<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_23_0244245</id>
	<title>Dutch Gov't Has No Idea How To Delete Tapped Calls</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1256287260000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>McDutchie writes <i>"The law in the Netherlands says that intercepted phone calls between attorneys and their clients must be destroyed. But the Dutch government has been keeping under wraps for years that <a href="http://www.nrc.nl/binnenland/article2394162.ece/Afluisteraar\_zoekt\_naar\_deleteknop">no one has the foggiest clue how to delete them</a> (<a href="http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate\_c?hl=nl&amp;sl=nl&amp;tl=en&amp;u=http://www.nrc.nl/binnenland/article2394162.ece/Afluisteraar\_zoekt\_naar\_deleteknop&amp;prev=hp&amp;rurl=translate.google.com&amp;usg=ALkJrhi2C3txSSPYj4Adj0XQDGVD3u\_yGA">Google translation</a>). Now, an <a href="http://www.nrc.nl/multimedia/archive/00255/Graafland\_255768a.pdf">email (PDF) from the National Police Services Agency</a> (KLPD) has surfaced, revealing that the working of the technology in question is a <a href="http://www.netapp.com/">NetApp</a> trade secret. The Dutch police are now trying to get their Israeli supplier <a href="http://verint.com/">Verint</a> to tell them how to delete tapped calls and comply with the law. Meanwhile, attorneys in the Netherlands remain afraid to use their phones."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>McDutchie writes " The law in the Netherlands says that intercepted phone calls between attorneys and their clients must be destroyed .
But the Dutch government has been keeping under wraps for years that no one has the foggiest clue how to delete them ( Google translation ) .
Now , an email ( PDF ) from the National Police Services Agency ( KLPD ) has surfaced , revealing that the working of the technology in question is a NetApp trade secret .
The Dutch police are now trying to get their Israeli supplier Verint to tell them how to delete tapped calls and comply with the law .
Meanwhile , attorneys in the Netherlands remain afraid to use their phones .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>McDutchie writes "The law in the Netherlands says that intercepted phone calls between attorneys and their clients must be destroyed.
But the Dutch government has been keeping under wraps for years that no one has the foggiest clue how to delete them (Google translation).
Now, an email (PDF) from the National Police Services Agency (KLPD) has surfaced, revealing that the working of the technology in question is a NetApp trade secret.
The Dutch police are now trying to get their Israeli supplier Verint to tell them how to delete tapped calls and comply with the law.
Meanwhile, attorneys in the Netherlands remain afraid to use their phones.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29847659</id>
	<title>Re:Delete, Remove, &amp; Drop</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256320740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Obvious foreward-going answer (doesn't fix already recorded data): if you don't need it, don't record it!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Obvious foreward-going answer ( does n't fix already recorded data ) : if you do n't need it , do n't record it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Obvious foreward-going answer (doesn't fix already recorded data): if you don't need it, don't record it!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843959</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844369</id>
	<title>Re:So many telcos</title>
	<author>ShakaUVM</author>
	<datestamp>1256301480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt;...revealing that the working of the technology in question is a NetApp trade secret</p><p>Apparently, there IS an app for that.</p><p>&gt;&gt;With fusion centres in the US and any suspect now a "terrorist" most of the attorney client privilege protection is getting blurred.</p><p>Well, I certainly hope they keep those terrorists away from the fusion centres!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; ...revealing that the working of the technology in question is a NetApp trade secretApparently , there IS an app for that. &gt; &gt; With fusion centres in the US and any suspect now a " terrorist " most of the attorney client privilege protection is getting blurred.Well , I certainly hope they keep those terrorists away from the fusion centres !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt;...revealing that the working of the technology in question is a NetApp trade secretApparently, there IS an app for that.&gt;&gt;With fusion centres in the US and any suspect now a "terrorist" most of the attorney client privilege protection is getting blurred.Well, I certainly hope they keep those terrorists away from the fusion centres!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29846691</id>
	<title>Re:any slashdot reader surprised?</title>
	<author>eggoeater</author>
	<datestamp>1256316300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ya know those "call may be monitored and recorded for quality blah blah" announcements you always hear when calling pretty much any company?
<br>
Most of that is done by Nice recording company, based in Israel (they sell the machines; they don't do the actual recording themselves.)
<br>
Every air traffic controller in the WORLD is recorded on Nice machines.  They are HUGE.
<br> <br>
So, yeah, Israelis know a thing or two about recording a phone call.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ya know those " call may be monitored and recorded for quality blah blah " announcements you always hear when calling pretty much any company ?
Most of that is done by Nice recording company , based in Israel ( they sell the machines ; they do n't do the actual recording themselves .
) Every air traffic controller in the WORLD is recorded on Nice machines .
They are HUGE .
So , yeah , Israelis know a thing or two about recording a phone call .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ya know those "call may be monitored and recorded for quality blah blah" announcements you always hear when calling pretty much any company?
Most of that is done by Nice recording company, based in Israel (they sell the machines; they don't do the actual recording themselves.
)

Every air traffic controller in the WORLD is recorded on Nice machines.
They are HUGE.
So, yeah, Israelis know a thing or two about recording a phone call.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843803</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843881</id>
	<title>The good news is</title>
	<author>obarthelemy</author>
	<datestamp>1256294580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>since they went with an open source solution, they can easily... oh, wait.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>since they went with an open source solution , they can easily... oh , wait .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>since they went with an open source solution, they can easily... oh, wait.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843859</id>
	<title>Anything can be deleted</title>
	<author>Hognoxious</author>
	<datestamp>1256294100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You can delete anything with a sufficiently large hammer or a can of kerosene.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You can delete anything with a sufficiently large hammer or a can of kerosene .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can delete anything with a sufficiently large hammer or a can of kerosene.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844037</id>
	<title>Dutch justice...</title>
	<author>AlXtreme</author>
	<datestamp>1256297040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Over the past few years quite a few criminal cases were lost exactly because of this problem. In Amsterdam a huge case against <a href="http://www.nos.nl/nosjournaal/artikelen/2007/12/20/201207\_hells\_angels.html" title="www.nos.nl">Hell's Angels</a> [www.nos.nl] went south in 2007 (everyone was set free) because they didn't destroy tapped recordings with attorneys. Last year it <a href="http://www.nos.nl/nosjournaal/artikelen/2008/11/17/171108\_afluisteren.html" title="www.nos.nl">happened again</a> [www.nos.nl] (dutch links, sorry).</p><p>I hope someone got canned because of this, but given our incompetent justice department I really can't see that happening. Phone tapping has reached epidemic proportions over here (highest number of taps per person in the western world), as it's much easier than actually investigating a case based on given evidence.</p><p>Funny that this is the second article on our incapable justice system within a day on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/., go us \o/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Over the past few years quite a few criminal cases were lost exactly because of this problem .
In Amsterdam a huge case against Hell 's Angels [ www.nos.nl ] went south in 2007 ( everyone was set free ) because they did n't destroy tapped recordings with attorneys .
Last year it happened again [ www.nos.nl ] ( dutch links , sorry ) .I hope someone got canned because of this , but given our incompetent justice department I really ca n't see that happening .
Phone tapping has reached epidemic proportions over here ( highest number of taps per person in the western world ) , as it 's much easier than actually investigating a case based on given evidence.Funny that this is the second article on our incapable justice system within a day on /. , go us \ o/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Over the past few years quite a few criminal cases were lost exactly because of this problem.
In Amsterdam a huge case against Hell's Angels [www.nos.nl] went south in 2007 (everyone was set free) because they didn't destroy tapped recordings with attorneys.
Last year it happened again [www.nos.nl] (dutch links, sorry).I hope someone got canned because of this, but given our incompetent justice department I really can't see that happening.
Phone tapping has reached epidemic proportions over here (highest number of taps per person in the western world), as it's much easier than actually investigating a case based on given evidence.Funny that this is the second article on our incapable justice system within a day on /., go us \o/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843871</id>
	<title>What's the dutch for...</title>
	<author>ctrl-alt-canc</author>
	<datestamp>1256294160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>rm -fR /</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>rm -fR /</tokentext>
<sentencetext>rm -fR /</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29846435</id>
	<title>Re:No joke, it's hard</title>
	<author>Luminary Crush</author>
	<datestamp>1256314860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Making sure that the data blocks which represented a file are *really* gone might not be the problem here.  When a file is deleted from a NetApp (like it most other operating systems) the data is not scrubbed, but rather the directory entry is removed and the blocks are free to be written over again - they are returned to the 'free block pool'.  However, it's not possible to 'undelete' a file on a NetApp - there is no such function (though perhaps NetApp does have such a tool in-house) and there are no third-party tools because NetApp does not allow the installation of any third party software (it's not possible to install any third party software packages because the OS is completely proprietary - eg not built on Linux or Windows like most other storage vendors - and completely locked-down).</p><p>Deleting a NetApp snapshot is not hard at all.  There are technical reasons why a snapshot might be 'busy' - such as during a mirroring operation, or being used as the basis of a LUN clone - but that can all be readily resolved with someone who knows just a little about Data OnTap (NetApp's operating system).</p><p>The problem might be that they have some kind of compliance requirements and are using NetApp's SnapLock Compliance, which will *not* allow you to delete data, period.  It's a software module which makes volumes WORM-compliant to the satisfaction of several standards organizations and makes it such that data can not be deleted before the expiration time set for it.</p><p>I would imagine IF you had the Data OnTap source code and tried hard enough you could find a way to delete files thus protected; nothing is impossible of course, but would in fact be hard.  No reseller like this Israeli organization is going to be able to help them... that would have to come from NetApp.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Making sure that the data blocks which represented a file are * really * gone might not be the problem here .
When a file is deleted from a NetApp ( like it most other operating systems ) the data is not scrubbed , but rather the directory entry is removed and the blocks are free to be written over again - they are returned to the 'free block pool' .
However , it 's not possible to 'undelete ' a file on a NetApp - there is no such function ( though perhaps NetApp does have such a tool in-house ) and there are no third-party tools because NetApp does not allow the installation of any third party software ( it 's not possible to install any third party software packages because the OS is completely proprietary - eg not built on Linux or Windows like most other storage vendors - and completely locked-down ) .Deleting a NetApp snapshot is not hard at all .
There are technical reasons why a snapshot might be 'busy ' - such as during a mirroring operation , or being used as the basis of a LUN clone - but that can all be readily resolved with someone who knows just a little about Data OnTap ( NetApp 's operating system ) .The problem might be that they have some kind of compliance requirements and are using NetApp 's SnapLock Compliance , which will * not * allow you to delete data , period .
It 's a software module which makes volumes WORM-compliant to the satisfaction of several standards organizations and makes it such that data can not be deleted before the expiration time set for it.I would imagine IF you had the Data OnTap source code and tried hard enough you could find a way to delete files thus protected ; nothing is impossible of course , but would in fact be hard .
No reseller like this Israeli organization is going to be able to help them... that would have to come from NetApp .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Making sure that the data blocks which represented a file are *really* gone might not be the problem here.
When a file is deleted from a NetApp (like it most other operating systems) the data is not scrubbed, but rather the directory entry is removed and the blocks are free to be written over again - they are returned to the 'free block pool'.
However, it's not possible to 'undelete' a file on a NetApp - there is no such function (though perhaps NetApp does have such a tool in-house) and there are no third-party tools because NetApp does not allow the installation of any third party software (it's not possible to install any third party software packages because the OS is completely proprietary - eg not built on Linux or Windows like most other storage vendors - and completely locked-down).Deleting a NetApp snapshot is not hard at all.
There are technical reasons why a snapshot might be 'busy' - such as during a mirroring operation, or being used as the basis of a LUN clone - but that can all be readily resolved with someone who knows just a little about Data OnTap (NetApp's operating system).The problem might be that they have some kind of compliance requirements and are using NetApp's SnapLock Compliance, which will *not* allow you to delete data, period.
It's a software module which makes volumes WORM-compliant to the satisfaction of several standards organizations and makes it such that data can not be deleted before the expiration time set for it.I would imagine IF you had the Data OnTap source code and tried hard enough you could find a way to delete files thus protected; nothing is impossible of course, but would in fact be hard.
No reseller like this Israeli organization is going to be able to help them... that would have to come from NetApp.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843947</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843697</id>
	<title>I know!</title>
	<author>puroresu</author>
	<datestamp>1256291580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>rm filename</htmltext>
<tokenext>rm filename</tokentext>
<sentencetext>rm filename</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844959</id>
	<title>Re:So many telcos</title>
	<author>chill</author>
	<datestamp>1256306280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Last time I worked on it, Verint only made the front-end software.  That is, the software that you entered the warrant and details on.  It then passed the tap information on to the actual telecom system, which in the case I was dealing with was developed by Chinese and Indian programmers.</p><p>Telecom software is usually run by code from companies like Ericson, Siemens, Nortel, Motorola or Alcatel-Lucent.  The Verint stuff is just the GUI and passes the instructions on to the actual system that does the work.  Call recordings are stored by the telecom system, not Verint.  Yes, the delete command is in the Verint software somewhere.  They customize for each vendor.</p><p>In the case of Alcatel-Lucent stuff, you can force the issue by just doing an rm -rf on the data directory -- assuming you have access to the system in question, which is heavily restricted.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Last time I worked on it , Verint only made the front-end software .
That is , the software that you entered the warrant and details on .
It then passed the tap information on to the actual telecom system , which in the case I was dealing with was developed by Chinese and Indian programmers.Telecom software is usually run by code from companies like Ericson , Siemens , Nortel , Motorola or Alcatel-Lucent .
The Verint stuff is just the GUI and passes the instructions on to the actual system that does the work .
Call recordings are stored by the telecom system , not Verint .
Yes , the delete command is in the Verint software somewhere .
They customize for each vendor.In the case of Alcatel-Lucent stuff , you can force the issue by just doing an rm -rf on the data directory -- assuming you have access to the system in question , which is heavily restricted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Last time I worked on it, Verint only made the front-end software.
That is, the software that you entered the warrant and details on.
It then passed the tap information on to the actual telecom system, which in the case I was dealing with was developed by Chinese and Indian programmers.Telecom software is usually run by code from companies like Ericson, Siemens, Nortel, Motorola or Alcatel-Lucent.
The Verint stuff is just the GUI and passes the instructions on to the actual system that does the work.
Call recordings are stored by the telecom system, not Verint.
Yes, the delete command is in the Verint software somewhere.
They customize for each vendor.In the case of Alcatel-Lucent stuff, you can force the issue by just doing an rm -rf on the data directory -- assuming you have access to the system in question, which is heavily restricted.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844387</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256301720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow, the Netherlands have their phone service going through a Mossad front company, Verint.  How very fucked up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , the Netherlands have their phone service going through a Mossad front company , Verint .
How very fucked up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, the Netherlands have their phone service going through a Mossad front company, Verint.
How very fucked up.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843937</id>
	<title>Re:If they can't delete them....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256295480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not a bug. It's a feature!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not a bug .
It 's a feature !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not a bug.
It's a feature!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843811</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29847025</id>
	<title>Re:not afraid</title>
	<author>RAMMS+EIN</author>
	<datestamp>1256318040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>``That may be true, but if the police / the prosecution is smart, they don't use the tapped calls themselves as evidence, but simply use them during their own investigation, and to better prepare their rebuttal to the defense attorney's arguments.''</p><p>Heh. The whole reason they are actually finally looking into this is that many defendants are acquitted because of mistakes made by the prosecution - in this case, not deleting recordings. I hope this shakes things up so that other data retention issues are looked into, as well. What is interesting to see is that actually the government care more about people's privacy than the people themselves - largely, people grumble when a defendant walks, people want more data gathered and retained, etc.</p><p>By the way, I was thinking about this issue the other day, and I figured that "letting the criminal get away with a crime because the prosecution didn't follow the right procedures" and "letting the prosecution get away with not following the procedures" are not the only options we have - for example, we could impose sanctions for not following procedures. That way, we can punish both transgressions. It also has the benefit that, for the prosecution, it won't be a "win the case or lose nothing" preposition - they will actually feel pain if they violate people's rights.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>` ` That may be true , but if the police / the prosecution is smart , they do n't use the tapped calls themselves as evidence , but simply use them during their own investigation , and to better prepare their rebuttal to the defense attorney 's arguments.''Heh .
The whole reason they are actually finally looking into this is that many defendants are acquitted because of mistakes made by the prosecution - in this case , not deleting recordings .
I hope this shakes things up so that other data retention issues are looked into , as well .
What is interesting to see is that actually the government care more about people 's privacy than the people themselves - largely , people grumble when a defendant walks , people want more data gathered and retained , etc.By the way , I was thinking about this issue the other day , and I figured that " letting the criminal get away with a crime because the prosecution did n't follow the right procedures " and " letting the prosecution get away with not following the procedures " are not the only options we have - for example , we could impose sanctions for not following procedures .
That way , we can punish both transgressions .
It also has the benefit that , for the prosecution , it wo n't be a " win the case or lose nothing " preposition - they will actually feel pain if they violate people 's rights .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>``That may be true, but if the police / the prosecution is smart, they don't use the tapped calls themselves as evidence, but simply use them during their own investigation, and to better prepare their rebuttal to the defense attorney's arguments.''Heh.
The whole reason they are actually finally looking into this is that many defendants are acquitted because of mistakes made by the prosecution - in this case, not deleting recordings.
I hope this shakes things up so that other data retention issues are looked into, as well.
What is interesting to see is that actually the government care more about people's privacy than the people themselves - largely, people grumble when a defendant walks, people want more data gathered and retained, etc.By the way, I was thinking about this issue the other day, and I figured that "letting the criminal get away with a crime because the prosecution didn't follow the right procedures" and "letting the prosecution get away with not following the procedures" are not the only options we have - for example, we could impose sanctions for not following procedures.
That way, we can punish both transgressions.
It also has the benefit that, for the prosecution, it won't be a "win the case or lose nothing" preposition - they will actually feel pain if they violate people's rights.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843767</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844195</id>
	<title>Conspiracy theory</title>
	<author>chrb</author>
	<datestamp>1256299320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's a well-known conspiracy theory: that Mossad has created Telco front companies throughout the world to spy on other nations. See <a href="http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/spyring.html" title="whatreallyhappened.com">The Israeli Spy Ring</a> [whatreallyhappened.com], which talks about the Fox News articles, and <a href="http://www.counterpunch.org/ketcham03122009.html" title="counterpunch.org">another typical story</a> [counterpunch.org]. Of course, a conspiracy theory doesn't make it true...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a well-known conspiracy theory : that Mossad has created Telco front companies throughout the world to spy on other nations .
See The Israeli Spy Ring [ whatreallyhappened.com ] , which talks about the Fox News articles , and another typical story [ counterpunch.org ] .
Of course , a conspiracy theory does n't make it true.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a well-known conspiracy theory: that Mossad has created Telco front companies throughout the world to spy on other nations.
See The Israeli Spy Ring [whatreallyhappened.com], which talks about the Fox News articles, and another typical story [counterpunch.org].
Of course, a conspiracy theory doesn't make it true...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843755</id>
	<title>Just put an average user at the console ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256292480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... and tell them that there's no way they could ever delete anything. Trust me, they'll find a way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... and tell them that there 's no way they could ever delete anything .
Trust me , they 'll find a way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... and tell them that there's no way they could ever delete anything.
Trust me, they'll find a way.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844143</id>
	<title>Re:No joke, it's hard</title>
	<author>dissy</author>
	<datestamp>1256298660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This sounds like a stupid problem, but in reality it is really tough to delete something and be certain that you've got it all.</p></div><p>I really can't believe I'm saying this, but this sounds like a technical problem that really does need a legal solution.</p><p>You are quite right regarding how difficult it can be to delete every copy of a piece of data, on the technical side.</p><p>Instead of all of that, it might be easier to enact an actual law saying a recording of a conversation is only legally valid for that time.  Or at the least, have both.  Then if one side fails you, the other hopefully will help pick up the slack.</p><p>No calls recorded before that time would be admissible in court, releasing calls recorded before that time would result in fines and/or further punishment, and if someone attempts to use a recording in court that is older than allowed, the entire trial is up for being dismissed.<br>I'm sure I am missing other problems that still need addressed, but you get the idea.</p><p>I realize a technical solution would be best, as one can not assume a law will always be in place, always followed, and never changed or twisted around based on the current politics of the time.<br>However as we have seen, even technical measures can be easily bypassed if it fits someones political agenda to do so, with the convenient excuse of "I don't know how those computer things work, we had no clue it was doing that!"</p><p>Having both in place would make it easier on the technical side to not constantly worry if every copy is destroyed.<br>If the telco can easily have a datestamp pop up, and it is beyond the retention date, they should have every legal point on their side to tell the law enforcement or court requesting the recording that it does not exist (even if that isn't the truth technically)</p><p>The technical policy must remain however, to help ensure people don't try to find a way to skirt the law.</p><p>In the US legal system, there have been times where one side of the case knows without a doubt that they are not allowed to present a piece of illegally obtained evidence to the jury, but does so anyway, with the hopes that the jury will form an emotional opinion on that evidence before the judge instructs them to ignore it.<br>I would assume that is one of the more important aspects that a pure legal solution can not solve, so will still need the data destroyed in the end.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This sounds like a stupid problem , but in reality it is really tough to delete something and be certain that you 've got it all.I really ca n't believe I 'm saying this , but this sounds like a technical problem that really does need a legal solution.You are quite right regarding how difficult it can be to delete every copy of a piece of data , on the technical side.Instead of all of that , it might be easier to enact an actual law saying a recording of a conversation is only legally valid for that time .
Or at the least , have both .
Then if one side fails you , the other hopefully will help pick up the slack.No calls recorded before that time would be admissible in court , releasing calls recorded before that time would result in fines and/or further punishment , and if someone attempts to use a recording in court that is older than allowed , the entire trial is up for being dismissed.I 'm sure I am missing other problems that still need addressed , but you get the idea.I realize a technical solution would be best , as one can not assume a law will always be in place , always followed , and never changed or twisted around based on the current politics of the time.However as we have seen , even technical measures can be easily bypassed if it fits someones political agenda to do so , with the convenient excuse of " I do n't know how those computer things work , we had no clue it was doing that !
" Having both in place would make it easier on the technical side to not constantly worry if every copy is destroyed.If the telco can easily have a datestamp pop up , and it is beyond the retention date , they should have every legal point on their side to tell the law enforcement or court requesting the recording that it does not exist ( even if that is n't the truth technically ) The technical policy must remain however , to help ensure people do n't try to find a way to skirt the law.In the US legal system , there have been times where one side of the case knows without a doubt that they are not allowed to present a piece of illegally obtained evidence to the jury , but does so anyway , with the hopes that the jury will form an emotional opinion on that evidence before the judge instructs them to ignore it.I would assume that is one of the more important aspects that a pure legal solution can not solve , so will still need the data destroyed in the end .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This sounds like a stupid problem, but in reality it is really tough to delete something and be certain that you've got it all.I really can't believe I'm saying this, but this sounds like a technical problem that really does need a legal solution.You are quite right regarding how difficult it can be to delete every copy of a piece of data, on the technical side.Instead of all of that, it might be easier to enact an actual law saying a recording of a conversation is only legally valid for that time.
Or at the least, have both.
Then if one side fails you, the other hopefully will help pick up the slack.No calls recorded before that time would be admissible in court, releasing calls recorded before that time would result in fines and/or further punishment, and if someone attempts to use a recording in court that is older than allowed, the entire trial is up for being dismissed.I'm sure I am missing other problems that still need addressed, but you get the idea.I realize a technical solution would be best, as one can not assume a law will always be in place, always followed, and never changed or twisted around based on the current politics of the time.However as we have seen, even technical measures can be easily bypassed if it fits someones political agenda to do so, with the convenient excuse of "I don't know how those computer things work, we had no clue it was doing that!
"Having both in place would make it easier on the technical side to not constantly worry if every copy is destroyed.If the telco can easily have a datestamp pop up, and it is beyond the retention date, they should have every legal point on their side to tell the law enforcement or court requesting the recording that it does not exist (even if that isn't the truth technically)The technical policy must remain however, to help ensure people don't try to find a way to skirt the law.In the US legal system, there have been times where one side of the case knows without a doubt that they are not allowed to present a piece of illegally obtained evidence to the jury, but does so anyway, with the hopes that the jury will form an emotional opinion on that evidence before the judge instructs them to ignore it.I would assume that is one of the more important aspects that a pure legal solution can not solve, so will still need the data destroyed in the end.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843815</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844073</id>
	<title>pathetic fauxking shill gets blind trust</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256297460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>lamenting his 'work' is not just paid ads for his advertising customers.</p><p>http://www.nytimes.com/ref/technology/poguedisclosure.html</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>lamenting his 'work ' is not just paid ads for his advertising customers.http : //www.nytimes.com/ref/technology/poguedisclosure.html</tokentext>
<sentencetext>lamenting his 'work' is not just paid ads for his advertising customers.http://www.nytimes.com/ref/technology/poguedisclosure.html</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29846185</id>
	<title>Dear Netherlands: How To Delete Tapped Calls</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256313540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>get a very large MAGNET !</p><p>By reading this solution, you obligate the Netherlands to pay the sum of Euro 100,000,000 into Acct #3443321</p><p>Nigeria National Savings Bank, Lagos, Nigeria.</p><p>Yours In Crime,<br>K Trout</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>get a very large MAGNET ! By reading this solution , you obligate the Netherlands to pay the sum of Euro 100,000,000 into Acct # 3443321Nigeria National Savings Bank , Lagos , Nigeria.Yours In Crime,K Trout</tokentext>
<sentencetext>get a very large MAGNET !By reading this solution, you obligate the Netherlands to pay the sum of Euro 100,000,000 into Acct #3443321Nigeria National Savings Bank, Lagos, Nigeria.Yours In Crime,K Trout</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29845599</id>
	<title>The irony here is...</title>
	<author>stakovahflow</author>
	<datestamp>1256310420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am not sure if someone already pointed this out, but the irony here is that most companies, governments, etc, have a hard time holding onto data. Normally, one does not read/hear about a company/government that cannot "delete" data... Good times! --StakOvahflow</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am not sure if someone already pointed this out , but the irony here is that most companies , governments , etc , have a hard time holding onto data .
Normally , one does not read/hear about a company/government that can not " delete " data... Good times !
--StakOvahflow</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am not sure if someone already pointed this out, but the irony here is that most companies, governments, etc, have a hard time holding onto data.
Normally, one does not read/hear about a company/government that cannot "delete" data... Good times!
--StakOvahflow</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29847685</id>
	<title>Drag the .wav files to . . .</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256320800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the little trash can thingie in the corner of the screen.  See, that was easy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the little trash can thingie in the corner of the screen .
See , that was easy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the little trash can thingie in the corner of the screen.
See, that was easy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29845575</id>
	<title>Re:not afraid</title>
	<author>NoOneInParticular</author>
	<datestamp>1256310300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The police wouldn't be dumb enough to use that as evidence.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>

Ha! You obviously don't know about the utter cluelesness of the Dutch authorities. In actuality, these phone calls have found their way to court in numerous occasions, even to the point that a 3 year investigation of the Hell's Angels was thrown out of court as their evidence consisted of the perps talking to their lawyers.
</p><p>
You see, in the Netherlands the police is stupid, and the prosecuters are worse. The only reason anybody gets locked up at all is because our judges are possibly even more stupid and (still) expect that the prosecution has done their job rather than outright lie. In some cases that fantasy becomes too difficult to maintain, and then a case gets thrown out.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The police would n't be dumb enough to use that as evidence .
Ha ! You obviously do n't know about the utter cluelesness of the Dutch authorities .
In actuality , these phone calls have found their way to court in numerous occasions , even to the point that a 3 year investigation of the Hell 's Angels was thrown out of court as their evidence consisted of the perps talking to their lawyers .
You see , in the Netherlands the police is stupid , and the prosecuters are worse .
The only reason anybody gets locked up at all is because our judges are possibly even more stupid and ( still ) expect that the prosecution has done their job rather than outright lie .
In some cases that fantasy becomes too difficult to maintain , and then a case gets thrown out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The police wouldn't be dumb enough to use that as evidence.
Ha! You obviously don't know about the utter cluelesness of the Dutch authorities.
In actuality, these phone calls have found their way to court in numerous occasions, even to the point that a 3 year investigation of the Hell's Angels was thrown out of court as their evidence consisted of the perps talking to their lawyers.
You see, in the Netherlands the police is stupid, and the prosecuters are worse.
The only reason anybody gets locked up at all is because our judges are possibly even more stupid and (still) expect that the prosecution has done their job rather than outright lie.
In some cases that fantasy becomes too difficult to maintain, and then a case gets thrown out.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843753</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843919</id>
	<title>Re:You can't make this stuff up</title>
	<author>rvw</author>
	<datestamp>1256295120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Absolutely superb.</p></div><p>It's called a Dutch Delete. It helps deleting the case by messing up the evidence.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Absolutely superb.It 's called a Dutch Delete .
It helps deleting the case by messing up the evidence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Absolutely superb.It's called a Dutch Delete.
It helps deleting the case by messing up the evidence.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843667</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29854233</id>
	<title>Re:If they can't delete them....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256318880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>What are the odds they can even find them after 3 years?</i> </p><p>Google search.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What are the odds they can even find them after 3 years ?
Google search .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What are the odds they can even find them after 3 years?
Google search.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843811</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843973</id>
	<title>No problem?</title>
	<author>Nomen Publicus</author>
	<datestamp>1256296200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There is this company called "Danger".......</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is this company called " Danger " ...... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is this company called "Danger".......</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844363</id>
	<title>Dutch secret service tapping journalists...</title>
	<author>BlackCreek</author>
	<datestamp>1256301480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Illegal tapping of newspapers in the NL:</p><p><a href="http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/2009/07/09/nisnews-nl-dutch-newspaper-suing-state-for-phone-tapping-journalists/" title="journalism.co.uk">http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/2009/07/09/nisnews-nl-dutch-newspaper-suing-state-for-phone-tapping-journalists/</a> [journalism.co.uk]</p><p><a href="http://badnewsfromthenetherlands.blogspot.com/2009/10/court-intelligence-service-illegally.html" title="blogspot.com">http://badnewsfromthenetherlands.blogspot.com/2009/10/court-intelligence-service-illegally.html</a> [blogspot.com]</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The Amsterdam court has determined that the General Intelligence Service AIVD broke the law of freedom of press by tapping the phones of journalists of the Telegraaf daily</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Illegal tapping of newspapers in the NL : http : //blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/2009/07/09/nisnews-nl-dutch-newspaper-suing-state-for-phone-tapping-journalists/ [ journalism.co.uk ] http : //badnewsfromthenetherlands.blogspot.com/2009/10/court-intelligence-service-illegally.html [ blogspot.com ] The Amsterdam court has determined that the General Intelligence Service AIVD broke the law of freedom of press by tapping the phones of journalists of the Telegraaf daily</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Illegal tapping of newspapers in the NL:http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/2009/07/09/nisnews-nl-dutch-newspaper-suing-state-for-phone-tapping-journalists/ [journalism.co.uk]http://badnewsfromthenetherlands.blogspot.com/2009/10/court-intelligence-service-illegally.html [blogspot.com]The Amsterdam court has determined that the General Intelligence Service AIVD broke the law of freedom of press by tapping the phones of journalists of the Telegraaf daily
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29848251</id>
	<title>Personal data sent to a non-EU country?</title>
	<author>John Hasler</author>
	<datestamp>1256322660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Doesn't that violate EU "data privacy" laws?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does n't that violate EU " data privacy " laws ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doesn't that violate EU "data privacy" laws?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843959</id>
	<title>Delete, Remove, &amp; Drop</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256296020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For those who are offering commands to get rid of the data, you need to understand the why they will not work.</p><p>This issue is that the storage system used is designed is such a way that you CAN NOT modify any data once it is written to the disk.</p><p>Once the data is written, it can not be modified or deleted.  Now, the reasoning behind this is so the police can not digitally manipulate the timestamps or data in any way.  This is to protect the integrity of the data so it can withstand legal challenges.</p><p>They are faced with a 'catch 22' situation.  If they can figure out a way to delete a 'prohibited conversation' they could theoretically modify the data too.  Opening up the possibility of having a criminal conversation being invalidated.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For those who are offering commands to get rid of the data , you need to understand the why they will not work.This issue is that the storage system used is designed is such a way that you CAN NOT modify any data once it is written to the disk.Once the data is written , it can not be modified or deleted .
Now , the reasoning behind this is so the police can not digitally manipulate the timestamps or data in any way .
This is to protect the integrity of the data so it can withstand legal challenges.They are faced with a 'catch 22 ' situation .
If they can figure out a way to delete a 'prohibited conversation ' they could theoretically modify the data too .
Opening up the possibility of having a criminal conversation being invalidated .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For those who are offering commands to get rid of the data, you need to understand the why they will not work.This issue is that the storage system used is designed is such a way that you CAN NOT modify any data once it is written to the disk.Once the data is written, it can not be modified or deleted.
Now, the reasoning behind this is so the police can not digitally manipulate the timestamps or data in any way.
This is to protect the integrity of the data so it can withstand legal challenges.They are faced with a 'catch 22' situation.
If they can figure out a way to delete a 'prohibited conversation' they could theoretically modify the data too.
Opening up the possibility of having a criminal conversation being invalidated.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29854295</id>
	<title>Its time for...</title>
	<author>deckardt</author>
	<datestamp>1256319540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>a <a href="http://cryptophone.de/" title="cryptophone.de" rel="nofollow">cryptophone</a> [cryptophone.de]. Sure, the call will be logged, but it'll be encrypted, care for some speech to text on noise?</htmltext>
<tokenext>a cryptophone [ cryptophone.de ] .
Sure , the call will be logged , but it 'll be encrypted , care for some speech to text on noise ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>a cryptophone [cryptophone.de].
Sure, the call will be logged, but it'll be encrypted, care for some speech to text on noise?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843717</id>
	<title>Every knows</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256291880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Every knows that you have a very high risk of getting tapped here. At least i'm glad to have a DSL connection as phoneline now, as it no longer introduces those annoying clicks traditional phonelines suffer, indicating recording started, whenever you say numbers, raise your voice or trigger a keyword, as it all is digital. I find it in particular funny to get 'observed' as i got nothing to hide, but just may have a couple 'interesting' friends between my connections. Also, by living in this town for a little, i know about at least 1 person for 100\% sure he works for secret intelligence (y, i learned deduce at skool). Call me paranoia or not. I'm knowing for sure me and some friends getting traced, and i don't fucking care except to think of bullshit stories to confuse them.
I'l make them easy this time by just publishing my IP: 127.153.231.2. You'r welcome.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Every knows that you have a very high risk of getting tapped here .
At least i 'm glad to have a DSL connection as phoneline now , as it no longer introduces those annoying clicks traditional phonelines suffer , indicating recording started , whenever you say numbers , raise your voice or trigger a keyword , as it all is digital .
I find it in particular funny to get 'observed ' as i got nothing to hide , but just may have a couple 'interesting ' friends between my connections .
Also , by living in this town for a little , i know about at least 1 person for 100 \ % sure he works for secret intelligence ( y , i learned deduce at skool ) .
Call me paranoia or not .
I 'm knowing for sure me and some friends getting traced , and i do n't fucking care except to think of bullshit stories to confuse them .
I'l make them easy this time by just publishing my IP : 127.153.231.2 .
You'r welcome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Every knows that you have a very high risk of getting tapped here.
At least i'm glad to have a DSL connection as phoneline now, as it no longer introduces those annoying clicks traditional phonelines suffer, indicating recording started, whenever you say numbers, raise your voice or trigger a keyword, as it all is digital.
I find it in particular funny to get 'observed' as i got nothing to hide, but just may have a couple 'interesting' friends between my connections.
Also, by living in this town for a little, i know about at least 1 person for 100\% sure he works for secret intelligence (y, i learned deduce at skool).
Call me paranoia or not.
I'm knowing for sure me and some friends getting traced, and i don't fucking care except to think of bullshit stories to confuse them.
I'l make them easy this time by just publishing my IP: 127.153.231.2.
You'r welcome.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844165</id>
	<title>Re:not afraid</title>
	<author>jonbryce</author>
	<datestamp>1256298960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not as simple as that.</p><p>The phone call is never going to appear in court.  What could happen is that the police listen to the call and then have a better idea where to look to find evidence that will help them with their case.  This evidence will be presented to court, will be solid evidence that proves the accused guilt, and there is no way you could prove it was obtained as a result of tapping a privilidged phone call.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not as simple as that.The phone call is never going to appear in court .
What could happen is that the police listen to the call and then have a better idea where to look to find evidence that will help them with their case .
This evidence will be presented to court , will be solid evidence that proves the accused guilt , and there is no way you could prove it was obtained as a result of tapping a privilidged phone call .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not as simple as that.The phone call is never going to appear in court.
What could happen is that the police listen to the call and then have a better idea where to look to find evidence that will help them with their case.
This evidence will be presented to court, will be solid evidence that proves the accused guilt, and there is no way you could prove it was obtained as a result of tapping a privilidged phone call.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843725</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843753</id>
	<title>Re:not afraid</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256292420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The police wouldn't be dumb enough to use that as evidence.</p><p>What they are more concerned about is the police hearing "Oh, you did do it? Right, this is how we'll get you off..."</p><p>Once they know you did it, even if they can't use that recording, you can bet your bottom dollar they will put every resource to use in finding the proof you did it, where without that taped call they may see no surface evidence and move on to the next suspect.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The police would n't be dumb enough to use that as evidence.What they are more concerned about is the police hearing " Oh , you did do it ?
Right , this is how we 'll get you off... " Once they know you did it , even if they ca n't use that recording , you can bet your bottom dollar they will put every resource to use in finding the proof you did it , where without that taped call they may see no surface evidence and move on to the next suspect .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The police wouldn't be dumb enough to use that as evidence.What they are more concerned about is the police hearing "Oh, you did do it?
Right, this is how we'll get you off..."Once they know you did it, even if they can't use that recording, you can bet your bottom dollar they will put every resource to use in finding the proof you did it, where without that taped call they may see no surface evidence and move on to the next suspect.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843725</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843799</id>
	<title>So many telcos</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256293020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Use Israeli telco supply firms for outsourced backend billing and interception.<br>
Fox new did a report on it <br>
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kle7ZgmFcpQ" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kle7ZgmFcpQ</a> [youtube.com] (pt 1) <br>
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeaXlrldqwo" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeaXlrldqwo</a> [youtube.com] (pt 2) <br>
Why or how so many national telcos let interception drift away from core in house responsibilities is just strange.<br>
If your an  attorney and your client is literate, buy a note pad, write out your work, read and then destroy (with a few pages under the written page too).<br>
With fusion centres in the US and any suspect now a "terrorist" most of the attorney client privilege protection is getting blurred.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Use Israeli telco supply firms for outsourced backend billing and interception .
Fox new did a report on it http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = kle7ZgmFcpQ [ youtube.com ] ( pt 1 ) http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = ZeaXlrldqwo [ youtube.com ] ( pt 2 ) Why or how so many national telcos let interception drift away from core in house responsibilities is just strange .
If your an attorney and your client is literate , buy a note pad , write out your work , read and then destroy ( with a few pages under the written page too ) .
With fusion centres in the US and any suspect now a " terrorist " most of the attorney client privilege protection is getting blurred .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Use Israeli telco supply firms for outsourced backend billing and interception.
Fox new did a report on it 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kle7ZgmFcpQ [youtube.com] (pt 1) 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeaXlrldqwo [youtube.com] (pt 2) 
Why or how so many national telcos let interception drift away from core in house responsibilities is just strange.
If your an  attorney and your client is literate, buy a note pad, write out your work, read and then destroy (with a few pages under the written page too).
With fusion centres in the US and any suspect now a "terrorist" most of the attorney client privilege protection is getting blurred.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844179</id>
	<title>This sounds like SnapLock</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256299080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously, when you buy a tamper-proof data retention system - don't be surprised if it does exactly that!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , when you buy a tamper-proof data retention system - do n't be surprised if it does exactly that !
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, when you buy a tamper-proof data retention system - don't be surprised if it does exactly that!
:)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844375</id>
	<title>Re:Delete, Remove, &amp; Drop</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256301600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would set it up so that when a piece of data is added to the system, it's signed with the investigator's private key and then the file, the signature, and a timestamp are in turn signed by a private key on a central server. With these signatures you can verify in court that a piece of evidence was uploaded by someone with a particular investigator's credentials and that it was uploaded at a particular time (at least, unless someone had access to the central server to modify it, but the central server should presumably be secure).</p><p>With a system like that in place, allowing deletion shouldn't allow other modifications to the data. Furthermore, you could design it so that a delete command requires a judges credentials and leaves an audit trail showing the command to delete was signed by a judge.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would set it up so that when a piece of data is added to the system , it 's signed with the investigator 's private key and then the file , the signature , and a timestamp are in turn signed by a private key on a central server .
With these signatures you can verify in court that a piece of evidence was uploaded by someone with a particular investigator 's credentials and that it was uploaded at a particular time ( at least , unless someone had access to the central server to modify it , but the central server should presumably be secure ) .With a system like that in place , allowing deletion should n't allow other modifications to the data .
Furthermore , you could design it so that a delete command requires a judges credentials and leaves an audit trail showing the command to delete was signed by a judge .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would set it up so that when a piece of data is added to the system, it's signed with the investigator's private key and then the file, the signature, and a timestamp are in turn signed by a private key on a central server.
With these signatures you can verify in court that a piece of evidence was uploaded by someone with a particular investigator's credentials and that it was uploaded at a particular time (at least, unless someone had access to the central server to modify it, but the central server should presumably be secure).With a system like that in place, allowing deletion shouldn't allow other modifications to the data.
Furthermore, you could design it so that a delete command requires a judges credentials and leaves an audit trail showing the command to delete was signed by a judge.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843959</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843767</id>
	<title>Re:not afraid</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256292600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That may be true, but if the police / the prosecution is smart, they don't use the tapped calls themselves as evidence, but simply use them during their own investigation, and to better prepare their rebuttal to the defense attorney's arguments.</p><p>Regardless of lawyers' feelings, this is a major violation of a basic right to have a private conversation with your defense attorney. The fact that these calls are tapped at all is outrageous. If those calls were occasionally accidentally stored that would be even more outrageous. But if they are not only recorded but even <i>impossible to delete</i>,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... well I can't think of a word.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That may be true , but if the police / the prosecution is smart , they do n't use the tapped calls themselves as evidence , but simply use them during their own investigation , and to better prepare their rebuttal to the defense attorney 's arguments.Regardless of lawyers ' feelings , this is a major violation of a basic right to have a private conversation with your defense attorney .
The fact that these calls are tapped at all is outrageous .
If those calls were occasionally accidentally stored that would be even more outrageous .
But if they are not only recorded but even impossible to delete , ... well I ca n't think of a word .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That may be true, but if the police / the prosecution is smart, they don't use the tapped calls themselves as evidence, but simply use them during their own investigation, and to better prepare their rebuttal to the defense attorney's arguments.Regardless of lawyers' feelings, this is a major violation of a basic right to have a private conversation with your defense attorney.
The fact that these calls are tapped at all is outrageous.
If those calls were occasionally accidentally stored that would be even more outrageous.
But if they are not only recorded but even impossible to delete, ... well I can't think of a word.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843725</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843865</id>
	<title>Will it blend?</title>
	<author>MPAB</author>
	<datestamp>1256294100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is the question.</p><p>Call Tom Dickson.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is the question.Call Tom Dickson .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is the question.Call Tom Dickson.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29845425</id>
	<title>Re:You can't make this stuff up</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256309460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>RTFM!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>RTFM !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>RTFM!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843667</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29847089</id>
	<title>Re:Delete, Remove, &amp; Drop</title>
	<author>LeDopore</author>
	<datestamp>1256318280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>OK, here's an idea that solves the "we can't delete it but we must be able to forget it and we can't forge it" problem.<ol>
<li>Encrypt the conversations while recording them, each with their own unique AES cypher.</li><li>Store the encrypted conversations to a WORM drive and keep them forever.</li><li>Store the AES keys on erasable media.</li><li>If you want to delete a conversation, you permanently delete the key but leave the encrypted conversation there.</li><li>If you want to *alter* a conversation, you're out of luck because the only alterable media is the one storing the keys.</li><li>Even though the encrypted conversation lasts forever on the WORM drive, bringing a conversation back from the dead is as hard as breaking AES without the benefit of any side channel attack - this won't happen any time soon.</li></ol><p>
Would this work?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>OK , here 's an idea that solves the " we ca n't delete it but we must be able to forget it and we ca n't forge it " problem .
Encrypt the conversations while recording them , each with their own unique AES cypher.Store the encrypted conversations to a WORM drive and keep them forever.Store the AES keys on erasable media.If you want to delete a conversation , you permanently delete the key but leave the encrypted conversation there.If you want to * alter * a conversation , you 're out of luck because the only alterable media is the one storing the keys.Even though the encrypted conversation lasts forever on the WORM drive , bringing a conversation back from the dead is as hard as breaking AES without the benefit of any side channel attack - this wo n't happen any time soon .
Would this work ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OK, here's an idea that solves the "we can't delete it but we must be able to forget it and we can't forge it" problem.
Encrypt the conversations while recording them, each with their own unique AES cypher.Store the encrypted conversations to a WORM drive and keep them forever.Store the AES keys on erasable media.If you want to delete a conversation, you permanently delete the key but leave the encrypted conversation there.If you want to *alter* a conversation, you're out of luck because the only alterable media is the one storing the keys.Even though the encrypted conversation lasts forever on the WORM drive, bringing a conversation back from the dead is as hard as breaking AES without the benefit of any side channel attack - this won't happen any time soon.
Would this work?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843959</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29849991</id>
	<title>Re:not afraid</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1256329140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The real problem is if the client tells his lawyer he DIDN'T do it (the police/prosecutor will never believe that) and then tells him about something he withheld from police because it would look really damning.</p><p>Then investigators can work backwards from the fact to some plausible way they could have stumbled onto it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The real problem is if the client tells his lawyer he DID N'T do it ( the police/prosecutor will never believe that ) and then tells him about something he withheld from police because it would look really damning.Then investigators can work backwards from the fact to some plausible way they could have stumbled onto it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The real problem is if the client tells his lawyer he DIDN'T do it (the police/prosecutor will never believe that) and then tells him about something he withheld from police because it would look really damning.Then investigators can work backwards from the fact to some plausible way they could have stumbled onto it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843753</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843667</id>
	<title>You can't make this stuff up</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256291160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Absolutely superb.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Absolutely superb .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Absolutely superb.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844253</id>
	<title>Way to go!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256300160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So can the western world stop mocking privacy in China now?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So can the western world stop mocking privacy in China now ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So can the western world stop mocking privacy in China now?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29853463</id>
	<title>Re:Delete, Remove, &amp; Drop</title>
	<author>Lehk228</author>
	<datestamp>1256307120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>untill someone breaks your hash algorithm, then every single record you have is useless</htmltext>
<tokenext>untill someone breaks your hash algorithm , then every single record you have is useless</tokentext>
<sentencetext>untill someone breaks your hash algorithm, then every single record you have is useless</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29846935</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843803</id>
	<title>any slashdot reader surprised?</title>
	<author>kubitus</author>
	<datestamp>1256293020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Israels IT industry is world champion in wiretapping everything.<p>
And I am not sure if they are interested in having tapped calls deleted</p><p>
I mean really deleted! </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Israels IT industry is world champion in wiretapping everything .
And I am not sure if they are interested in having tapped calls deleted I mean really deleted !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Israels IT industry is world champion in wiretapping everything.
And I am not sure if they are interested in having tapped calls deleted
I mean really deleted! </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844267</id>
	<title>Re:No joke, it's hard</title>
	<author>Filip22012005</author>
	<datestamp>1256300400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Would it be possible to encrypt all the mediafiles and keep the keys in a separate database? That way one could just delete the keys to make the data impossible to recover without actually going through all the tapes. Of course, you'd keep a backup of the keys, but that would be much easier to keep track of.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Would it be possible to encrypt all the mediafiles and keep the keys in a separate database ?
That way one could just delete the keys to make the data impossible to recover without actually going through all the tapes .
Of course , you 'd keep a backup of the keys , but that would be much easier to keep track of .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Would it be possible to encrypt all the mediafiles and keep the keys in a separate database?
That way one could just delete the keys to make the data impossible to recover without actually going through all the tapes.
Of course, you'd keep a backup of the keys, but that would be much easier to keep track of.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843815</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29847463</id>
	<title>Re:You can't make this stuff up</title>
	<author>Lorens</author>
	<datestamp>1256319960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You don't have to. I bet the calls are saved to a NetApp that has the no-delete feature turned on. Absolutely no way of deleting things short of physical intervention on the storage bay, which would destroy other calls. You would have to copy calls you want to keep to another bay and sent the old one back to NetApp for a wipe.</p><p>Cool feature when you don't want to lose things<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't have to .
I bet the calls are saved to a NetApp that has the no-delete feature turned on .
Absolutely no way of deleting things short of physical intervention on the storage bay , which would destroy other calls .
You would have to copy calls you want to keep to another bay and sent the old one back to NetApp for a wipe.Cool feature when you do n't want to lose things : - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't have to.
I bet the calls are saved to a NetApp that has the no-delete feature turned on.
Absolutely no way of deleting things short of physical intervention on the storage bay, which would destroy other calls.
You would have to copy calls you want to keep to another bay and sent the old one back to NetApp for a wipe.Cool feature when you don't want to lose things :-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843667</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29852385</id>
	<title>Re:You can't make this stuff up</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256296860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They should hire Danger to run their storage....  They seem to have a good idea of how to delete things....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They should hire Danger to run their storage.... They seem to have a good idea of how to delete things... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They should hire Danger to run their storage....  They seem to have a good idea of how to delete things....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843667</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843985</id>
	<title>Re:No joke, it's hard</title>
	<author>noundi</author>
	<datestamp>1256296320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Deleting data is really really hard.  If one is storing large amounts of data it is difficult to put a system in place which can prove that every copy in your posession has been deleted.  Think about the work of sifting through thousands of write-once offline backups, be it tapes or CDs or whatever, locating the data, copying the original minus the data and destroying the originals.  If that's not hard enough, what about data that's not in discrete files.  Say there's a PostgreSQL database that's zipped and spans a thousand peices of physical media.  The only way to delete a record is to load the whole database then redump it.  And don't forget about regenerating all the index files.  And dealing with obsolete file formats.</p><p>This sounds like a stupid problem, but in reality it is really tough to delete something and be certain that you've got it all.</p></div><p>Which makes them look even more dumb for not asking how difficult/expensive the task is in the first place.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Deleting data is really really hard .
If one is storing large amounts of data it is difficult to put a system in place which can prove that every copy in your posession has been deleted .
Think about the work of sifting through thousands of write-once offline backups , be it tapes or CDs or whatever , locating the data , copying the original minus the data and destroying the originals .
If that 's not hard enough , what about data that 's not in discrete files .
Say there 's a PostgreSQL database that 's zipped and spans a thousand peices of physical media .
The only way to delete a record is to load the whole database then redump it .
And do n't forget about regenerating all the index files .
And dealing with obsolete file formats.This sounds like a stupid problem , but in reality it is really tough to delete something and be certain that you 've got it all.Which makes them look even more dumb for not asking how difficult/expensive the task is in the first place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Deleting data is really really hard.
If one is storing large amounts of data it is difficult to put a system in place which can prove that every copy in your posession has been deleted.
Think about the work of sifting through thousands of write-once offline backups, be it tapes or CDs or whatever, locating the data, copying the original minus the data and destroying the originals.
If that's not hard enough, what about data that's not in discrete files.
Say there's a PostgreSQL database that's zipped and spans a thousand peices of physical media.
The only way to delete a record is to load the whole database then redump it.
And don't forget about regenerating all the index files.
And dealing with obsolete file formats.This sounds like a stupid problem, but in reality it is really tough to delete something and be certain that you've got it all.Which makes them look even more dumb for not asking how difficult/expensive the task is in the first place.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843815</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844931</id>
	<title>Re:Every knows</title>
	<author>ArsenneLupin</author>
	<datestamp>1256306100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>i know about at least 1 person for 100\% sure he works for secret intelligence</p></div><p>Only one? I know 3:</p><ol>
<li>one is an ex-colleague. Officially he just works for "the State", but "everybody" knows which part of the State he works for, even though he never stops denying it (especially once our local CCC chapter started spreading the same rumor...).</li>
<li>Another one is the boy scouts chieftain of a friend from our local LUG. He's pretty open (to us) about it.</li>
<li>And the third is the brother of my ex who sank a certain ship, and then was foolish enough to brag about it to his family after he came back from that mission...</li></ol><p>
Ok, so how long until the subpoenas will start raining in on Slashdot?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>i know about at least 1 person for 100 \ % sure he works for secret intelligenceOnly one ?
I know 3 : one is an ex-colleague .
Officially he just works for " the State " , but " everybody " knows which part of the State he works for , even though he never stops denying it ( especially once our local CCC chapter started spreading the same rumor... ) .
Another one is the boy scouts chieftain of a friend from our local LUG .
He 's pretty open ( to us ) about it .
And the third is the brother of my ex who sank a certain ship , and then was foolish enough to brag about it to his family after he came back from that mission.. . Ok , so how long until the subpoenas will start raining in on Slashdot ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i know about at least 1 person for 100\% sure he works for secret intelligenceOnly one?
I know 3:
one is an ex-colleague.
Officially he just works for "the State", but "everybody" knows which part of the State he works for, even though he never stops denying it (especially once our local CCC chapter started spreading the same rumor...).
Another one is the boy scouts chieftain of a friend from our local LUG.
He's pretty open (to us) about it.
And the third is the brother of my ex who sank a certain ship, and then was foolish enough to brag about it to his family after he came back from that mission...
Ok, so how long until the subpoenas will start raining in on Slashdot?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843717</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29847649</id>
	<title>Re:No joke, it's hard</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256320680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Zuh?  Why in the world would you go to the effort of copying all files from a tape drive except what you want deleted to somewhere else, and then destroy the physical tape the 'to be deleted' file is on?</p><p>I mean, I'm not a programmer by profession (although I have dabbled in it for years), but I can't imagine it would be that hard to make a program that writes over the data of X file with zeroes.  *BAM*, problem solved, no wasted time or items.</p><p>Isn't there even a contest of some sort in which a hard drive is overwritten using a *nix command for overwriting it with zeroes that noone has ever recovered data from?  Ever?</p><p>Hell, at the bare minimum, go with your original theory of copying the 'good' files elsewhere, and then use that 'overwrite' command on the tape!  There, reuseable!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Zuh ?
Why in the world would you go to the effort of copying all files from a tape drive except what you want deleted to somewhere else , and then destroy the physical tape the 'to be deleted ' file is on ? I mean , I 'm not a programmer by profession ( although I have dabbled in it for years ) , but I ca n't imagine it would be that hard to make a program that writes over the data of X file with zeroes .
* BAM * , problem solved , no wasted time or items.Is n't there even a contest of some sort in which a hard drive is overwritten using a * nix command for overwriting it with zeroes that noone has ever recovered data from ?
Ever ? Hell , at the bare minimum , go with your original theory of copying the 'good ' files elsewhere , and then use that 'overwrite ' command on the tape !
There , reuseable !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Zuh?
Why in the world would you go to the effort of copying all files from a tape drive except what you want deleted to somewhere else, and then destroy the physical tape the 'to be deleted' file is on?I mean, I'm not a programmer by profession (although I have dabbled in it for years), but I can't imagine it would be that hard to make a program that writes over the data of X file with zeroes.
*BAM*, problem solved, no wasted time or items.Isn't there even a contest of some sort in which a hard drive is overwritten using a *nix command for overwriting it with zeroes that noone has ever recovered data from?
Ever?Hell, at the bare minimum, go with your original theory of copying the 'good' files elsewhere, and then use that 'overwrite' command on the tape!
There, reuseable!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843947</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29869207</id>
	<title>Re:Dutch justice...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256494800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seems to me a simple case of the wrong technical solution that does not meet all the requirements.</p><p>Us Dutchies need to stop bitching and go and fix the KLPD phone tap system to meet the requirements. In this case: don't use the write-once feature of a NetApps storage array to ensure data entegrity, but use data finger printing techniques as described above by JesseMcDonald or other techniques instead. Which probably means switching software vendors.</p><p>NetApp trade secrets? I think NetApp is simply trying to avoid being involved in this, and with good reasons. They just supply the array, not the phone tap software that integrates with it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seems to me a simple case of the wrong technical solution that does not meet all the requirements.Us Dutchies need to stop bitching and go and fix the KLPD phone tap system to meet the requirements .
In this case : do n't use the write-once feature of a NetApps storage array to ensure data entegrity , but use data finger printing techniques as described above by JesseMcDonald or other techniques instead .
Which probably means switching software vendors.NetApp trade secrets ?
I think NetApp is simply trying to avoid being involved in this , and with good reasons .
They just supply the array , not the phone tap software that integrates with it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seems to me a simple case of the wrong technical solution that does not meet all the requirements.Us Dutchies need to stop bitching and go and fix the KLPD phone tap system to meet the requirements.
In this case: don't use the write-once feature of a NetApps storage array to ensure data entegrity, but use data finger printing techniques as described above by JesseMcDonald or other techniques instead.
Which probably means switching software vendors.NetApp trade secrets?
I think NetApp is simply trying to avoid being involved in this, and with good reasons.
They just supply the array, not the phone tap software that integrates with it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844037</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844907</id>
	<title>We knew at some point</title>
	<author>Errtu76</author>
	<datestamp>1256305980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But then we got high.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But then we got high .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But then we got high.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843947</id>
	<title>Re:No joke, it's hard</title>
	<author>Sycraft-fu</author>
	<datestamp>1256295840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think what it is easy to forget as geeks is just how hard everything works to keep data. All our technology is designed around the assumption that you never want to lose any data. Thus completely removing it gets harder all the time.</p><p>As another example snapshot backups are now real common. NetApps can be configured, and often are, to take periodic snapshots of your data. That way, if something is accidentally deleted or modified, there are point in time shots to go back to. Likewise Windows Vista and 7 now keep revisions of files automatically. If you change a file, a new version is written and the old one is kept, by default, so long as there's free space on the drive.</p><p>Now none of this is stuff you can't turn off or remove but it is all stuff that adds to the complexity. Just deleting the file, and even overwriting it, doesn't necessarily do it. The computer may still have a copy. It is designed such to try and keep you from losing your data accidentally.</p><p>None of this is to excuse the government, if they have a requirement to delete these things they need to work out a way to do so, however that doesn't mean I don't sympathize with the problem. It isn't trivial to ensure all copies have been delete and have been done so in a provable fashion.</p><p>This is why when we surplus old computers, the harddrives never go with. They are taken to be wiped and/or destroyed later. We are just not interested in screwing around with making sure the data is gone and then screwing that up. Instead a simple visual inspection tells you there is no data (since there are no drives).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think what it is easy to forget as geeks is just how hard everything works to keep data .
All our technology is designed around the assumption that you never want to lose any data .
Thus completely removing it gets harder all the time.As another example snapshot backups are now real common .
NetApps can be configured , and often are , to take periodic snapshots of your data .
That way , if something is accidentally deleted or modified , there are point in time shots to go back to .
Likewise Windows Vista and 7 now keep revisions of files automatically .
If you change a file , a new version is written and the old one is kept , by default , so long as there 's free space on the drive.Now none of this is stuff you ca n't turn off or remove but it is all stuff that adds to the complexity .
Just deleting the file , and even overwriting it , does n't necessarily do it .
The computer may still have a copy .
It is designed such to try and keep you from losing your data accidentally.None of this is to excuse the government , if they have a requirement to delete these things they need to work out a way to do so , however that does n't mean I do n't sympathize with the problem .
It is n't trivial to ensure all copies have been delete and have been done so in a provable fashion.This is why when we surplus old computers , the harddrives never go with .
They are taken to be wiped and/or destroyed later .
We are just not interested in screwing around with making sure the data is gone and then screwing that up .
Instead a simple visual inspection tells you there is no data ( since there are no drives ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think what it is easy to forget as geeks is just how hard everything works to keep data.
All our technology is designed around the assumption that you never want to lose any data.
Thus completely removing it gets harder all the time.As another example snapshot backups are now real common.
NetApps can be configured, and often are, to take periodic snapshots of your data.
That way, if something is accidentally deleted or modified, there are point in time shots to go back to.
Likewise Windows Vista and 7 now keep revisions of files automatically.
If you change a file, a new version is written and the old one is kept, by default, so long as there's free space on the drive.Now none of this is stuff you can't turn off or remove but it is all stuff that adds to the complexity.
Just deleting the file, and even overwriting it, doesn't necessarily do it.
The computer may still have a copy.
It is designed such to try and keep you from losing your data accidentally.None of this is to excuse the government, if they have a requirement to delete these things they need to work out a way to do so, however that doesn't mean I don't sympathize with the problem.
It isn't trivial to ensure all copies have been delete and have been done so in a provable fashion.This is why when we surplus old computers, the harddrives never go with.
They are taken to be wiped and/or destroyed later.
We are just not interested in screwing around with making sure the data is gone and then screwing that up.
Instead a simple visual inspection tells you there is no data (since there are no drives).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843815</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843729</id>
	<title>Quick and permanent</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256292060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>drop database;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>drop database ;</tokentext>
<sentencetext>drop database;</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844275</id>
	<title>Re:Wish i was surprised...</title>
	<author>MrMr</author>
	<datestamp>1256300460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Somehow I think things could get worse:
<br>Imagine the same attitude and objectives, but now with competent staff...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Somehow I think things could get worse : Imagine the same attitude and objectives , but now with competent staff.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Somehow I think things could get worse:
Imagine the same attitude and objectives, but now with competent staff...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843849</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844643</id>
	<title>Easy solution</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256304180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1) Move tapes to Soviet Russia<br>2) Tapes delete you<br>3) ????<br>4) Profit!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) Move tapes to Soviet Russia2 ) Tapes delete you3 ) ? ? ?
? 4 ) Profit !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1) Move tapes to Soviet Russia2) Tapes delete you3) ???
?4) Profit!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843993</id>
	<title>Re:You can't make this stuff up</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256296500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Meanwhile, attorneys in the Netherlands remain afraid to use their phones."

Apparently they need some Dutch courage.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Meanwhile , attorneys in the Netherlands remain afraid to use their phones .
" Apparently they need some Dutch courage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Meanwhile, attorneys in the Netherlands remain afraid to use their phones.
"

Apparently they need some Dutch courage.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843919</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29845235</id>
	<title>Re:Delete, Remove, &amp; Drop</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256308440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Its fairly straight-forward then:</p><p>Every time they want to delete a file, buy a new NetApp and copy all the files they *don't* want to delete across to the new device.</p><p>Then destroy the old filer through, uh, <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5orss3fAEU" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">conventional</a> [youtube.com] methods..<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Its fairly straight-forward then : Every time they want to delete a file , buy a new NetApp and copy all the files they * do n't * want to delete across to the new device.Then destroy the old filer through , uh , conventional [ youtube.com ] methods.. : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its fairly straight-forward then:Every time they want to delete a file, buy a new NetApp and copy all the files they *don't* want to delete across to the new device.Then destroy the old filer through, uh, conventional [youtube.com] methods.. :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843959</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29847709</id>
	<title>Re:You can't make this stuff up</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256320980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The Dutch police are now trying to get their Israeli supplier Verint"</p><p>ISRAELI supplier.</p><p>i.e. JEWISH supplier.</p><p>i.e. JEWS.</p><p>The eternal jew...</p><p>He just can't keep his nose (hooked nose, of course) out of other people's business, nor can he stay out of white people's countries...</p><p>I wonder why.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The Dutch police are now trying to get their Israeli supplier Verint " ISRAELI supplier.i.e .
JEWISH supplier.i.e .
JEWS.The eternal jew...He just ca n't keep his nose ( hooked nose , of course ) out of other people 's business , nor can he stay out of white people 's countries...I wonder why .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The Dutch police are now trying to get their Israeli supplier Verint"ISRAELI supplier.i.e.
JEWISH supplier.i.e.
JEWS.The eternal jew...He just can't keep his nose (hooked nose, of course) out of other people's business, nor can he stay out of white people's countries...I wonder why.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843667</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844903</id>
	<title>WORM drive</title>
	<author>midicase</author>
	<datestamp>1256305920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I worked at fortune 500 company we had these Write Once Ream Many dive systems to record images of contracts.   <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Write\_Once\_Read\_Many" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Write\_Once\_Read\_Many</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>The drive platters looked like CD recordable media in a plastic case about the size of a large pizza.   Two machines would write out the data and when full the platters went into one of the jukeboxes (readers).   Not a bad system, a bit slow.  90's tech.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I worked at fortune 500 company we had these Write Once Ream Many dive systems to record images of contracts .
http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Write \ _Once \ _Read \ _Many [ wikipedia.org ] The drive platters looked like CD recordable media in a plastic case about the size of a large pizza .
Two machines would write out the data and when full the platters went into one of the jukeboxes ( readers ) .
Not a bad system , a bit slow .
90 's tech .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I worked at fortune 500 company we had these Write Once Ream Many dive systems to record images of contracts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Write\_Once\_Read\_Many [wikipedia.org]The drive platters looked like CD recordable media in a plastic case about the size of a large pizza.
Two machines would write out the data and when full the platters went into one of the jukeboxes (readers).
Not a bad system, a bit slow.
90's tech.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843959</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843815</id>
	<title>No joke, it's hard</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256293440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Deleting data is really really hard.  If one is storing large amounts of data it is difficult to put a system in place which can prove that every copy in your posession has been deleted.  Think about the work of sifting through thousands of write-once offline backups, be it tapes or CDs or whatever, locating the data, copying the original minus the data and destroying the originals.  If that's not hard enough, what about data that's not in discrete files.  Say there's a PostgreSQL database that's zipped and spans a thousand peices of physical media.  The only way to delete a record is to load the whole database then redump it.  And don't forget about regenerating all the index files.  And dealing with obsolete file formats.</p><p>This sounds like a stupid problem, but in reality it is really tough to delete something and be certain that you've got it all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Deleting data is really really hard .
If one is storing large amounts of data it is difficult to put a system in place which can prove that every copy in your posession has been deleted .
Think about the work of sifting through thousands of write-once offline backups , be it tapes or CDs or whatever , locating the data , copying the original minus the data and destroying the originals .
If that 's not hard enough , what about data that 's not in discrete files .
Say there 's a PostgreSQL database that 's zipped and spans a thousand peices of physical media .
The only way to delete a record is to load the whole database then redump it .
And do n't forget about regenerating all the index files .
And dealing with obsolete file formats.This sounds like a stupid problem , but in reality it is really tough to delete something and be certain that you 've got it all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Deleting data is really really hard.
If one is storing large amounts of data it is difficult to put a system in place which can prove that every copy in your posession has been deleted.
Think about the work of sifting through thousands of write-once offline backups, be it tapes or CDs or whatever, locating the data, copying the original minus the data and destroying the originals.
If that's not hard enough, what about data that's not in discrete files.
Say there's a PostgreSQL database that's zipped and spans a thousand peices of physical media.
The only way to delete a record is to load the whole database then redump it.
And don't forget about regenerating all the index files.
And dealing with obsolete file formats.This sounds like a stupid problem, but in reality it is really tough to delete something and be certain that you've got it all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29845585</id>
	<title>rm -rf</title>
	<author>nimbius</author>
	<datestamp>1256310360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>*.wav or *.aiff usually...<br> <br>
references available upon request.  hourly, not salary offer please.</htmltext>
<tokenext>* .wav or * .aiff usually.. . references available upon request .
hourly , not salary offer please .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>*.wav or *.aiff usually... 
references available upon request.
hourly, not salary offer please.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29846249</id>
	<title>Good luck with that</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256313840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Having worked with Verint many many times I can tell you that they will nothing but stonewall you and then charge out the ass (7+ figures) for the simplest of procedures. Verint and Nice are the worst recording companies there are.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Having worked with Verint many many times I can tell you that they will nothing but stonewall you and then charge out the ass ( 7 + figures ) for the simplest of procedures .
Verint and Nice are the worst recording companies there are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having worked with Verint many many times I can tell you that they will nothing but stonewall you and then charge out the ass (7+ figures) for the simplest of procedures.
Verint and Nice are the worst recording companies there are.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844149</id>
	<title>Re:not afraid</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256298780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In fact, GP is right. Here in the Netherlands, several cases basically took the course that GP describes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In fact , GP is right .
Here in the Netherlands , several cases basically took the course that GP describes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In fact, GP is right.
Here in the Netherlands, several cases basically took the course that GP describes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843753</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843737</id>
	<title>Easy</title>
	<author>L4t3r4lu5</author>
	<datestamp>1256292180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Take media with recorded conversations, place in a pile, load it up with a half-tonne of aluminium filings and iron oxide, and apply a high temperature heat source.<br> <br>You might want to wear safety goggles.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Take media with recorded conversations , place in a pile , load it up with a half-tonne of aluminium filings and iron oxide , and apply a high temperature heat source .
You might want to wear safety goggles .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Take media with recorded conversations, place in a pile, load it up with a half-tonne of aluminium filings and iron oxide, and apply a high temperature heat source.
You might want to wear safety goggles.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844223</id>
	<title>Re:not afraid</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256299680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The police wouldn't be dumb enough to use that as evidence.</p></div><p>Yes, they are that dumb. They actually tried to do that in The Netherlands in a case against the local hells angels club (and the judge threw the case out because of it).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The police would n't be dumb enough to use that as evidence.Yes , they are that dumb .
They actually tried to do that in The Netherlands in a case against the local hells angels club ( and the judge threw the case out because of it ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The police wouldn't be dumb enough to use that as evidence.Yes, they are that dumb.
They actually tried to do that in The Netherlands in a case against the local hells angels club (and the judge threw the case out because of it).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843753</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29845661</id>
	<title>No privacy but No Idea how to USE Tapped Calls?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256310780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Netherlands are famous for the highest level worldwide of tapped calls: basically everyone is tapped. Privacy of human beings is constantly and relentlessly violated by saving all people's data, child growth records, police records, medical records, all highways you ever drove through, all metro or bus you ever took, any website you ever visited through your mobile, sms you sent, call you made and so forth, all goes into huge databases often officially in the hands (or easily accessible from) government agencies, and quite often very badly managed(read: badly protected) through external outsourcing contracts. That's the impression you get.</p><p>Let alone having a clue about their own IT system. Everyone is tapped, we said. Unsurprisingly: nobody cares, because despite overly unnecessary tapping, the country stays as yet infested by criminals and criminality, also due to the fight between judiciary and political worlds.</p><p>It's a cultural aspect I think: so much logged, nobody knows how to use that in first instance to successfully defeat criminality in courts, so that bad guys manage to walk free. But I guess a lot of people has fun in their gray office in rainy days at listening the recording of your call with your girlfriend..</p><p>That said, if you are lucky your living standard may be pretty good in the land. You can sue your neighbor for damage by his cat and win his money.<br>Only: if there is a bad example of paranoid violation of privacy combined with apparently inadequate enforcement of the criminal law, there you have it.</p><p>Any world you say may be used against you, if we find the record.. wait a minute.. just a sec.. almost there......<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... oh but we didn't have the right to keep records of you so we deleted it......<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..... actually, we have no idea how to delete a record and all its snapshots normally, but in this exceptional case we managed to.. a system crash.. I'm not sure..<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.......<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.........there seems to be a problem with the support contract of this thing... they manage it from India...<br>Ahem, sorry It's friday 17:30 can you come back on Tuesday?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. otherwise send a letter to............</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Netherlands are famous for the highest level worldwide of tapped calls : basically everyone is tapped .
Privacy of human beings is constantly and relentlessly violated by saving all people 's data , child growth records , police records , medical records , all highways you ever drove through , all metro or bus you ever took , any website you ever visited through your mobile , sms you sent , call you made and so forth , all goes into huge databases often officially in the hands ( or easily accessible from ) government agencies , and quite often very badly managed ( read : badly protected ) through external outsourcing contracts .
That 's the impression you get.Let alone having a clue about their own IT system .
Everyone is tapped , we said .
Unsurprisingly : nobody cares , because despite overly unnecessary tapping , the country stays as yet infested by criminals and criminality , also due to the fight between judiciary and political worlds.It 's a cultural aspect I think : so much logged , nobody knows how to use that in first instance to successfully defeat criminality in courts , so that bad guys manage to walk free .
But I guess a lot of people has fun in their gray office in rainy days at listening the recording of your call with your girlfriend..That said , if you are lucky your living standard may be pretty good in the land .
You can sue your neighbor for damage by his cat and win his money.Only : if there is a bad example of paranoid violation of privacy combined with apparently inadequate enforcement of the criminal law , there you have it.Any world you say may be used against you , if we find the record.. wait a minute.. just a sec.. almost there...... ... oh but we did n't have the right to keep records of you so we deleted it...... ..... actually , we have no idea how to delete a record and all its snapshots normally , but in this exceptional case we managed to.. a system crash.. I 'm not sure.. ....... .........there seems to be a problem with the support contract of this thing... they manage it from India...Ahem , sorry It 's friday 17 : 30 can you come back on Tuesday ?
.. otherwise send a letter to........... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Netherlands are famous for the highest level worldwide of tapped calls: basically everyone is tapped.
Privacy of human beings is constantly and relentlessly violated by saving all people's data, child growth records, police records, medical records, all highways you ever drove through, all metro or bus you ever took, any website you ever visited through your mobile, sms you sent, call you made and so forth, all goes into huge databases often officially in the hands (or easily accessible from) government agencies, and quite often very badly managed(read: badly protected) through external outsourcing contracts.
That's the impression you get.Let alone having a clue about their own IT system.
Everyone is tapped, we said.
Unsurprisingly: nobody cares, because despite overly unnecessary tapping, the country stays as yet infested by criminals and criminality, also due to the fight between judiciary and political worlds.It's a cultural aspect I think: so much logged, nobody knows how to use that in first instance to successfully defeat criminality in courts, so that bad guys manage to walk free.
But I guess a lot of people has fun in their gray office in rainy days at listening the recording of your call with your girlfriend..That said, if you are lucky your living standard may be pretty good in the land.
You can sue your neighbor for damage by his cat and win his money.Only: if there is a bad example of paranoid violation of privacy combined with apparently inadequate enforcement of the criminal law, there you have it.Any world you say may be used against you, if we find the record.. wait a minute.. just a sec.. almost there...... ... oh but we didn't have the right to keep records of you so we deleted it...... ..... actually, we have no idea how to delete a record and all its snapshots normally, but in this exceptional case we managed to.. a system crash.. I'm not sure.. ....... .........there seems to be a problem with the support contract of this thing... they manage it from India...Ahem, sorry It's friday 17:30 can you come back on Tuesday?
.. otherwise send a letter to............</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29853303</id>
	<title>Re:Conspiracy theory</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256305440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>It's a well-known conspiracy theory: that Mossad has created Telco front companies throughout the world to spy on other nations</i> </p><p>Along the same lines, there was (maybe still is) a well-regarded firewall appliance of Israeli origin which was supposed to be supplied with a Mossad-friendly back door.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a well-known conspiracy theory : that Mossad has created Telco front companies throughout the world to spy on other nations Along the same lines , there was ( maybe still is ) a well-regarded firewall appliance of Israeli origin which was supposed to be supplied with a Mossad-friendly back door .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a well-known conspiracy theory: that Mossad has created Telco front companies throughout the world to spy on other nations Along the same lines, there was (maybe still is) a well-regarded firewall appliance of Israeli origin which was supposed to be supplied with a Mossad-friendly back door.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844195</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844729</id>
	<title>isn't there a law</title>
	<author>brillow</author>
	<datestamp>1256304780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Isn't there a law which would prevent an entity from blocking another entity from complying with the law?

For instance, if I sign a contract with you that requires me to break the law to fulfill it, the contract is invalid and you can't hold me to it.

How does this work in the case of one entity withholding information which compels others to break the law?

I'd not heard of this Dutch wiretapping of lawyers stuff, but its ironic that a society which many naive American liberals (of which I am one) view as more-enlightened than the use would so quickly slide down the slope of injustice.  Privilege is one of the pillars of society.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't there a law which would prevent an entity from blocking another entity from complying with the law ?
For instance , if I sign a contract with you that requires me to break the law to fulfill it , the contract is invalid and you ca n't hold me to it .
How does this work in the case of one entity withholding information which compels others to break the law ?
I 'd not heard of this Dutch wiretapping of lawyers stuff , but its ironic that a society which many naive American liberals ( of which I am one ) view as more-enlightened than the use would so quickly slide down the slope of injustice .
Privilege is one of the pillars of society .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't there a law which would prevent an entity from blocking another entity from complying with the law?
For instance, if I sign a contract with you that requires me to break the law to fulfill it, the contract is invalid and you can't hold me to it.
How does this work in the case of one entity withholding information which compels others to break the law?
I'd not heard of this Dutch wiretapping of lawyers stuff, but its ironic that a society which many naive American liberals (of which I am one) view as more-enlightened than the use would so quickly slide down the slope of injustice.
Privilege is one of the pillars of society.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843849</id>
	<title>Wish i was surprised...</title>
	<author>Veneratio</author>
	<datestamp>1256293920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But im not, really. Having worked for the Dutch police twice now, I can safely say that the majority of their IT staff are completely clueless. A few years ago they "outsourced" their IT to a seperate entity to handle all their IT, but this entity was staffed mostly with the people they already had, so there wasn't any actual increase of knowledge (as far as I could tell). They got a nice fat bag of money and an unclear manifest, all paid for by us - the Dutch taxpayer - and this is what we get.</p><p>The Netherlands: No privacy, no competence and instead of capable beatcops we get highway robbery in the form of a cop with a lasergun having his daylong break sitting behind a bush next to our highways. And they wonder why the populace is starting to hate law enforcement.</p><p>Do yourself a favor and do a search on Google for "C2000", another one of the Dutch police success stories.</p><p>I could weep. Or well....puke really.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But im not , really .
Having worked for the Dutch police twice now , I can safely say that the majority of their IT staff are completely clueless .
A few years ago they " outsourced " their IT to a seperate entity to handle all their IT , but this entity was staffed mostly with the people they already had , so there was n't any actual increase of knowledge ( as far as I could tell ) .
They got a nice fat bag of money and an unclear manifest , all paid for by us - the Dutch taxpayer - and this is what we get.The Netherlands : No privacy , no competence and instead of capable beatcops we get highway robbery in the form of a cop with a lasergun having his daylong break sitting behind a bush next to our highways .
And they wonder why the populace is starting to hate law enforcement.Do yourself a favor and do a search on Google for " C2000 " , another one of the Dutch police success stories.I could weep .
Or well....puke really .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But im not, really.
Having worked for the Dutch police twice now, I can safely say that the majority of their IT staff are completely clueless.
A few years ago they "outsourced" their IT to a seperate entity to handle all their IT, but this entity was staffed mostly with the people they already had, so there wasn't any actual increase of knowledge (as far as I could tell).
They got a nice fat bag of money and an unclear manifest, all paid for by us - the Dutch taxpayer - and this is what we get.The Netherlands: No privacy, no competence and instead of capable beatcops we get highway robbery in the form of a cop with a lasergun having his daylong break sitting behind a bush next to our highways.
And they wonder why the populace is starting to hate law enforcement.Do yourself a favor and do a search on Google for "C2000", another one of the Dutch police success stories.I could weep.
Or well....puke really.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843727</id>
	<title>Now</title>
	<author>MistrX</author>
	<datestamp>1256292060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wait for the claims against the state!<br>Is this already on failblog?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait for the claims against the state ! Is this already on failblog ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait for the claims against the state!Is this already on failblog?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29845655</id>
	<title>Re:You can't make this stuff up</title>
	<author>s2theg</author>
	<datestamp>1256310720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Here let me help you with that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Here let me help you with that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here let me help you with that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843667</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843875</id>
	<title>they shold've just used</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256294400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>msft products, they consistently delete data automatically for you with no interaction required</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>msft products , they consistently delete data automatically for you with no interaction required</tokentext>
<sentencetext>msft products, they consistently delete data automatically for you with no interaction required</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844901</id>
	<title>What's the problem?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256305920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just have them store their data on Seagate 1TB drives!  Everything will be gone in 3-6 months.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just have them store their data on Seagate 1TB drives !
Everything will be gone in 3-6 months .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just have them store their data on Seagate 1TB drives!
Everything will be gone in 3-6 months.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29861533</id>
	<title>Re:You can't make this stuff up</title>
	<author>DaVince21</author>
	<datestamp>1256397060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Indeed, geweldig. Unbelievable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Indeed , geweldig .
Unbelievable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Indeed, geweldig.
Unbelievable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843667</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843981</id>
	<title>Re:No joke, it's hard</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256296320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It sounds as if they may have employed a NetApp archival technology called SnapLock Compliance.  If this is the case, they will not be able to delete the data, by design.  All media upon which the data resides, would need to be destroyed.  The product is designed and sold that way, and I am sure the admins knew that from the beginning.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It sounds as if they may have employed a NetApp archival technology called SnapLock Compliance .
If this is the case , they will not be able to delete the data , by design .
All media upon which the data resides , would need to be destroyed .
The product is designed and sold that way , and I am sure the admins knew that from the beginning .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It sounds as if they may have employed a NetApp archival technology called SnapLock Compliance.
If this is the case, they will not be able to delete the data, by design.
All media upon which the data resides, would need to be destroyed.
The product is designed and sold that way, and I am sure the admins knew that from the beginning.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843815</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843749</id>
	<title>don't tape</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256292300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>So then the only way to comply with the law is to not tape them in the first place.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So then the only way to comply with the law is to not tape them in the first place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So then the only way to comply with the law is to not tape them in the first place.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844301</id>
	<title>Re:You can't make this stuff up</title>
	<author>Nossie</author>
	<datestamp>1256300700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And in related news...</p><p>"The law in America says that file sharing hosts and their clients/files must be destroyed. But [what] the Dutch ISP Nforce has been keeping under wraps for years [is] that no one has the foggiest clue how to delete them"</p><p>So many levels....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And in related news... " The law in America says that file sharing hosts and their clients/files must be destroyed .
But [ what ] the Dutch ISP Nforce has been keeping under wraps for years [ is ] that no one has the foggiest clue how to delete them " So many levels... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And in related news..."The law in America says that file sharing hosts and their clients/files must be destroyed.
But [what] the Dutch ISP Nforce has been keeping under wraps for years [is] that no one has the foggiest clue how to delete them"So many levels....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843667</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843943</id>
	<title>This is real good news.</title>
	<author>Fengpost</author>
	<datestamp>1256295660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If the Dutch government can not figure out how to delete the files, how can they expect TPB to delete the torrents!</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the Dutch government can not figure out how to delete the files , how can they expect TPB to delete the torrents !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the Dutch government can not figure out how to delete the files, how can they expect TPB to delete the torrents!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843725</id>
	<title>not afraid</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256292060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lawyers aren't afraid at all to use the phone: If a tapped conversation between them and their client turns up later in court, their client usually walks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lawyers are n't afraid at all to use the phone : If a tapped conversation between them and their client turns up later in court , their client usually walks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lawyers aren't afraid at all to use the phone: If a tapped conversation between them and their client turns up later in court, their client usually walks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844699</id>
	<title>How dumb can you be?</title>
	<author>X10</author>
	<datestamp>1256304540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The actual problem is that they don't know how to delete calls that they shouldn't have recorded in the first place: conversations between lawyers and their clients. Why am I not surprised? Someone told me a couple of years ago that Dutch police staff is not allowed to be present when staff of the Israeli vendor of the equipment is performing maintenance. I'm sure Moss^H^H^H^H Verint has put in components that send the calls to more recipients than it should.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The actual problem is that they do n't know how to delete calls that they should n't have recorded in the first place : conversations between lawyers and their clients .
Why am I not surprised ?
Someone told me a couple of years ago that Dutch police staff is not allowed to be present when staff of the Israeli vendor of the equipment is performing maintenance .
I 'm sure Moss ^ H ^ H ^ H ^ H Verint has put in components that send the calls to more recipients than it should .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The actual problem is that they don't know how to delete calls that they shouldn't have recorded in the first place: conversations between lawyers and their clients.
Why am I not surprised?
Someone told me a couple of years ago that Dutch police staff is not allowed to be present when staff of the Israeli vendor of the equipment is performing maintenance.
I'm sure Moss^H^H^H^H Verint has put in components that send the calls to more recipients than it should.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844875</id>
	<title>Re:Delete, Remove, &amp; Drop</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256305740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Very interesting.</p><p>So, the only way for the police to abide the law is to stop all wiretapping.</p><p>But of course personal freedom is not so easily achieved.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Very interesting.So , the only way for the police to abide the law is to stop all wiretapping.But of course personal freedom is not so easily achieved .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Very interesting.So, the only way for the police to abide the law is to stop all wiretapping.But of course personal freedom is not so easily achieved.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843959</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844015</id>
	<title>Law required change of supplier</title>
	<author>AlecC</author>
	<datestamp>1256296800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It seems to me that, now that this is certain knowledge, the police cannot legally continue to outsource their tapping to this supplier. Surely there are required to find another, compliant, way of doing their intercepts with emergency status. Otherwise, they themselves are committing a crime. They could reasonably plead ignorance up to a certain point, but they cannot do so now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems to me that , now that this is certain knowledge , the police can not legally continue to outsource their tapping to this supplier .
Surely there are required to find another , compliant , way of doing their intercepts with emergency status .
Otherwise , they themselves are committing a crime .
They could reasonably plead ignorance up to a certain point , but they can not do so now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems to me that, now that this is certain knowledge, the police cannot legally continue to outsource their tapping to this supplier.
Surely there are required to find another, compliant, way of doing their intercepts with emergency status.
Otherwise, they themselves are committing a crime.
They could reasonably plead ignorance up to a certain point, but they cannot do so now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844389</id>
	<title>Vendor lock-in</title>
	<author>Jerry Smith</author>
	<datestamp>1256301720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's all: it's a black box situation, the police have no control over the data, maintenance is done purely by the manufacturer and tampering will be punished. Somehow somewhen in the past (at least for a decade) the decision was made to purchase (probably read "lease") this Israelian device. And de peaple pay dearly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's all : it 's a black box situation , the police have no control over the data , maintenance is done purely by the manufacturer and tampering will be punished .
Somehow somewhen in the past ( at least for a decade ) the decision was made to purchase ( probably read " lease " ) this Israelian device .
And de peaple pay dearly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's all: it's a black box situation, the police have no control over the data, maintenance is done purely by the manufacturer and tampering will be punished.
Somehow somewhen in the past (at least for a decade) the decision was made to purchase (probably read "lease") this Israelian device.
And de peaple pay dearly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844407</id>
	<title>Re:If they can't delete them....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256301900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt;....the system is probably a piece of shit built by incompetents.</p><p>Citation Please</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; ....the system is probably a piece of shit built by incompetents.Citation Please</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt;....the system is probably a piece of shit built by incompetents.Citation Please</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843811</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843967</id>
	<title>About destroying not deleting...</title>
	<author>dajak</author>
	<datestamp>1256296140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The issue is the difference between destroying (in practical terms: erasing), as they are legally obliged to do, and deleting it. <a href="http://www.nrc.nl/multimedia/archive/00255/Vernietiging\_gegeve\_255769a.pdf" title="www.nrc.nl">This pdf document</a> [www.nrc.nl]linked from the article explains in laymen's language how the "pointer (or route) in the system to the data concerned" is removed, making 1) the data inaccessible to investigators, and 2) freeing up the space of a hard disk array for new data, and then goes on explaining that the data may theoretically still be retrieved from the disks if not yet overwritten. They don't know whether the commercial black box system they use erases the data, and suspect it doesn't.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The issue is the difference between destroying ( in practical terms : erasing ) , as they are legally obliged to do , and deleting it .
This pdf document [ www.nrc.nl ] linked from the article explains in laymen 's language how the " pointer ( or route ) in the system to the data concerned " is removed , making 1 ) the data inaccessible to investigators , and 2 ) freeing up the space of a hard disk array for new data , and then goes on explaining that the data may theoretically still be retrieved from the disks if not yet overwritten .
They do n't know whether the commercial black box system they use erases the data , and suspect it does n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The issue is the difference between destroying (in practical terms: erasing), as they are legally obliged to do, and deleting it.
This pdf document [www.nrc.nl]linked from the article explains in laymen's language how the "pointer (or route) in the system to the data concerned" is removed, making 1) the data inaccessible to investigators, and 2) freeing up the space of a hard disk array for new data, and then goes on explaining that the data may theoretically still be retrieved from the disks if not yet overwritten.
They don't know whether the commercial black box system they use erases the data, and suspect it doesn't.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843811</id>
	<title>If they can't delete them....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256293320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>....the system is probably a piece of shit built by incompetents. What are the odds they can even find them after 3 years?</p><p>On the other hand perhaps they can delete them but they're claiming not to be able to so they can hang onto them.</p><p>Either way police that don't comply with the law, or incompetent fools - not good.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>....the system is probably a piece of shit built by incompetents .
What are the odds they can even find them after 3 years ? On the other hand perhaps they can delete them but they 're claiming not to be able to so they can hang onto them.Either way police that do n't comply with the law , or incompetent fools - not good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>....the system is probably a piece of shit built by incompetents.
What are the odds they can even find them after 3 years?On the other hand perhaps they can delete them but they're claiming not to be able to so they can hang onto them.Either way police that don't comply with the law, or incompetent fools - not good.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29846935</id>
	<title>Re:Delete, Remove, &amp; Drop</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256317440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If they can figure out a way to delete a 'prohibited conversation' they could theoretically modify the data too.</p></div><p>Technically there is no need to make the conversations themselves immutable. You just need to be able to verify that the recording you have is the one which was originally recorded. A one-way hash can serve this purpose. For each recording, store the conversation itself in an erasable/mutable medium, but record a hash of the conversation in append-only storage (with multiple distributed backups). If you need to show that the recording is legit, compare it with the hash. If you need to delete something, record the deletion in the append-only medium and then remove it from the mutable storage. The hash will remain, but you can't use the hash to obtain information about the conversation without the original recording.</p><p>Bonus: You can recognize unauthorized deletions by comparing the mutable and immutable records.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If they can figure out a way to delete a 'prohibited conversation ' they could theoretically modify the data too.Technically there is no need to make the conversations themselves immutable .
You just need to be able to verify that the recording you have is the one which was originally recorded .
A one-way hash can serve this purpose .
For each recording , store the conversation itself in an erasable/mutable medium , but record a hash of the conversation in append-only storage ( with multiple distributed backups ) .
If you need to show that the recording is legit , compare it with the hash .
If you need to delete something , record the deletion in the append-only medium and then remove it from the mutable storage .
The hash will remain , but you ca n't use the hash to obtain information about the conversation without the original recording.Bonus : You can recognize unauthorized deletions by comparing the mutable and immutable records .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they can figure out a way to delete a 'prohibited conversation' they could theoretically modify the data too.Technically there is no need to make the conversations themselves immutable.
You just need to be able to verify that the recording you have is the one which was originally recorded.
A one-way hash can serve this purpose.
For each recording, store the conversation itself in an erasable/mutable medium, but record a hash of the conversation in append-only storage (with multiple distributed backups).
If you need to show that the recording is legit, compare it with the hash.
If you need to delete something, record the deletion in the append-only medium and then remove it from the mutable storage.
The hash will remain, but you can't use the hash to obtain information about the conversation without the original recording.Bonus: You can recognize unauthorized deletions by comparing the mutable and immutable records.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843959</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844875
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843959
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29869207
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844037
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29845425
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843667
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29846691
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843803
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844903
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843959
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843937
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843811
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29847659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843959
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844301
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843667
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29847463
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843667
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844959
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843799
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29845235
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843959
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844267
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843815
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29847089
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843959
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29853463
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29846935
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843959
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843981
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843815
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843985
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843815
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29846435
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843947
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843815
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843753
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843725
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844275
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843849
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29854233
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843811
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29861533
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843667
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29852385
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843667
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843959
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29847025
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843725
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29847649
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843947
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843815
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844143
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843815
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843717
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844407
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843811
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29853303
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843799
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29845575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843753
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843725
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844369
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843799
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29845655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843667
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844149
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843753
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843725
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29849991
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843753
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843725
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844165
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843725
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843993
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843919
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843667
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0244245_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29847709
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843667
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0244245.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29848251
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0244245.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843859
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0244245.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843737
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0244245.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843849
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844275
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0244245.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843875
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0244245.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844389
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0244245.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29845599
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0244245.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843799
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844369
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844959
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844195
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29853303
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0244245.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843815
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843947
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29847649
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29846435
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843981
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843985
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844143
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844267
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0244245.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843667
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844301
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29861533
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29847709
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29845425
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29845655
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843919
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843993
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29847463
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29852385
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0244245.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844729
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0244245.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843811
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843937
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844407
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29854233
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0244245.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844253
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0244245.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843725
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843753
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844149
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29849991
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844223
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29845575
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843767
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29847025
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844165
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0244245.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844037
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29869207
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0244245.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843717
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844931
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0244245.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843803
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29846691
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0244245.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843959
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844875
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29846935
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29853463
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29847659
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29845235
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29847089
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844375
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29844903
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0244245.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843749
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0244245.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843697
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0244245.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0244245.29843871
</commentlist>
</conversation>
