<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_26_1241238</id>
	<title>Ultrasurf Easily Blocked, But So What?</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1256572860000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Frequent Slashdot contributor Bennett Haselton writes
<i>"A simple experiment shows that it's easy to find the IP addresses used by the UltraSurf anti-censorship program, and block traffic to all of those IP addresses, effectively stopping UltraSurf from working. But this is not a fault of UltraSurf; rather, it demonstrates that an anti-censorship software program can be successful even if it's relatively trivial to block it."</i>
Read on for Bennett's analysis.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Frequent Slashdot contributor Bennett Haselton writes " A simple experiment shows that it 's easy to find the IP addresses used by the UltraSurf anti-censorship program , and block traffic to all of those IP addresses , effectively stopping UltraSurf from working .
But this is not a fault of UltraSurf ; rather , it demonstrates that an anti-censorship software program can be successful even if it 's relatively trivial to block it .
" Read on for Bennett 's analysis .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Frequent Slashdot contributor Bennett Haselton writes
"A simple experiment shows that it's easy to find the IP addresses used by the UltraSurf anti-censorship program, and block traffic to all of those IP addresses, effectively stopping UltraSurf from working.
But this is not a fault of UltraSurf; rather, it demonstrates that an anti-censorship software program can be successful even if it's relatively trivial to block it.
"
Read on for Bennett's analysis.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873913</id>
	<title>Even more dynamic</title>
	<author>davidwr</author>
	<datestamp>1256579220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Have every copy include a few dozen or hundred random addresses out of the larger pool.  Add and "retire" addresses to the pool daily, so it won't be possible to see "retired" addresses by repeatedly downloading the program.</p><p>"Retired" doesn't mean no longer in use, just no longer included with new downloads.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have every copy include a few dozen or hundred random addresses out of the larger pool .
Add and " retire " addresses to the pool daily , so it wo n't be possible to see " retired " addresses by repeatedly downloading the program .
" Retired " does n't mean no longer in use , just no longer included with new downloads .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have every copy include a few dozen or hundred random addresses out of the larger pool.
Add and "retire" addresses to the pool daily, so it won't be possible to see "retired" addresses by repeatedly downloading the program.
"Retired" doesn't mean no longer in use, just no longer included with new downloads.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29885091</id>
	<title>Re:The point of censorship is not to stop the geek</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256664300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, that is the procedure of censorship, but not the purpose of it. The end goal, as always, is to facilitate the expansion of government in terms of both power and revenue.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , that is the procedure of censorship , but not the purpose of it .
The end goal , as always , is to facilitate the expansion of government in terms of both power and revenue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, that is the procedure of censorship, but not the purpose of it.
The end goal, as always, is to facilitate the expansion of government in terms of both power and revenue.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873529</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29881957</id>
	<title>Re:Do you really want to know?</title>
	<author>couchslug</author>
	<datestamp>1256642880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's why the US has a Second Amendment, and why embedding the capability for armed violence has been well worth the cost. There can be no real personal security without the autonomous power to kill an attacker (even in Iraq, the Coalition allow one Kalashnikov per householder), and dispersion of weapons means that the people can always post a threat to government if they are willing to sacrifice.</p><p>Sure, going heads up against an army is difficult, but the Viet Cong and Taliban prove that if you have the balls for it and are willing to die that can take you a long way (and co-opt a good bit of the opposing armed force while you are at it).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's why the US has a Second Amendment , and why embedding the capability for armed violence has been well worth the cost .
There can be no real personal security without the autonomous power to kill an attacker ( even in Iraq , the Coalition allow one Kalashnikov per householder ) , and dispersion of weapons means that the people can always post a threat to government if they are willing to sacrifice.Sure , going heads up against an army is difficult , but the Viet Cong and Taliban prove that if you have the balls for it and are willing to die that can take you a long way ( and co-opt a good bit of the opposing armed force while you are at it ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's why the US has a Second Amendment, and why embedding the capability for armed violence has been well worth the cost.
There can be no real personal security without the autonomous power to kill an attacker (even in Iraq, the Coalition allow one Kalashnikov per householder), and dispersion of weapons means that the people can always post a threat to government if they are willing to sacrifice.Sure, going heads up against an army is difficult, but the Viet Cong and Taliban prove that if you have the balls for it and are willing to die that can take you a long way (and co-opt a good bit of the opposing armed force while you are at it).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873973</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29875825</id>
	<title>Re:Why block? Monitor...</title>
	<author>tlhIngan</author>
	<datestamp>1256588040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>It's all encrypted. You could detect it, but not really "monitor" the activity.</p></div></blockquote><p>No, but knowing both parties (one end is this thing, which you detect, and the other end is someone using it), it's often "good enough".</p><p>Think of it as a pen recorder for the destination - you'll know who's using the service and where it's coming from inside the network. Trace that IP back to an address.</p><p>This is assuming that all uses for such a service are "illegal" in China (with the thinking of if it was legal, why use it?). Now you can bounce it through proxies inside China, but then those admins would probably get pressure to identify those using their services...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's all encrypted .
You could detect it , but not really " monitor " the activity.No , but knowing both parties ( one end is this thing , which you detect , and the other end is someone using it ) , it 's often " good enough " .Think of it as a pen recorder for the destination - you 'll know who 's using the service and where it 's coming from inside the network .
Trace that IP back to an address.This is assuming that all uses for such a service are " illegal " in China ( with the thinking of if it was legal , why use it ? ) .
Now you can bounce it through proxies inside China , but then those admins would probably get pressure to identify those using their services.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's all encrypted.
You could detect it, but not really "monitor" the activity.No, but knowing both parties (one end is this thing, which you detect, and the other end is someone using it), it's often "good enough".Think of it as a pen recorder for the destination - you'll know who's using the service and where it's coming from inside the network.
Trace that IP back to an address.This is assuming that all uses for such a service are "illegal" in China (with the thinking of if it was legal, why use it?).
Now you can bounce it through proxies inside China, but then those admins would probably get pressure to identify those using their services...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29874825</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29874199</id>
	<title>Solution?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256580660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Make it target-dependant which IP addresses you send to whom. I've thought about this for copy-protection (but haven't told anybody). You can give every downloader his/her own copy of your executable with a fresh MD5. Make the executable contents (the IP address list) IP address dependant. Better yet, get 128 of them and give out a set of 64, based on the IP address and some awkward hash of the IP address. That way, every user has half of the targets (making the chance of finding a working host really big) but no country can get the full list (since they lack a few bits in the IP address range they use).</p><p>An idea?</p><p>Of course, you can keep swapping the IP addresses monthly/weekly or so to add to this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Make it target-dependant which IP addresses you send to whom .
I 've thought about this for copy-protection ( but have n't told anybody ) .
You can give every downloader his/her own copy of your executable with a fresh MD5 .
Make the executable contents ( the IP address list ) IP address dependant .
Better yet , get 128 of them and give out a set of 64 , based on the IP address and some awkward hash of the IP address .
That way , every user has half of the targets ( making the chance of finding a working host really big ) but no country can get the full list ( since they lack a few bits in the IP address range they use ) .An idea ? Of course , you can keep swapping the IP addresses monthly/weekly or so to add to this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Make it target-dependant which IP addresses you send to whom.
I've thought about this for copy-protection (but haven't told anybody).
You can give every downloader his/her own copy of your executable with a fresh MD5.
Make the executable contents (the IP address list) IP address dependant.
Better yet, get 128 of them and give out a set of 64, based on the IP address and some awkward hash of the IP address.
That way, every user has half of the targets (making the chance of finding a working host really big) but no country can get the full list (since they lack a few bits in the IP address range they use).An idea?Of course, you can keep swapping the IP addresses monthly/weekly or so to add to this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873529</id>
	<title>The point of censorship is not to stop the geeks.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256577300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Stopping the geeks with the ability to use a proxy was never the point. I cant get my grandparents to hold the mouse the right way around, no way would they be able to understand something like Ultrasurf. If it works on 90\% of the people, it's working very well.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Stopping the geeks with the ability to use a proxy was never the point .
I cant get my grandparents to hold the mouse the right way around , no way would they be able to understand something like Ultrasurf .
If it works on 90 \ % of the people , it 's working very well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stopping the geeks with the ability to use a proxy was never the point.
I cant get my grandparents to hold the mouse the right way around, no way would they be able to understand something like Ultrasurf.
If it works on 90\% of the people, it's working very well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29876885</id>
	<title>Re:Solution?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256549580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Interesting idea, but I think you're assuming that there's some central server (or set of servers) from which users download the program.  Any evil government will have blocked your servers long before they bother trying to block the program's communications.</p><p>And if the Chinese government has no way of finding out the IP addresses of the proxies that Iranian users are using... so what?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Interesting idea , but I think you 're assuming that there 's some central server ( or set of servers ) from which users download the program .
Any evil government will have blocked your servers long before they bother trying to block the program 's communications.And if the Chinese government has no way of finding out the IP addresses of the proxies that Iranian users are using... so what ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interesting idea, but I think you're assuming that there's some central server (or set of servers) from which users download the program.
Any evil government will have blocked your servers long before they bother trying to block the program's communications.And if the Chinese government has no way of finding out the IP addresses of the proxies that Iranian users are using... so what?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29874199</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29879383</id>
	<title>Re:Do you really want to know?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256562780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw\_Ghetto\_Uprising</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw \ _Ghetto \ _Uprising</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw\_Ghetto\_Uprising</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873973</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29878747</id>
	<title>ULTRASURF IS MALWARE</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256558400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No joke.<br><a href="http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=1514487&amp;postcount=106" title="wilderssecurity.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=1514487&amp;postcount=106</a> [wilderssecurity.com]</p><p>Spread the word.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No joke.http : //www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php ? p = 1514487&amp;postcount = 106 [ wilderssecurity.com ] Spread the word .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No joke.http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=1514487&amp;postcount=106 [wilderssecurity.com]Spread the word.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873425</id>
	<title>FROST PISS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256576700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>marco de luca rules the world</p><p>HEHEH<br>bruno o ciccon v'accir</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>marco de luca rules the worldHEHEHbruno o ciccon v'accir</tokentext>
<sentencetext>marco de luca rules the worldHEHEHbruno o ciccon v'accir</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873763</id>
	<title>More complete block</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256578500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you really want to block out all the bad web sites, just install Norton Antivirus. It pretty much bricks the system. It also has the effect of blocking all the good sites too, but you can't have everything.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you really want to block out all the bad web sites , just install Norton Antivirus .
It pretty much bricks the system .
It also has the effect of blocking all the good sites too , but you ca n't have everything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you really want to block out all the bad web sites, just install Norton Antivirus.
It pretty much bricks the system.
It also has the effect of blocking all the good sites too, but you can't have everything.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29875255</id>
	<title>Re:small issue</title>
	<author>bsdaemonaut</author>
	<datestamp>1256585340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually TOR is pretty easy to block. There are a pretty finite amount of servers that are available as an entry node. TOR caches all of these servers in flat text file and it is much more then just the one you are using. All you have to do is write a simple script to pull out those IP addresses and insert then into your blacklist. You have to disconnect and reconnect a couple of times to get all of them (it took my maybe three times), but the process is relatively quick and can be pretty easily automated. The kids don't even bother trying to use TOR here anymore.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually TOR is pretty easy to block .
There are a pretty finite amount of servers that are available as an entry node .
TOR caches all of these servers in flat text file and it is much more then just the one you are using .
All you have to do is write a simple script to pull out those IP addresses and insert then into your blacklist .
You have to disconnect and reconnect a couple of times to get all of them ( it took my maybe three times ) , but the process is relatively quick and can be pretty easily automated .
The kids do n't even bother trying to use TOR here anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually TOR is pretty easy to block.
There are a pretty finite amount of servers that are available as an entry node.
TOR caches all of these servers in flat text file and it is much more then just the one you are using.
All you have to do is write a simple script to pull out those IP addresses and insert then into your blacklist.
You have to disconnect and reconnect a couple of times to get all of them (it took my maybe three times), but the process is relatively quick and can be pretty easily automated.
The kids don't even bother trying to use TOR here anymore.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873689</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29881765</id>
	<title>Posting from China here.</title>
	<author>poity</author>
	<datestamp>1256639160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My usual favorite, FreeGate, stopped working around August of this year. There are sporadic times where the client software will find 1 server with &gt;1000ms pings, which makes it effectively useless.</p><p>I tried every other free proxy client out there to no avail and gave up soon after. Apparently they're all blocked now.</p><p>I've got nothing now. No more youtube, no more boobs in gis along with 90\% of other perfectly legitimate pictures (not to say that boobs are never legitimate), certain word searches in google will give me a reset connection error right after giving me a millisecond flash of the rendered page.</p><p>What really bugs me is sometimes when I'm googling I'll be hit by that connection reset error (like if my finger slips and out comes "constitstution" or something), and on top of that my connection to all google servers is cut for a few minutes (I guess timeout as punishment?).</p><p>I rarely curse back in the US, but I let the "fuck you"s fly freely here, and quite often.</p><p>(ctrl+a ctrl+c just in case something happens to this message...)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My usual favorite , FreeGate , stopped working around August of this year .
There are sporadic times where the client software will find 1 server with &gt; 1000ms pings , which makes it effectively useless.I tried every other free proxy client out there to no avail and gave up soon after .
Apparently they 're all blocked now.I 've got nothing now .
No more youtube , no more boobs in gis along with 90 \ % of other perfectly legitimate pictures ( not to say that boobs are never legitimate ) , certain word searches in google will give me a reset connection error right after giving me a millisecond flash of the rendered page.What really bugs me is sometimes when I 'm googling I 'll be hit by that connection reset error ( like if my finger slips and out comes " constitstution " or something ) , and on top of that my connection to all google servers is cut for a few minutes ( I guess timeout as punishment ?
) .I rarely curse back in the US , but I let the " fuck you " s fly freely here , and quite often .
( ctrl + a ctrl + c just in case something happens to this message... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My usual favorite, FreeGate, stopped working around August of this year.
There are sporadic times where the client software will find 1 server with &gt;1000ms pings, which makes it effectively useless.I tried every other free proxy client out there to no avail and gave up soon after.
Apparently they're all blocked now.I've got nothing now.
No more youtube, no more boobs in gis along with 90\% of other perfectly legitimate pictures (not to say that boobs are never legitimate), certain word searches in google will give me a reset connection error right after giving me a millisecond flash of the rendered page.What really bugs me is sometimes when I'm googling I'll be hit by that connection reset error (like if my finger slips and out comes "constitstution" or something), and on top of that my connection to all google servers is cut for a few minutes (I guess timeout as punishment?
).I rarely curse back in the US, but I let the "fuck you"s fly freely here, and quite often.
(ctrl+a ctrl+c just in case something happens to this message...)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873423</id>
	<title>Blahblahblah</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256576700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It can also automatically sign you up for a government trojan horse upgrade or a special observation list. If you have nothing to hide, why use it? Anything that does not look like random noise or latest pop mp3s via p2p, will land you on said lists in countries with no human rights, so why bother?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It can also automatically sign you up for a government trojan horse upgrade or a special observation list .
If you have nothing to hide , why use it ?
Anything that does not look like random noise or latest pop mp3s via p2p , will land you on said lists in countries with no human rights , so why bother ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It can also automatically sign you up for a government trojan horse upgrade or a special observation list.
If you have nothing to hide, why use it?
Anything that does not look like random noise or latest pop mp3s via p2p, will land you on said lists in countries with no human rights, so why bother?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873749</id>
	<title>Why block? Monitor...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256578440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The obvious solution is to block the IPs to keep it from working. But then another one will pop up and you'll have to block that, lather, rinse, repeat.</p><p>No, I'm sure places like China already know about it. Instead of preventing the access, it's probably easier to monitor who's using them when they connect to those addresses. People work around blocks easily enough. But if you let a circumvention tool work, especially one that results in easily tracable activity, why block it? Monitor, find the user, and do some "re-education".</p><p>Blocking is an arms race. People will make better blocks and others make better workarounds and it escalates rapidly. But if you keep the current workaround keep working, more people will be using it, making it easy to monitor and track. And evolution won't happen as fast. It'll evolve so the monitoring programs will have to be adjusted, but when it works, the movement to evolve is far lower than if it was blocked and now you have a bunch of people trying to find a way to evade it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The obvious solution is to block the IPs to keep it from working .
But then another one will pop up and you 'll have to block that , lather , rinse , repeat.No , I 'm sure places like China already know about it .
Instead of preventing the access , it 's probably easier to monitor who 's using them when they connect to those addresses .
People work around blocks easily enough .
But if you let a circumvention tool work , especially one that results in easily tracable activity , why block it ?
Monitor , find the user , and do some " re-education " .Blocking is an arms race .
People will make better blocks and others make better workarounds and it escalates rapidly .
But if you keep the current workaround keep working , more people will be using it , making it easy to monitor and track .
And evolution wo n't happen as fast .
It 'll evolve so the monitoring programs will have to be adjusted , but when it works , the movement to evolve is far lower than if it was blocked and now you have a bunch of people trying to find a way to evade it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The obvious solution is to block the IPs to keep it from working.
But then another one will pop up and you'll have to block that, lather, rinse, repeat.No, I'm sure places like China already know about it.
Instead of preventing the access, it's probably easier to monitor who's using them when they connect to those addresses.
People work around blocks easily enough.
But if you let a circumvention tool work, especially one that results in easily tracable activity, why block it?
Monitor, find the user, and do some "re-education".Blocking is an arms race.
People will make better blocks and others make better workarounds and it escalates rapidly.
But if you keep the current workaround keep working, more people will be using it, making it easy to monitor and track.
And evolution won't happen as fast.
It'll evolve so the monitoring programs will have to be adjusted, but when it works, the movement to evolve is far lower than if it was blocked and now you have a bunch of people trying to find a way to evade it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873689</id>
	<title>small issue</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256578200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The author does not seem to account for onion routing - which is what TOR essentially is.</p><p>There is no way to lookup all of the nodes in a TOR network using the methods described - since they are using tunnels to reach secondary (and further) nodes, this only accounts for the first node you lookup.<br>You can block the server that provides the first node, yes.<br>The one you know about. How many are there that you don't know about ?<br>How about the one that's not behind your great firewall, but in some kinds bedroom ?</p><p>Looks to me like you would most likely block stuff thats on your network anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The author does not seem to account for onion routing - which is what TOR essentially is.There is no way to lookup all of the nodes in a TOR network using the methods described - since they are using tunnels to reach secondary ( and further ) nodes , this only accounts for the first node you lookup.You can block the server that provides the first node , yes.The one you know about .
How many are there that you do n't know about ? How about the one that 's not behind your great firewall , but in some kinds bedroom ? Looks to me like you would most likely block stuff thats on your network anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The author does not seem to account for onion routing - which is what TOR essentially is.There is no way to lookup all of the nodes in a TOR network using the methods described - since they are using tunnels to reach secondary (and further) nodes, this only accounts for the first node you lookup.You can block the server that provides the first node, yes.The one you know about.
How many are there that you don't know about ?How about the one that's not behind your great firewall, but in some kinds bedroom ?Looks to me like you would most likely block stuff thats on your network anyway.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29874739</id>
	<title>Meanwhile, in an office Bejing...</title>
	<author>Jawn98685</author>
	<datestamp>1256583000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"Presumably either the ideas leaking in through an unfiltered Internet are not reaching a large enough proportion of the population, or the ideas are not expected to take hold in enough people's minds to reach a tipping point that causes a problem for the ruling party."</p> </div><p>
<b>Comrade Minister of People's Internet Service Provider:</b> "Comrade Minister of Enforcement of Proper Thinking, I am pleased to announce that Great Firewall 3.0 is now in place and operational. "
<br>
<br>
<b>Comrade Minister of Enforcement of Proper Thinking:</b>  Comrade Minister of People's Internet Service Provider, this is a glorious accomplishment. We can now prevent all manner of dangerous information from reaching the people and disrupting our peace and prosperity. But..., you have blocked my access to RedTube. I can no longer perform my research into the disgusting sex practices of the Western Imperialist dogs.
<br>
<br>
<b>Comrade Minister of People's Internet Service Provider:</b> "Dude, have you never heard of UltraSurf?"</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Presumably either the ideas leaking in through an unfiltered Internet are not reaching a large enough proportion of the population , or the ideas are not expected to take hold in enough people 's minds to reach a tipping point that causes a problem for the ruling party .
" Comrade Minister of People 's Internet Service Provider : " Comrade Minister of Enforcement of Proper Thinking , I am pleased to announce that Great Firewall 3.0 is now in place and operational .
" Comrade Minister of Enforcement of Proper Thinking : Comrade Minister of People 's Internet Service Provider , this is a glorious accomplishment .
We can now prevent all manner of dangerous information from reaching the people and disrupting our peace and prosperity .
But... , you have blocked my access to RedTube .
I can no longer perform my research into the disgusting sex practices of the Western Imperialist dogs .
Comrade Minister of People 's Internet Service Provider : " Dude , have you never heard of UltraSurf ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Presumably either the ideas leaking in through an unfiltered Internet are not reaching a large enough proportion of the population, or the ideas are not expected to take hold in enough people's minds to reach a tipping point that causes a problem for the ruling party.
" 
Comrade Minister of People's Internet Service Provider: "Comrade Minister of Enforcement of Proper Thinking, I am pleased to announce that Great Firewall 3.0 is now in place and operational.
"


Comrade Minister of Enforcement of Proper Thinking:  Comrade Minister of People's Internet Service Provider, this is a glorious accomplishment.
We can now prevent all manner of dangerous information from reaching the people and disrupting our peace and prosperity.
But..., you have blocked my access to RedTube.
I can no longer perform my research into the disgusting sex practices of the Western Imperialist dogs.
Comrade Minister of People's Internet Service Provider: "Dude, have you never heard of UltraSurf?
"
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29874901</id>
	<title>Re:More complete block</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256583660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In my experience, <em>not</em> installing Norton Antivirus can be just as bad!  In fact, simply installing a system that <em>can</em> actually <em>run</em> Norton Antivirus seems to be a pretty high-risk activity, whether or not you actually <em>do</em> install it.  This risk can be somewhat mitigated by using a VM or an emulator or an "...Is Not an Emulator" hosted on a system that can't use NAV--but only somewhat.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>Of course (to bring this slightly back towards on-topic), if you can get the authorities to <em>believe</em> you installed their (real) censorware (along with NAV, at your option), when it's really just running on a VM or emulator or WINE, that might very slightly increase your chance of <em>safely</em> bypassing their censorship.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In my experience , not installing Norton Antivirus can be just as bad !
In fact , simply installing a system that can actually run Norton Antivirus seems to be a pretty high-risk activity , whether or not you actually do install it .
This risk can be somewhat mitigated by using a VM or an emulator or an " ...Is Not an Emulator " hosted on a system that ca n't use NAV--but only somewhat .
: ) Of course ( to bring this slightly back towards on-topic ) , if you can get the authorities to believe you installed their ( real ) censorware ( along with NAV , at your option ) , when it 's really just running on a VM or emulator or WINE , that might very slightly increase your chance of safely bypassing their censorship .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my experience, not installing Norton Antivirus can be just as bad!
In fact, simply installing a system that can actually run Norton Antivirus seems to be a pretty high-risk activity, whether or not you actually do install it.
This risk can be somewhat mitigated by using a VM or an emulator or an "...Is Not an Emulator" hosted on a system that can't use NAV--but only somewhat.
:)Of course (to bring this slightly back towards on-topic), if you can get the authorities to believe you installed their (real) censorware (along with NAV, at your option), when it's really just running on a VM or emulator or WINE, that might very slightly increase your chance of safely bypassing their censorship.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873763</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29874219</id>
	<title>Re:Blahblahblah</title>
	<author>eleuthero</author>
	<datestamp>1256580780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>While the above has been modded flamebait, the poster does have somewhat of a point. If one is part of the crowd of "normal" internet users simply looking at "acceptable" news for the filter-happy country of choice, and if the user is participating in nominally "criminal" activities like downloading bootlegs, the country is not likely to care nor will it matter if the individual user has a means to block detection. The government might well start to care if everything from John Doe's IP address suddenly becomes unreadable nonsense. When this happens, the individual could be added to an extra watchlist regardless. Hiding in the crowd often works best. In fact, it would not surprise me in the least if the Chinese government (or others) have a set level of "appropriate" seditious activity (a la 1984 - some seditious activity is expected and consistent with normal individuals but when it becomes more than ordinary, it gets flagged for attention).</htmltext>
<tokenext>While the above has been modded flamebait , the poster does have somewhat of a point .
If one is part of the crowd of " normal " internet users simply looking at " acceptable " news for the filter-happy country of choice , and if the user is participating in nominally " criminal " activities like downloading bootlegs , the country is not likely to care nor will it matter if the individual user has a means to block detection .
The government might well start to care if everything from John Doe 's IP address suddenly becomes unreadable nonsense .
When this happens , the individual could be added to an extra watchlist regardless .
Hiding in the crowd often works best .
In fact , it would not surprise me in the least if the Chinese government ( or others ) have a set level of " appropriate " seditious activity ( a la 1984 - some seditious activity is expected and consistent with normal individuals but when it becomes more than ordinary , it gets flagged for attention ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While the above has been modded flamebait, the poster does have somewhat of a point.
If one is part of the crowd of "normal" internet users simply looking at "acceptable" news for the filter-happy country of choice, and if the user is participating in nominally "criminal" activities like downloading bootlegs, the country is not likely to care nor will it matter if the individual user has a means to block detection.
The government might well start to care if everything from John Doe's IP address suddenly becomes unreadable nonsense.
When this happens, the individual could be added to an extra watchlist regardless.
Hiding in the crowd often works best.
In fact, it would not surprise me in the least if the Chinese government (or others) have a set level of "appropriate" seditious activity (a la 1984 - some seditious activity is expected and consistent with normal individuals but when it becomes more than ordinary, it gets flagged for attention).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873423</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873855</id>
	<title>Fear and self-censorship</title>
	<author>bzzfzz</author>
	<datestamp>1256579040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Chinese internet filtering is justified publicly by stating that it is done to help Chinese people avoid inadvertent violations of the law, and that is how it is seen by most Chinese.  The real purpose of the censorship there is to facilitate prosecution of dissidents by making it impossible to violate laws against anti-government speech and unlawful assembly inadvertently.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Chinese internet filtering is justified publicly by stating that it is done to help Chinese people avoid inadvertent violations of the law , and that is how it is seen by most Chinese .
The real purpose of the censorship there is to facilitate prosecution of dissidents by making it impossible to violate laws against anti-government speech and unlawful assembly inadvertently .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Chinese internet filtering is justified publicly by stating that it is done to help Chinese people avoid inadvertent violations of the law, and that is how it is seen by most Chinese.
The real purpose of the censorship there is to facilitate prosecution of dissidents by making it impossible to violate laws against anti-government speech and unlawful assembly inadvertently.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873733</id>
	<title>Hint</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256578380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Partion the IP addresses, and then finger print the PC and use these based on the hash value</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Partion the IP addresses , and then finger print the PC and use these based on the hash value</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Partion the IP addresses, and then finger print the PC and use these based on the hash value</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873547</id>
	<title>Teal Deer</title>
	<author>Itninja</author>
	<datestamp>1256577420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>tl;dr</htmltext>
<tokenext>tl ; dr</tokentext>
<sentencetext>tl;dr</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29874825</id>
	<title>Re:Why block? Monitor...</title>
	<author>clone53421</author>
	<datestamp>1256583360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's all encrypted. You could detect it, but not really "monitor" the activity.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's all encrypted .
You could detect it , but not really " monitor " the activity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's all encrypted.
You could detect it, but not really "monitor" the activity.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873749</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29875177</id>
	<title>IPv6</title>
	<author>NotBornYesterday</author>
	<datestamp>1256584980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Having a near-inexhaustable list of IPs for Ultrasurf would make tracking and filtering them all virtually impossible.  That, combined with IPsec (required by IPv6) could either punch vast holes in the Great Firewall of China, or force them to step up their game considerably.</p><p>If it does prove to be a factor in fighting Chinese censorship, is interesting that the massive growth of the internet in Asia has been one of the driving factors behind the need for IPv6 migration.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Having a near-inexhaustable list of IPs for Ultrasurf would make tracking and filtering them all virtually impossible .
That , combined with IPsec ( required by IPv6 ) could either punch vast holes in the Great Firewall of China , or force them to step up their game considerably.If it does prove to be a factor in fighting Chinese censorship , is interesting that the massive growth of the internet in Asia has been one of the driving factors behind the need for IPv6 migration .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having a near-inexhaustable list of IPs for Ultrasurf would make tracking and filtering them all virtually impossible.
That, combined with IPsec (required by IPv6) could either punch vast holes in the Great Firewall of China, or force them to step up their game considerably.If it does prove to be a factor in fighting Chinese censorship, is interesting that the massive growth of the internet in Asia has been one of the driving factors behind the need for IPv6 migration.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29887579</id>
	<title>Blocking IP has cost</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256674620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It seems trivial enough to detect all the IP's ultrasurf is connecting to when it's running in your computer.</p><p>For smaller sites, it's too expensive to block 1000+ IP's.  For each user trying to connect to the site, his IP has to be matched against a table of size &gt; 1000.</p><p>It's feasible for larger sites if their life depends on it, for example, Wikipedia.  They block all the public listed TOR nodes.</p><p>For all ISP's in the nation to block some outgoing websites, it's a big task.  It's not like running a clever little program in your PC.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems trivial enough to detect all the IP 's ultrasurf is connecting to when it 's running in your computer.For smaller sites , it 's too expensive to block 1000 + IP 's .
For each user trying to connect to the site , his IP has to be matched against a table of size &gt; 1000.It 's feasible for larger sites if their life depends on it , for example , Wikipedia .
They block all the public listed TOR nodes.For all ISP 's in the nation to block some outgoing websites , it 's a big task .
It 's not like running a clever little program in your PC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems trivial enough to detect all the IP's ultrasurf is connecting to when it's running in your computer.For smaller sites, it's too expensive to block 1000+ IP's.
For each user trying to connect to the site, his IP has to be matched against a table of size &gt; 1000.It's feasible for larger sites if their life depends on it, for example, Wikipedia.
They block all the public listed TOR nodes.For all ISP's in the nation to block some outgoing websites, it's a big task.
It's not like running a clever little program in your PC.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873519</id>
	<title>How do you solve the problem...</title>
	<author>zonker</author>
	<datestamp>1256577240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How do you solve the problem where the jackbooted thugs come to your door because they now know you are using this software?  Seems the only real advantage Chinese citizens have over the censors is the ratio of censors to users is very low.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How do you solve the problem where the jackbooted thugs come to your door because they now know you are using this software ?
Seems the only real advantage Chinese citizens have over the censors is the ratio of censors to users is very low .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How do you solve the problem where the jackbooted thugs come to your door because they now know you are using this software?
Seems the only real advantage Chinese citizens have over the censors is the ratio of censors to users is very low.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29874895</id>
	<title>Re:Solution?</title>
	<author>clone53421</author>
	<datestamp>1256583660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>no country can get the full list (since they lack a few bits in the IP address range they use).</p></div><p>What about open proxies in other countries...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>no country can get the full list ( since they lack a few bits in the IP address range they use ) .What about open proxies in other countries.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>no country can get the full list (since they lack a few bits in the IP address range they use).What about open proxies in other countries...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29874199</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29875593</id>
	<title>Re:Why block? Monitor...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256586900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>PRC already has been there and done that:</p><p><a href="http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/226950.html" title="phrases.org.uk" rel="nofollow">Let a thousand flowers bloom</a> [phrases.org.uk]</p><p>expose execute repeat...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>PRC already has been there and done that : Let a thousand flowers bloom [ phrases.org.uk ] expose execute repeat.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PRC already has been there and done that:Let a thousand flowers bloom [phrases.org.uk]expose execute repeat...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873749</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873825</id>
	<title>China proably doesn't care.</title>
	<author>Jartan</author>
	<datestamp>1256578860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I get the feeling that the Chinese govt's attitude towards censorship has been changing.  In a way you could say they are becoming more skilled with it and choosing to be a lot more subtle here and there.   This is actually probably a lot more dangerous.   Instead of hiding the truth they are using the censorship along with propaganda to make the people accept the truth and support it.</p><p>Probably in the future they'll model their whole system on the way the Western world uses the media to alter public perception.   Of course they won't be stupid and hand over the reigns to people like Rupert Murdoch.   They'll keep that power for themselves.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I get the feeling that the Chinese govt 's attitude towards censorship has been changing .
In a way you could say they are becoming more skilled with it and choosing to be a lot more subtle here and there .
This is actually probably a lot more dangerous .
Instead of hiding the truth they are using the censorship along with propaganda to make the people accept the truth and support it.Probably in the future they 'll model their whole system on the way the Western world uses the media to alter public perception .
Of course they wo n't be stupid and hand over the reigns to people like Rupert Murdoch .
They 'll keep that power for themselves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I get the feeling that the Chinese govt's attitude towards censorship has been changing.
In a way you could say they are becoming more skilled with it and choosing to be a lot more subtle here and there.
This is actually probably a lot more dangerous.
Instead of hiding the truth they are using the censorship along with propaganda to make the people accept the truth and support it.Probably in the future they'll model their whole system on the way the Western world uses the media to alter public perception.
Of course they won't be stupid and hand over the reigns to people like Rupert Murdoch.
They'll keep that power for themselves.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873899</id>
	<title>YHGMTPO the Great Firewall</title>
	<author>nsayer</author>
	<datestamp>1256579220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The purpose of the Great Firewall is to simply keep people from accidentally surfing to the "wrong" sites. If you are pure in heart, you wouldn't <i>want</i> to go places where Big Brother says you oughtn't to go.</p><p>If you're not pure in heart, then you get to go visit room 101. You'll get to go there when you manage to get your hands on the firewall evasion software written by Emmanuel Goldstein (and here I'm specifically referring to the character in the book, not Eric Corley).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The purpose of the Great Firewall is to simply keep people from accidentally surfing to the " wrong " sites .
If you are pure in heart , you would n't want to go places where Big Brother says you ought n't to go.If you 're not pure in heart , then you get to go visit room 101 .
You 'll get to go there when you manage to get your hands on the firewall evasion software written by Emmanuel Goldstein ( and here I 'm specifically referring to the character in the book , not Eric Corley ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The purpose of the Great Firewall is to simply keep people from accidentally surfing to the "wrong" sites.
If you are pure in heart, you wouldn't want to go places where Big Brother says you oughtn't to go.If you're not pure in heart, then you get to go visit room 101.
You'll get to go there when you manage to get your hands on the firewall evasion software written by Emmanuel Goldstein (and here I'm specifically referring to the character in the book, not Eric Corley).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873973</id>
	<title>Do you really want to know?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256579580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say goodbye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling in terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand. The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin&rsquo;s thirst; the cursed machine would have ground to a halt!
<br> <br>
&ndash;Alexander Solzhenitsyn</htmltext>
<tokenext>And how we burned in the camps later , thinking : What would things have been like if every Security operative , when he went out at night to make an arrest , had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say goodbye to his family ?
Or if , during periods of mass arrests , as for example in Leningrad , when they arrested a quarter of the entire city , people had not simply sat there in their lairs , paling in terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase , but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes , hammers , pokers , or whatever else was at hand .
The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and , notwithstanding all of Stalin    s thirst ; the cursed machine would have ground to a halt !
   Alexander Solzhenitsyn</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say goodbye to his family?
Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling in terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand.
The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin’s thirst; the cursed machine would have ground to a halt!
–Alexander Solzhenitsyn</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873519</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29897145</id>
	<title>Actually, the Chinese are crazy-like-a-fox.</title>
	<author>Dr. Crash</author>
	<datestamp>1256744040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Consider this: if you make it just harder than trivial to circumvent the block, then you get three categories of people.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; 1) The ones who don't circumvent the block.  These are sheep.  You can ignore them.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; 2) The ones who circumvent the block.  These are opposition ringleaders.  Watch them carefully.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; 3) The ones who circumvent it but only after a known associate already circumvents it.  These are motivated followers.  Subvert and enlist them.</p><p>As Yogi Berra said, "You can observe a lot just by watching".   In this case, UltraSurf provides a way for the Great Wall operators to \_automatically\_ find your enemies of the state- and prime followers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Consider this : if you make it just harder than trivial to circumvent the block , then you get three categories of people .
    1 ) The ones who do n't circumvent the block .
These are sheep .
You can ignore them .
    2 ) The ones who circumvent the block .
These are opposition ringleaders .
Watch them carefully .
    3 ) The ones who circumvent it but only after a known associate already circumvents it .
These are motivated followers .
Subvert and enlist them.As Yogi Berra said , " You can observe a lot just by watching " .
In this case , UltraSurf provides a way for the Great Wall operators to \ _automatically \ _ find your enemies of the state- and prime followers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Consider this: if you make it just harder than trivial to circumvent the block, then you get three categories of people.
    1) The ones who don't circumvent the block.
These are sheep.
You can ignore them.
    2) The ones who circumvent the block.
These are opposition ringleaders.
Watch them carefully.
    3) The ones who circumvent it but only after a known associate already circumvents it.
These are motivated followers.
Subvert and enlist them.As Yogi Berra said, "You can observe a lot just by watching".
In this case, UltraSurf provides a way for the Great Wall operators to \_automatically\_ find your enemies of the state- and prime followers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29877611</id>
	<title>Re:small issue</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256552460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The author addressed Ultrasurf as it is vastly easier to use, thus presumably used more that Tor.  For the considerations of the article, however, the two are identical products.<br>(The attack is on the program's initial connection point.  Each time either tries to connect the target IP is blocked.  You do not need to know about any of the Tor servers at all, you will learn about all of the ones the Tor client knows by running it as per the article.  Blocking those IP addresses blocks access to the rest of the Tor network.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The author addressed Ultrasurf as it is vastly easier to use , thus presumably used more that Tor .
For the considerations of the article , however , the two are identical products .
( The attack is on the program 's initial connection point .
Each time either tries to connect the target IP is blocked .
You do not need to know about any of the Tor servers at all , you will learn about all of the ones the Tor client knows by running it as per the article .
Blocking those IP addresses blocks access to the rest of the Tor network .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The author addressed Ultrasurf as it is vastly easier to use, thus presumably used more that Tor.
For the considerations of the article, however, the two are identical products.
(The attack is on the program's initial connection point.
Each time either tries to connect the target IP is blocked.
You do not need to know about any of the Tor servers at all, you will learn about all of the ones the Tor client knows by running it as per the article.
Blocking those IP addresses blocks access to the rest of the Tor network.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873689</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29874327</id>
	<title>Re:small issue</title>
	<author>TubeSteak</author>
	<datestamp>1256581140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>There is no way to lookup all of the nodes in a TOR network using the methods described - since they are using tunnels to reach secondary (and further) nodes, this only accounts for the first node you lookup.</p></div><p>You don't need to.<br>The bad actor just sets up fast Tor nodes (or nodes that look fast) and traffic will come flooding in.</p><p>Never forget that we're talking about State actors here.<br>They have the resources to do things at a scale we'd normally write off as unlikely or implausible.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no way to lookup all of the nodes in a TOR network using the methods described - since they are using tunnels to reach secondary ( and further ) nodes , this only accounts for the first node you lookup.You do n't need to.The bad actor just sets up fast Tor nodes ( or nodes that look fast ) and traffic will come flooding in.Never forget that we 're talking about State actors here.They have the resources to do things at a scale we 'd normally write off as unlikely or implausible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no way to lookup all of the nodes in a TOR network using the methods described - since they are using tunnels to reach secondary (and further) nodes, this only accounts for the first node you lookup.You don't need to.The bad actor just sets up fast Tor nodes (or nodes that look fast) and traffic will come flooding in.Never forget that we're talking about State actors here.They have the resources to do things at a scale we'd normally write off as unlikely or implausible.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873689</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29874259</id>
	<title>A Bigger Worry</title>
	<author>starfarer42</author>
	<datestamp>1256580900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Never assume your adversary is incompetent. If they can easily find and block all IP addresses used by this program, then why would they choose not to? I can think of one possibility, and it doesn't bode well for people who are using this program under the belief that it will protect their anonymity.

We all know that monitoring *all* Internet traffic into and out of a country (especially one as populous as China) is a futile task. But suppose you could identify which fraction of those connections are specifically trying to evade government controls? Wouldn't it make sense to focus your attention on those connections? And instead of blocking them out right, why not trace them back to their source? Even if you can't decrypt the traffic, you can at least identify those "subversives" that could be in need of "reeducation". And remember that just because you choose to block those connections *right now* doesn't mean you can't start blocking them at some point in the future.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Never assume your adversary is incompetent .
If they can easily find and block all IP addresses used by this program , then why would they choose not to ?
I can think of one possibility , and it does n't bode well for people who are using this program under the belief that it will protect their anonymity .
We all know that monitoring * all * Internet traffic into and out of a country ( especially one as populous as China ) is a futile task .
But suppose you could identify which fraction of those connections are specifically trying to evade government controls ?
Would n't it make sense to focus your attention on those connections ?
And instead of blocking them out right , why not trace them back to their source ?
Even if you ca n't decrypt the traffic , you can at least identify those " subversives " that could be in need of " reeducation " .
And remember that just because you choose to block those connections * right now * does n't mean you ca n't start blocking them at some point in the future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Never assume your adversary is incompetent.
If they can easily find and block all IP addresses used by this program, then why would they choose not to?
I can think of one possibility, and it doesn't bode well for people who are using this program under the belief that it will protect their anonymity.
We all know that monitoring *all* Internet traffic into and out of a country (especially one as populous as China) is a futile task.
But suppose you could identify which fraction of those connections are specifically trying to evade government controls?
Wouldn't it make sense to focus your attention on those connections?
And instead of blocking them out right, why not trace them back to their source?
Even if you can't decrypt the traffic, you can at least identify those "subversives" that could be in need of "reeducation".
And remember that just because you choose to block those connections *right now* doesn't mean you can't start blocking them at some point in the future.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873767</id>
	<title>Bad logic</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1256578560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It would not be hard for a government censor operating the filter in a country like China to do the same thing. But this does not mean that UltraSurf's network is likely to collapse any day now; on the contrary, it means that it and similar programs are likely to flourish for years to come, since the censors obviously have other priorities.</p> </div><p>Other priorities?  That's a new assumption, not stated before the final assessment was made.  It seems like all the Chinese Gov't needs to do is give one person the task of keeping the Great Firewall up to date for UltraSurf's range of IPs, so to any user in China: "UltraSurf's network is likely to collapse any day now"</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It would not be hard for a government censor operating the filter in a country like China to do the same thing .
But this does not mean that UltraSurf 's network is likely to collapse any day now ; on the contrary , it means that it and similar programs are likely to flourish for years to come , since the censors obviously have other priorities .
Other priorities ?
That 's a new assumption , not stated before the final assessment was made .
It seems like all the Chinese Gov't needs to do is give one person the task of keeping the Great Firewall up to date for UltraSurf 's range of IPs , so to any user in China : " UltraSurf 's network is likely to collapse any day now "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would not be hard for a government censor operating the filter in a country like China to do the same thing.
But this does not mean that UltraSurf's network is likely to collapse any day now; on the contrary, it means that it and similar programs are likely to flourish for years to come, since the censors obviously have other priorities.
Other priorities?
That's a new assumption, not stated before the final assessment was made.
It seems like all the Chinese Gov't needs to do is give one person the task of keeping the Great Firewall up to date for UltraSurf's range of IPs, so to any user in China: "UltraSurf's network is likely to collapse any day now"
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29874967</id>
	<title>More than that</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256584020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Every cruel dictator faces the same problem: He leads a country full of good men who want to do good things. It is slightly more difficult to oppose him than it is to follow orders but most of the people don't want to be cruel and do bad things to give someone else more power. There are always power hungry sociopaths that enjoy the chance to be violent but those people are a tiny minority and a small enough minority can never oppress a large one for long periods of time. So, good people need to make bad things or at least be able to watch them happen and not do anything to stop them.</p><p>Propaganda comes to play here. Perhaps the oppressed groups are lesser humans who shouldn't be given the same rights as you have. Perhaps there is a religion saying that the other group is evil and needs to be stopped. The excuse doesn't really matter, there just needs to be one. Then good people can convince themselves "Perhaps this isn't bad and just needs to happen...". And they will do everything they can to make themselves believe that claim because that helps them sleep at night and go on with their daily lives. The government can say "Those demonstrators we killed were violent anarchists" and they don't need to provide evidence, quite the opposite. People who read that from the news *want* to believe that the government tells the truth because otherwise their conscience would be too painful.</p><p>Then there comes the free press. Just like there are people who enjoy violence, there are people who just can't close their eyes. Those people will do the best they can to spread the information about what is happening. They will do their best to force the large, good population to see what is happening. To prevent them from looking away.</p><p>Censorship comes to play here. It isn't to prevent the people from seeking out information. It is to prevent people from being forced to see what is happening. To let them read the newspapers and live a normal life without seeing the truth.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Every cruel dictator faces the same problem : He leads a country full of good men who want to do good things .
It is slightly more difficult to oppose him than it is to follow orders but most of the people do n't want to be cruel and do bad things to give someone else more power .
There are always power hungry sociopaths that enjoy the chance to be violent but those people are a tiny minority and a small enough minority can never oppress a large one for long periods of time .
So , good people need to make bad things or at least be able to watch them happen and not do anything to stop them.Propaganda comes to play here .
Perhaps the oppressed groups are lesser humans who should n't be given the same rights as you have .
Perhaps there is a religion saying that the other group is evil and needs to be stopped .
The excuse does n't really matter , there just needs to be one .
Then good people can convince themselves " Perhaps this is n't bad and just needs to happen... " .
And they will do everything they can to make themselves believe that claim because that helps them sleep at night and go on with their daily lives .
The government can say " Those demonstrators we killed were violent anarchists " and they do n't need to provide evidence , quite the opposite .
People who read that from the news * want * to believe that the government tells the truth because otherwise their conscience would be too painful.Then there comes the free press .
Just like there are people who enjoy violence , there are people who just ca n't close their eyes .
Those people will do the best they can to spread the information about what is happening .
They will do their best to force the large , good population to see what is happening .
To prevent them from looking away.Censorship comes to play here .
It is n't to prevent the people from seeking out information .
It is to prevent people from being forced to see what is happening .
To let them read the newspapers and live a normal life without seeing the truth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Every cruel dictator faces the same problem: He leads a country full of good men who want to do good things.
It is slightly more difficult to oppose him than it is to follow orders but most of the people don't want to be cruel and do bad things to give someone else more power.
There are always power hungry sociopaths that enjoy the chance to be violent but those people are a tiny minority and a small enough minority can never oppress a large one for long periods of time.
So, good people need to make bad things or at least be able to watch them happen and not do anything to stop them.Propaganda comes to play here.
Perhaps the oppressed groups are lesser humans who shouldn't be given the same rights as you have.
Perhaps there is a religion saying that the other group is evil and needs to be stopped.
The excuse doesn't really matter, there just needs to be one.
Then good people can convince themselves "Perhaps this isn't bad and just needs to happen...".
And they will do everything they can to make themselves believe that claim because that helps them sleep at night and go on with their daily lives.
The government can say "Those demonstrators we killed were violent anarchists" and they don't need to provide evidence, quite the opposite.
People who read that from the news *want* to believe that the government tells the truth because otherwise their conscience would be too painful.Then there comes the free press.
Just like there are people who enjoy violence, there are people who just can't close their eyes.
Those people will do the best they can to spread the information about what is happening.
They will do their best to force the large, good population to see what is happening.
To prevent them from looking away.Censorship comes to play here.
It isn't to prevent the people from seeking out information.
It is to prevent people from being forced to see what is happening.
To let them read the newspapers and live a normal life without seeing the truth.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873529</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_26_1241238_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29885091
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873529
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_26_1241238_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29879383
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873973
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873519
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_26_1241238_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29874327
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873689
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_26_1241238_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29875255
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873689
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_26_1241238_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29874901
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873763
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_26_1241238_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29881957
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873973
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873519
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_26_1241238_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29875593
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873749
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_26_1241238_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29874967
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873529
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_26_1241238_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29877611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873689
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_26_1241238_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29874219
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873423
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_26_1241238_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29874895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29874199
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_26_1241238_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29876885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29874199
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_26_1241238_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29875825
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29874825
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873749
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_26_1241238.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873689
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29877611
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29875255
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29874327
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_26_1241238.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29874199
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29874895
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29876885
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_26_1241238.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873763
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29874901
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_26_1241238.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29874259
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_26_1241238.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873913
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_26_1241238.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29875177
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_26_1241238.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873423
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29874219
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_26_1241238.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873749
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29875593
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29874825
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29875825
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_26_1241238.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873529
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29874967
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29885091
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_26_1241238.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29878747
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_26_1241238.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873519
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873973
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29879383
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29881957
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_26_1241238.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_26_1241238.29873825
</commentlist>
</conversation>
