedbug [pwnie-awards.org]I'm sure there's a lot more to the story, but let's not assume we're dealing with someone who would normally know better.
As a security consultant, his best skill is being an alarmist.
So this story was right up his ally, and another chance to be in the news.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483643</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483649</id>
	<title>Big Surprise</title>
	<author>JCSoRocks</author>
	<datestamp>1246034760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Only the sort of people that would hand over their information to a company like this would be surprised to find out that they're going to sell it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Only the sort of people that would hand over their information to a company like this would be surprised to find out that they 're going to sell it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only the sort of people that would hand over their information to a company like this would be surprised to find out that they're going to sell it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28486611</id>
	<title>Re:Reverse Elitist Drivel</title>
	<author>stoolpigeon</author>
	<datestamp>1246046640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>so if that's "reverse elitist drivel" what do we call your response?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>so if that 's " reverse elitist drivel " what do we call your response ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so if that's "reverse elitist drivel" what do we call your response?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28485095</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28486785</id>
	<title>Selling personal info en masse</title>
	<author>YrWrstNtmr</author>
	<datestamp>1246047540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I had a similar experience several years ago. I had built a personnel database for all of our call center workers. Held name, address, SSAN, when and why they quit, etc, etc.<br>We quit that portion of the business, and sold the servers and sublet the office space to a new company. The personnel db was part of the deal, including all the data. *Most, but not all*, of our employees got hired with the new company.<br> <br>I was instructed to send the new company an install disk, and all of the data.<br> <br>I told our IT VP that, no...I'll send them the empty shell, because not all of our people work for the new company. They have no reason to hold that info on people that do not work for them.<br> <br>They pushed. I pushed back.<br>Eventually, it got down to "ok...I'll send them the entire thing. If, and only if we have a signed letter from legal, HR, and you, Mr CTO, saying this is OK, and absolving the company, and me personally, of any future actions regarding this data".<br> <br>I ended up sending them the blank shell. They can reenter the data as needed.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I had a similar experience several years ago .
I had built a personnel database for all of our call center workers .
Held name , address , SSAN , when and why they quit , etc , etc.We quit that portion of the business , and sold the servers and sublet the office space to a new company .
The personnel db was part of the deal , including all the data .
* Most , but not all * , of our employees got hired with the new company .
I was instructed to send the new company an install disk , and all of the data .
I told our IT VP that , no...I 'll send them the empty shell , because not all of our people work for the new company .
They have no reason to hold that info on people that do not work for them .
They pushed .
I pushed back.Eventually , it got down to " ok...I 'll send them the entire thing .
If , and only if we have a signed letter from legal , HR , and you , Mr CTO , saying this is OK , and absolving the company , and me personally , of any future actions regarding this data " .
I ended up sending them the blank shell .
They can reenter the data as needed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had a similar experience several years ago.
I had built a personnel database for all of our call center workers.
Held name, address, SSAN, when and why they quit, etc, etc.We quit that portion of the business, and sold the servers and sublet the office space to a new company.
The personnel db was part of the deal, including all the data.
*Most, but not all*, of our employees got hired with the new company.
I was instructed to send the new company an install disk, and all of the data.
I told our IT VP that, no...I'll send them the empty shell, because not all of our people work for the new company.
They have no reason to hold that info on people that do not work for them.
They pushed.
I pushed back.Eventually, it got down to "ok...I'll send them the entire thing.
If, and only if we have a signed letter from legal, HR, and you, Mr CTO, saying this is OK, and absolving the company, and me personally, of any future actions regarding this data".
I ended up sending them the blank shell.
They can reenter the data as needed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483723</id>
	<title>Re:Suckers!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246035000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>For those folks who trust private enterprises more than governments. WTF did you expect?</p></div><p>Obvious troll is obvious.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For those folks who trust private enterprises more than governments .
WTF did you expect ? Obvious troll is obvious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For those folks who trust private enterprises more than governments.
WTF did you expect?Obvious troll is obvious.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483653</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483653</id>
	<title>Suckers!</title>
	<author>Dr\_Ken</author>
	<datestamp>1246034760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>For those folks who trust private enterprises more than governments. WTF did you expect?</htmltext>
<tokenext>For those folks who trust private enterprises more than governments .
WTF did you expect ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For those folks who trust private enterprises more than governments.
WTF did you expect?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28489007</id>
	<title>The Truth</title>
	<author>SuperKendall</author>
	<datestamp>1246014360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>so if that's "reverse elitist drivel" what do we call your response?</i></p><p>My response outlines how the world works, and the fact that anyone in reality could afford to pay for Clear (anyone flying anywhere anyway).   I'm pointing out he's angry at the elite, when the program is not even *for* the elite - it's for everyone.</p><p>So I tell you all how it actually works, and get modded down. That's Slashdot I guess, when reality doesn't fit the meme such as all privilege is arrogance and not optimization...  Oh wait, I thought people were actually technical here.  I guess that used to be true.</p><p>The original poster should also write an angry response about how his user threads don't always have greater priority than system processes, and how he's be glad to see that damn elitist scheduler out of the system.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>so if that 's " reverse elitist drivel " what do we call your response ? My response outlines how the world works , and the fact that anyone in reality could afford to pay for Clear ( anyone flying anywhere anyway ) .
I 'm pointing out he 's angry at the elite , when the program is not even * for * the elite - it 's for everyone.So I tell you all how it actually works , and get modded down .
That 's Slashdot I guess , when reality does n't fit the meme such as all privilege is arrogance and not optimization... Oh wait , I thought people were actually technical here .
I guess that used to be true.The original poster should also write an angry response about how his user threads do n't always have greater priority than system processes , and how he 's be glad to see that damn elitist scheduler out of the system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so if that's "reverse elitist drivel" what do we call your response?My response outlines how the world works, and the fact that anyone in reality could afford to pay for Clear (anyone flying anywhere anyway).
I'm pointing out he's angry at the elite, when the program is not even *for* the elite - it's for everyone.So I tell you all how it actually works, and get modded down.
That's Slashdot I guess, when reality doesn't fit the meme such as all privilege is arrogance and not optimization...  Oh wait, I thought people were actually technical here.
I guess that used to be true.The original poster should also write an angry response about how his user threads don't always have greater priority than system processes, and how he's be glad to see that damn elitist scheduler out of the system.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28486611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483891</id>
	<title>Always judge by capability, not intention</title>
	<author>Lead Butthead</author>
	<datestamp>1246035600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When handing someone (or some company) your information, always keep in mind a shift in "company strategy" or PHB change can hurt you. Always judge by capability (what could happen if your information is sold,) and not intention, for intention can change quickly and without warning.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When handing someone ( or some company ) your information , always keep in mind a shift in " company strategy " or PHB change can hurt you .
Always judge by capability ( what could happen if your information is sold , ) and not intention , for intention can change quickly and without warning .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When handing someone (or some company) your information, always keep in mind a shift in "company strategy" or PHB change can hurt you.
Always judge by capability (what could happen if your information is sold,) and not intention, for intention can change quickly and without warning.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483951</id>
	<title>Re:Oh the irony</title>
	<author>immakiku</author>
	<datestamp>1246035840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yea in a perfect world he would've. The reality is that people don't have enough time to read all the fine print for everything ever. As long as there's a reasonable expectation of a decent privacy policy, most of us just go with it because the time and effort spent looking for a possible alternative is not worth it. Who's to say that he was even provided with a fine print? The article is not very clear that Clear is in the legal "right" here.</p><p>This is also why it's so important to raise alarm at these issues, because short of forcing privacy standards or laws, that's all the majority of us can reasonably be expected to do.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yea in a perfect world he would 've .
The reality is that people do n't have enough time to read all the fine print for everything ever .
As long as there 's a reasonable expectation of a decent privacy policy , most of us just go with it because the time and effort spent looking for a possible alternative is not worth it .
Who 's to say that he was even provided with a fine print ?
The article is not very clear that Clear is in the legal " right " here.This is also why it 's so important to raise alarm at these issues , because short of forcing privacy standards or laws , that 's all the majority of us can reasonably be expected to do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yea in a perfect world he would've.
The reality is that people don't have enough time to read all the fine print for everything ever.
As long as there's a reasonable expectation of a decent privacy policy, most of us just go with it because the time and effort spent looking for a possible alternative is not worth it.
Who's to say that he was even provided with a fine print?
The article is not very clear that Clear is in the legal "right" here.This is also why it's so important to raise alarm at these issues, because short of forcing privacy standards or laws, that's all the majority of us can reasonably be expected to do.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483643</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28488721</id>
	<title>No, it's crap</title>
	<author>zogger</author>
	<datestamp>1246012920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They SHOULD make everyone go through the same BS, even on PRIVATE PLANES, corporate jets, all of them. Let no one be "special". Everyone =politicians, cops, official government bureaucrats, military generals, rich fatcats, all of them, not just the plebes. Get on a plane and fly, you need to go through all the same routine.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; Like was said, we won't get rid of the stupid security theater until everyone is inconvenienced enough and complains enough to get changes forced through.  That's just nonsense they don't, "everyone is equal, but some are more equal than others" is the height of hypocrisy and just more of them tards trying to bring back an aristocratic class.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They SHOULD make everyone go through the same BS , even on PRIVATE PLANES , corporate jets , all of them .
Let no one be " special " .
Everyone = politicians , cops , official government bureaucrats , military generals , rich fatcats , all of them , not just the plebes .
Get on a plane and fly , you need to go through all the same routine .
    Like was said , we wo n't get rid of the stupid security theater until everyone is inconvenienced enough and complains enough to get changes forced through .
That 's just nonsense they do n't , " everyone is equal , but some are more equal than others " is the height of hypocrisy and just more of them tards trying to bring back an aristocratic class .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They SHOULD make everyone go through the same BS, even on PRIVATE PLANES, corporate jets, all of them.
Let no one be "special".
Everyone =politicians, cops, official government bureaucrats, military generals, rich fatcats, all of them, not just the plebes.
Get on a plane and fly, you need to go through all the same routine.
    Like was said, we won't get rid of the stupid security theater until everyone is inconvenienced enough and complains enough to get changes forced through.
That's just nonsense they don't, "everyone is equal, but some are more equal than others" is the height of hypocrisy and just more of them tards trying to bring back an aristocratic class.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28485095</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483747</id>
	<title>Is Slashdot for or against copyright today?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246035120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm confused.  Slashdotters are vehemently pro-piracy and anti-copyright in every article.  Content creators don't have rights to their work, and anyone going after infringers is evil.</p><p>Except in GPL violation articles.  In those articles, suddenly content creator rights are of the utmost importance, and the GPL should be upheld under the law even though it's a copyright license complete with usage restrictions.</p><p>Do Slashdotters realize how self-serving they are?  That they're against copyright when it benefits them in getting free stuff off of PirateBay but in favor of copyright when it protects their precious GPL code?  You can't have it both ways.  If you're don't like copyrights, then it should be okay for me to sell GPL code as a modified, closed-source binary without any legal consequences.</p><p>Could it be that most of you are only against copyrights because you don't want to lose the free ride of your favorite P2P networks, so you rant about copyright law as an excuse to justify your behavior?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm confused .
Slashdotters are vehemently pro-piracy and anti-copyright in every article .
Content creators do n't have rights to their work , and anyone going after infringers is evil.Except in GPL violation articles .
In those articles , suddenly content creator rights are of the utmost importance , and the GPL should be upheld under the law even though it 's a copyright license complete with usage restrictions.Do Slashdotters realize how self-serving they are ?
That they 're against copyright when it benefits them in getting free stuff off of PirateBay but in favor of copyright when it protects their precious GPL code ?
You ca n't have it both ways .
If you 're do n't like copyrights , then it should be okay for me to sell GPL code as a modified , closed-source binary without any legal consequences.Could it be that most of you are only against copyrights because you do n't want to lose the free ride of your favorite P2P networks , so you rant about copyright law as an excuse to justify your behavior ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm confused.
Slashdotters are vehemently pro-piracy and anti-copyright in every article.
Content creators don't have rights to their work, and anyone going after infringers is evil.Except in GPL violation articles.
In those articles, suddenly content creator rights are of the utmost importance, and the GPL should be upheld under the law even though it's a copyright license complete with usage restrictions.Do Slashdotters realize how self-serving they are?
That they're against copyright when it benefits them in getting free stuff off of PirateBay but in favor of copyright when it protects their precious GPL code?
You can't have it both ways.
If you're don't like copyrights, then it should be okay for me to sell GPL code as a modified, closed-source binary without any legal consequences.Could it be that most of you are only against copyrights because you don't want to lose the free ride of your favorite P2P networks, so you rant about copyright law as an excuse to justify your behavior?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483659</id>
	<title>Switch</title>
	<author>Divebus</author>
	<datestamp>1246034760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"They should be the only ones who have access to that information"</p></div><p>Only if they're going to do what they said with that information - make it faster to clear airport security. If they don't, I want my identity back.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" They should be the only ones who have access to that information " Only if they 're going to do what they said with that information - make it faster to clear airport security .
If they do n't , I want my identity back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"They should be the only ones who have access to that information"Only if they're going to do what they said with that information - make it faster to clear airport security.
If they don't, I want my identity back.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28485651</id>
	<title>Re:heh</title>
	<author>clarkkent09</author>
	<datestamp>1246042200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Being poor doesn't make you superior to somebody who is rich. It doesn't make you inferior either, except when you gloat over somebody's misfortune just because they have more money than you. Try to get over your envy, you'll be a happier person.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Being poor does n't make you superior to somebody who is rich .
It does n't make you inferior either , except when you gloat over somebody 's misfortune just because they have more money than you .
Try to get over your envy , you 'll be a happier person .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Being poor doesn't make you superior to somebody who is rich.
It doesn't make you inferior either, except when you gloat over somebody's misfortune just because they have more money than you.
Try to get over your envy, you'll be a happier person.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483629</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28490425</id>
	<title>Re:CTO? I don't think so</title>
	<author>nacturation</author>
	<datestamp>1246026060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If the CTO of a corporation didn't realize a private company, contracted by the government, would not delete his personal information at his request, he shouldn't be a CTO.</p><p>ALL data, in whatever form, once in the hands of the government, its entities, subsidiaries and contractors, will exist essentially forever.</p></div><p>Oh no!  The government now has his Social Security Number!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the CTO of a corporation did n't realize a private company , contracted by the government , would not delete his personal information at his request , he should n't be a CTO.ALL data , in whatever form , once in the hands of the government , its entities , subsidiaries and contractors , will exist essentially forever.Oh no !
The government now has his Social Security Number !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the CTO of a corporation didn't realize a private company, contracted by the government, would not delete his personal information at his request, he shouldn't be a CTO.ALL data, in whatever form, once in the hands of the government, its entities, subsidiaries and contractors, will exist essentially forever.Oh no!
The government now has his Social Security Number!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483713</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28485095</id>
	<title>Reverse Elitist Drivel</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246040100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>As someone who stood in line and watched well off folks who could fork up the cash and fly by</i></p><p>Oh yeah, they were so much better off that you, having the fantastic cash reserves to be able to afford a whole $99 a year ($199 at the end) to have shorter security lines for frequent trips!</p><p>How much do you spend on your internet again?  Oh but you say, I use that every day!   Well what about people who had to fly every week...</p><p>Your post is nothing more than a case of reverse elitism, proclaiming how much better a man you are because you sucked it up and stood in a line.  Well I say, foo on that - if there's a way to make security lines a somewhat quantifiable chunk of time let people take it who need it.  The great thing about Clear was how non-elitist it was, anyone could afford to sign up if they traveled much and felt like it was worthwhile.</p><p>I was very close to signing up myself, and if another provider comes on line I probably will even though I don't own a single yacht or private island.  In fact I am so poor I have but one next gen console instead of all three.  Doesn't anyone value their time anymore?   If you take even just ten trips a year by plane it seems well worthwhile to me to be able to show up an hour later because you know roughly how long security will take every time you go.</p><p>To keep up that air of self-satisfied smugness, the next time you go glance over at the first class/premier checkin line.  Those people still get to go ahead of you only they do so by paying a few thousand dollars for a ticket, not the price of two video games a year.  So you can still think how awesome you are because you are standing in line with the "real" people unlike Them.</p><p>It does annoy me they are selling the data (I don't think they should be allowed to transfer that without owner consent) but it wouldn't stop me for signing up with the next iteration.  A service like this is needed for real world travelers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As someone who stood in line and watched well off folks who could fork up the cash and fly byOh yeah , they were so much better off that you , having the fantastic cash reserves to be able to afford a whole $ 99 a year ( $ 199 at the end ) to have shorter security lines for frequent trips ! How much do you spend on your internet again ?
Oh but you say , I use that every day !
Well what about people who had to fly every week...Your post is nothing more than a case of reverse elitism , proclaiming how much better a man you are because you sucked it up and stood in a line .
Well I say , foo on that - if there 's a way to make security lines a somewhat quantifiable chunk of time let people take it who need it .
The great thing about Clear was how non-elitist it was , anyone could afford to sign up if they traveled much and felt like it was worthwhile.I was very close to signing up myself , and if another provider comes on line I probably will even though I do n't own a single yacht or private island .
In fact I am so poor I have but one next gen console instead of all three .
Does n't anyone value their time anymore ?
If you take even just ten trips a year by plane it seems well worthwhile to me to be able to show up an hour later because you know roughly how long security will take every time you go.To keep up that air of self-satisfied smugness , the next time you go glance over at the first class/premier checkin line .
Those people still get to go ahead of you only they do so by paying a few thousand dollars for a ticket , not the price of two video games a year .
So you can still think how awesome you are because you are standing in line with the " real " people unlike Them.It does annoy me they are selling the data ( I do n't think they should be allowed to transfer that without owner consent ) but it would n't stop me for signing up with the next iteration .
A service like this is needed for real world travelers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As someone who stood in line and watched well off folks who could fork up the cash and fly byOh yeah, they were so much better off that you, having the fantastic cash reserves to be able to afford a whole $99 a year ($199 at the end) to have shorter security lines for frequent trips!How much do you spend on your internet again?
Oh but you say, I use that every day!
Well what about people who had to fly every week...Your post is nothing more than a case of reverse elitism, proclaiming how much better a man you are because you sucked it up and stood in a line.
Well I say, foo on that - if there's a way to make security lines a somewhat quantifiable chunk of time let people take it who need it.
The great thing about Clear was how non-elitist it was, anyone could afford to sign up if they traveled much and felt like it was worthwhile.I was very close to signing up myself, and if another provider comes on line I probably will even though I don't own a single yacht or private island.
In fact I am so poor I have but one next gen console instead of all three.
Doesn't anyone value their time anymore?
If you take even just ten trips a year by plane it seems well worthwhile to me to be able to show up an hour later because you know roughly how long security will take every time you go.To keep up that air of self-satisfied smugness, the next time you go glance over at the first class/premier checkin line.
Those people still get to go ahead of you only they do so by paying a few thousand dollars for a ticket, not the price of two video games a year.
So you can still think how awesome you are because you are standing in line with the "real" people unlike Them.It does annoy me they are selling the data (I don't think they should be allowed to transfer that without owner consent) but it wouldn't stop me for signing up with the next iteration.
A service like this is needed for real world travelers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483629</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1435209_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28489007
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28486611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28485095
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483629
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1435209_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28484595
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483885
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1435209_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28485043
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483659
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1435209_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28489867
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483643
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1435209_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28487889
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483951
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483643
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1435209_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28486077
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483951
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483643
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1435209_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28486701
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483629
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1435209_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28490425
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483713
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1435209_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28486177
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483659
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1435209_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28497617
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483951
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483643
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1435209_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28484153
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483643
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1435209_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28488721
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28485095
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483629
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1435209_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28487469
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483629
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1435209_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28490539
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28484501
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1435209_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28485651
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483629
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1435209_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483723
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483653
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_1435209.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28484541
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_1435209.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28484799
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_1435209.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483643
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28484153
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483951
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28486077
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28497617
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28487889
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28489867
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_1435209.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483631
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_1435209.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483713
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28490425
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_1435209.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483629
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28487469
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28485651
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28485095
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28488721
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28486611
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28489007
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28486701
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_1435209.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483885
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28484595
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_1435209.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483665
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_1435209.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28484175
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_1435209.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483653
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483723
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_1435209.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483747
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_1435209.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28484501
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28490539
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_1435209.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28483659
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28486177
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1435209.28485043
</commentlist>
</conversation>
