<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_07_02_1317205</id>
	<title>Your Browser History Is Showing</title>
	<author>samzenpus</author>
	<datestamp>1246543380000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>tiffanydanica writes <i>"For a lot of us our browser history is something we consider private, or at least not something we want to expose to every website we visit. <a href="http://web2.0collage.com/?q=-31">Web2.0collage</a> is showing just how easy it is (with <a href="http://web2.0collage.com/sl1.tar.bz2?q=-31">code!</a>) for sites to determine what sites you visit. When you visit the site it sniffs your browser history, and creates a collage of the (safe for work) sites that you visit. It is an interesting application of potentially scary technology (imagine a job application site using this to screen candidates). You can <a href="http://web2.0collage.com/app/?q=-31">jump right into having your history sniffed</a> if you so desire. While the collages are cool on their own merit, they also serve as an illustration of the privacy implications of browser history sniffing."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>tiffanydanica writes " For a lot of us our browser history is something we consider private , or at least not something we want to expose to every website we visit .
Web2.0collage is showing just how easy it is ( with code !
) for sites to determine what sites you visit .
When you visit the site it sniffs your browser history , and creates a collage of the ( safe for work ) sites that you visit .
It is an interesting application of potentially scary technology ( imagine a job application site using this to screen candidates ) .
You can jump right into having your history sniffed if you so desire .
While the collages are cool on their own merit , they also serve as an illustration of the privacy implications of browser history sniffing .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>tiffanydanica writes "For a lot of us our browser history is something we consider private, or at least not something we want to expose to every website we visit.
Web2.0collage is showing just how easy it is (with code!
) for sites to determine what sites you visit.
When you visit the site it sniffs your browser history, and creates a collage of the (safe for work) sites that you visit.
It is an interesting application of potentially scary technology (imagine a job application site using this to screen candidates).
You can jump right into having your history sniffed if you so desire.
While the collages are cool on their own merit, they also serve as an illustration of the privacy implications of browser history sniffing.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557191</id>
	<title>black image</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246547220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I tried it.<br> <br>I got a black screen (apparently no history to be shown).<br> <br>Either the engine is borked, or my privacy add-ins are working properly...<br> <br>Or possible the Oracle of Browser History has determined that my history is darker than the darkest dark, and refused to show images.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I tried it .
I got a black screen ( apparently no history to be shown ) .
Either the engine is borked , or my privacy add-ins are working properly... Or possible the Oracle of Browser History has determined that my history is darker than the darkest dark , and refused to show images .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I tried it.
I got a black screen (apparently no history to be shown).
Either the engine is borked, or my privacy add-ins are working properly... Or possible the Oracle of Browser History has determined that my history is darker than the darkest dark, and refused to show images.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28558119</id>
	<title>worked for me</title>
	<author>itsamemario</author>
	<datestamp>1246551420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Although I get the impression its randomly failing what with the slashdot load and being written in an interperted language.
I put up a picture <a href="http://s910.photobucket.com/albums/ac301/itsamemario2009/?action=view&amp;current=web20collagecom.png" title="photobucket.com" rel="nofollow">here</a> [photobucket.com].</htmltext>
<tokenext>Although I get the impression its randomly failing what with the slashdot load and being written in an interperted language .
I put up a picture here [ photobucket.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Although I get the impression its randomly failing what with the slashdot load and being written in an interperted language.
I put up a picture here [photobucket.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557191</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28561313</id>
	<title>Re:workaround in firefox</title>
	<author>colfer</author>
	<datestamp>1246562100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That kb is out of date on many topics.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That kb is out of date on many topics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That kb is out of date on many topics.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28558629</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28561139</id>
	<title>Re:Known since at least 2006</title>
	<author>interiot</author>
	<datestamp>1246561500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Of course there is no reason this is still not fixed (by being able to disable a:visited style)</p></div></blockquote><p>If the issue were so simple, why has <i>no</i> major browser implemented a proper fix for this yet, despite the fact that we've known about the issue for <i> <a href="https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show\_bug.cgi?id=57351" title="mozilla.org">nine years</a> [mozilla.org] </i>?

</p><p>A:visited is very useful to the user in some circumstances, so it's unacceptable to turn it off for every user in every circumstance.  Firefox 3.5 added a <a href="http://www.squarefree.com/burningedge/2008/10/26/2008-10-26-trunk-builds/" title="squarefree.com">hidden preference</a> [squarefree.com] in case some users want to turn it on sometimes, but that solution doesn't work for 80\% of the people out there.   Personally, I think <a href="http://crypto.stanford.edu/sameorigin/" title="stanford.edu">applying the "same origin" policy to a:visited</a> [stanford.edu] is a better solution, but that hasn't been integrated into any mainline either.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course there is no reason this is still not fixed ( by being able to disable a : visited style ) If the issue were so simple , why has no major browser implemented a proper fix for this yet , despite the fact that we 've known about the issue for nine years [ mozilla.org ] ?
A : visited is very useful to the user in some circumstances , so it 's unacceptable to turn it off for every user in every circumstance .
Firefox 3.5 added a hidden preference [ squarefree.com ] in case some users want to turn it on sometimes , but that solution does n't work for 80 \ % of the people out there .
Personally , I think applying the " same origin " policy to a : visited [ stanford.edu ] is a better solution , but that has n't been integrated into any mainline either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course there is no reason this is still not fixed (by being able to disable a:visited style)If the issue were so simple, why has no major browser implemented a proper fix for this yet, despite the fact that we've known about the issue for  nine years [mozilla.org] ?
A:visited is very useful to the user in some circumstances, so it's unacceptable to turn it off for every user in every circumstance.
Firefox 3.5 added a hidden preference [squarefree.com] in case some users want to turn it on sometimes, but that solution doesn't work for 80\% of the people out there.
Personally, I think applying the "same origin" policy to a:visited [stanford.edu] is a better solution, but that hasn't been integrated into any mainline either.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557541</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28558159</id>
	<title>Four Things</title>
	<author>jason.sweet</author>
	<datestamp>1246551660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The results are rather disappointing.<br>
A t-shirt!?!?!?<br>
Why does this jackass misspell 'women'?<br>
Why the fuck is this even possible?!?!?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The results are rather disappointing .
A t-shirt ! ? ! ? ! ?
Why does this jackass misspell 'women ' ?
Why the fuck is this even possible ? ! ? !
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The results are rather disappointing.
A t-shirt!?!?!?
Why does this jackass misspell 'women'?
Why the fuck is this even possible?!?!
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557715</id>
	<title>Duh</title>
	<author>Akira Kogami</author>
	<datestamp>1246549440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Am I the only person who simply doesn't keep a browser history? I set my Firefox not to and it works fine.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Am I the only person who simply does n't keep a browser history ?
I set my Firefox not to and it works fine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Am I the only person who simply doesn't keep a browser history?
I set my Firefox not to and it works fine.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28558133</id>
	<title>I see London,</title>
	<author>smackenzie</author>
	<datestamp>1246551540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I see France,<br>
I see you shopping online at Victoria's Secret for underpants...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I see France , I see you shopping online at Victoria 's Secret for underpants.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I see France,
I see you shopping online at Victoria's Secret for underpants...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28558227</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft actually did something right</title>
	<author>Geoffrey.landis</author>
	<datestamp>1246552080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>With its "inprivate" browsing mode in IE8.
Since it doesn't track your history, I'm assuming that it your "inprivate" history can't be "sniffed".</p></div><p>The same as the Safari "private browsing" mode, I assume.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>With its " inprivate " browsing mode in IE8 .
Since it does n't track your history , I 'm assuming that it your " inprivate " history ca n't be " sniffed " .The same as the Safari " private browsing " mode , I assume .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With its "inprivate" browsing mode in IE8.
Since it doesn't track your history, I'm assuming that it your "inprivate" history can't be "sniffed".The same as the Safari "private browsing" mode, I assume.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557159</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557341</id>
	<title>Another security hole</title>
	<author>Scutter</author>
	<datestamp>1246547880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can we please just have something that doesn't give up our privacy every three seconds?  If you like having a browser history or enjoy the benefits of javascript, you're screwed.  The only answer is to disable one or both of those.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can we please just have something that does n't give up our privacy every three seconds ?
If you like having a browser history or enjoy the benefits of javascript , you 're screwed .
The only answer is to disable one or both of those .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can we please just have something that doesn't give up our privacy every three seconds?
If you like having a browser history or enjoy the benefits of javascript, you're screwed.
The only answer is to disable one or both of those.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28561335</id>
	<title>Forget your silly pr0n folks</title>
	<author>galego</author>
	<datestamp>1246562160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Granted, some of you are concerned about people finding out the sites you visit, but what about a real world problem (or two)?</p><p>Some time back, there was an attack that threw a phony dialog pop-up saying that your timeout had been expired at your bank site.  Combine that with being able to see *what* bank's site (and whether or not you  have been at it recently). This could even be injected through a compromised ad-server system or the like. Maybe you don't even have to visit my site. There's some moving parts in there, but things like this, combined with click-happy-and-fill-in-personal-data user syndrome could make for some pretty sophisticated attacks.</p><p>From a private organization's perspective (many of whom have private systems, blocked off from the outer world)<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... this can also be used to help map their internal network from the outside (just by one of their users visiting a site). Think about that after you visit your interal cisco web interface and then merrily tab into some other site.</p><p>I am particular about who I allow to set cookies, but not so much about my history (except that I do wipe it<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. and other 'private data' when FF closes). don't know that I'll change that behavior yet, but will probably modify the config on visited site styles as some have suggested here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Granted , some of you are concerned about people finding out the sites you visit , but what about a real world problem ( or two ) ? Some time back , there was an attack that threw a phony dialog pop-up saying that your timeout had been expired at your bank site .
Combine that with being able to see * what * bank 's site ( and whether or not you have been at it recently ) .
This could even be injected through a compromised ad-server system or the like .
Maybe you do n't even have to visit my site .
There 's some moving parts in there , but things like this , combined with click-happy-and-fill-in-personal-data user syndrome could make for some pretty sophisticated attacks.From a private organization 's perspective ( many of whom have private systems , blocked off from the outer world ) ... this can also be used to help map their internal network from the outside ( just by one of their users visiting a site ) .
Think about that after you visit your interal cisco web interface and then merrily tab into some other site.I am particular about who I allow to set cookies , but not so much about my history ( except that I do wipe it .. and other 'private data ' when FF closes ) .
do n't know that I 'll change that behavior yet , but will probably modify the config on visited site styles as some have suggested here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Granted, some of you are concerned about people finding out the sites you visit, but what about a real world problem (or two)?Some time back, there was an attack that threw a phony dialog pop-up saying that your timeout had been expired at your bank site.
Combine that with being able to see *what* bank's site (and whether or not you  have been at it recently).
This could even be injected through a compromised ad-server system or the like.
Maybe you don't even have to visit my site.
There's some moving parts in there, but things like this, combined with click-happy-and-fill-in-personal-data user syndrome could make for some pretty sophisticated attacks.From a private organization's perspective (many of whom have private systems, blocked off from the outer world) ... this can also be used to help map their internal network from the outside (just by one of their users visiting a site).
Think about that after you visit your interal cisco web interface and then merrily tab into some other site.I am particular about who I allow to set cookies, but not so much about my history (except that I do wipe it .. and other 'private data' when FF closes).
don't know that I'll change that behavior yet, but will probably modify the config on visited site styles as some have suggested here.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28563759</id>
	<title>Re:I checked it out</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246526700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All I got was the slashdot logo and the google logo...</p><p>Maybe I am just that boring...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All I got was the slashdot logo and the google logo...Maybe I am just that boring.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All I got was the slashdot logo and the google logo...Maybe I am just that boring...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557229</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557521</id>
	<title>Re:Not mine</title>
	<author>Yaa 101</author>
	<datestamp>1246548480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is unbelievable how many sites try to cram your surfing session with all sorts of cross scripting and other nuisance from 3rd parties.</p><p>Noscript essentially gives back the decision of running scripts to the owner of the web client.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is unbelievable how many sites try to cram your surfing session with all sorts of cross scripting and other nuisance from 3rd parties.Noscript essentially gives back the decision of running scripts to the owner of the web client .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is unbelievable how many sites try to cram your surfing session with all sorts of cross scripting and other nuisance from 3rd parties.Noscript essentially gives back the decision of running scripts to the owner of the web client.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557213</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28565035</id>
	<title>This smells fishy</title>
	<author>Pictish Prince</author>
	<datestamp>1246531920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What do you bet the script checks to see if firefox is browsing it and just throws up a black box in that case?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What do you bet the script checks to see if firefox is browsing it and just throws up a black box in that case ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What do you bet the script checks to see if firefox is browsing it and just throws up a black box in that case?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28569407</id>
	<title>Firefox 3.5 with Private Browsing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246614180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Tried the link with Firefox 3.5, and got a nice collage of icons of sites I visited.</p><p>However, switching to Private Browsing seems to block access to the browser history - I got the black square.</p><p>Cheers</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Tried the link with Firefox 3.5 , and got a nice collage of icons of sites I visited.However , switching to Private Browsing seems to block access to the browser history - I got the black square.Cheers</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tried the link with Firefox 3.5, and got a nice collage of icons of sites I visited.However, switching to Private Browsing seems to block access to the browser history - I got the black square.Cheers</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28566261</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft actually did something right</title>
	<author>hacker</author>
	<datestamp>1246538700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here, try <a href="http://www.making-the-web.com/misc/sites-you-visit/nojs/" title="making-the-web.com">this one</a> [making-the-web.com] which works without using Javascript at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here , try this one [ making-the-web.com ] which works without using Javascript at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here, try this one [making-the-web.com] which works without using Javascript at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557391</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28560883</id>
	<title>Re:Not mine</title>
	<author>Daimanta</author>
	<datestamp>1246560780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, then I'll install a NoCSS add-on. Who needs layout anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , then I 'll install a NoCSS add-on .
Who needs layout anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, then I'll install a NoCSS add-on.
Who needs layout anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557641</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557583</id>
	<title>who the hell</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246548780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>who the hell is that guy in the picture?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>who the hell is that guy in the picture ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>who the hell is that guy in the picture?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557675</id>
	<title>ooooh!</title>
	<author>gandhi\_2</author>
	<datestamp>1246549260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's like a collage of my favorite porn sites.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's like a collage of my favorite porn sites .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's like a collage of my favorite porn sites.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28559487</id>
	<title>doesn't work here</title>
	<author>brezel</author>
	<datestamp>1246556820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>sits at 0\% forever. ff+noscript+linux</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>sits at 0 \ % forever .
ff + noscript + linux</tokentext>
<sentencetext>sits at 0\% forever.
ff+noscript+linux</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557605</id>
	<title>Another link with similar technique.</title>
	<author>vieux schnock</author>
	<datestamp>1246548900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe it's an old story but I found this site that uses the same technique:<br>http://www.schillmania.com/random/humour/web20awareness/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe it 's an old story but I found this site that uses the same technique : http : //www.schillmania.com/random/humour/web20awareness/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe it's an old story but I found this site that uses the same technique:http://www.schillmania.com/random/humour/web20awareness/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28563787</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft actually did something right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246526880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Same, pretty happy about seeing a black square myself<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Same , pretty happy about seeing a black square myself : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Same, pretty happy about seeing a black square myself :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557391</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28558317</id>
	<title>This is what I got:</title>
	<author>XxtraLarGe</author>
	<datestamp>1246552440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>ERROR

<p>The requested URL could not be retrieved

</p><p>While trying to retrieve the URL: <a href="http://web2.0collage.com/app/" title="0collage.com">http://web2.0collage.com/app/</a> [0collage.com];...

</p><p>The following error was encountered:

</p><p>Unable to forward this request at this time.
</p><p>This request could not be forwarded to the origin server or to any parent caches. The most likely cause for this error is that:

</p><p> <b>Being on slashdot!</b>

</p><p>imagemagick bindings that leak memory
</p><p>a hard limit of 4gb in a 64bit version of mzscheme for reason's I don't know
</p><p>Your cache administrator is webmaster.
</p><p>Generated Thu, 02 Jul 2009 15:32:25 GMT by nullsleep.csclub.uwaterloo.ca (squid/2.7.STABLE3)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ERROR The requested URL could not be retrieved While trying to retrieve the URL : http : //web2.0collage.com/app/ [ 0collage.com ] ; .. . The following error was encountered : Unable to forward this request at this time .
This request could not be forwarded to the origin server or to any parent caches .
The most likely cause for this error is that : Being on slashdot !
imagemagick bindings that leak memory a hard limit of 4gb in a 64bit version of mzscheme for reason 's I do n't know Your cache administrator is webmaster .
Generated Thu , 02 Jul 2009 15 : 32 : 25 GMT by nullsleep.csclub.uwaterloo.ca ( squid/2.7.STABLE3 )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ERROR

The requested URL could not be retrieved

While trying to retrieve the URL: http://web2.0collage.com/app/ [0collage.com];...

The following error was encountered:

Unable to forward this request at this time.
This request could not be forwarded to the origin server or to any parent caches.
The most likely cause for this error is that:

 Being on slashdot!
imagemagick bindings that leak memory
a hard limit of 4gb in a 64bit version of mzscheme for reason's I don't know
Your cache administrator is webmaster.
Generated Thu, 02 Jul 2009 15:32:25 GMT by nullsleep.csclub.uwaterloo.ca (squid/2.7.STABLE3)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28558225</id>
	<title>Reminds me of timing attacks.</title>
	<author>askksa</author>
	<datestamp>1246552080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.cs.princeton.edu/sip/pub/webtiming.pdf" title="princeton.edu" rel="nofollow">http://www.cs.princeton.edu/sip/pub/webtiming.pdf</a> [princeton.edu]</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.cs.princeton.edu/sip/pub/webtiming.pdf [ princeton.edu ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.cs.princeton.edu/sip/pub/webtiming.pdf [princeton.edu]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28558629</id>
	<title>Re:workaround in firefox</title>
	<author>haifastudent</author>
	<datestamp>1246553700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>That workaround is a myth. See here for all about:config entries:
<a href="http://kb.mozillazine.org/Firefox\_:\_FAQs\_:\_About:config\_Entries" title="mozillazine.org" rel="nofollow">http://kb.mozillazine.org/Firefox\_:\_FAQs\_:\_About:config\_Entries</a> [mozillazine.org]

So by using that method, not only is the user not protected, but he \_thinks\_ that he is protected. That's worse.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That workaround is a myth .
See here for all about : config entries : http : //kb.mozillazine.org/Firefox \ _ : \ _FAQs \ _ : \ _About : config \ _Entries [ mozillazine.org ] So by using that method , not only is the user not protected , but he \ _thinks \ _ that he is protected .
That 's worse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That workaround is a myth.
See here for all about:config entries:
http://kb.mozillazine.org/Firefox\_:\_FAQs\_:\_About:config\_Entries [mozillazine.org]

So by using that method, not only is the user not protected, but he \_thinks\_ that he is protected.
That's worse.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557797</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557797</id>
	<title>workaround in firefox</title>
	<author>denominateur</author>
	<datestamp>1246549740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>in firefox:</p><p>
&nbsp; set layout.css.visited\_links\_enabled to FALSE in about config</p><p>This will break (a tiny part of) the layout of sites that use CSS to change the style of links that were visited by the user, but it protects against this problem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>in firefox :   set layout.css.visited \ _links \ _enabled to FALSE in about configThis will break ( a tiny part of ) the layout of sites that use CSS to change the style of links that were visited by the user , but it protects against this problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>in firefox:
  set layout.css.visited\_links\_enabled to FALSE in about configThis will break (a tiny part of) the layout of sites that use CSS to change the style of links that were visited by the user, but it protects against this problem.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28559891</id>
	<title>Surprisingly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246557960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>my collage only has slashdot and ars technica symblos...and I vist a LOT of other sites</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>my collage only has slashdot and ars technica symblos...and I vist a LOT of other sites</tokentext>
<sentencetext>my collage only has slashdot and ars technica symblos...and I vist a LOT of other sites</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28559941</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft actually did something right</title>
	<author>sairax</author>
	<datestamp>1246558080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, but Microsoft can't protect you from Linus Torvalds. He takes one look at your desktop and knows which porn sites you visited. In the last ten years.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , but Microsoft ca n't protect you from Linus Torvalds .
He takes one look at your desktop and knows which porn sites you visited .
In the last ten years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, but Microsoft can't protect you from Linus Torvalds.
He takes one look at your desktop and knows which porn sites you visited.
In the last ten years.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557159</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557141</id>
	<title>Welfare Reform</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246547040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I heard a great idea today! Every welfare line should have a guy who collects cell phones, disposes of them, and cancels the contracts. That way maybe the jigaboos will realize that one reason they're poor is that they buy luxury shit they can't really afford. What an idea!!  Silly niggers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I heard a great idea today !
Every welfare line should have a guy who collects cell phones , disposes of them , and cancels the contracts .
That way maybe the jigaboos will realize that one reason they 're poor is that they buy luxury shit they ca n't really afford .
What an idea ! !
Silly niggers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I heard a great idea today!
Every welfare line should have a guy who collects cell phones, disposes of them, and cancels the contracts.
That way maybe the jigaboos will realize that one reason they're poor is that they buy luxury shit they can't really afford.
What an idea!!
Silly niggers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557223</id>
	<title>Sensationalism in summary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246547340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Being able to query whether or not I visit common sites is a far cry from my browser history being shown, but still this needs to be fixed.<br> <br>How long until a politician gets busted for visiting a child pornography website?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Being able to query whether or not I visit common sites is a far cry from my browser history being shown , but still this needs to be fixed .
How long until a politician gets busted for visiting a child pornography website ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Being able to query whether or not I visit common sites is a far cry from my browser history being shown, but still this needs to be fixed.
How long until a politician gets busted for visiting a child pornography website?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557537</id>
	<title>Re:This methodology is actually quite old</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246548600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>New about:config setting in FF 3.5:<br><a href="https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show\_bug.cgi?id=147777#c98" title="mozilla.org" rel="nofollow">layout.css.visited\_links\_enabled</a> [mozilla.org]</p><p>If "visited" is a useful feature for you check out <a href="https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/1502" title="mozilla.org" rel="nofollow">SafeHistory</a> [mozilla.org]:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Restricts the marking of visited links on the basis of the originating document, defending against web privacy attacks that remote sites can use to determine your browser history at other sites</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>New about : config setting in FF 3.5 : layout.css.visited \ _links \ _enabled [ mozilla.org ] If " visited " is a useful feature for you check out SafeHistory [ mozilla.org ] : Restricts the marking of visited links on the basis of the originating document , defending against web privacy attacks that remote sites can use to determine your browser history at other sites</tokentext>
<sentencetext>New about:config setting in FF 3.5:layout.css.visited\_links\_enabled [mozilla.org]If "visited" is a useful feature for you check out SafeHistory [mozilla.org]:Restricts the marking of visited links on the basis of the originating document, defending against web privacy attacks that remote sites can use to determine your browser history at other sites
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557231</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28562649</id>
	<title>Re:Not mine</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246566420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nor mine.  Opera.  javascript OFF by default; ON only for a few (lame-ass) sites.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nor mine .
Opera. javascript OFF by default ; ON only for a few ( lame-ass ) sites .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nor mine.
Opera.  javascript OFF by default; ON only for a few (lame-ass) sites.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557213</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557249</id>
	<title>It's slashdotted</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246547460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Twice in a row, all I get is<blockquote><div><p> <strong>Expired</strong> </p><p>This URL has expired. Please return to the home page.This is likely because of increased load. It shouldn't happen again.</p></div> </blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Twice in a row , all I get is Expired This URL has expired .
Please return to the home page.This is likely because of increased load .
It should n't happen again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Twice in a row, all I get is Expired This URL has expired.
Please return to the home page.This is likely because of increased load.
It shouldn't happen again. 
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557213</id>
	<title>Not mine</title>
	<author>Monoman</author>
	<datestamp>1246547280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No Script baby</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No Script baby</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No Script baby</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28558523</id>
	<title>Re:Did not work for me</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246553220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does not work with Opera. The page just loads for a while, then endlessly reloads itself without result. Once again it looks like Opera is immune to yet another web "vulnerability".</p><p>I love that Opera continues to be the most secure and standards compliant web browser ever made.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does not work with Opera .
The page just loads for a while , then endlessly reloads itself without result .
Once again it looks like Opera is immune to yet another web " vulnerability " .I love that Opera continues to be the most secure and standards compliant web browser ever made .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does not work with Opera.
The page just loads for a while, then endlessly reloads itself without result.
Once again it looks like Opera is immune to yet another web "vulnerability".I love that Opera continues to be the most secure and standards compliant web browser ever made.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557235</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557173</id>
	<title>...So....</title>
	<author>Darkness404</author>
	<datestamp>1246547160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So just disable your browser history if you are that paranoid about it. It only takes a few clicks in any major browser. Plus if you for some reason don't want to do that, most browsers now have a private mode that doesn't record those sites in the history.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So just disable your browser history if you are that paranoid about it .
It only takes a few clicks in any major browser .
Plus if you for some reason do n't want to do that , most browsers now have a private mode that does n't record those sites in the history .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So just disable your browser history if you are that paranoid about it.
It only takes a few clicks in any major browser.
Plus if you for some reason don't want to do that, most browsers now have a private mode that doesn't record those sites in the history.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28558993</id>
	<title>No problem here... and I still have my history</title>
	<author>aaaurgh</author>
	<datestamp>1246555140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yawn... been waiting for the collage for about ten minutes so far but the progress bar seems stuck at 0\%.</p><p>I wonder if it has something to do with the unchecked "Enable JavaScript" checkbox I have displayed at the bottom of my Opera 10 window.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yawn... been waiting for the collage for about ten minutes so far but the progress bar seems stuck at 0 \ % .I wonder if it has something to do with the unchecked " Enable JavaScript " checkbox I have displayed at the bottom of my Opera 10 window .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yawn... been waiting for the collage for about ten minutes so far but the progress bar seems stuck at 0\%.I wonder if it has something to do with the unchecked "Enable JavaScript" checkbox I have displayed at the bottom of my Opera 10 window.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28558591</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft actually did something right</title>
	<author>Krojack</author>
	<datestamp>1246553580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Same for me only I don't have history disabled.  NoScript just didn't allow the scanning.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Same for me only I do n't have history disabled .
NoScript just did n't allow the scanning .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Same for me only I don't have history disabled.
NoScript just didn't allow the scanning.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557391</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557229</id>
	<title>I checked it out</title>
	<author>oodaloop</author>
	<datestamp>1246547340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And all it showed was pictures of raptors and deadbolts.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And all it showed was pictures of raptors and deadbolts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And all it showed was pictures of raptors and deadbolts.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557579</id>
	<title>wommens</title>
	<author>psergiu</author>
	<datestamp>1246548780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Quote from the final page of the script:</p><p><i>You can get your web2.0collage as a mug,wommens<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</i> </p><p>I can have it as WHAT ? Okay, then can i have my wommens without the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. favicon all over them ?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Quote from the final page of the script : You can get your web2.0collage as a mug,wommens ... I can have it as WHAT ?
Okay , then can i have my wommens without the / .
favicon all over them ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Quote from the final page of the script:You can get your web2.0collage as a mug,wommens ... I can have it as WHAT ?
Okay, then can i have my wommens without the /.
favicon all over them ?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557615</id>
	<title>Re:Not mine</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246549020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It can also be done using CSS and then grepping accesslog. NoScript will not help you there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It can also be done using CSS and then grepping accesslog .
NoScript will not help you there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It can also be done using CSS and then grepping accesslog.
NoScript will not help you there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557213</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28568031</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft actually did something right</title>
	<author>rdnetto</author>
	<datestamp>1246552860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>Microsoft actually did something right</p></div><p>You mean like the mode Safari had 4 years ago?</p></div><p>Exactly. The 'something right' was copying features from better browsers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft actually did something rightYou mean like the mode Safari had 4 years ago ? Exactly .
The 'something right ' was copying features from better browsers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft actually did something rightYou mean like the mode Safari had 4 years ago?Exactly.
The 'something right' was copying features from better browsers.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557267</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557541</id>
	<title>Known since at least 2006</title>
	<author>ugen</author>
	<datestamp>1246548600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://jeremiahgrossman.blogspot.com/2006/08/i-know-where-youve-been.html" title="blogspot.com">http://jeremiahgrossman.blogspot.com/2006/08/i-know-where-youve-been.html</a> [blogspot.com]</p><p>Of course there is no reason this is still not fixed (by being able to disable a:visited style).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //jeremiahgrossman.blogspot.com/2006/08/i-know-where-youve-been.html [ blogspot.com ] Of course there is no reason this is still not fixed ( by being able to disable a : visited style ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://jeremiahgrossman.blogspot.com/2006/08/i-know-where-youve-been.html [blogspot.com]Of course there is no reason this is still not fixed (by being able to disable a:visited style).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28561517</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft actually did something right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246562820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I call shenanigans. All it gave me was a list of popular-looking sites many people could have visited, and at least 2 I've not heard of and do not appear in my browser history either.</p><p>So I downloaded Opera, a browser I have never used on this machine and has an empty browser history (last OS install about 8 months ago, last used Opera in the early 2000s) and got a similar (but slightly different) list of popular sites.</p><p>This is called a hoax, people. How hard is it for an oracle to go "ommmmmm I'm channeling the spirits who tell me you've visited wikipedia, google and imdb recently".</p><p>No shit sherlock, let me predict you've gone for a shit AND a piss in the last week. I bet you've also eaten something. Why is this a story?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I call shenanigans .
All it gave me was a list of popular-looking sites many people could have visited , and at least 2 I 've not heard of and do not appear in my browser history either.So I downloaded Opera , a browser I have never used on this machine and has an empty browser history ( last OS install about 8 months ago , last used Opera in the early 2000s ) and got a similar ( but slightly different ) list of popular sites.This is called a hoax , people .
How hard is it for an oracle to go " ommmmmm I 'm channeling the spirits who tell me you 've visited wikipedia , google and imdb recently " .No shit sherlock , let me predict you 've gone for a shit AND a piss in the last week .
I bet you 've also eaten something .
Why is this a story ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I call shenanigans.
All it gave me was a list of popular-looking sites many people could have visited, and at least 2 I've not heard of and do not appear in my browser history either.So I downloaded Opera, a browser I have never used on this machine and has an empty browser history (last OS install about 8 months ago, last used Opera in the early 2000s) and got a similar (but slightly different) list of popular sites.This is called a hoax, people.
How hard is it for an oracle to go "ommmmmm I'm channeling the spirits who tell me you've visited wikipedia, google and imdb recently".No shit sherlock, let me predict you've gone for a shit AND a piss in the last week.
I bet you've also eaten something.
Why is this a story?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557391</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557559</id>
	<title>Really no script</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246548720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thanks for pointing out! I now realize you can do the whole thing, including server communication, in CSS. Just combine the "visited" tag with a unique background image on the same server. The background image URL can then be the server-side script that handles the privacy violation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thanks for pointing out !
I now realize you can do the whole thing , including server communication , in CSS .
Just combine the " visited " tag with a unique background image on the same server .
The background image URL can then be the server-side script that handles the privacy violation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thanks for pointing out!
I now realize you can do the whole thing, including server communication, in CSS.
Just combine the "visited" tag with a unique background image on the same server.
The background image URL can then be the server-side script that handles the privacy violation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557231</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557267</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft actually did something right</title>
	<author>Freetardo Jones</author>
	<datestamp>1246547520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Microsoft actually did something right</p></div><p>You mean like the mode Safari had 4 years ago?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft actually did something rightYou mean like the mode Safari had 4 years ago ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft actually did something rightYou mean like the mode Safari had 4 years ago?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557159</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557235</id>
	<title>Did not work for me</title>
	<author>danzona</author>
	<datestamp>1246547340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I went to the sniffing page linked from the summary and it stayed on 0\% for 5 minutes so I guess it does not work for me.<br> <br>

NoScript (I presume) saves the day again!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I went to the sniffing page linked from the summary and it stayed on 0 \ % for 5 minutes so I guess it does not work for me .
NoScript ( I presume ) saves the day again !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I went to the sniffing page linked from the summary and it stayed on 0\% for 5 minutes so I guess it does not work for me.
NoScript (I presume) saves the day again!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557159</id>
	<title>Microsoft actually did something right</title>
	<author>Absolut187</author>
	<datestamp>1246547100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With its "inprivate" browsing mode in IE8.<br>Since it doesn't track your history, I'm assuming that it your "inprivate" history can't be "sniffed".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With its " inprivate " browsing mode in IE8.Since it does n't track your history , I 'm assuming that it your " inprivate " history ca n't be " sniffed " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With its "inprivate" browsing mode in IE8.Since it doesn't track your history, I'm assuming that it your "inprivate" history can't be "sniffed".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557391</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft actually did something right</title>
	<author>sam0vi</author>
	<datestamp>1246548000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm using FF 3.0.11 on Jaunty with history disabled, and it did not get anything from my browser even though the "recently closed tabs" menu has many entries in it. All i got was a black square. I also had to tell NoScript to allow their domain. This made me feel better about my paranoid ways!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm using FF 3.0.11 on Jaunty with history disabled , and it did not get anything from my browser even though the " recently closed tabs " menu has many entries in it .
All i got was a black square .
I also had to tell NoScript to allow their domain .
This made me feel better about my paranoid ways !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm using FF 3.0.11 on Jaunty with history disabled, and it did not get anything from my browser even though the "recently closed tabs" menu has many entries in it.
All i got was a black square.
I also had to tell NoScript to allow their domain.
This made me feel better about my paranoid ways!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557159</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557171</id>
	<title>Something tells me</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246547160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That I would not want to look at the browser history of the guy that is in the attached featured article picture.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That I would not want to look at the browser history of the guy that is in the attached featured article picture .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That I would not want to look at the browser history of the guy that is in the attached featured article picture.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28564623</id>
	<title>"Ask Slashdot": "safe" browsing in FF??</title>
	<author>Ponga</author>
	<datestamp>1246530300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I want to browse "safely"; protection against most XSS and sh1t like scripts reading my browser history, etc. However, I want the sites that I visit to "work" at the same time. Ya, NoScript is great, but with sites globally disallowed, the Internets are useless.
<br> <br>
Can anyone offer some suggestions to reasonably lock down FF where a balance is struck between security and usability??
<br> <br>
TIA,
--ponga</htmltext>
<tokenext>I want to browse " safely " ; protection against most XSS and sh1t like scripts reading my browser history , etc .
However , I want the sites that I visit to " work " at the same time .
Ya , NoScript is great , but with sites globally disallowed , the Internets are useless .
Can anyone offer some suggestions to reasonably lock down FF where a balance is struck between security and usability ? ?
TIA , --ponga</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I want to browse "safely"; protection against most XSS and sh1t like scripts reading my browser history, etc.
However, I want the sites that I visit to "work" at the same time.
Ya, NoScript is great, but with sites globally disallowed, the Internets are useless.
Can anyone offer some suggestions to reasonably lock down FF where a balance is struck between security and usability??
TIA,
--ponga</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28561307</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft actually did something right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246562100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://blogs.msdn.com/ieinternals/archive/2009/06/17/CSSHistoryProbing.aspx</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //blogs.msdn.com/ieinternals/archive/2009/06/17/CSSHistoryProbing.aspx</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://blogs.msdn.com/ieinternals/archive/2009/06/17/CSSHistoryProbing.aspx</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557159</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557939</id>
	<title>Re:Not mine</title>
	<author>stickrnan</author>
	<datestamp>1246550340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A lot of sites need javascript allowed to see any content. Are you planning on browsing with absolutely no script?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A lot of sites need javascript allowed to see any content .
Are you planning on browsing with absolutely no script ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A lot of sites need javascript allowed to see any content.
Are you planning on browsing with absolutely no script?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557213</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28558685</id>
	<title>Nice</title>
	<author>tsnorquist</author>
	<datestamp>1246553940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The following error was encountered:</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * Unable to forward this request at this time.</p><p>This request could not be forwarded to the origin server or to any parent caches. The most likely cause for this error is that:</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; *<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Being on slashdot!<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * imagemagick bindings that leak memory<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * a hard limit of 4gb in a 64bit version of mzscheme for reason's I don't know</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The following error was encountered :         * Unable to forward this request at this time.This request could not be forwarded to the origin server or to any parent caches .
The most likely cause for this error is that :         *             Being on slashdot !
        * imagemagick bindings that leak memory         * a hard limit of 4gb in a 64bit version of mzscheme for reason 's I do n't know</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The following error was encountered:
        * Unable to forward this request at this time.This request could not be forwarded to the origin server or to any parent caches.
The most likely cause for this error is that:
        *
            Being on slashdot!
        * imagemagick bindings that leak memory
        * a hard limit of 4gb in a 64bit version of mzscheme for reason's I don't know</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28567525</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft actually did something right</title>
	<author>CastrTroy</author>
	<datestamp>1246548000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've been doing this with firefox for years.  Just go to the privacy section of your options/preferences, and disable history, disable cookies, and tell it to clear your history every time you leave.  Really I just have it set for no password/form/history saved, and only accept first party cookies until I close firefox, except for the white list I have so I don't have to keep on signing in to my usual sites.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been doing this with firefox for years .
Just go to the privacy section of your options/preferences , and disable history , disable cookies , and tell it to clear your history every time you leave .
Really I just have it set for no password/form/history saved , and only accept first party cookies until I close firefox , except for the white list I have so I do n't have to keep on signing in to my usual sites .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been doing this with firefox for years.
Just go to the privacy section of your options/preferences, and disable history, disable cookies, and tell it to clear your history every time you leave.
Really I just have it set for no password/form/history saved, and only accept first party cookies until I close firefox, except for the white list I have so I don't have to keep on signing in to my usual sites.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557159</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557417</id>
	<title>Re:Did not work for me</title>
	<author>Krneki</author>
	<datestamp>1246548120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Same story here, it does not work.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Same story here , it does not work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Same story here, it does not work.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557235</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28558563</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft actually did something right</title>
	<author>haifastudent</author>
	<datestamp>1246553340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>On a stock Firefox 3.0.11 on a fresh install and no extensions, I visited about 20 popular sites (facebook.com, digg.com, xnxx.com and the like), then tried the history site. Just a big black png. Either the script is<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.ed or I don't know the right sites to visit.</htmltext>
<tokenext>On a stock Firefox 3.0.11 on a fresh install and no extensions , I visited about 20 popular sites ( facebook.com , digg.com , xnxx.com and the like ) , then tried the history site .
Just a big black png .
Either the script is /.ed or I do n't know the right sites to visit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On a stock Firefox 3.0.11 on a fresh install and no extensions, I visited about 20 popular sites (facebook.com, digg.com, xnxx.com and the like), then tried the history site.
Just a big black png.
Either the script is /.ed or I don't know the right sites to visit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557391</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557469</id>
	<title>Broken or Slashdotted?</title>
	<author>stry\_cat</author>
	<datestamp>1246548300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ERROR<br>The requested URL could not be retrieved</p><p>While trying to retrieve the URL: <a href="http://web2.0collage.com/app/;((\%22k\%22\%20.\%20\%22(1970\%201\%2079269687)\%22))" title="0collage.com">http://web2.0collage.com/app/;((\%22k\%22\%20.\%20\%22(1970\%201\%2079269687)\%22))</a> [0collage.com]</p><p>The following error was encountered:</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * Unable to forward this request at this time.</p><p>This request could not be forwarded to the origin server or to any parent caches. The most likely cause for this error is that:</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * The cache administrator does not allow this cache to make direct connections to origin servers, and<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * All configured parent caches are currently unreachable.</p><p>Your cache administrator is webmaster.<br>Generated Thu, 02 Jul 2009 14:23:14 GMT by nullsleep.csclub.uwaterloo.ca (squid/2.7.STABLE3)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ERRORThe requested URL could not be retrievedWhile trying to retrieve the URL : http : //web2.0collage.com/app/ ; ( ( \ % 22k \ % 22 \ % 20. \ % 20 \ % 22 ( 1970 \ % 201 \ % 2079269687 ) \ % 22 ) ) [ 0collage.com ] The following error was encountered :         * Unable to forward this request at this time.This request could not be forwarded to the origin server or to any parent caches .
The most likely cause for this error is that :         * The cache administrator does not allow this cache to make direct connections to origin servers , and         * All configured parent caches are currently unreachable.Your cache administrator is webmaster.Generated Thu , 02 Jul 2009 14 : 23 : 14 GMT by nullsleep.csclub.uwaterloo.ca ( squid/2.7.STABLE3 )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ERRORThe requested URL could not be retrievedWhile trying to retrieve the URL: http://web2.0collage.com/app/;((\%22k\%22\%20.\%20\%22(1970\%201\%2079269687)\%22)) [0collage.com]The following error was encountered:
        * Unable to forward this request at this time.This request could not be forwarded to the origin server or to any parent caches.
The most likely cause for this error is that:
        * The cache administrator does not allow this cache to make direct connections to origin servers, and
        * All configured parent caches are currently unreachable.Your cache administrator is webmaster.Generated Thu, 02 Jul 2009 14:23:14 GMT by nullsleep.csclub.uwaterloo.ca (squid/2.7.STABLE3)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28566093</id>
	<title>Security Warnings</title>
	<author>kasperd</author>
	<datestamp>1246537920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I tried visiting the site. After I had closed the first 100 security warning windows, I closed the tab. As far as I know, most browsers do give warnings whenever you are about to submit a form over an unencrypted connection. And as far as I know, most users disable those warnings. Any user who have those warnings turned on would notice this attack. I have seen some css variant a while back, that didn't produce the same kind of warnings. So to me it looks like this new attack is inferior to what was previously demonstrated. (Somebody suggested that the CPU usage would give away the attack. But if you have multiple tabs opens in is actually very difficult to find out which of them are responsible for the CPU and memory usage of the browser).</htmltext>
<tokenext>I tried visiting the site .
After I had closed the first 100 security warning windows , I closed the tab .
As far as I know , most browsers do give warnings whenever you are about to submit a form over an unencrypted connection .
And as far as I know , most users disable those warnings .
Any user who have those warnings turned on would notice this attack .
I have seen some css variant a while back , that did n't produce the same kind of warnings .
So to me it looks like this new attack is inferior to what was previously demonstrated .
( Somebody suggested that the CPU usage would give away the attack .
But if you have multiple tabs opens in is actually very difficult to find out which of them are responsible for the CPU and memory usage of the browser ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I tried visiting the site.
After I had closed the first 100 security warning windows, I closed the tab.
As far as I know, most browsers do give warnings whenever you are about to submit a form over an unencrypted connection.
And as far as I know, most users disable those warnings.
Any user who have those warnings turned on would notice this attack.
I have seen some css variant a while back, that didn't produce the same kind of warnings.
So to me it looks like this new attack is inferior to what was previously demonstrated.
(Somebody suggested that the CPU usage would give away the attack.
But if you have multiple tabs opens in is actually very difficult to find out which of them are responsible for the CPU and memory usage of the browser).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557633</id>
	<title>The guy in the picture of this artical.</title>
	<author>orsty3001</author>
	<datestamp>1246549080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>He just typed, "15/f/CA".</htmltext>
<tokenext>He just typed , " 15/f/CA " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He just typed, "15/f/CA".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28559417</id>
	<title>Hmmm...</title>
	<author>noirsoldats</author>
	<datestamp>1246556640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Has it been forgotten that a few weeks ago a more advanced form of this 'sniffing' was shown NOT using javascript?  <a href="http://it.slashdot.org/story/09/06/13/2125211/Sniffing-Browser-History-Without-Javascript" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://it.slashdot.org/story/09/06/13/2125211/Sniffing-Browser-History-Without-Javascript</a> [slashdot.org]  So, y'all that thing 'Oh, No Script protects me' think again.. This exploit has been around for years and I'm pretty sure it's been used for quite some time as well.  Maybe I'm just apathetic about people knowing what sites I visit but... Meh, let them know, what harm could it do? (Yea, I know, I don't visit child porn so what do I have to hide?)<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Has it been forgotten that a few weeks ago a more advanced form of this 'sniffing ' was shown NOT using javascript ?
http : //it.slashdot.org/story/09/06/13/2125211/Sniffing-Browser-History-Without-Javascript [ slashdot.org ] So , y'all that thing 'Oh , No Script protects me ' think again.. This exploit has been around for years and I 'm pretty sure it 's been used for quite some time as well .
Maybe I 'm just apathetic about people knowing what sites I visit but... Meh , let them know , what harm could it do ?
( Yea , I know , I do n't visit child porn so what do I have to hide ?
) : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Has it been forgotten that a few weeks ago a more advanced form of this 'sniffing' was shown NOT using javascript?
http://it.slashdot.org/story/09/06/13/2125211/Sniffing-Browser-History-Without-Javascript [slashdot.org]  So, y'all that thing 'Oh, No Script protects me' think again.. This exploit has been around for years and I'm pretty sure it's been used for quite some time as well.
Maybe I'm just apathetic about people knowing what sites I visit but... Meh, let them know, what harm could it do?
(Yea, I know, I don't visit child porn so what do I have to hide?
) :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28558341</id>
	<title>Site is 404'ing "Slashdot"</title>
	<author>rotide</author>
	<datestamp>1246552560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not a joke, look down at the possible reasons for the error, one is being on slashdot.<p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>.</p><p>
ERROR
The requested URL could not be retrieved</p><p>

While trying to retrieve the URL: <a href="http://web2.0collage.com/app/;(a12v)" title="0collage.com">http://web2.0collage.com/app/;(a12v)</a> [0collage.com]
</p><p>
The following error was encountered:
</p><p>
    * Unable to forward this request at this time.
</p><p>
This request could not be forwarded to the origin server or to any parent caches. The most likely cause for this error is that:
</p><p>
    * Being on slashdot!<br>
    * imagemagick bindings that leak memory<br>
    * a hard limit of 4gb in a 64bit version of mzscheme for reason's I don't know</p><p>
Your cache administrator is webmaster.<br>
Generated Thu, 02 Jul 2009 15:32:25 GMT by nullsleep.csclub.uwaterloo.ca (squid/2.7.STABLE3)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not a joke , look down at the possible reasons for the error , one is being on slashdot .
. ERROR The requested URL could not be retrieved While trying to retrieve the URL : http : //web2.0collage.com/app/ ; ( a12v ) [ 0collage.com ] The following error was encountered : * Unable to forward this request at this time .
This request could not be forwarded to the origin server or to any parent caches .
The most likely cause for this error is that : * Being on slashdot !
* imagemagick bindings that leak memory * a hard limit of 4gb in a 64bit version of mzscheme for reason 's I do n't know Your cache administrator is webmaster .
Generated Thu , 02 Jul 2009 15 : 32 : 25 GMT by nullsleep.csclub.uwaterloo.ca ( squid/2.7.STABLE3 )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not a joke, look down at the possible reasons for the error, one is being on slashdot.
.
ERROR
The requested URL could not be retrieved

While trying to retrieve the URL: http://web2.0collage.com/app/;(a12v) [0collage.com]

The following error was encountered:

    * Unable to forward this request at this time.
This request could not be forwarded to the origin server or to any parent caches.
The most likely cause for this error is that:

    * Being on slashdot!
* imagemagick bindings that leak memory
    * a hard limit of 4gb in a 64bit version of mzscheme for reason's I don't know
Your cache administrator is webmaster.
Generated Thu, 02 Jul 2009 15:32:25 GMT by nullsleep.csclub.uwaterloo.ca (squid/2.7.STABLE3)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28558939</id>
	<title>OLD</title>
	<author>user24</author>
	<datestamp>1246554900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm stunned this is still exploitable. This bug is YEARS old.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm stunned this is still exploitable .
This bug is YEARS old .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm stunned this is still exploitable.
This bug is YEARS old.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557451</id>
	<title>Re:Did not work for me</title>
	<author>causality</author>
	<datestamp>1246548240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I went to the sniffing page linked from the summary and it stayed on 0\% for 5 minutes so I guess it does not work for me.



NoScript (I presume) saves the day again!</p></div><p>Well, yeah.  The whole thing is JavaScript powered, so if you're not executing their JavaScript it's going to stay at 0\% for a lot longer than 5 minutes<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...
<br> <br>
This is defnitely not the first time I was glad I use NoScript.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I went to the sniffing page linked from the summary and it stayed on 0 \ % for 5 minutes so I guess it does not work for me .
NoScript ( I presume ) saves the day again ! Well , yeah .
The whole thing is JavaScript powered , so if you 're not executing their JavaScript it 's going to stay at 0 \ % for a lot longer than 5 minutes .. . This is defnitely not the first time I was glad I use NoScript .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I went to the sniffing page linked from the summary and it stayed on 0\% for 5 minutes so I guess it does not work for me.
NoScript (I presume) saves the day again!Well, yeah.
The whole thing is JavaScript powered, so if you're not executing their JavaScript it's going to stay at 0\% for a lot longer than 5 minutes ...
 
This is defnitely not the first time I was glad I use NoScript.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557235</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28565093</id>
	<title>zilch</title>
	<author>Spaham</author>
	<datestamp>1246532220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It did a lot of blinkin' and stuff then I got that :<br>An internal server error occurred. Please try again later.</p><p>Running safari 4 on a mac, normal browsing (not safe mode)<br>I wonder, still, if it would show the data locally or does the server really have access to it ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It did a lot of blinkin ' and stuff then I got that : An internal server error occurred .
Please try again later.Running safari 4 on a mac , normal browsing ( not safe mode ) I wonder , still , if it would show the data locally or does the server really have access to it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It did a lot of blinkin' and stuff then I got that :An internal server error occurred.
Please try again later.Running safari 4 on a mac, normal browsing (not safe mode)I wonder, still, if it would show the data locally or does the server really have access to it ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557641</id>
	<title>Re:Not mine</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246549080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>No Script may help in this case, but not in general.  There was a story here only a couple of weeks back talking about a pure CSS method for doing exactly this.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No Script may help in this case , but not in general .
There was a story here only a couple of weeks back talking about a pure CSS method for doing exactly this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No Script may help in this case, but not in general.
There was a story here only a couple of weeks back talking about a pure CSS method for doing exactly this.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557213</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28558485</id>
	<title>It uses javascript</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246553100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Javascript runs locally on my own computer; so I'm sniffing myself?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Javascript runs locally on my own computer ; so I 'm sniffing myself ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Javascript runs locally on my own computer; so I'm sniffing myself?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557399</id>
	<title>Re:...So....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246548060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So just disable your browser history if you are that paranoid about it. It only takes a few clicks in any major browser. Plus if you for some reason don't want to do that, most browsers now have a private mode that doesn't record those sites in the history.</p></div><p>I think the point can be explained this way:  "who's the numbnuts who thought it would be a great idea to make this information available to anyone who asks for it?"  Speaking generally about all user data and all remote IP addresses, all remote hosts are on a need-to-know basis and 99.999\% of the time, they don't need to know.  They particularly don't need to know without prompting the user and asking "do you want to give out this information?" with that question defaulting to "No" and a box, checked by default, which says "Remember this preference".
<br> <br>
You can subtly dismiss it as paranoia if you like.  That doesn't excuse poor design.  Also, globally disabling the browser history would deny the remote Web site access to the browser's history, sure, but it would also deprive the user of this local feature.  There should be a more reasonable alternative to either "lose this feature" or "make this feature available to anyone who asks with no regard for privacy."  Apparently NoScript provides such an alternative.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So just disable your browser history if you are that paranoid about it .
It only takes a few clicks in any major browser .
Plus if you for some reason do n't want to do that , most browsers now have a private mode that does n't record those sites in the history.I think the point can be explained this way : " who 's the numbnuts who thought it would be a great idea to make this information available to anyone who asks for it ?
" Speaking generally about all user data and all remote IP addresses , all remote hosts are on a need-to-know basis and 99.999 \ % of the time , they do n't need to know .
They particularly do n't need to know without prompting the user and asking " do you want to give out this information ?
" with that question defaulting to " No " and a box , checked by default , which says " Remember this preference " .
You can subtly dismiss it as paranoia if you like .
That does n't excuse poor design .
Also , globally disabling the browser history would deny the remote Web site access to the browser 's history , sure , but it would also deprive the user of this local feature .
There should be a more reasonable alternative to either " lose this feature " or " make this feature available to anyone who asks with no regard for privacy .
" Apparently NoScript provides such an alternative .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So just disable your browser history if you are that paranoid about it.
It only takes a few clicks in any major browser.
Plus if you for some reason don't want to do that, most browsers now have a private mode that doesn't record those sites in the history.I think the point can be explained this way:  "who's the numbnuts who thought it would be a great idea to make this information available to anyone who asks for it?
"  Speaking generally about all user data and all remote IP addresses, all remote hosts are on a need-to-know basis and 99.999\% of the time, they don't need to know.
They particularly don't need to know without prompting the user and asking "do you want to give out this information?
" with that question defaulting to "No" and a box, checked by default, which says "Remember this preference".
You can subtly dismiss it as paranoia if you like.
That doesn't excuse poor design.
Also, globally disabling the browser history would deny the remote Web site access to the browser's history, sure, but it would also deprive the user of this local feature.
There should be a more reasonable alternative to either "lose this feature" or "make this feature available to anyone who asks with no regard for privacy.
"  Apparently NoScript provides such an alternative.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557173</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28558339</id>
	<title>isn't this what Safari and Chrome are for?</title>
	<author>alen</author>
	<datestamp>1246552560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>use the niche browsers for your private surfing and IE/Firefox for important things</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>use the niche browsers for your private surfing and IE/Firefox for important things</tokentext>
<sentencetext>use the niche browsers for your private surfing and IE/Firefox for important things</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557231</id>
	<title>This methodology is actually quite old</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246547340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This methodology is actually quite old. It takes advantage of the CSS a:visited tag. Imagine making a:visited have a width of 5 and A have a width of 100. Drop another element right next to it and then after the page loads, check to see the location of that second element. Even if the browser attempts to block JS from accessing the style applied to the visited link, it can't keep you from accessing everything else on the page. Voila, by injecting a lot of links onto the page, you can find out where a person has been.</p><p>This is particularly dangerous because it can make Phishing very powerful. Imagine creating a resource that collects email addresses, but on that same page running this script to check the login pages of major banks. Then, you can send out targeted emails to people who you know have bank accounts at particular providers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This methodology is actually quite old .
It takes advantage of the CSS a : visited tag .
Imagine making a : visited have a width of 5 and A have a width of 100 .
Drop another element right next to it and then after the page loads , check to see the location of that second element .
Even if the browser attempts to block JS from accessing the style applied to the visited link , it ca n't keep you from accessing everything else on the page .
Voila , by injecting a lot of links onto the page , you can find out where a person has been.This is particularly dangerous because it can make Phishing very powerful .
Imagine creating a resource that collects email addresses , but on that same page running this script to check the login pages of major banks .
Then , you can send out targeted emails to people who you know have bank accounts at particular providers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This methodology is actually quite old.
It takes advantage of the CSS a:visited tag.
Imagine making a:visited have a width of 5 and A have a width of 100.
Drop another element right next to it and then after the page loads, check to see the location of that second element.
Even if the browser attempts to block JS from accessing the style applied to the visited link, it can't keep you from accessing everything else on the page.
Voila, by injecting a lot of links onto the page, you can find out where a person has been.This is particularly dangerous because it can make Phishing very powerful.
Imagine creating a resource that collects email addresses, but on that same page running this script to check the login pages of major banks.
Then, you can send out targeted emails to people who you know have bank accounts at particular providers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557277</id>
	<title>Awesomeness...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246547580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The whole world can see my pr0n and um...blogs....and it totally dosen't crash all mai machinez!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The whole world can see my pr0n and um...blogs....and it totally dose n't crash all mai machinez !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The whole world can see my pr0n and um...blogs....and it totally dosen't crash all mai machinez!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28560975</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246561020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have been on the internet since 1995, and let me state, I couldn't care less if people see what I am browsing.</p><p>The Tin Foil hat Anon-program running people have always amused me. If some person really wants to see what websites I visit, I truely don't care.</p><p>I remember back in 1998 or so when everyone freaked out about Cookies, and I had many friends that made it so their browser would reject any website that tried to set one.</p><p>IMO people freaking out about privacy is just a way for people to feel important.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have been on the internet since 1995 , and let me state , I could n't care less if people see what I am browsing.The Tin Foil hat Anon-program running people have always amused me .
If some person really wants to see what websites I visit , I truely do n't care.I remember back in 1998 or so when everyone freaked out about Cookies , and I had many friends that made it so their browser would reject any website that tried to set one.IMO people freaking out about privacy is just a way for people to feel important .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have been on the internet since 1995, and let me state, I couldn't care less if people see what I am browsing.The Tin Foil hat Anon-program running people have always amused me.
If some person really wants to see what websites I visit, I truely don't care.I remember back in 1998 or so when everyone freaked out about Cookies, and I had many friends that made it so their browser would reject any website that tried to set one.IMO people freaking out about privacy is just a way for people to feel important.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28560989</id>
	<title>Just slashdot?</title>
	<author>eliphas\_levy</author>
	<datestamp>1246561080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mine showed just four slashdot favicons in a square...<br>Should I start to go on other web2.0 websites?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)<br><a href="http://web2.0collage.com/app/;((\%22k\%22\%20.\%20\%22(1014\%205\%2031402284)\%22))" title="0collage.com" rel="nofollow">http://web2.0collage.com/app/;((\%22k\%22\%20.\%20\%22(1014\%205\%2031402284)\%22))</a> [0collage.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mine showed just four slashdot favicons in a square...Should I start to go on other web2.0 websites ?
: ) http : //web2.0collage.com/app/ ; ( ( \ % 22k \ % 22 \ % 20. \ % 20 \ % 22 ( 1014 \ % 205 \ % 2031402284 ) \ % 22 ) ) [ 0collage.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mine showed just four slashdot favicons in a square...Should I start to go on other web2.0 websites?
:)http://web2.0collage.com/app/;((\%22k\%22\%20.\%20\%22(1014\%205\%2031402284)\%22)) [0collage.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557789</id>
	<title>It's pretty obvious</title>
	<author>phantomcircuit</author>
	<datestamp>1246549740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am using Firefox 3.0.11 on Ubuntu 9.04 with a T7500 CPU (Core 2 Duo 2.2 GHz).</p><p> <strong>That site pegged one core of my CPU.</strong> </p><p>Really? That would be damn obvious, not to mention most people would see the slow down and close the browser.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am using Firefox 3.0.11 on Ubuntu 9.04 with a T7500 CPU ( Core 2 Duo 2.2 GHz ) .
That site pegged one core of my CPU .
Really ? That would be damn obvious , not to mention most people would see the slow down and close the browser .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am using Firefox 3.0.11 on Ubuntu 9.04 with a T7500 CPU (Core 2 Duo 2.2 GHz).
That site pegged one core of my CPU.
Really? That would be damn obvious, not to mention most people would see the slow down and close the browser.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1317205_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28558119
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557191
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1317205_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28558563
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557391
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557159
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1317205_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28558227
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557159
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1317205_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28560883
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557641
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557213
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1317205_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557559
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557231
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1317205_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28563759
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557229
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1317205_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557521
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557213
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1317205_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28566261
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557391
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557159
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1317205_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28567525
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557159
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1317205_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557939
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557213
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1317205_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557537
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557231
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1317205_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28568031
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557267
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557159
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1317205_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28563787
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557391
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557159
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1317205_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28561517
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557391
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557159
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1317205_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28561139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557541
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1317205_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557417
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557235
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1317205_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28561307
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557159
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1317205_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557399
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557173
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1317205_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28562649
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557213
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1317205_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28559941
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557159
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1317205_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28561313
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28558629
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557797
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1317205_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28558523
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557235
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1317205_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557615
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557213
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1317205_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557451
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557235
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1317205_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28558591
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557391
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557159
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1317205.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557797
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28558629
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28561313
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1317205.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557341
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1317205.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557789
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1317205.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557159
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28561307
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28567525
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28558227
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557391
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28566261
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28561517
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28563787
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28558563
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28558591
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28559941
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557267
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28568031
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1317205.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557213
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557641
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28560883
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28562649
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557615
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557939
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557521
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1317205.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557541
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28561139
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1317205.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557191
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28558119
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1317205.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557249
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1317205.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557235
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28558523
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557451
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557417
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1317205.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557229
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28563759
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1317205.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557715
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1317205.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557223
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1317205.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557469
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1317205.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557231
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557537
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557559
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1317205.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557141
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1317205.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28558339
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1317205.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28560975
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1317205.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557173
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1317205.28557399
</commentlist>
</conversation>
