<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_07_08_1213222</id>
	<title>Online Attack Hits US Government Web Sites</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1247060580000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.goodgearguide.com.au/" rel="nofollow">angry tapir</a> writes <i>"A botnet composed of about 50,000 infected computers has been <a href="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5icTKBW9\_fm-oKDzns75BI-ykokSwD99A28U01">waging a war against US government Web sites</a> and causing headaches for businesses in the US and South Korea. The attack started Saturday, and security experts have credited it with knocking the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC's) web site offline for <a href="http://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/article/310108/us\_ftc\_web\_site\_down\_Monday">parts of Monday and Tuesday</a>. Several <a href="http://www.goodgearguide.com.au/article/310356/online\_attack\_hits\_us\_government\_web\_sites">other government Web sites have also been targeted</a>, including the Department of Transportation."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>angry tapir writes " A botnet composed of about 50,000 infected computers has been waging a war against US government Web sites and causing headaches for businesses in the US and South Korea .
The attack started Saturday , and security experts have credited it with knocking the Federal Trade Commission 's ( FTC 's ) web site offline for parts of Monday and Tuesday .
Several other government Web sites have also been targeted , including the Department of Transportation .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>angry tapir writes "A botnet composed of about 50,000 infected computers has been waging a war against US government Web sites and causing headaches for businesses in the US and South Korea.
The attack started Saturday, and security experts have credited it with knocking the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC's) web site offline for parts of Monday and Tuesday.
Several other government Web sites have also been targeted, including the Department of Transportation.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621533</id>
	<title>Aiding and abetting?</title>
	<author>starglider29a</author>
	<datestamp>1247065380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Whenever some whacko grabs a gun and kills a bunch of people, the hew and cry is for "gun control". When someone takes a computer and attacks government sites, and other important infrastructural servers, where is the cry for "Computer control?"<br> <br>
Why are people who harbor botnets not as guilty as those who harbor criminal and terrorists? If you let someone use your garage to store gasoline/petrol for Molotov Cocktails, you'd be arrested.<br> <br>
What was the OS and browser of the botnetted collaborators? Wouldn't it be fun if the FBI knocked on the doors of those whose machines were "hijacked*" and brought their computers in for questioning?<br> <br> <br>
*I use the phrase 'hijacked' loosely. If a person leaves the car running, the keys in the ignition and the windows down (pun intended), can they say that their car was 'stolen'?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Whenever some whacko grabs a gun and kills a bunch of people , the hew and cry is for " gun control " .
When someone takes a computer and attacks government sites , and other important infrastructural servers , where is the cry for " Computer control ?
" Why are people who harbor botnets not as guilty as those who harbor criminal and terrorists ?
If you let someone use your garage to store gasoline/petrol for Molotov Cocktails , you 'd be arrested .
What was the OS and browser of the botnetted collaborators ?
Would n't it be fun if the FBI knocked on the doors of those whose machines were " hijacked * " and brought their computers in for questioning ?
* I use the phrase 'hijacked ' loosely .
If a person leaves the car running , the keys in the ignition and the windows down ( pun intended ) , can they say that their car was 'stolen ' ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whenever some whacko grabs a gun and kills a bunch of people, the hew and cry is for "gun control".
When someone takes a computer and attacks government sites, and other important infrastructural servers, where is the cry for "Computer control?
" 
Why are people who harbor botnets not as guilty as those who harbor criminal and terrorists?
If you let someone use your garage to store gasoline/petrol for Molotov Cocktails, you'd be arrested.
What was the OS and browser of the botnetted collaborators?
Wouldn't it be fun if the FBI knocked on the doors of those whose machines were "hijacked*" and brought their computers in for questioning?
*I use the phrase 'hijacked' loosely.
If a person leaves the car running, the keys in the ignition and the windows down (pun intended), can they say that their car was 'stolen'?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28624027</id>
	<title>Re:Internet Sovereignty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247074440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>U.S. and N.K. are still at war, no need to declare a new one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>U.S. and N.K .
are still at war , no need to declare a new one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>U.S. and N.K.
are still at war, no need to declare a new one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621503</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28625517</id>
	<title>Coincidence? 4chan is also down</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247079480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>4chan is also down right now. Coincidence? Or is it part of the same attack? Take out the government websites, and the only website full of enough script kiddies to fight back.</p><p>Or someone is having some good lulz about now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>4chan is also down right now .
Coincidence ? Or is it part of the same attack ?
Take out the government websites , and the only website full of enough script kiddies to fight back.Or someone is having some good lulz about now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>4chan is also down right now.
Coincidence? Or is it part of the same attack?
Take out the government websites, and the only website full of enough script kiddies to fight back.Or someone is having some good lulz about now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622787</id>
	<title>Internet Sanctions</title>
	<author>ground.zero.612</author>
	<datestamp>1247069820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm surprised no one has mentioned this yet, but to me it seems like a perfect solution. Warn a country with an official statement and 24hrs response required. Deploy autonomous cable cutting vehicles, then (if necessary) press the cut cable button at 24:00.01.

If you want your computers to talk to our computers <em>on the network we invented</em>; you get to play by <em>our</em> rules or you <b>don't get to play at all.</b></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm surprised no one has mentioned this yet , but to me it seems like a perfect solution .
Warn a country with an official statement and 24hrs response required .
Deploy autonomous cable cutting vehicles , then ( if necessary ) press the cut cable button at 24 : 00.01 .
If you want your computers to talk to our computers on the network we invented ; you get to play by our rules or you do n't get to play at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm surprised no one has mentioned this yet, but to me it seems like a perfect solution.
Warn a country with an official statement and 24hrs response required.
Deploy autonomous cable cutting vehicles, then (if necessary) press the cut cable button at 24:00.01.
If you want your computers to talk to our computers on the network we invented; you get to play by our rules or you don't get to play at all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621547</id>
	<title>Re:Counter attack</title>
	<author>Rogerborg</author>
	<datestamp>1247065440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do you seriously think that North Korea has any significant systems exposed on public networks?

</p><p>You could probably deface their Wikipedia entry, though.  Go hog wild.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you seriously think that North Korea has any significant systems exposed on public networks ?
You could probably deface their Wikipedia entry , though .
Go hog wild .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you seriously think that North Korea has any significant systems exposed on public networks?
You could probably deface their Wikipedia entry, though.
Go hog wild.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623585</id>
	<title>Apparently it isn't an issue</title>
	<author>bickle</author>
	<datestamp>1247072700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Apparently cyber-warfare isn't an issue, at least <a href="http://it.slashdot.org/story/09/06/24/197241/Pentagon-Confirms-Cyber-Command-Under-NSA-Control?from=rss" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">according to Slashdot commenters a few weeks ago</a> [slashdot.org].</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apparently cyber-warfare is n't an issue , at least according to Slashdot commenters a few weeks ago [ slashdot.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apparently cyber-warfare isn't an issue, at least according to Slashdot commenters a few weeks ago [slashdot.org].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623795</id>
	<title>Re:Counter attack</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247073540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ironically, 4chan is currently being DDoS'd.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ironically , 4chan is currently being DDoS 'd .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ironically, 4chan is currently being DDoS'd.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621689</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622809</id>
	<title>Re:Pull the Gdamn plug!</title>
	<author>kybred</author>
	<datestamp>1247070000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Each of these machines has and IP address which it advertises every time it makes an attack. That's right folks: The return IP address is part of the header. You can't route packets without this information.</p></div><p>Not necessarily. For <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SYN\_flood" title="wikipedia.org">SYN flood</a> [wikipedia.org] the src address can be spoofed, since the attacker doesn't care if he gets the SYN-ACK.</p><p>What the ISPs could do for this is to filter outbound traffic such that if the src IP is not on their network (i.e., is spoofed) the packet is dropped.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Each of these machines has and IP address which it advertises every time it makes an attack .
That 's right folks : The return IP address is part of the header .
You ca n't route packets without this information.Not necessarily .
For SYN flood [ wikipedia.org ] the src address can be spoofed , since the attacker does n't care if he gets the SYN-ACK.What the ISPs could do for this is to filter outbound traffic such that if the src IP is not on their network ( i.e. , is spoofed ) the packet is dropped .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Each of these machines has and IP address which it advertises every time it makes an attack.
That's right folks: The return IP address is part of the header.
You can't route packets without this information.Not necessarily.
For SYN flood [wikipedia.org] the src address can be spoofed, since the attacker doesn't care if he gets the SYN-ACK.What the ISPs could do for this is to filter outbound traffic such that if the src IP is not on their network (i.e., is spoofed) the packet is dropped.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621979</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28643239</id>
	<title>Webserver/vulnerability?</title>
	<author>outer0rb</author>
	<datestamp>1247137980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Any news on which webservers are affected (apache or IIS), and which vulnerability was used in this attack?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Any news on which webservers are affected ( apache or IIS ) , and which vulnerability was used in this attack ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any news on which webservers are affected (apache or IIS), and which vulnerability was used in this attack?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622035</id>
	<title>Re:Counter attack</title>
	<author>gubers33</author>
	<datestamp>1247067300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Someone obviously needs to read my signature again.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Someone obviously needs to read my signature again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Someone obviously needs to read my signature again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28625615</id>
	<title>Re:How do you know they went down?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247079720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good one, now not only are they being attacked by that botnet, but they're getting slashdotted as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good one , now not only are they being attacked by that botnet , but they 're getting slashdotted as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good one, now not only are they being attacked by that botnet, but they're getting slashdotted as well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621939</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622049</id>
	<title>stating the obvious...</title>
	<author>pig-power</author>
	<datestamp>1247067300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Government website?<br>
"and nothing of any value was lost"</htmltext>
<tokenext>Government website ?
" and nothing of any value was lost "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Government website?
"and nothing of any value was lost"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28624059</id>
	<title>Re:blame China</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247074560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>With the limited information available, this could even be the U.S. hitting itself with North Korea as a cover.<br>
Do you need the military to control all networks? Given this new attack, isnt the need obvious?</htmltext>
<tokenext>With the limited information available , this could even be the U.S. hitting itself with North Korea as a cover .
Do you need the military to control all networks ?
Given this new attack , isnt the need obvious ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With the limited information available, this could even be the U.S. hitting itself with North Korea as a cover.
Do you need the military to control all networks?
Given this new attack, isnt the need obvious?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621363</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621653</id>
	<title>Re:blame China</title>
	<author>delt0r</author>
	<datestamp>1247065920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why does it have to be a country. What about some dirty hacker somewhere with nothing more than an axe to grind. Or perhaps he/she just doesn't like getting teased at school.
<br> <br>
Its not fricken national emergency. Its just a botnet attack. Seriously what are the effects? Some website wasn't available all day? Sounds like just another day on the internet...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why does it have to be a country .
What about some dirty hacker somewhere with nothing more than an axe to grind .
Or perhaps he/she just does n't like getting teased at school .
Its not fricken national emergency .
Its just a botnet attack .
Seriously what are the effects ?
Some website was n't available all day ?
Sounds like just another day on the internet.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why does it have to be a country.
What about some dirty hacker somewhere with nothing more than an axe to grind.
Or perhaps he/she just doesn't like getting teased at school.
Its not fricken national emergency.
Its just a botnet attack.
Seriously what are the effects?
Some website wasn't available all day?
Sounds like just another day on the internet...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621363</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621909</id>
	<title>I blame Blizzard</title>
	<author>castironpigeon</author>
	<datestamp>1247066880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Seriously, if SC2 were out already those Asian tweens would have something else to keep them busy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , if SC2 were out already those Asian tweens would have something else to keep them busy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, if SC2 were out already those Asian tweens would have something else to keep them busy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623341</id>
	<title>Re:How do you know they went down?</title>
	<author>biobogonics</author>
	<datestamp>1247071860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i> ftc.gov? Nobody goes to those sites...</i></p><p>I do. It's the home of the National Do Not Call Registry. www.donotcall.gov.</p><p>Also notice that registrations there no longer expire every 5 years!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ftc.gov ?
Nobody goes to those sites...I do .
It 's the home of the National Do Not Call Registry .
www.donotcall.gov.Also notice that registrations there no longer expire every 5 years !</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ftc.gov?
Nobody goes to those sites...I do.
It's the home of the National Do Not Call Registry.
www.donotcall.gov.Also notice that registrations there no longer expire every 5 years!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621939</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621877</id>
	<title>Re:blame China</title>
	<author>Errtu76</author>
	<datestamp>1247066700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well said. And might i add that we in the past used to blame Canada for all that's wrong. With their beady little eyes and flapping heads so full of lies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well said .
And might i add that we in the past used to blame Canada for all that 's wrong .
With their beady little eyes and flapping heads so full of lies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well said.
And might i add that we in the past used to blame Canada for all that's wrong.
With their beady little eyes and flapping heads so full of lies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621363</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28626469</id>
	<title>You are Jew</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247082660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You hate China</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You hate China</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You hate China</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621275</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621433</id>
	<title>Re:Counter attack</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247064900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The best defense is always a good offense. Why not launch an attack on North Korea? We have far more advanced technology and could probably cause more damage to them than they could cause to us. If we are crippling their systems, they won't be able to attack ours. I would love to see our government take off the gloves in the cyber world for a change rather than always invading everyone.</p></div><p>Since they started it, it would only be fair. However, there would definitely be some line about imperialist agression. Still, there's almost no chance they would escalate it to physical conflict. A shot above the bows would be nice for once. It might save us from having to drop the hammer when they finally go too far.</p><p>However, do they have enough internet connected infastructure to be worth hitting?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The best defense is always a good offense .
Why not launch an attack on North Korea ?
We have far more advanced technology and could probably cause more damage to them than they could cause to us .
If we are crippling their systems , they wo n't be able to attack ours .
I would love to see our government take off the gloves in the cyber world for a change rather than always invading everyone.Since they started it , it would only be fair .
However , there would definitely be some line about imperialist agression .
Still , there 's almost no chance they would escalate it to physical conflict .
A shot above the bows would be nice for once .
It might save us from having to drop the hammer when they finally go too far.However , do they have enough internet connected infastructure to be worth hitting ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The best defense is always a good offense.
Why not launch an attack on North Korea?
We have far more advanced technology and could probably cause more damage to them than they could cause to us.
If we are crippling their systems, they won't be able to attack ours.
I would love to see our government take off the gloves in the cyber world for a change rather than always invading everyone.Since they started it, it would only be fair.
However, there would definitely be some line about imperialist agression.
Still, there's almost no chance they would escalate it to physical conflict.
A shot above the bows would be nice for once.
It might save us from having to drop the hammer when they finally go too far.However, do they have enough internet connected infastructure to be worth hitting?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28624525</id>
	<title>Re:blame China</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247076060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Who hates both the US and South Korea?</p></div><p>Democrats</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who hates both the US and South Korea ? Democrats</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who hates both the US and South Korea?Democrats
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621363</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28624449</id>
	<title>Re:Counter attack</title>
	<author>scvalex</author>
	<datestamp>1247075820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The reason the U.S. wouldn't attack North Korea in a cyber war...</p></div><p>Also, there are no computers worth mentioning in North Korea.

Cheers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The reason the U.S. would n't attack North Korea in a cyber war...Also , there are no computers worth mentioning in North Korea .
Cheers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The reason the U.S. wouldn't attack North Korea in a cyber war...Also, there are no computers worth mentioning in North Korea.
Cheers.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621449</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28629885</id>
	<title>Re:Pull the Gdamn plug!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247055960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Really? 50k machines? How long would it take to enter 50k addresses and how much memory would it take?  What about other resources like CPU or even bandwidth?</p></div><p>About 1.5 MB</p><p>How long does it take for you to load a 2 MB file?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Really ?
50k machines ?
How long would it take to enter 50k addresses and how much memory would it take ?
What about other resources like CPU or even bandwidth ? About 1.5 MBHow long does it take for you to load a 2 MB file ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really?
50k machines?
How long would it take to enter 50k addresses and how much memory would it take?
What about other resources like CPU or even bandwidth?About 1.5 MBHow long does it take for you to load a 2 MB file?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28628605</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621809</id>
	<title>Re:blame China</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247066460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>dont be naive. Why would China try to bring NK to the table? They have nothing to gain from that! Of course they pretended, seeing how far the US goes.<br>The NK pressure clearly causes headaches for US, ergo its good for China.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>dont be naive .
Why would China try to bring NK to the table ?
They have nothing to gain from that !
Of course they pretended , seeing how far the US goes.The NK pressure clearly causes headaches for US , ergo its good for China .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>dont be naive.
Why would China try to bring NK to the table?
They have nothing to gain from that!
Of course they pretended, seeing how far the US goes.The NK pressure clearly causes headaches for US, ergo its good for China.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621363</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622347</id>
	<title>Re:Aiding and abetting?</title>
	<author>StillNeedMoreCoffee</author>
	<datestamp>1247068380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes you can say the car was stolen. There are parts of the country that don't lock their doors and leave keys in there ignition. Thats a good thing, it says people are relatively honest in those parts. Should you suddenly be an accomplis a theft if someone steals your car. I think not unless you hand them the key and say steal it. And no leaving your keys in the ignition is Not handing to them, its showing some amount of trust. That justification is a spin done by theives to justify their actions. Well they left the door open so they were handing my their silverware, or she did not have a chastity belt on so its her fault. All that is spin and should be avoided. Computers that come off the shelf in stores should not be hijacked. Consumers should not be responsible for someone coming into their home and stealing use of their computers. Its a crime, and should be thought of as such and systems should be strengthened for protection and investigation and prosecutions done to find and punish this type of crime.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes you can say the car was stolen .
There are parts of the country that do n't lock their doors and leave keys in there ignition .
Thats a good thing , it says people are relatively honest in those parts .
Should you suddenly be an accomplis a theft if someone steals your car .
I think not unless you hand them the key and say steal it .
And no leaving your keys in the ignition is Not handing to them , its showing some amount of trust .
That justification is a spin done by theives to justify their actions .
Well they left the door open so they were handing my their silverware , or she did not have a chastity belt on so its her fault .
All that is spin and should be avoided .
Computers that come off the shelf in stores should not be hijacked .
Consumers should not be responsible for someone coming into their home and stealing use of their computers .
Its a crime , and should be thought of as such and systems should be strengthened for protection and investigation and prosecutions done to find and punish this type of crime .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes you can say the car was stolen.
There are parts of the country that don't lock their doors and leave keys in there ignition.
Thats a good thing, it says people are relatively honest in those parts.
Should you suddenly be an accomplis a theft if someone steals your car.
I think not unless you hand them the key and say steal it.
And no leaving your keys in the ignition is Not handing to them, its showing some amount of trust.
That justification is a spin done by theives to justify their actions.
Well they left the door open so they were handing my their silverware, or she did not have a chastity belt on so its her fault.
All that is spin and should be avoided.
Computers that come off the shelf in stores should not be hijacked.
Consumers should not be responsible for someone coming into their home and stealing use of their computers.
Its a crime, and should be thought of as such and systems should be strengthened for protection and investigation and prosecutions done to find and punish this type of crime.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622579</id>
	<title>Re:blame China</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247069160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Chicoms are not happy with what North Korea is doing. With North Korea getting nuclear weapons, this means that South Korea - and more importantly to the Chicoms - Japan AND TAIWAN will also do the same.</p><p>If hostilities resume, it would mean that China will have to deal with millions of illegal aliens coming from Noth Korea.</p><p>Rastillin (my sibling post), South Korea is much more socialistic than China is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Chicoms are not happy with what North Korea is doing .
With North Korea getting nuclear weapons , this means that South Korea - and more importantly to the Chicoms - Japan AND TAIWAN will also do the same.If hostilities resume , it would mean that China will have to deal with millions of illegal aliens coming from Noth Korea.Rastillin ( my sibling post ) , South Korea is much more socialistic than China is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Chicoms are not happy with what North Korea is doing.
With North Korea getting nuclear weapons, this means that South Korea - and more importantly to the Chicoms - Japan AND TAIWAN will also do the same.If hostilities resume, it would mean that China will have to deal with millions of illegal aliens coming from Noth Korea.Rastillin (my sibling post), South Korea is much more socialistic than China is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621809</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28632619</id>
	<title>Re:Counter attack</title>
	<author>indi0144</author>
	<datestamp>1247077260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>/facepalm<br><br>NK BARELY has any bandwidth, people can get death penalty for owning a PC, what are you going to attack?<br><br>You're 12 and whats this TROLL?  4chan is that way -----&gt;<br><br>BTW I'd blame an awkward Japanese rich guy in his 20's that rented a Botnet in the sumer for the lulz<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... or the archetypal Russian guy who's Advertising his newly harvested botnet. But yeah we NEED to jump and blame every attack against the US to our ENEMIES *TM*, self inflicted 2 minutes of hate anyone.<br><br>Why so easily manipulable and predictable guys?</htmltext>
<tokenext>/facepalmNK BARELY has any bandwidth , people can get death penalty for owning a PC , what are you going to attack ? You 're 12 and whats this TROLL ?
4chan is that way ----- &gt; BTW I 'd blame an awkward Japanese rich guy in his 20 's that rented a Botnet in the sumer for the lulz ... or the archetypal Russian guy who 's Advertising his newly harvested botnet .
But yeah we NEED to jump and blame every attack against the US to our ENEMIES * TM * , self inflicted 2 minutes of hate anyone.Why so easily manipulable and predictable guys ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>/facepalmNK BARELY has any bandwidth, people can get death penalty for owning a PC, what are you going to attack?You're 12 and whats this TROLL?
4chan is that way -----&gt;BTW I'd blame an awkward Japanese rich guy in his 20's that rented a Botnet in the sumer for the lulz ... or the archetypal Russian guy who's Advertising his newly harvested botnet.
But yeah we NEED to jump and blame every attack against the US to our ENEMIES *TM*, self inflicted 2 minutes of hate anyone.Why so easily manipulable and predictable guys?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623095</id>
	<title>Re:Brilliant insight - yet used wrong...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247070900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hence my "theoretically" disclaimer. Perhaps I should have gone into meticulous detail so that it didn't sound like I was advocating a preemptive nuclear strike.</p><p>IF we had evidence that this attack was being led by North Korea AND we had an easy means of disconnecting their access to the net AND we decided to do so because the general populace seems to have almost no access to a free flow of information AND we decided that it would only affect the people attacking our information infrastructure, then I WONDER what might happen after such an act.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hence my " theoretically " disclaimer .
Perhaps I should have gone into meticulous detail so that it did n't sound like I was advocating a preemptive nuclear strike.IF we had evidence that this attack was being led by North Korea AND we had an easy means of disconnecting their access to the net AND we decided to do so because the general populace seems to have almost no access to a free flow of information AND we decided that it would only affect the people attacking our information infrastructure , then I WONDER what might happen after such an act .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hence my "theoretically" disclaimer.
Perhaps I should have gone into meticulous detail so that it didn't sound like I was advocating a preemptive nuclear strike.IF we had evidence that this attack was being led by North Korea AND we had an easy means of disconnecting their access to the net AND we decided to do so because the general populace seems to have almost no access to a free flow of information AND we decided that it would only affect the people attacking our information infrastructure, then I WONDER what might happen after such an act.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622575</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623295</id>
	<title>Re:Internet Sovereignty</title>
	<author>Trent Hawkins</author>
	<datestamp>1247071680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm just curious when or if rules are going to be put up about Internet sovereignty, so that an attack on a website is seen as an act of war.</p></div><p>Then<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. would be a declared enemies of humanity as any link that is posted on it would completely freeze the targeted site (aka, Slashdotted).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm just curious when or if rules are going to be put up about Internet sovereignty , so that an attack on a website is seen as an act of war.Then / .
would be a declared enemies of humanity as any link that is posted on it would completely freeze the targeted site ( aka , Slashdotted ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm just curious when or if rules are going to be put up about Internet sovereignty, so that an attack on a website is seen as an act of war.Then /.
would be a declared enemies of humanity as any link that is posted on it would completely freeze the targeted site (aka, Slashdotted).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621503</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623885</id>
	<title>Re:Counter attack</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247073840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>NC ?<br>Why do we need to bring North Carolina into this<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.... well, OK, but can I have some of OBX after we bomb them into submission?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>NC ? Why do we need to bring North Carolina into this .... well , OK , but can I have some of OBX after we bomb them into submission ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NC ?Why do we need to bring North Carolina into this .... well, OK, but can I have some of OBX after we bomb them into submission?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621537</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621553</id>
	<title>Just thinking theoretically here...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247065500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How much connectivity does NK have? How hard would it be to just cut them off for a day and see if all the attacks cease? It's not like NK wants anyone other than the military to have access to any information anyway. I don't think a severed backbone would inconvenience the general population in the slightest.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How much connectivity does NK have ?
How hard would it be to just cut them off for a day and see if all the attacks cease ?
It 's not like NK wants anyone other than the military to have access to any information anyway .
I do n't think a severed backbone would inconvenience the general population in the slightest .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How much connectivity does NK have?
How hard would it be to just cut them off for a day and see if all the attacks cease?
It's not like NK wants anyone other than the military to have access to any information anyway.
I don't think a severed backbone would inconvenience the general population in the slightest.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28627509</id>
	<title>Re:How do you know they went down?</title>
	<author>david.emery</author>
	<datestamp>1247086740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, in the best tradition of the "dog at midnight" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver\_Blaze), what's most significant are the sites that are NOT reporting problems, including *.mil, dhs.gov and state.gov.  Thus it seems to me that some parts of government have much better/more hardened infrastructures than others.</p><p>A couple of posts below this "Pull the Gdamn plug!" and some of the responses, lay down thoughts on shutting down DDOS attacks.</p><p>My first thought was "OK, was this attack targeted to anything besides WIndows Servers."  My current thought is "what -is- the point of vulnerability for this attack, and why does it seem that some organizations were able to recover better than others?"<br>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , in the best tradition of the " dog at midnight " ( http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver \ _Blaze ) , what 's most significant are the sites that are NOT reporting problems , including * .mil , dhs.gov and state.gov .
Thus it seems to me that some parts of government have much better/more hardened infrastructures than others.A couple of posts below this " Pull the Gdamn plug !
" and some of the responses , lay down thoughts on shutting down DDOS attacks.My first thought was " OK , was this attack targeted to anything besides WIndows Servers .
" My current thought is " what -is- the point of vulnerability for this attack , and why does it seem that some organizations were able to recover better than others ?
"  </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, in the best tradition of the "dog at midnight" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver\_Blaze), what's most significant are the sites that are NOT reporting problems, including *.mil, dhs.gov and state.gov.
Thus it seems to me that some parts of government have much better/more hardened infrastructures than others.A couple of posts below this "Pull the Gdamn plug!
" and some of the responses, lay down thoughts on shutting down DDOS attacks.My first thought was "OK, was this attack targeted to anything besides WIndows Servers.
"  My current thought is "what -is- the point of vulnerability for this attack, and why does it seem that some organizations were able to recover better than others?
"
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621939</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623193</id>
	<title>Re:How do you know they went down?</title>
	<author>SloppySevenths</author>
	<datestamp>1247071260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Honestly, when was the last time you went to <a href="http://www.ftc.gov/" title="ftc.gov" rel="nofollow">ftc.gov</a> [ftc.gov]?  Nobody goes to those sites...</p></div><p>Funny you mention ftc.gov.  If you're running a legal telemarketing business, you probably hit their site on a regular basis to make sure you're in compliance with the do not call list.

For this reason, I happen to like that site a lot.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Honestly , when was the last time you went to ftc.gov [ ftc.gov ] ?
Nobody goes to those sites...Funny you mention ftc.gov .
If you 're running a legal telemarketing business , you probably hit their site on a regular basis to make sure you 're in compliance with the do not call list .
For this reason , I happen to like that site a lot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Honestly, when was the last time you went to ftc.gov [ftc.gov]?
Nobody goes to those sites...Funny you mention ftc.gov.
If you're running a legal telemarketing business, you probably hit their site on a regular basis to make sure you're in compliance with the do not call list.
For this reason, I happen to like that site a lot.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621939</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621743</id>
	<title>US Government websites attacked...</title>
	<author>Chrisq</author>
	<datestamp>1247066160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>US Government websites attacked... but slashdot is OK so what the heck.</htmltext>
<tokenext>US Government websites attacked... but slashdot is OK so what the heck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>US Government websites attacked... but slashdot is OK so what the heck.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622715</id>
	<title>Re:Just thinking theoretically here...</title>
	<author>Sinning</author>
	<datestamp>1247069580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>If they're using a botnet to carry out the attack there is no guarantee that any of the computers are even in NK.  Cutting off NK's connectivity would likely have little to no impact.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If they 're using a botnet to carry out the attack there is no guarantee that any of the computers are even in NK .
Cutting off NK 's connectivity would likely have little to no impact .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they're using a botnet to carry out the attack there is no guarantee that any of the computers are even in NK.
Cutting off NK's connectivity would likely have little to no impact.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621553</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622797</id>
	<title>Re:Aiding and abetting?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247069880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know damned well that this is a Windows botnet running on Windows machines.</p><p>If a person can only buy a car with keyless ignition, no windows or locks can they say that their car was stolen?</p><p>Why isn't Microsoft being held accountable for this sad state of affairs? IE is a joke; I have worked on no less than 6 machines over the past year that were hijacked by simple drive-by downloads, i.e. simply viewing a malicious web-site caused the machine to be infected. All were patched and current.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know damned well that this is a Windows botnet running on Windows machines.If a person can only buy a car with keyless ignition , no windows or locks can they say that their car was stolen ? Why is n't Microsoft being held accountable for this sad state of affairs ?
IE is a joke ; I have worked on no less than 6 machines over the past year that were hijacked by simple drive-by downloads , i.e .
simply viewing a malicious web-site caused the machine to be infected .
All were patched and current .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know damned well that this is a Windows botnet running on Windows machines.If a person can only buy a car with keyless ignition, no windows or locks can they say that their car was stolen?Why isn't Microsoft being held accountable for this sad state of affairs?
IE is a joke; I have worked on no less than 6 machines over the past year that were hijacked by simple drive-by downloads, i.e.
simply viewing a malicious web-site caused the machine to be infected.
All were patched and current.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621683</id>
	<title>Re:Counter attack</title>
	<author>someone1234</author>
	<datestamp>1247066040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's BS.<br>The best defense is invisibility to the possible attacker.</p><p>&gt;We have far more advanced technology...<br>*COUGH*<br>Did you notice, you are being pounded by your own technology?<br>Like in BSG, the least 'advanced' battleship survived the first attack.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's BS.The best defense is invisibility to the possible attacker. &gt; We have far more advanced technology... * COUGH * Did you notice , you are being pounded by your own technology ? Like in BSG , the least 'advanced ' battleship survived the first attack .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's BS.The best defense is invisibility to the possible attacker.&gt;We have far more advanced technology...*COUGH*Did you notice, you are being pounded by your own technology?Like in BSG, the least 'advanced' battleship survived the first attack.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622461</id>
	<title>Re:Pull the Gdamn plug!</title>
	<author>xdor</author>
	<datestamp>1247068740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah, but what if I flood your sight with custom headers that make your little script block mission critical sites?  Your black list would be your own undoing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , but what if I flood your sight with custom headers that make your little script block mission critical sites ?
Your black list would be your own undoing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, but what if I flood your sight with custom headers that make your little script block mission critical sites?
Your black list would be your own undoing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621979</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621697</id>
	<title>Re:Counter attack</title>
	<author>Ogive17</author>
	<datestamp>1247066040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Even if the gov't does nothing there will be some vigilante script kiddies that take up the fight and go after anything related to N. Korea...   even if no proof the attacks originated from there is ever found.<br>
<br>
Of course we could just blame Michael Jackon's funeral for the internet meltdown.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Even if the gov't does nothing there will be some vigilante script kiddies that take up the fight and go after anything related to N. Korea... even if no proof the attacks originated from there is ever found .
Of course we could just blame Michael Jackon 's funeral for the internet meltdown .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even if the gov't does nothing there will be some vigilante script kiddies that take up the fight and go after anything related to N. Korea...   even if no proof the attacks originated from there is ever found.
Of course we could just blame Michael Jackon's funeral for the internet meltdown.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331</id>
	<title>Counter attack</title>
	<author>gubers33</author>
	<datestamp>1247064600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The best defense is always a good offense. Why not launch an attack on North Korea? We have far more advanced technology and could probably cause more damage to them than they could cause to us. If we are crippling their systems, they won't be able to attack ours. I would love to see our government take off the gloves in the cyber world for a change rather than always invading everyone.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The best defense is always a good offense .
Why not launch an attack on North Korea ?
We have far more advanced technology and could probably cause more damage to them than they could cause to us .
If we are crippling their systems , they wo n't be able to attack ours .
I would love to see our government take off the gloves in the cyber world for a change rather than always invading everyone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The best defense is always a good offense.
Why not launch an attack on North Korea?
We have far more advanced technology and could probably cause more damage to them than they could cause to us.
If we are crippling their systems, they won't be able to attack ours.
I would love to see our government take off the gloves in the cyber world for a change rather than always invading everyone.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621727</id>
	<title>Who Cares?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247066100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm sorry, but if this has nothing to do with Michael Jackson, apparently no one cares.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sorry , but if this has nothing to do with Michael Jackson , apparently no one cares .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sorry, but if this has nothing to do with Michael Jackson, apparently no one cares.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28630987</id>
	<title>Re:Pull the Gdamn plug!</title>
	<author>shentino</author>
	<datestamp>1247062680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I assume that only end level providers would do so.  Otherwise it would make it hard as hell to route foreign packets.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I assume that only end level providers would do so .
Otherwise it would make it hard as hell to route foreign packets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I assume that only end level providers would do so.
Otherwise it would make it hard as hell to route foreign packets.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622809</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622045</id>
	<title>Re:Aiding and abetting?</title>
	<author>Marnhinn</author>
	<datestamp>1247067300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, normally I would agree with you hands down, however, I think the issue is that many people are unaware that their computers are being used for malicious purposes.</p><p>Case in point: recently I visited a friend of mine to take a look at his computer.  He was complaining it was running slow.  A quick check showed multiple viruses on his machine.  I asked him how long it had been that way, and his response was, "a few months".</p><p>The thing is, by far and large a significant portion of the population is more than likely unaware of what a botnet is, let alone possess the ability to diagnose when their computer has been infected.  This is quite different then say, a harboring a bomb maker, as most people (hopefully) would be aware that the guy building bombs in their garage is bad news.</p><p>Further, this issue is complicated that the attacks may be motivated politically but carried out by private individuals.  If a connection is found, say possibly even a direct link, how is a government supposed to react.  Does this qualify as an act of war, espionage, or state sponsored terror attack?</p><p>It becomes a sticky issue whenever states are involved, simply due to the politics behind it.  If it was soley an attack on a private enterprise, by some general criminal, I would simply recommend getting the cooperation of the government that is harboring / serving as a base of operations for the person / people behind the botnet and having it resolved that way.  (Now, I do realize that there are many rogue nations or places that are willing to harbor these types of people, so in reality, a different solution is more than likely needed.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , normally I would agree with you hands down , however , I think the issue is that many people are unaware that their computers are being used for malicious purposes.Case in point : recently I visited a friend of mine to take a look at his computer .
He was complaining it was running slow .
A quick check showed multiple viruses on his machine .
I asked him how long it had been that way , and his response was , " a few months " .The thing is , by far and large a significant portion of the population is more than likely unaware of what a botnet is , let alone possess the ability to diagnose when their computer has been infected .
This is quite different then say , a harboring a bomb maker , as most people ( hopefully ) would be aware that the guy building bombs in their garage is bad news.Further , this issue is complicated that the attacks may be motivated politically but carried out by private individuals .
If a connection is found , say possibly even a direct link , how is a government supposed to react .
Does this qualify as an act of war , espionage , or state sponsored terror attack ? It becomes a sticky issue whenever states are involved , simply due to the politics behind it .
If it was soley an attack on a private enterprise , by some general criminal , I would simply recommend getting the cooperation of the government that is harboring / serving as a base of operations for the person / people behind the botnet and having it resolved that way .
( Now , I do realize that there are many rogue nations or places that are willing to harbor these types of people , so in reality , a different solution is more than likely needed .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, normally I would agree with you hands down, however, I think the issue is that many people are unaware that their computers are being used for malicious purposes.Case in point: recently I visited a friend of mine to take a look at his computer.
He was complaining it was running slow.
A quick check showed multiple viruses on his machine.
I asked him how long it had been that way, and his response was, "a few months".The thing is, by far and large a significant portion of the population is more than likely unaware of what a botnet is, let alone possess the ability to diagnose when their computer has been infected.
This is quite different then say, a harboring a bomb maker, as most people (hopefully) would be aware that the guy building bombs in their garage is bad news.Further, this issue is complicated that the attacks may be motivated politically but carried out by private individuals.
If a connection is found, say possibly even a direct link, how is a government supposed to react.
Does this qualify as an act of war, espionage, or state sponsored terror attack?It becomes a sticky issue whenever states are involved, simply due to the politics behind it.
If it was soley an attack on a private enterprise, by some general criminal, I would simply recommend getting the cooperation of the government that is harboring / serving as a base of operations for the person / people behind the botnet and having it resolved that way.
(Now, I do realize that there are many rogue nations or places that are willing to harbor these types of people, so in reality, a different solution is more than likely needed.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28627255</id>
	<title>Re:How do you know they went down?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247085540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I submitted several telemarketers to www.donotcall.gov without any problems at all yesterday, so if there's a CYBERATTACK! going on, it's not having much of an effect.  I think there's actually no attack happening at all, and it's just a lame PR stunt by some pentagon guy fishing for some money for his pet ANTI-CYBERATTACK! project.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I submitted several telemarketers to www.donotcall.gov without any problems at all yesterday , so if there 's a CYBERATTACK !
going on , it 's not having much of an effect .
I think there 's actually no attack happening at all , and it 's just a lame PR stunt by some pentagon guy fishing for some money for his pet ANTI-CYBERATTACK !
project .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I submitted several telemarketers to www.donotcall.gov without any problems at all yesterday, so if there's a CYBERATTACK!
going on, it's not having much of an effect.
I think there's actually no attack happening at all, and it's just a lame PR stunt by some pentagon guy fishing for some money for his pet ANTI-CYBERATTACK!
project.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621939</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28624951</id>
	<title>I saw... its thoughts. I saw what they're planning</title>
	<author>levicivita</author>
	<datestamp>1247077440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I saw... its thoughts. I saw what they're planning to do. They're like locusts. They're moving from planet to planet... their whole civilization. After they've consumed every natural resource they move on... and we're next. Nuke 'em. Let's nuke the bastards.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I saw... its thoughts .
I saw what they 're planning to do .
They 're like locusts .
They 're moving from planet to planet... their whole civilization .
After they 've consumed every natural resource they move on... and we 're next .
Nuke 'em .
Let 's nuke the bastards .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I saw... its thoughts.
I saw what they're planning to do.
They're like locusts.
They're moving from planet to planet... their whole civilization.
After they've consumed every natural resource they move on... and we're next.
Nuke 'em.
Let's nuke the bastards.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621449</id>
	<title>Re:Counter attack</title>
	<author>sheehaje</author>
	<datestamp>1247065020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The reason the U.S. wouldn't attack North Korea in a cyber war is the same reason we wouldn't attack Iran.  The internet is a far more powerful tool when it is use to sway opinion than it is to cripple systems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The reason the U.S. would n't attack North Korea in a cyber war is the same reason we would n't attack Iran .
The internet is a far more powerful tool when it is use to sway opinion than it is to cripple systems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The reason the U.S. wouldn't attack North Korea in a cyber war is the same reason we wouldn't attack Iran.
The internet is a far more powerful tool when it is use to sway opinion than it is to cripple systems.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621873</id>
	<title>Irresponsible</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247066700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As suspicious as North Korea may be, with this incident, there is no proof that they are the culprits. Assuming that North Korea is behind it and acting accordingly could have disastrous results even if they are right. (Also see: Intensifying the conflict much)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As suspicious as North Korea may be , with this incident , there is no proof that they are the culprits .
Assuming that North Korea is behind it and acting accordingly could have disastrous results even if they are right .
( Also see : Intensifying the conflict much )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As suspicious as North Korea may be, with this incident, there is no proof that they are the culprits.
Assuming that North Korea is behind it and acting accordingly could have disastrous results even if they are right.
(Also see: Intensifying the conflict much)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621971</id>
	<title>Down for Maintenance</title>
	<author>xdor</author>
	<datestamp>1247067060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Its the July 4th weekend.  They were probably down for maintenance and it took longer than expected.
<br>
What would you tell your PHB?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Its the July 4th weekend .
They were probably down for maintenance and it took longer than expected .
What would you tell your PHB ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its the July 4th weekend.
They were probably down for maintenance and it took longer than expected.
What would you tell your PHB?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28626441</id>
	<title>Re:blame China</title>
	<author>0x537461746943</author>
	<datestamp>1247082540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>At the same time though... South Korea could just be thrown in the the mix just to confuse the issue of who is doing it.  It is fairly easy to get people to place blame based on who is affected by something.

We can not place blame based just on who is affected by something.</htmltext>
<tokenext>At the same time though... South Korea could just be thrown in the the mix just to confuse the issue of who is doing it .
It is fairly easy to get people to place blame based on who is affected by something .
We can not place blame based just on who is affected by something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At the same time though... South Korea could just be thrown in the the mix just to confuse the issue of who is doing it.
It is fairly easy to get people to place blame based on who is affected by something.
We can not place blame based just on who is affected by something.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621363</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621475</id>
	<title>Intensifying the conflict much?</title>
	<author>Vernes</author>
	<datestamp>1247065140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Every reaction will result in a counterreaction.
And with each itteration, things enhance.

Now it is some group of assholes.
When you take this cyber asshattery into the realm of militairy warfare, you can nolonger stick it undert the label of web-security, it becomes a... war activity.
Who would you attack? The zombied systems?
Or just govermental systems of a nation who you PRESUME to be responsible for the attack?

And then the counter attack is made officially by the USA militairy, not an anonymous group.

Nobody wins... except the asshats behind the original attack.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Every reaction will result in a counterreaction .
And with each itteration , things enhance .
Now it is some group of assholes .
When you take this cyber asshattery into the realm of militairy warfare , you can nolonger stick it undert the label of web-security , it becomes a... war activity .
Who would you attack ?
The zombied systems ?
Or just govermental systems of a nation who you PRESUME to be responsible for the attack ?
And then the counter attack is made officially by the USA militairy , not an anonymous group .
Nobody wins... except the asshats behind the original attack .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Every reaction will result in a counterreaction.
And with each itteration, things enhance.
Now it is some group of assholes.
When you take this cyber asshattery into the realm of militairy warfare, you can nolonger stick it undert the label of web-security, it becomes a... war activity.
Who would you attack?
The zombied systems?
Or just govermental systems of a nation who you PRESUME to be responsible for the attack?
And then the counter attack is made officially by the USA militairy, not an anonymous group.
Nobody wins... except the asshats behind the original attack.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621979</id>
	<title>Pull the Gdamn plug!</title>
	<author>cdn-programmer</author>
	<datestamp>1247067120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All that is required is to pull the damn plug on these bots.  Each of these machines has and IP address which it advertises every time it makes an attack.  That's right folks:  The return IP address is part of the header.  You can't route packets without this information.</p><p>These feral packets \_ALSO\_ come into the ISP's routers.  It is easy to identify them.  Uninfected machines don't normally sit there and hammer away at port Blah.  Some of the worst ports are 80 (html), 25 (mail) and 22 (SSH).</p><p>One really needs to only look at the ports that the botnet tries to exploit.</p><p>A simple solution is to pull the plug.  A solution which is slightly more difficult is to block the ports the botnet is trying to attack on and then redirect any web access to a banner page advising the owner their machine is cracked and what to do about it... or a tech could phone the client.</p><p>\_any\_ ISP can do this.  If they don't do it then they don't want to.  As for consumer rights - crap!  Its the ISP's which write the Terms of Service.  They can put pretty much any terms they want providing said terms are considered reasonable.  The public will probably not object.  Spammers might however but then who cares if they can't find an uplink.</p><p>So the first place to start is at the ISP level.</p><p>Next:  I've blocked botnets of more than 50,000 machines.  I use OpenBSD on the webservers and on the firewalls.  Its not that hard to do.  Pf can easily handle this.  If the server admins over at the "US Government Web Sites"  can't handle this then IMHO they are incompetent.  If reference, here is an example of how to block these bots in PF:</p><p>
&nbsp; pfctl -t spammers -T add 190.174.220.241<br>
&nbsp; pfctl -t spammers -T add 67.10.200.220<br>
&nbsp; pfctl -t spammers -T add 125.161.37.199<br>
&nbsp; pfctl -t spammers -T add 71.218.209.198<br>
&nbsp; pfctl -t spammers -T add 202.28.120.19</p><p>This is a shell script BTW.  extracting the list of bots can be done by scanning the appropriate logs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All that is required is to pull the damn plug on these bots .
Each of these machines has and IP address which it advertises every time it makes an attack .
That 's right folks : The return IP address is part of the header .
You ca n't route packets without this information.These feral packets \ _ALSO \ _ come into the ISP 's routers .
It is easy to identify them .
Uninfected machines do n't normally sit there and hammer away at port Blah .
Some of the worst ports are 80 ( html ) , 25 ( mail ) and 22 ( SSH ) .One really needs to only look at the ports that the botnet tries to exploit.A simple solution is to pull the plug .
A solution which is slightly more difficult is to block the ports the botnet is trying to attack on and then redirect any web access to a banner page advising the owner their machine is cracked and what to do about it... or a tech could phone the client. \ _any \ _ ISP can do this .
If they do n't do it then they do n't want to .
As for consumer rights - crap !
Its the ISP 's which write the Terms of Service .
They can put pretty much any terms they want providing said terms are considered reasonable .
The public will probably not object .
Spammers might however but then who cares if they ca n't find an uplink.So the first place to start is at the ISP level.Next : I 've blocked botnets of more than 50,000 machines .
I use OpenBSD on the webservers and on the firewalls .
Its not that hard to do .
Pf can easily handle this .
If the server admins over at the " US Government Web Sites " ca n't handle this then IMHO they are incompetent .
If reference , here is an example of how to block these bots in PF :   pfctl -t spammers -T add 190.174.220.241   pfctl -t spammers -T add 67.10.200.220   pfctl -t spammers -T add 125.161.37.199   pfctl -t spammers -T add 71.218.209.198   pfctl -t spammers -T add 202.28.120.19This is a shell script BTW .
extracting the list of bots can be done by scanning the appropriate logs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All that is required is to pull the damn plug on these bots.
Each of these machines has and IP address which it advertises every time it makes an attack.
That's right folks:  The return IP address is part of the header.
You can't route packets without this information.These feral packets \_ALSO\_ come into the ISP's routers.
It is easy to identify them.
Uninfected machines don't normally sit there and hammer away at port Blah.
Some of the worst ports are 80 (html), 25 (mail) and 22 (SSH).One really needs to only look at the ports that the botnet tries to exploit.A simple solution is to pull the plug.
A solution which is slightly more difficult is to block the ports the botnet is trying to attack on and then redirect any web access to a banner page advising the owner their machine is cracked and what to do about it... or a tech could phone the client.\_any\_ ISP can do this.
If they don't do it then they don't want to.
As for consumer rights - crap!
Its the ISP's which write the Terms of Service.
They can put pretty much any terms they want providing said terms are considered reasonable.
The public will probably not object.
Spammers might however but then who cares if they can't find an uplink.So the first place to start is at the ISP level.Next:  I've blocked botnets of more than 50,000 machines.
I use OpenBSD on the webservers and on the firewalls.
Its not that hard to do.
Pf can easily handle this.
If the server admins over at the "US Government Web Sites"  can't handle this then IMHO they are incompetent.
If reference, here is an example of how to block these bots in PF:
  pfctl -t spammers -T add 190.174.220.241
  pfctl -t spammers -T add 67.10.200.220
  pfctl -t spammers -T add 125.161.37.199
  pfctl -t spammers -T add 71.218.209.198
  pfctl -t spammers -T add 202.28.120.19This is a shell script BTW.
extracting the list of bots can be done by scanning the appropriate logs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622437</id>
	<title>Shit....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247068680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sorry about the attack guys, tripped on a bag of dorrities and hit the wrong button. My bad.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry about the attack guys , tripped on a bag of dorrities and hit the wrong button .
My bad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry about the attack guys, tripped on a bag of dorrities and hit the wrong button.
My bad.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621645</id>
	<title>Re:Internet Sovereignty</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1247065920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's actually an interesting brain teaser. On so many levels.</p><p>First, nothing's more trivial than to frame someone in such an attack. The computers participating are usually bots, the server is often a hacked box as well (and if not, you can rent one for little money), it's nothing you could easily trace to the source.</p><p>Second, will people understand why they should fight and possibly die for a virtual attack, people who don't use a computer and don't know the importance of the internet to modern commerce and military? Would your soldiers understand why they should fight a war so a few geeks can enjoy their net?</p><p>And let's ignore the ignorance in our political bodies about that matter, or it crosses into the surreal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's actually an interesting brain teaser .
On so many levels.First , nothing 's more trivial than to frame someone in such an attack .
The computers participating are usually bots , the server is often a hacked box as well ( and if not , you can rent one for little money ) , it 's nothing you could easily trace to the source.Second , will people understand why they should fight and possibly die for a virtual attack , people who do n't use a computer and do n't know the importance of the internet to modern commerce and military ?
Would your soldiers understand why they should fight a war so a few geeks can enjoy their net ? And let 's ignore the ignorance in our political bodies about that matter , or it crosses into the surreal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's actually an interesting brain teaser.
On so many levels.First, nothing's more trivial than to frame someone in such an attack.
The computers participating are usually bots, the server is often a hacked box as well (and if not, you can rent one for little money), it's nothing you could easily trace to the source.Second, will people understand why they should fight and possibly die for a virtual attack, people who don't use a computer and don't know the importance of the internet to modern commerce and military?
Would your soldiers understand why they should fight a war so a few geeks can enjoy their net?And let's ignore the ignorance in our political bodies about that matter, or it crosses into the surreal.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621503</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623985</id>
	<title>Re:Who Cares?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247074260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why in the hell was this modded insightful as opposed to funny?</p><p>Seriously... think before you moderate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why in the hell was this modded insightful as opposed to funny ? Seriously... think before you moderate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why in the hell was this modded insightful as opposed to funny?Seriously... think before you moderate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621727</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623533</id>
	<title>Re:Intensifying the conflict much?</title>
	<author>ConceptJunkie</author>
	<datestamp>1247072520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're right.  The real enemy here is Microsoft!  If we stopped Windows, we would stop the attacks.  I think we should send the military to liberate Redmond.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're right .
The real enemy here is Microsoft !
If we stopped Windows , we would stop the attacks .
I think we should send the military to liberate Redmond .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're right.
The real enemy here is Microsoft!
If we stopped Windows, we would stop the attacks.
I think we should send the military to liberate Redmond.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621475</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621621</id>
	<title>South Park Obligatory</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247065860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>US General:  Bring me Bill Gates</p><p>(Bill Gates walks in)</p><p>US General: YOU TOLD US WINDOWS WOULD BE FASTER AND MORE SECURE WITH BETTER ACCESS TO THE   INTERNET!!!</p><p>Bill Gates: It is more secure, over five million ti</p><p>(US General pulls out a gun and shoots him in the head. Gates falls to the floor, dead)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>US General : Bring me Bill Gates ( Bill Gates walks in ) US General : YOU TOLD US WINDOWS WOULD BE FASTER AND MORE SECURE WITH BETTER ACCESS TO THE INTERNET ! !
! Bill Gates : It is more secure , over five million ti ( US General pulls out a gun and shoots him in the head .
Gates falls to the floor , dead )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>US General:  Bring me Bill Gates(Bill Gates walks in)US General: YOU TOLD US WINDOWS WOULD BE FASTER AND MORE SECURE WITH BETTER ACCESS TO THE   INTERNET!!
!Bill Gates: It is more secure, over five million ti(US General pulls out a gun and shoots him in the head.
Gates falls to the floor, dead)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621835</id>
	<title>Re:blame China</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247066520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Let's not. See what offends me about this whole thing is that it's so obivious. If they'd just targeted America, it could have been anyone. But 'whoever' it was had to go and hit South Korea too, at the same time. Who hates both the US and South Korea?</p></div><p>It could be  the Martians.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's not .
See what offends me about this whole thing is that it 's so obivious .
If they 'd just targeted America , it could have been anyone .
But 'whoever ' it was had to go and hit South Korea too , at the same time .
Who hates both the US and South Korea ? It could be the Martians .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's not.
See what offends me about this whole thing is that it's so obivious.
If they'd just targeted America, it could have been anyone.
But 'whoever' it was had to go and hit South Korea too, at the same time.
Who hates both the US and South Korea?It could be  the Martians.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621363</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622769</id>
	<title>Who hates both the US and South Korea?</title>
	<author>denzacar</author>
	<datestamp>1247069760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Japan.</p><p>Granted, Japan from 60-70 years ago but still...<br>How would USA feel about someone dropping not one, but two nukes on them AND robbing them of say... Texas (Korea)?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Japan.Granted , Japan from 60-70 years ago but still...How would USA feel about someone dropping not one , but two nukes on them AND robbing them of say... Texas ( Korea ) ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Japan.Granted, Japan from 60-70 years ago but still...How would USA feel about someone dropping not one, but two nukes on them AND robbing them of say... Texas (Korea)?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621363</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621447</id>
	<title>Re:Counter attack</title>
	<author>GeorgeStone22</author>
	<datestamp>1247065020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I had a dream last night where I was on an island, but it was actually North Korea.
A great big US ship pulled up to it with a Saturn 5 rocket on the deck.
Then NK shot 2 little artillery shells at the ship, they missed, but then the Saturn 5 launched and hit the island, to which it caused a nuclear explosion for some reason.
Then me and my friends ran away from the blast, I hid behind a rock and my leg got burned a bit.

Funny since the dream started with me driving a Ferrari.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I had a dream last night where I was on an island , but it was actually North Korea .
A great big US ship pulled up to it with a Saturn 5 rocket on the deck .
Then NK shot 2 little artillery shells at the ship , they missed , but then the Saturn 5 launched and hit the island , to which it caused a nuclear explosion for some reason .
Then me and my friends ran away from the blast , I hid behind a rock and my leg got burned a bit .
Funny since the dream started with me driving a Ferrari .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had a dream last night where I was on an island, but it was actually North Korea.
A great big US ship pulled up to it with a Saturn 5 rocket on the deck.
Then NK shot 2 little artillery shells at the ship, they missed, but then the Saturn 5 launched and hit the island, to which it caused a nuclear explosion for some reason.
Then me and my friends ran away from the blast, I hid behind a rock and my leg got burned a bit.
Funny since the dream started with me driving a Ferrari.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622575</id>
	<title>Brilliant insight - yet used wrong...</title>
	<author>denzacar</author>
	<datestamp>1247069160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What on Earth gave you the idea that it was North Korea that did it?<br>As you have so insightfully put it "How much connectivity does NK have?".</p><p>Japan on the other hand has a lot more connectivity, and a huge bone to pick with both US and SC.<br>Or how about China? India? Germany? Vatican?</p><p>Even if the botnet CAME from a particular country, with each attack being accompanied by spamming of the mailboxes around the world with the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.mp3s of the national anthem of the particular country - that is still NOT EVIDENCE that said country had anything to do with it.<br>It could all be work of a drunk Australian hacker for all we know.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What on Earth gave you the idea that it was North Korea that did it ? As you have so insightfully put it " How much connectivity does NK have ?
" .Japan on the other hand has a lot more connectivity , and a huge bone to pick with both US and SC.Or how about China ?
India ? Germany ?
Vatican ? Even if the botnet CAME from a particular country , with each attack being accompanied by spamming of the mailboxes around the world with the .mp3s of the national anthem of the particular country - that is still NOT EVIDENCE that said country had anything to do with it.It could all be work of a drunk Australian hacker for all we know .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What on Earth gave you the idea that it was North Korea that did it?As you have so insightfully put it "How much connectivity does NK have?
".Japan on the other hand has a lot more connectivity, and a huge bone to pick with both US and SC.Or how about China?
India? Germany?
Vatican?Even if the botnet CAME from a particular country, with each attack being accompanied by spamming of the mailboxes around the world with the .mp3s of the national anthem of the particular country - that is still NOT EVIDENCE that said country had anything to do with it.It could all be work of a drunk Australian hacker for all we know.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621553</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621537</id>
	<title>Re:Counter attack</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1247065440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can't really win that war.</p><p>If you want to wage a "real" war for a "virtual" one, you can't win. Hell, NC is so beaten up, any bomb you drop there would only increase land value due to the increase of resources, whatever you might want to bomb is worth less than the bomb you drop on it.</p><p>And staying in virtual land... now, what virtual targets of NC do exist, anyway?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You ca n't really win that war.If you want to wage a " real " war for a " virtual " one , you ca n't win .
Hell , NC is so beaten up , any bomb you drop there would only increase land value due to the increase of resources , whatever you might want to bomb is worth less than the bomb you drop on it.And staying in virtual land... now , what virtual targets of NC do exist , anyway ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can't really win that war.If you want to wage a "real" war for a "virtual" one, you can't win.
Hell, NC is so beaten up, any bomb you drop there would only increase land value due to the increase of resources, whatever you might want to bomb is worth less than the bomb you drop on it.And staying in virtual land... now, what virtual targets of NC do exist, anyway?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28628605</id>
	<title>Re:Pull the Gdamn plug!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247048880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Really? 50k machines? How long would it take to enter 50k addresses and how much memory would it take?  What about other resources like CPU or even bandwidth?</p><p>Oh, and what happens when the next botnet comes with 150k machines?  And the next one?</p><p>I'm not saying it isn't possible, just that it isn't easy and not always feasible.  Calling admins incompetent because they can't handle this with static access lists only tells me you don't deal with this sort of thing very often.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Really ?
50k machines ?
How long would it take to enter 50k addresses and how much memory would it take ?
What about other resources like CPU or even bandwidth ? Oh , and what happens when the next botnet comes with 150k machines ?
And the next one ? I 'm not saying it is n't possible , just that it is n't easy and not always feasible .
Calling admins incompetent because they ca n't handle this with static access lists only tells me you do n't deal with this sort of thing very often .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really?
50k machines?
How long would it take to enter 50k addresses and how much memory would it take?
What about other resources like CPU or even bandwidth?Oh, and what happens when the next botnet comes with 150k machines?
And the next one?I'm not saying it isn't possible, just that it isn't easy and not always feasible.
Calling admins incompetent because they can't handle this with static access lists only tells me you don't deal with this sort of thing very often.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621979</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621811</id>
	<title>Re:Aiding and abetting?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247066460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>*I use the phrase 'hijacked' loosely. If a person leaves the car running, the keys in the ignition and the windows down (pun intended), can they say that their car was 'stolen'?</p></div><p>Yes, that person can still say their car was stolen. Regardless of what condition it is left in, if my car is in my garage one minute and it isn't the next, it was stolen, even if I left it on.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>* I use the phrase 'hijacked ' loosely .
If a person leaves the car running , the keys in the ignition and the windows down ( pun intended ) , can they say that their car was 'stolen ' ? Yes , that person can still say their car was stolen .
Regardless of what condition it is left in , if my car is in my garage one minute and it is n't the next , it was stolen , even if I left it on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>*I use the phrase 'hijacked' loosely.
If a person leaves the car running, the keys in the ignition and the windows down (pun intended), can they say that their car was 'stolen'?Yes, that person can still say their car was stolen.
Regardless of what condition it is left in, if my car is in my garage one minute and it isn't the next, it was stolen, even if I left it on.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621275</id>
	<title>blame China</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247064360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ok let's blame China now for this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ok let 's blame China now for this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ok let's blame China now for this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623677</id>
	<title>No reason to attack</title>
	<author>wsanders</author>
	<datestamp>1247073060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Any<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. user could personally swamp North Korea's 56k leased line and their rack full of diesel-powered Pentium II boxes. For the US or China, it's not worth the trouble.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Any / .
user could personally swamp North Korea 's 56k leased line and their rack full of diesel-powered Pentium II boxes .
For the US or China , it 's not worth the trouble .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any /.
user could personally swamp North Korea's 56k leased line and their rack full of diesel-powered Pentium II boxes.
For the US or China, it's not worth the trouble.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621449</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621887</id>
	<title>Official North Korean Reply -</title>
	<author>Phizzle</author>
	<datestamp>1247066760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><b>These aren't the bots you are looking for. You can go about your business</b></htmltext>
<tokenext>These are n't the bots you are looking for .
You can go about your business</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These aren't the bots you are looking for.
You can go about your business</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622899</id>
	<title>Re:Internet Sovereignty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247070180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The false flag potential would be unbelievably damaging. Botnets = attack from the country of the compromised machine?! You need to start thinking a little harder.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The false flag potential would be unbelievably damaging .
Botnets = attack from the country of the compromised machine ? !
You need to start thinking a little harder .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The false flag potential would be unbelievably damaging.
Botnets = attack from the country of the compromised machine?!
You need to start thinking a little harder.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621503</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623639</id>
	<title>Re:How do you know they went down?</title>
	<author>skeeto</author>
	<datestamp>1247072940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Honestly, when was the last time you went to ftc.gov?</p></div><p>I send people <a href="http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/credit/cre04.shtm" title="ftc.gov">here</a> [ftc.gov] all the time to point out credit card misconceptions.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Honestly , when was the last time you went to ftc.gov ? I send people here [ ftc.gov ] all the time to point out credit card misconceptions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Honestly, when was the last time you went to ftc.gov?I send people here [ftc.gov] all the time to point out credit card misconceptions.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621939</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621503</id>
	<title>Internet Sovereignty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247065260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm just curious when or if rules are going to be put up about Internet sovereignty, so that an attack on a website is seen as an act of war.<br> <br>

I can totally see a situation where a US gov't website or economic hub (e.g. stock exchange servers) would get hit by a series of computers based out of N. Korea, the US declares war on N. Korea for violating US internet sovereignty, and the whole thing was a setup by a third party looking to create and exploit a power vacuum.<br> <br>

Maybe I've been reading too many NetForce novels, but the whole idea scares me, and I have the feeling that most people in America wouldn't understand why... particularly the people who make the laws about this kind of thing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm just curious when or if rules are going to be put up about Internet sovereignty , so that an attack on a website is seen as an act of war .
I can totally see a situation where a US gov't website or economic hub ( e.g .
stock exchange servers ) would get hit by a series of computers based out of N. Korea , the US declares war on N. Korea for violating US internet sovereignty , and the whole thing was a setup by a third party looking to create and exploit a power vacuum .
Maybe I 've been reading too many NetForce novels , but the whole idea scares me , and I have the feeling that most people in America would n't understand why... particularly the people who make the laws about this kind of thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm just curious when or if rules are going to be put up about Internet sovereignty, so that an attack on a website is seen as an act of war.
I can totally see a situation where a US gov't website or economic hub (e.g.
stock exchange servers) would get hit by a series of computers based out of N. Korea, the US declares war on N. Korea for violating US internet sovereignty, and the whole thing was a setup by a third party looking to create and exploit a power vacuum.
Maybe I've been reading too many NetForce novels, but the whole idea scares me, and I have the feeling that most people in America wouldn't understand why... particularly the people who make the laws about this kind of thing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623457</id>
	<title>Re:Pull the Gdamn plug!</title>
	<author>shentino</author>
	<datestamp>1247072280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>IP spoof much?</htmltext>
<tokenext>IP spoof much ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IP spoof much?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621979</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28624773</id>
	<title>Re:Pull the Gdamn plug!</title>
	<author>tunapez</author>
	<datestamp>1247076900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What the ISPs could do for this is to filter outbound traffic such that if the src IP is not on their network (i.e., is spoofed) the packet is dropped.</p></div><p>This should have been a day 1 rule. Why else do we have headers?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... it's not b/c they're an interesting read. The wild, wild west BS has gotten old. Teh powers that be will wait until a disaster and we beg for a new sheriff, then we will get eDHS and something more egregious and intrusive than FISA.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What the ISPs could do for this is to filter outbound traffic such that if the src IP is not on their network ( i.e. , is spoofed ) the packet is dropped.This should have been a day 1 rule .
Why else do we have headers ?
... it 's not b/c they 're an interesting read .
The wild , wild west BS has gotten old .
Teh powers that be will wait until a disaster and we beg for a new sheriff , then we will get eDHS and something more egregious and intrusive than FISA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What the ISPs could do for this is to filter outbound traffic such that if the src IP is not on their network (i.e., is spoofed) the packet is dropped.This should have been a day 1 rule.
Why else do we have headers?
... it's not b/c they're an interesting read.
The wild, wild west BS has gotten old.
Teh powers that be will wait until a disaster and we beg for a new sheriff, then we will get eDHS and something more egregious and intrusive than FISA.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622809</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28628227</id>
	<title>Re:Internet Sovereignty</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1247046900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I could see it going fully virtual. N. Korea attacks<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.gov servers, you get a notice from the DoD that your computer has been drafted to fight in the war, slamming N.Korea's routers with a DDOS.</p><p>Next they hit the middle schools offering various awards to the kiddez who hack N. Korean websites.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I could see it going fully virtual .
N. Korea attacks .gov servers , you get a notice from the DoD that your computer has been drafted to fight in the war , slamming N.Korea 's routers with a DDOS.Next they hit the middle schools offering various awards to the kiddez who hack N. Korean websites .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I could see it going fully virtual.
N. Korea attacks .gov servers, you get a notice from the DoD that your computer has been drafted to fight in the war, slamming N.Korea's routers with a DDOS.Next they hit the middle schools offering various awards to the kiddez who hack N. Korean websites.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621645</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28625473</id>
	<title>Re:Counter attack</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1247079300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Attention mods: "Troll" does NOT mean "I disagree with this post." Even though I personall disagree with the parent, it is NOT a troll and should be modded to at least where it was before some asshat modded it down.</p><p>This (my) comment is offtopic and should be modded as such. God, I miss meaningful metamoderation, there used to be far less of this crap.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Attention mods : " Troll " does NOT mean " I disagree with this post .
" Even though I personall disagree with the parent , it is NOT a troll and should be modded to at least where it was before some asshat modded it down.This ( my ) comment is offtopic and should be modded as such .
God , I miss meaningful metamoderation , there used to be far less of this crap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Attention mods: "Troll" does NOT mean "I disagree with this post.
" Even though I personall disagree with the parent, it is NOT a troll and should be modded to at least where it was before some asshat modded it down.This (my) comment is offtopic and should be modded as such.
God, I miss meaningful metamoderation, there used to be far less of this crap.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622793</id>
	<title>Re:Just thinking theoretically here...</title>
	<author>dimension6</author>
	<datestamp>1247069880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was thinking the same thing, but considering NK's lengthy border with China and shorter one with Russia, the odds of cutting all the cables (let alone getting permission from China and Russia!) are slim.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was thinking the same thing , but considering NK 's lengthy border with China and shorter one with Russia , the odds of cutting all the cables ( let alone getting permission from China and Russia !
) are slim .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was thinking the same thing, but considering NK's lengthy border with China and shorter one with Russia, the odds of cutting all the cables (let alone getting permission from China and Russia!
) are slim.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621553</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623433</id>
	<title>Re:Pull the Gdamn plug!</title>
	<author>The Moof</author>
	<datestamp>1247072160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This is a shell script BTW. extracting the list of bots can be done by scanning the appropriate logs.</p></div><p>You can do the same via PF's built in features.  Search the FAQ/man pages for the stateful tracking options.  It's got several options to restrict/limit the connections per address and lets you start dumping offending addresses into a table automatically.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a shell script BTW .
extracting the list of bots can be done by scanning the appropriate logs.You can do the same via PF 's built in features .
Search the FAQ/man pages for the stateful tracking options .
It 's got several options to restrict/limit the connections per address and lets you start dumping offending addresses into a table automatically .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a shell script BTW.
extracting the list of bots can be done by scanning the appropriate logs.You can do the same via PF's built in features.
Search the FAQ/man pages for the stateful tracking options.
It's got several options to restrict/limit the connections per address and lets you start dumping offending addresses into a table automatically.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621979</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28625191</id>
	<title>Re:blame China</title>
	<author>farble1670</author>
	<datestamp>1247078280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>china gains by stressing it's enemies. assuming they consider the US an enemy, raising tensiosn with n. korea destabilizes the US because it's already up to it's neck in afghanistan and iraq.

i'm not accusing china, jut making an observation.</htmltext>
<tokenext>china gains by stressing it 's enemies .
assuming they consider the US an enemy , raising tensiosn with n. korea destabilizes the US because it 's already up to it 's neck in afghanistan and iraq .
i 'm not accusing china , jut making an observation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>china gains by stressing it's enemies.
assuming they consider the US an enemy, raising tensiosn with n. korea destabilizes the US because it's already up to it's neck in afghanistan and iraq.
i'm not accusing china, jut making an observation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621363</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621365</id>
	<title>Re:blame China</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247064720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>No. <a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article6667440.ece" title="timesonline.co.uk" rel="nofollow">They</a> [timesonline.co.uk] are <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/southkorea/5778176/North-Korea-blamed-for-cyber-attack-on-South-Korea.html" title="telegraph.co.uk" rel="nofollow">suspecting</a> [telegraph.co.uk] <a href="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iaaWwzg--SOmIz9Qjdju4UYFB5GgD99A9LE00" title="google.com" rel="nofollow">North Korea</a> [google.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>No .
They [ timesonline.co.uk ] are suspecting [ telegraph.co.uk ] North Korea [ google.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.
They [timesonline.co.uk] are suspecting [telegraph.co.uk] North Korea [google.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621275</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622351</id>
	<title>Infosec</title>
	<author>NES HQ</author>
	<datestamp>1247068380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Perhaps folks will take Infosec more seriously given the regularity with which we see these headlines?

<p>I am concerned that a sizable government department can't repel attacks from - allegedly - North Korea.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps folks will take Infosec more seriously given the regularity with which we see these headlines ?
I am concerned that a sizable government department ca n't repel attacks from - allegedly - North Korea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps folks will take Infosec more seriously given the regularity with which we see these headlines?
I am concerned that a sizable government department can't repel attacks from - allegedly - North Korea.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621491</id>
	<title>Re:Counter attack</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247065260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't think anyone should be attacked for being a suspect, it doesn't seem fair. But that's just me.
Besides, just because the government does something (or have a certain position) doesn't mean their citizens share that opinion.


It could have been the North Koreans, the Chinese or anyone not linked to a government, even in the USA itself.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think anyone should be attacked for being a suspect , it does n't seem fair .
But that 's just me .
Besides , just because the government does something ( or have a certain position ) does n't mean their citizens share that opinion .
It could have been the North Koreans , the Chinese or anyone not linked to a government , even in the USA itself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think anyone should be attacked for being a suspect, it doesn't seem fair.
But that's just me.
Besides, just because the government does something (or have a certain position) doesn't mean their citizens share that opinion.
It could have been the North Koreans, the Chinese or anyone not linked to a government, even in the USA itself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621413</id>
	<title>Article missing other attack target</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247064840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>4chan has been down also</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>4chan has been down also</tokentext>
<sentencetext>4chan has been down also</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623933</id>
	<title>Re:Pull the Gdamn plug!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247073960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What the ISPs could do for this is to filter outbound traffic such that if the src IP is not on their network (i.e., is spoofed) the packet is dropped.</p></div><p>Yes they <i>could</i> do it. But would they? This I'm not able to make up my mind on.</p><p>Some ISP's buy and sell their bandwidth per xByte. Others source to a dedicated pipe, and as long as they aren't saturated don't care. If the ISP is charging their client's per xByte, then they're not going to want to filter the client's data. Of course, you'd think all the ISP's jumping on the throttling bandwagon would be all over this already. Does anyone know the answer to that?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What the ISPs could do for this is to filter outbound traffic such that if the src IP is not on their network ( i.e. , is spoofed ) the packet is dropped.Yes they could do it .
But would they ?
This I 'm not able to make up my mind on.Some ISP 's buy and sell their bandwidth per xByte .
Others source to a dedicated pipe , and as long as they are n't saturated do n't care .
If the ISP is charging their client 's per xByte , then they 're not going to want to filter the client 's data .
Of course , you 'd think all the ISP 's jumping on the throttling bandwagon would be all over this already .
Does anyone know the answer to that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What the ISPs could do for this is to filter outbound traffic such that if the src IP is not on their network (i.e., is spoofed) the packet is dropped.Yes they could do it.
But would they?
This I'm not able to make up my mind on.Some ISP's buy and sell their bandwidth per xByte.
Others source to a dedicated pipe, and as long as they aren't saturated don't care.
If the ISP is charging their client's per xByte, then they're not going to want to filter the client's data.
Of course, you'd think all the ISP's jumping on the throttling bandwagon would be all over this already.
Does anyone know the answer to that?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622809</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28624781</id>
	<title>Re:Who Cares?</title>
	<author>SparkleMotion88</author>
	<datestamp>1247076900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>But perhaps the attackers used an iPhone?</htmltext>
<tokenext>But perhaps the attackers used an iPhone ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But perhaps the attackers used an iPhone?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621727</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621689</id>
	<title>Re:Counter attack</title>
	<author>u38cg</author>
	<datestamp>1247066040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Can you say joe job?  Also, the FTC website is down?  OMG THE FTC WEBSITE IS DOWN!!!!  Oh hang on, wait, ermm, world totally failing to collapse here.  Can we stop calling this rubbish cyber warfare and call it a middling DoS attack, which is what it is?  It's not war, it's pathetic.  4chan could probably do better than this.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Can you say joe job ?
Also , the FTC website is down ?
OMG THE FTC WEBSITE IS DOWN ! ! ! !
Oh hang on , wait , ermm , world totally failing to collapse here .
Can we stop calling this rubbish cyber warfare and call it a middling DoS attack , which is what it is ?
It 's not war , it 's pathetic .
4chan could probably do better than this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can you say joe job?
Also, the FTC website is down?
OMG THE FTC WEBSITE IS DOWN!!!!
Oh hang on, wait, ermm, world totally failing to collapse here.
Can we stop calling this rubbish cyber warfare and call it a middling DoS attack, which is what it is?
It's not war, it's pathetic.
4chan could probably do better than this.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622015</id>
	<title>Re:Counter attack</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247067240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So you're sure koreans did:<br>1- medium-scale attack of US cyber-infrastructure<br>2- ???<br>3- PROFIT!!!</p><p>There is a dozen other scenarios where this attack would benefit different entities than North Korea.</p><p>PS. Troll<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So you 're sure koreans did : 1- medium-scale attack of US cyber-infrastructure2- ? ?
? 3- PROFIT ! !
! There is a dozen other scenarios where this attack would benefit different entities than North Korea.PS .
Troll : D</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you're sure koreans did:1- medium-scale attack of US cyber-infrastructure2- ??
?3- PROFIT!!
!There is a dozen other scenarios where this attack would benefit different entities than North Korea.PS.
Troll :D</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28628797</id>
	<title>Re:Pull the Gdamn plug!</title>
	<author>jvkjvk</author>
	<datestamp>1247049840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's nice and all, but what systems are currently vulnerable to this type of attack?</p><p>I was under the impression that this variety of attack was passe since systems were hardened against it.</p><p>Regards.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's nice and all , but what systems are currently vulnerable to this type of attack ? I was under the impression that this variety of attack was passe since systems were hardened against it.Regards .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's nice and all, but what systems are currently vulnerable to this type of attack?I was under the impression that this variety of attack was passe since systems were hardened against it.Regards.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622809</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621939</id>
	<title>How do you know they went down?</title>
	<author>2obvious4u</author>
	<datestamp>1247066940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Honestly, when was the last time you went to <a href="http://www.ftc.gov/" title="ftc.gov">ftc.gov</a> [ftc.gov]?  Nobody goes to those sites...<br> <br>
Now if <a href="http://www.google.com/" title="google.com">google</a> [google.com], <a href="http://www.wikipedia.org/" title="wikipedia.org">wiki</a> [wikipedia.org], or <a href="http://www.apple.com/itunes/overview/" title="apple.com">itunes</a> [apple.com] goes down, then PANIC!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Honestly , when was the last time you went to ftc.gov [ ftc.gov ] ?
Nobody goes to those sites.. . Now if google [ google.com ] , wiki [ wikipedia.org ] , or itunes [ apple.com ] goes down , then PANIC !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Honestly, when was the last time you went to ftc.gov [ftc.gov]?
Nobody goes to those sites... 
Now if google [google.com], wiki [wikipedia.org], or itunes [apple.com] goes down, then PANIC!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622643</id>
	<title>Skynet</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247069340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Skynet is online....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Skynet is online... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Skynet is online....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28631501</id>
	<title>Re:Internet Sovereignty</title>
	<author>wrappingpaper</author>
	<datestamp>1247066940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Internet sovereignty" makes the Internet sound far more important than it really is. The assassination of an Austrian prince (small p) in Bosnia in 1914 unleashed all sorts of diplomatic agreements between various countries. What will matter is that if some country's interests are affected then something will happen, and it just happens so that in this case these interests take the form of various computer related things. The important thing is "you destroyed my work", not "the work I did on the Internet".</p><p>The Internet is not usually an end unto itself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Internet sovereignty " makes the Internet sound far more important than it really is .
The assassination of an Austrian prince ( small p ) in Bosnia in 1914 unleashed all sorts of diplomatic agreements between various countries .
What will matter is that if some country 's interests are affected then something will happen , and it just happens so that in this case these interests take the form of various computer related things .
The important thing is " you destroyed my work " , not " the work I did on the Internet " .The Internet is not usually an end unto itself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Internet sovereignty" makes the Internet sound far more important than it really is.
The assassination of an Austrian prince (small p) in Bosnia in 1914 unleashed all sorts of diplomatic agreements between various countries.
What will matter is that if some country's interests are affected then something will happen, and it just happens so that in this case these interests take the form of various computer related things.
The important thing is "you destroyed my work", not "the work I did on the Internet".The Internet is not usually an end unto itself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621503</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622447</id>
	<title>system check method</title>
	<author>Chemkook</author>
	<datestamp>1247068680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><br>They mentioned that there is a botnet of about 50000 computers that are infected which composed the attack.
<br>It would be helpful if they provided a method for users to check to make sure that their systems are not part of this.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They mentioned that there is a botnet of about 50000 computers that are infected which composed the attack .
It would be helpful if they provided a method for users to check to make sure that their systems are not part of this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They mentioned that there is a botnet of about 50000 computers that are infected which composed the attack.
It would be helpful if they provided a method for users to check to make sure that their systems are not part of this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28624635</id>
	<title>Annual computer health day</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247076420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We need to establish a day to have all of the non-computer geeks (geek squad included) bring their computers and have them cleaned out.</p><p>Essentially, take the hard drive out, make a copy, wipe the sucker, reinstall an OS, copy any precious files and nuke the copy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We need to establish a day to have all of the non-computer geeks ( geek squad included ) bring their computers and have them cleaned out.Essentially , take the hard drive out , make a copy , wipe the sucker , reinstall an OS , copy any precious files and nuke the copy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We need to establish a day to have all of the non-computer geeks (geek squad included) bring their computers and have them cleaned out.Essentially, take the hard drive out, make a copy, wipe the sucker, reinstall an OS, copy any precious files and nuke the copy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621363</id>
	<title>Re:blame China</title>
	<author>rastilin</author>
	<datestamp>1247064720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>ok let's blame China now for this.</p></div><p>Let's not. See what offends me about this whole thing is that it's so obivious. If they'd just targeted America, it could have been anyone. But 'whoever' it was had to go and hit South Korea too, at the same time. Who hates both the US and South Korea?</p><p>By the way, don't say "Chinese Plot", they have nothing to gain from upping tensions at this point. They've been trying to bring the North Koreans into negotiations and they too have issued denounciations against NK by this point. Iran's official line is that the UK is mostly responsible for their problems, they have little to gain from doing something to the Americans and the Russians were just recently in negotiations with Obama that appear to have gone well.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>ok let 's blame China now for this.Let 's not .
See what offends me about this whole thing is that it 's so obivious .
If they 'd just targeted America , it could have been anyone .
But 'whoever ' it was had to go and hit South Korea too , at the same time .
Who hates both the US and South Korea ? By the way , do n't say " Chinese Plot " , they have nothing to gain from upping tensions at this point .
They 've been trying to bring the North Koreans into negotiations and they too have issued denounciations against NK by this point .
Iran 's official line is that the UK is mostly responsible for their problems , they have little to gain from doing something to the Americans and the Russians were just recently in negotiations with Obama that appear to have gone well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ok let's blame China now for this.Let's not.
See what offends me about this whole thing is that it's so obivious.
If they'd just targeted America, it could have been anyone.
But 'whoever' it was had to go and hit South Korea too, at the same time.
Who hates both the US and South Korea?By the way, don't say "Chinese Plot", they have nothing to gain from upping tensions at this point.
They've been trying to bring the North Koreans into negotiations and they too have issued denounciations against NK by this point.
Iran's official line is that the UK is mostly responsible for their problems, they have little to gain from doing something to the Americans and the Russians were just recently in negotiations with Obama that appear to have gone well.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621275</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623529</id>
	<title>Re:Aiding and abetting?</title>
	<author>T Murphy</author>
	<datestamp>1247072520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I use the phrase 'hijacked' loosely. If a person leaves the car running, the keys in the ignition and the windows down (pun intended), can they say that their car was 'stolen'?</p></div><p>It would be more like the car never came with doors and the keys are permanently attached to the ignition. Doors, locks and better keys have to be installed separately by the user.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I use the phrase 'hijacked ' loosely .
If a person leaves the car running , the keys in the ignition and the windows down ( pun intended ) , can they say that their car was 'stolen ' ? It would be more like the car never came with doors and the keys are permanently attached to the ignition .
Doors , locks and better keys have to be installed separately by the user .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use the phrase 'hijacked' loosely.
If a person leaves the car running, the keys in the ignition and the windows down (pun intended), can they say that their car was 'stolen'?It would be more like the car never came with doors and the keys are permanently attached to the ignition.
Doors, locks and better keys have to be installed separately by the user.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621533</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28626469
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621275
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622769
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621363
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621275
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622899
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621503
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28629885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28628605
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621979
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622015
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622347
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621873
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28625615
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621939
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623457
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621979
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622035
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621537
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622715
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621553
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28625473
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623533
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621475
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622045
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621877
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621363
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621275
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621835
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621363
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621275
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622461
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621979
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28627509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621939
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28624059
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621363
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621275
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621683
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621491
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28625191
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621363
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621275
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622579
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621809
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621363
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621275
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28624449
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621449
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28628797
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622809
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621979
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621811
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28627255
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621939
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621449
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28624781
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621727
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28626441
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621363
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621275
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622809
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621979
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623795
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621689
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622793
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621553
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621547
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621365
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621275
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621433
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623433
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621979
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621447
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28624773
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622809
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621979
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623639
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621939
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622797
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623295
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621503
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623985
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621727
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623341
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621939
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28624027
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621503
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28630987
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622809
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621979
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621697
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623193
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621939
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28628227
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621645
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621503
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621653
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621363
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621275
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28631501
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621503
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28624525
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621363
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621275
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623529
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28632619
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_1213222_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623095
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621553
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_08_1213222.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621503
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623295
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28624027
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28631501
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622899
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621645
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28628227
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_08_1213222.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621275
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28626469
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621365
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621363
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622769
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621835
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28624059
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621653
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28625191
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28626441
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28624525
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621809
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622579
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621877
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_08_1213222.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621413
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_08_1213222.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621939
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28627509
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623639
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623341
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28625615
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28627255
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623193
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_08_1213222.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621553
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622793
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622715
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622575
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623095
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_08_1213222.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621331
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621683
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621873
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622015
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621449
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28624449
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623677
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621537
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623885
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621689
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623795
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621547
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28625473
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621491
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621447
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621697
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622035
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28632619
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621433
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621475
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623533
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_08_1213222.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621979
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623433
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622809
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623933
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28628797
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28630987
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28624773
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28628605
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28629885
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622461
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623457
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_08_1213222.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621727
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623985
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28624781
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_08_1213222.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621533
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622045
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621811
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622347
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28623529
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28622797
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_08_1213222.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_1213222.28621743
</commentlist>
</conversation>
