<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_03_1649246</id>
	<title>Unfinished Windows 7 Hotspot Feature Exploited</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1257267240000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes with this excerpt from Engadget: <i>"It wasn't all that long ago that Microsoft was talking up the Virtual WiFi feature developed by Microsoft Research and set for inclusion in Windows 7, but something got lost along the road to release day, and the functionality never officially made it into the OS. As you might expect with anything as big and complicated as an operating system though, some of that code did make it into the final release, and there was apparently enough of it for the folks at Nomadio to exploit into a full fledged feature. That's now become Connectify, a free application from the company that effectively <a href="http://www.pcworld.com/article/181046/Unfinished\_Windows\_7\_Feature\_Turns\_Laptops\_Into\_Wi\_Fi\_Hotspots.html?tk=rss\_news">turns any Windows 7 computer into a virtual WiFi hotspot</a> &mdash; letting you, for instance, wirelessly tether a number of devices to your laptop at location where only an Ethernet jack is available, or even tether a number of laptops together at a coffee shop that charges for WiFi."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes with this excerpt from Engadget : " It was n't all that long ago that Microsoft was talking up the Virtual WiFi feature developed by Microsoft Research and set for inclusion in Windows 7 , but something got lost along the road to release day , and the functionality never officially made it into the OS .
As you might expect with anything as big and complicated as an operating system though , some of that code did make it into the final release , and there was apparently enough of it for the folks at Nomadio to exploit into a full fledged feature .
That 's now become Connectify , a free application from the company that effectively turns any Windows 7 computer into a virtual WiFi hotspot    letting you , for instance , wirelessly tether a number of devices to your laptop at location where only an Ethernet jack is available , or even tether a number of laptops together at a coffee shop that charges for WiFi .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes with this excerpt from Engadget: "It wasn't all that long ago that Microsoft was talking up the Virtual WiFi feature developed by Microsoft Research and set for inclusion in Windows 7, but something got lost along the road to release day, and the functionality never officially made it into the OS.
As you might expect with anything as big and complicated as an operating system though, some of that code did make it into the final release, and there was apparently enough of it for the folks at Nomadio to exploit into a full fledged feature.
That's now become Connectify, a free application from the company that effectively turns any Windows 7 computer into a virtual WiFi hotspot — letting you, for instance, wirelessly tether a number of devices to your laptop at location where only an Ethernet jack is available, or even tether a number of laptops together at a coffee shop that charges for WiFi.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967346</id>
	<title>Re:Netfilter?</title>
	<author>HomelessInLaJolla</author>
	<datestamp>1257238920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes.  Microsoft managed to reduce that functionality to about 12k in a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.dll so that they could charge extra for it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes .
Microsoft managed to reduce that functionality to about 12k in a .dll so that they could charge extra for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes.
Microsoft managed to reduce that functionality to about 12k in a .dll so that they could charge extra for it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966448</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>Jarik C-Bol</author>
	<datestamp>1257277260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>i was just thinking the same thing. this has been available on macs for ages. hell, i even used it to get a windows laptop online through my mac when we only had 1 ethernet jack.</htmltext>
<tokenext>i was just thinking the same thing .
this has been available on macs for ages .
hell , i even used it to get a windows laptop online through my mac when we only had 1 ethernet jack .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i was just thinking the same thing.
this has been available on macs for ages.
hell, i even used it to get a windows laptop online through my mac when we only had 1 ethernet jack.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966830</id>
	<title>Re:Stealing</title>
	<author>plague3106</author>
	<datestamp>1257279480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>That "overpriced" coffee includes the rent for the space (resources) you take up. If the place is charging for WiFi then it is because too many people were ordering a single small coffee of the day and then plunking themselves down for the day with their laptop and not ordering anything else.</i></p><p>Um, if the coffee house let you use wifi all day after purchasing a single item, what is wrong with taking advantage of that?  The coffee house goes under?  So what, it was a bad business plan then and should be left to die.</p><p><i>"I like making use of your establishment but I don't feel the need to contribute towards its ongoing operations." seems to be all too common of an attitude these days.</i></p><p>Ya right, like corportations aren't trying to screw you out of every cent possible either.  Turn about is fair play you know.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That " overpriced " coffee includes the rent for the space ( resources ) you take up .
If the place is charging for WiFi then it is because too many people were ordering a single small coffee of the day and then plunking themselves down for the day with their laptop and not ordering anything else.Um , if the coffee house let you use wifi all day after purchasing a single item , what is wrong with taking advantage of that ?
The coffee house goes under ?
So what , it was a bad business plan then and should be left to die .
" I like making use of your establishment but I do n't feel the need to contribute towards its ongoing operations .
" seems to be all too common of an attitude these days.Ya right , like corportations are n't trying to screw you out of every cent possible either .
Turn about is fair play you know .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That "overpriced" coffee includes the rent for the space (resources) you take up.
If the place is charging for WiFi then it is because too many people were ordering a single small coffee of the day and then plunking themselves down for the day with their laptop and not ordering anything else.Um, if the coffee house let you use wifi all day after purchasing a single item, what is wrong with taking advantage of that?
The coffee house goes under?
So what, it was a bad business plan then and should be left to die.
"I like making use of your establishment but I don't feel the need to contribute towards its ongoing operations.
" seems to be all too common of an attitude these days.Ya right, like corportations aren't trying to screw you out of every cent possible either.
Turn about is fair play you know.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965854</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966240</id>
	<title>Re:just like.. internet sharing</title>
	<author>jazzduck</author>
	<datestamp>1257276240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's odd you should say this, because I've had a Windows guru/sysadmin try several times to get this working (with his Dell running XP), and every time he's given up after about 45 minutes of messing with configuration settings. I myself tried it on both of my work-issued PCs (an HP and a Lenovo, both running XP) and found it completely impossible. Of the many Windows users I know, none have ever successfully used their laptop as an AP or a reverse bridge (providing connectivity over ethernet from a single wireless connection).</p><p>Therefore, you are either lying, or a statistical anomaly. I trust you're recounting the story accurately, so I'm going to conclude that your success is the exception rather than the rule.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's odd you should say this , because I 've had a Windows guru/sysadmin try several times to get this working ( with his Dell running XP ) , and every time he 's given up after about 45 minutes of messing with configuration settings .
I myself tried it on both of my work-issued PCs ( an HP and a Lenovo , both running XP ) and found it completely impossible .
Of the many Windows users I know , none have ever successfully used their laptop as an AP or a reverse bridge ( providing connectivity over ethernet from a single wireless connection ) .Therefore , you are either lying , or a statistical anomaly .
I trust you 're recounting the story accurately , so I 'm going to conclude that your success is the exception rather than the rule .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's odd you should say this, because I've had a Windows guru/sysadmin try several times to get this working (with his Dell running XP), and every time he's given up after about 45 minutes of messing with configuration settings.
I myself tried it on both of my work-issued PCs (an HP and a Lenovo, both running XP) and found it completely impossible.
Of the many Windows users I know, none have ever successfully used their laptop as an AP or a reverse bridge (providing connectivity over ethernet from a single wireless connection).Therefore, you are either lying, or a statistical anomaly.
I trust you're recounting the story accurately, so I'm going to conclude that your success is the exception rather than the rule.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965440</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967878</id>
	<title>Re:It'll be gone shortly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257241380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's a feature of Windows 7 but lacks a GUI.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a feature of Windows 7 but lacks a GUI .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a feature of Windows 7 but lacks a GUI.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965066</id>
	<title>Wow</title>
	<author>Arcady13</author>
	<datestamp>1257270960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just like I could do on a Mac with the included OS since 2001.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just like I could do on a Mac with the included OS since 2001 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just like I could do on a Mac with the included OS since 2001.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965534</id>
	<title>Re:Does it work with any wifi card??</title>
	<author>Kadagan AU</author>
	<datestamp>1257272940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Seems ironic.. <i>and on Linux you had to spend your time with ifconfig and whatnot (it was never clear for me, but the first step was to change your wifi card to AP mode).</i> and then your sig says <i>Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'</i>... I'm guessing you're a Ubuntu user?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seems ironic.. and on Linux you had to spend your time with ifconfig and whatnot ( it was never clear for me , but the first step was to change your wifi card to AP mode ) .
and then your sig says Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I ca n't configure Debian'... I 'm guessing you 're a Ubuntu user ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seems ironic.. and on Linux you had to spend your time with ifconfig and whatnot (it was never clear for me, but the first step was to change your wifi card to AP mode).
and then your sig says Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'... I'm guessing you're a Ubuntu user?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965282</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965648</id>
	<title>Re:Stealing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257273480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's why they limit the amount of bandwidth each user can use? A single computer torrenting can use up as much bandwidth as 10 computers browsing the web.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's why they limit the amount of bandwidth each user can use ?
A single computer torrenting can use up as much bandwidth as 10 computers browsing the web .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's why they limit the amount of bandwidth each user can use?
A single computer torrenting can use up as much bandwidth as 10 computers browsing the web.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965246</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965848</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257274320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If your Mac runs Tiger or an older version of OS X, it will show up as an ad-hoc network.</p><p>But if it's running Leopard or Snow Leopard it will show up as a regular access point.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If your Mac runs Tiger or an older version of OS X , it will show up as an ad-hoc network.But if it 's running Leopard or Snow Leopard it will show up as a regular access point .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If your Mac runs Tiger or an older version of OS X, it will show up as an ad-hoc network.But if it's running Leopard or Snow Leopard it will show up as a regular access point.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965494</id>
	<title>Every Repost is Repost?</title>
	<author>Orbijx</author>
	<datestamp>1257272760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Didn't we have this app <a href="http://mobile.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/10/28/1758226" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">in an article last week</a> [slashdot.org]?</p><p>It's not news. It's olds at best.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did n't we have this app in an article last week [ slashdot.org ] ? It 's not news .
It 's olds at best .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Didn't we have this app in an article last week [slashdot.org]?It's not news.
It's olds at best.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965238</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1257271680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can do it in XP anyway, out of the box, turn on connection sharing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can do it in XP anyway , out of the box , turn on connection sharing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can do it in XP anyway, out of the box, turn on connection sharing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965274</id>
	<title>Re:just like.. internet sharing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257271800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Windows has had ICS (simple network bridging) since Windows 98 2e (May 1999).  Would be hard for them to have cribbed an Apple feature] from April 2005 back then.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows has had ICS ( simple network bridging ) since Windows 98 2e ( May 1999 ) .
Would be hard for them to have cribbed an Apple feature ] from April 2005 back then .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows has had ICS (simple network bridging) since Windows 98 2e (May 1999).
Would be hard for them to have cribbed an Apple feature] from April 2005 back then.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965176</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965178</id>
	<title>big deal</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257271440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can do this with my HTC phone and don't even need to find an ethernet port to do it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can do this with my HTC phone and do n't even need to find an ethernet port to do it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can do this with my HTC phone and don't even need to find an ethernet port to do it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29969466</id>
	<title>Or Linux</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257247560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or any Linux computer that supports networking and wireless.  This feature can also be easily set up with a GUI like <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firestarter\_(firewall)" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">FireStarter</a> [wikipedia.org].</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or any Linux computer that supports networking and wireless .
This feature can also be easily set up with a GUI like FireStarter [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or any Linux computer that supports networking and wireless.
This feature can also be easily set up with a GUI like FireStarter [wikipedia.org].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965888</id>
	<title>Re:Can someone please tell me..</title>
	<author>Kippesoep</author>
	<datestamp>1257274620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or maybe they're just ahead of their time. This feature is obviously intended for Windows 8 only.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or maybe they 're just ahead of their time .
This feature is obviously intended for Windows 8 only .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or maybe they're just ahead of their time.
This feature is obviously intended for Windows 8 only.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965078</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965968</id>
	<title>Stupid Microsoft.</title>
	<author>crhylove</author>
	<datestamp>1257275040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds like MS actually finished a feature that would make Windows 7 more valuable than XP (I haven't found another one).  But of course they had to cut it out because some of their customers would lose revenue because they currently rely on over-charging for WiFi.</p><p>This is just yet another example of why we need this functionality in Linux TODAY, and why we all need to switch to Linux IMMEDIATELY.</p><p>These corporations are all sucking the life blood out of technology just to make a couple extra bucks, and stifling our advancement as a species for monetary gain.  It's absolutely disgusting and embarrassing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like MS actually finished a feature that would make Windows 7 more valuable than XP ( I have n't found another one ) .
But of course they had to cut it out because some of their customers would lose revenue because they currently rely on over-charging for WiFi.This is just yet another example of why we need this functionality in Linux TODAY , and why we all need to switch to Linux IMMEDIATELY.These corporations are all sucking the life blood out of technology just to make a couple extra bucks , and stifling our advancement as a species for monetary gain .
It 's absolutely disgusting and embarrassing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like MS actually finished a feature that would make Windows 7 more valuable than XP (I haven't found another one).
But of course they had to cut it out because some of their customers would lose revenue because they currently rely on over-charging for WiFi.This is just yet another example of why we need this functionality in Linux TODAY, and why we all need to switch to Linux IMMEDIATELY.These corporations are all sucking the life blood out of technology just to make a couple extra bucks, and stifling our advancement as a species for monetary gain.
It's absolutely disgusting and embarrassing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965854</id>
	<title>Re:Stealing</title>
	<author>Duradin</author>
	<datestamp>1257274440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bandwidth isn't the only limited resource. Physical space is a limited resource.</p><p>That "overpriced" coffee includes the rent for the space (resources) you take up. If the place is charging for WiFi then it is because too many people were ordering a single small coffee of the day and then plunking themselves down for the day with their laptop and not ordering anything else.</p><p>If you like the coffee house enough to go there and make use of its services you should also be willing to pay for them. Really good coffee houses are hard to find and its a shame when a group of freeloaders disrupts things so that enough of the paying regulars go somewhere else and the place goes under.</p><p>When enough of the WiFi leeches become paying customers, the WiFi might become free again. If something is annoying for the regulars a good manager would want to change that, if it was affordable to do so. Pay WiFi is annoying to everybody.</p><p>"I like making use of your establishment but I don't feel the need to contribute towards its ongoing operations." seems to be all too common of an attitude these days.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bandwidth is n't the only limited resource .
Physical space is a limited resource.That " overpriced " coffee includes the rent for the space ( resources ) you take up .
If the place is charging for WiFi then it is because too many people were ordering a single small coffee of the day and then plunking themselves down for the day with their laptop and not ordering anything else.If you like the coffee house enough to go there and make use of its services you should also be willing to pay for them .
Really good coffee houses are hard to find and its a shame when a group of freeloaders disrupts things so that enough of the paying regulars go somewhere else and the place goes under.When enough of the WiFi leeches become paying customers , the WiFi might become free again .
If something is annoying for the regulars a good manager would want to change that , if it was affordable to do so .
Pay WiFi is annoying to everybody .
" I like making use of your establishment but I do n't feel the need to contribute towards its ongoing operations .
" seems to be all too common of an attitude these days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bandwidth isn't the only limited resource.
Physical space is a limited resource.That "overpriced" coffee includes the rent for the space (resources) you take up.
If the place is charging for WiFi then it is because too many people were ordering a single small coffee of the day and then plunking themselves down for the day with their laptop and not ordering anything else.If you like the coffee house enough to go there and make use of its services you should also be willing to pay for them.
Really good coffee houses are hard to find and its a shame when a group of freeloaders disrupts things so that enough of the paying regulars go somewhere else and the place goes under.When enough of the WiFi leeches become paying customers, the WiFi might become free again.
If something is annoying for the regulars a good manager would want to change that, if it was affordable to do so.
Pay WiFi is annoying to everybody.
"I like making use of your establishment but I don't feel the need to contribute towards its ongoing operations.
" seems to be all too common of an attitude these days.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965246</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29974342</id>
	<title>Does it still generate adhoc hotspots by default?</title>
	<author>Cato</author>
	<datestamp>1257275520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://blogs.chron.com/techblog/archives/2006/09/free\_public\_wif.html" title="chron.com">http://blogs.chron.com/techblog/archives/2006/09/free\_public\_wif.html</a> [chron.com]. points out that any time you connect to a WiFi SSID, your laptop will then appear to be hosting an adhoc SSID of the same name.... weird but true, at least on XP, and explains why I see so many "Free Public WiFi" adhoc mode SSIDs almost anywhere, including on trains where I know there is no official WiFi hotspot.  Most of these are probably not hackers trying to do a MITM attack, since this is something XP does automatically.</p><p>Does Windows 7 do the same thing?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //blogs.chron.com/techblog/archives/2006/09/free \ _public \ _wif.html [ chron.com ] .
points out that any time you connect to a WiFi SSID , your laptop will then appear to be hosting an adhoc SSID of the same name.... weird but true , at least on XP , and explains why I see so many " Free Public WiFi " adhoc mode SSIDs almost anywhere , including on trains where I know there is no official WiFi hotspot .
Most of these are probably not hackers trying to do a MITM attack , since this is something XP does automatically.Does Windows 7 do the same thing ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://blogs.chron.com/techblog/archives/2006/09/free\_public\_wif.html [chron.com].
points out that any time you connect to a WiFi SSID, your laptop will then appear to be hosting an adhoc SSID of the same name.... weird but true, at least on XP, and explains why I see so many "Free Public WiFi" adhoc mode SSIDs almost anywhere, including on trains where I know there is no official WiFi hotspot.
Most of these are probably not hackers trying to do a MITM attack, since this is something XP does automatically.Does Windows 7 do the same thing?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967296</id>
	<title>Re:"Virtual" hotspot?</title>
	<author>CannonballHead</author>
	<datestamp>1257281940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Online Rich Web Application with Cloud Based Virtual Cyber Hotspot 2.0!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Online Rich Web Application with Cloud Based Virtual Cyber Hotspot 2.0 !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Online Rich Web Application with Cloud Based Virtual Cyber Hotspot 2.0!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965996</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967272</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>dotgain</author>
	<datestamp>1257281820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> or fucking firewire.</p><p>
Not any more, MS have pulled support for IP over Firewire.  Sucks, I know...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>or fucking firewire .
Not any more , MS have pulled support for IP over Firewire .
Sucks , I know.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> or fucking firewire.
Not any more, MS have pulled support for IP over Firewire.
Sucks, I know...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967376</id>
	<title>Re:Stealing</title>
	<author>malaprohibita</author>
	<datestamp>1257239040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Have you ever worked in a cafe/coffee shop?  Customers steal coffee all the time if you consider topping off or surreptitious refills stealing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you ever worked in a cafe/coffee shop ?
Customers steal coffee all the time if you consider topping off or surreptitious refills stealing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you ever worked in a cafe/coffee shop?
Customers steal coffee all the time if you consider topping off or surreptitious refills stealing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965246</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965246</id>
	<title>Stealing</title>
	<author>Reason58</author>
	<datestamp>1257271740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>or even tether a number of laptops together at a coffee shop that charges for WiFi</p></div><p>That coffee shop has to pay for its connection, and bandwidth is a limited resource. Is Engadget going to instruct us on how to distract the employees while you pour free coffee into your thermos too?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>or even tether a number of laptops together at a coffee shop that charges for WiFiThat coffee shop has to pay for its connection , and bandwidth is a limited resource .
Is Engadget going to instruct us on how to distract the employees while you pour free coffee into your thermos too ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>or even tether a number of laptops together at a coffee shop that charges for WiFiThat coffee shop has to pay for its connection, and bandwidth is a limited resource.
Is Engadget going to instruct us on how to distract the employees while you pour free coffee into your thermos too?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966164</id>
	<title>So what?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257275880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The hacks allow you to operate a wireless network in infustructure mode similiar to a wireless access point.</p><p>Previously in windows you could do ad-hoc mode (conversation of peers) to share wired connections over ICS or by just bridging interfaces.</p><p>I personally don't care about the differences between ad-hoc and infustructure mode. They accomplish the same goal and sharing a connection is no more or less complicated either way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The hacks allow you to operate a wireless network in infustructure mode similiar to a wireless access point.Previously in windows you could do ad-hoc mode ( conversation of peers ) to share wired connections over ICS or by just bridging interfaces.I personally do n't care about the differences between ad-hoc and infustructure mode .
They accomplish the same goal and sharing a connection is no more or less complicated either way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The hacks allow you to operate a wireless network in infustructure mode similiar to a wireless access point.Previously in windows you could do ad-hoc mode (conversation of peers) to share wired connections over ICS or by just bridging interfaces.I personally don't care about the differences between ad-hoc and infustructure mode.
They accomplish the same goal and sharing a connection is no more or less complicated either way.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965282</id>
	<title>Does it work with any wifi card??</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257271860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I read the article and it does not make clear if it will work with any card.</p><p>I ask this because I was looking to do this some time ago (I want to connect my DS and Wii to internet using my existing PC as an access point) and, although there was some software (now discontinued) that allowed you to do that on WIndows, and on Linux you had to spend your time with ifconfig and whatnot (it was never clear for me, but the first step was to change your wifi card to AP mode).</p><p>Thus I wonder if this Vista feature would make it possible use the computer as an AP with all types of wireless cards.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I read the article and it does not make clear if it will work with any card.I ask this because I was looking to do this some time ago ( I want to connect my DS and Wii to internet using my existing PC as an access point ) and , although there was some software ( now discontinued ) that allowed you to do that on WIndows , and on Linux you had to spend your time with ifconfig and whatnot ( it was never clear for me , but the first step was to change your wifi card to AP mode ) .Thus I wonder if this Vista feature would make it possible use the computer as an AP with all types of wireless cards .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I read the article and it does not make clear if it will work with any card.I ask this because I was looking to do this some time ago (I want to connect my DS and Wii to internet using my existing PC as an access point) and, although there was some software (now discontinued) that allowed you to do that on WIndows, and on Linux you had to spend your time with ifconfig and whatnot (it was never clear for me, but the first step was to change your wifi card to AP mode).Thus I wonder if this Vista feature would make it possible use the computer as an AP with all types of wireless cards.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967398</id>
	<title>Re:Bloat...</title>
	<author>MikeBabcock</author>
	<datestamp>1257239160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You non-haters need to think more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You non-haters need to think more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You non-haters need to think more.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965204</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965064</id>
	<title>Hey Frank remember this?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257270960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My penis is made of cheese!</htmltext>
<tokenext>My penis is made of cheese !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My penis is made of cheese!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967174</id>
	<title>Re:It'll be gone shortly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257281400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Those are completely baseless claims. Don't make stuff up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Those are completely baseless claims .
Do n't make stuff up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Those are completely baseless claims.
Don't make stuff up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966200</id>
	<title>Clearing the Static</title>
	<author>huckamania</author>
	<datestamp>1257276000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The resulting Connectify differs from the Internet connection sharing that Windows already supports via an "ad hoc" network connection, which lets several Windows computers share a single connection. "For one thing, it shows up as a real wireless access point," Gizis said. "Two, Internet connection sharing has issues. It returns to the default settings every time you shut down a connection. And three, <b>you can join another wireless network and still run the Connectify Hotspot on the same Wi-Fi card.</b>"<br> <br>

One application came immediately to mind, Gizis continued. "You're sitting in a coffee shop that charges you for a wireless connection. With Connectify, <b>I can pay for that connection, and still have all my other devices, like my iPhone, connected to the Internet.</b>"</htmltext>
<tokenext>The resulting Connectify differs from the Internet connection sharing that Windows already supports via an " ad hoc " network connection , which lets several Windows computers share a single connection .
" For one thing , it shows up as a real wireless access point , " Gizis said .
" Two , Internet connection sharing has issues .
It returns to the default settings every time you shut down a connection .
And three , you can join another wireless network and still run the Connectify Hotspot on the same Wi-Fi card .
" One application came immediately to mind , Gizis continued .
" You 're sitting in a coffee shop that charges you for a wireless connection .
With Connectify , I can pay for that connection , and still have all my other devices , like my iPhone , connected to the Internet .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The resulting Connectify differs from the Internet connection sharing that Windows already supports via an "ad hoc" network connection, which lets several Windows computers share a single connection.
"For one thing, it shows up as a real wireless access point," Gizis said.
"Two, Internet connection sharing has issues.
It returns to the default settings every time you shut down a connection.
And three, you can join another wireless network and still run the Connectify Hotspot on the same Wi-Fi card.
" 

One application came immediately to mind, Gizis continued.
"You're sitting in a coffee shop that charges you for a wireless connection.
With Connectify, I can pay for that connection, and still have all my other devices, like my iPhone, connected to the Internet.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965246</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965078</id>
	<title>Can someone please tell me..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257271020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Can someone please tell me why the <a href="http://connectify.me/" title="connectify.me" rel="nofollow">Connectify</a> [connectify.me] website is "(C) 2009 - 2010."</htmltext>
<tokenext>Can someone please tell me why the Connectify [ connectify.me ] website is " ( C ) 2009 - 2010 .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can someone please tell me why the Connectify [connectify.me] website is "(C) 2009 - 2010.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965394</id>
	<title>Re:Stealing</title>
	<author>BarryJacobsen</author>
	<datestamp>1257272340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>or even tether a number of laptops together at a coffee shop that charges for WiFi</p></div><p>That coffee shop has to pay for its connection, and bandwidth is a limited resource. Is Engadget going to instruct us on how to distract the employees while you pour free coffee into your thermos too?</p></div><p>Don't be silly - Engadget would never support you distracting an employee to steal coffee!  The review for the device that distracts the employee for you is due any moment now, though.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>or even tether a number of laptops together at a coffee shop that charges for WiFiThat coffee shop has to pay for its connection , and bandwidth is a limited resource .
Is Engadget going to instruct us on how to distract the employees while you pour free coffee into your thermos too ? Do n't be silly - Engadget would never support you distracting an employee to steal coffee !
The review for the device that distracts the employee for you is due any moment now , though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>or even tether a number of laptops together at a coffee shop that charges for WiFiThat coffee shop has to pay for its connection, and bandwidth is a limited resource.
Is Engadget going to instruct us on how to distract the employees while you pour free coffee into your thermos too?Don't be silly - Engadget would never support you distracting an employee to steal coffee!
The review for the device that distracts the employee for you is due any moment now, though.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965246</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965176</id>
	<title>just like.. internet sharing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257271440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>just like apple's OSX's built-in Internet Sharing feature did way back in OSX 10.4 (Tiger)..<br>you can share your ethernet &gt; wifi or you can share a wired connection to your ethernet<br>(in case you have an older computer around which doesnt have wireless)</p><p>keep those photocopiers running MS...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>just like apple 's OSX 's built-in Internet Sharing feature did way back in OSX 10.4 ( Tiger ) ..you can share your ethernet &gt; wifi or you can share a wired connection to your ethernet ( in case you have an older computer around which doesnt have wireless ) keep those photocopiers running MS.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>just like apple's OSX's built-in Internet Sharing feature did way back in OSX 10.4 (Tiger)..you can share your ethernet &gt; wifi or you can share a wired connection to your ethernet(in case you have an older computer around which doesnt have wireless)keep those photocopiers running MS...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966444</id>
	<title>Re:Stealing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257277260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Never mind stealing the Wi-FI what about stealing personal information.  Someone could set  this up in an area and re-broacast as a free hotspot.  Run a sniffer on same machine and look at all the data you'll get. from unsuspecting people.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Never mind stealing the Wi-FI what about stealing personal information .
Someone could set this up in an area and re-broacast as a free hotspot .
Run a sniffer on same machine and look at all the data you 'll get .
from unsuspecting people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Never mind stealing the Wi-FI what about stealing personal information.
Someone could set  this up in an area and re-broacast as a free hotspot.
Run a sniffer on same machine and look at all the data you'll get.
from unsuspecting people.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965246</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965614</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>jo\_ham</author>
	<datestamp>1257273300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It does indeed show up as an access point.</p><p>On OS X itself (that is set up this way) the Airport icon changes into a base station icon with an arrow to show you the card is running in AP mode instead of ad-hoc wireless network (which is a different icon again) or normal wireless client mode.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It does indeed show up as an access point.On OS X itself ( that is set up this way ) the Airport icon changes into a base station icon with an arrow to show you the card is running in AP mode instead of ad-hoc wireless network ( which is a different icon again ) or normal wireless client mode .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It does indeed show up as an access point.On OS X itself (that is set up this way) the Airport icon changes into a base station icon with an arrow to show you the card is running in AP mode instead of ad-hoc wireless network (which is a different icon again) or normal wireless client mode.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965512</id>
	<title>Standard functionality...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257272820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>This has been standard and expected functionality in Linux for years; practically as long as wi-fi cards have been supported.  Why the hell is this news?  Microsoft didn't even complete the support, it's a third party hack...  This is worse than the claim that Aero Glass was revolutionary.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This has been standard and expected functionality in Linux for years ; practically as long as wi-fi cards have been supported .
Why the hell is this news ?
Microsoft did n't even complete the support , it 's a third party hack... This is worse than the claim that Aero Glass was revolutionary .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This has been standard and expected functionality in Linux for years; practically as long as wi-fi cards have been supported.
Why the hell is this news?
Microsoft didn't even complete the support, it's a third party hack...  This is worse than the claim that Aero Glass was revolutionary.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965348</id>
	<title>Re:just like.. internet sharing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257272160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No.  OSX does not allow you to use a single wireless card for both 1) connecting to a wireless network, and 2) broadcasting itself as a hotspot.</p><p>Windows has had Internet Sharing since the 90's (oh dear, did Apple not invent that feature?!).  The new feature here is virtualizing the wireless card so it behaves as though it's two wireless cards. Try that on any version of OSX and let me know how it goes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No .
OSX does not allow you to use a single wireless card for both 1 ) connecting to a wireless network , and 2 ) broadcasting itself as a hotspot.Windows has had Internet Sharing since the 90 's ( oh dear , did Apple not invent that feature ? ! ) .
The new feature here is virtualizing the wireless card so it behaves as though it 's two wireless cards .
Try that on any version of OSX and let me know how it goes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.
OSX does not allow you to use a single wireless card for both 1) connecting to a wireless network, and 2) broadcasting itself as a hotspot.Windows has had Internet Sharing since the 90's (oh dear, did Apple not invent that feature?!).
The new feature here is virtualizing the wireless card so it behaves as though it's two wireless cards.
Try that on any version of OSX and let me know how it goes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965176</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965466</id>
	<title>You guys are SUCKERS!</title>
	<author>chaoskitty</author>
	<datestamp>1257272640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This was already posted:</p><p><a href="http://mobile.slashdot.org/story/09/10/28/1758226/The-Software-Router-As-MiFi-Killer" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://mobile.slashdot.org/story/09/10/28/1758226/The-Software-Router-As-MiFi-Killer</a> [slashdot.org]</p><p>Plus, this is obviously a sales ploy to get people interested in the "Connectify" product.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This was already posted : http : //mobile.slashdot.org/story/09/10/28/1758226/The-Software-Router-As-MiFi-Killer [ slashdot.org ] Plus , this is obviously a sales ploy to get people interested in the " Connectify " product .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This was already posted:http://mobile.slashdot.org/story/09/10/28/1758226/The-Software-Router-As-MiFi-Killer [slashdot.org]Plus, this is obviously a sales ploy to get people interested in the "Connectify" product.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29974654</id>
	<title>Re:Can someone please tell me..</title>
	<author>rdnetto</author>
	<datestamp>1257019260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Relativistic effects.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Relativistic effects .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Relativistic effects.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965078</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965788</id>
	<title>Re:Bloat...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257274140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So what? As long as inactive services in the OS don't slow me down, lay them on! Pile them on!  If I decide I want something, like, I dunno, wi-fi hotspot capability, it's nice to have it.<br>
&nbsp; <br>Have you heard? Disk space is really cheap!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So what ?
As long as inactive services in the OS do n't slow me down , lay them on !
Pile them on !
If I decide I want something , like , I dunno , wi-fi hotspot capability , it 's nice to have it .
  Have you heard ?
Disk space is really cheap !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So what?
As long as inactive services in the OS don't slow me down, lay them on!
Pile them on!
If I decide I want something, like, I dunno, wi-fi hotspot capability, it's nice to have it.
  Have you heard?
Disk space is really cheap!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965112</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965296</id>
	<title>Re:just like.. internet sharing</title>
	<author>Bageloid</author>
	<datestamp>1257271980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>That was a feature since windows 98SE, this talking about connecting to a hotspot with wifi and then letting other devices connect to the laptops wifi and access the internet that way.

Instead of ethernet&gt;wifi&gt;internet or wifi&gt;ethernet&gt;internet this is wifi&gt;wifi&gt;internet where the host computer only has one wifi card.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That was a feature since windows 98SE , this talking about connecting to a hotspot with wifi and then letting other devices connect to the laptops wifi and access the internet that way .
Instead of ethernet &gt; wifi &gt; internet or wifi &gt; ethernet &gt; internet this is wifi &gt; wifi &gt; internet where the host computer only has one wifi card .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That was a feature since windows 98SE, this talking about connecting to a hotspot with wifi and then letting other devices connect to the laptops wifi and access the internet that way.
Instead of ethernet&gt;wifi&gt;internet or wifi&gt;ethernet&gt;internet this is wifi&gt;wifi&gt;internet where the host computer only has one wifi card.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965176</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29999514</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>badkarmadayaccount</author>
	<datestamp>1257414720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I prefer daisy chaining HDDs, rather than using firewire as a sextoy.<br>Then again, your username can't be that random.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I prefer daisy chaining HDDs , rather than using firewire as a sextoy.Then again , your username ca n't be that random .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I prefer daisy chaining HDDs, rather than using firewire as a sextoy.Then again, your username can't be that random.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965590</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>CrashNBrn</author>
	<datestamp>1257273240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>From TFA (reformatting/emphasis mine):<blockquote><div><p>The resulting Connectify <b>differs</b> from ICS that Windows already supports via an "ad hoc" network connection, which lets several Windows computers share a single connection.<br>
<b>1</b>) It shows up as a real wireless access point.<br>
<b>2</b>) ICS returns to default settings every time you shut down a connection. <br>
<b>3</b>) You can join another wireless network and still run the Connectify Hotspot on the same Wi-Fi card.</p></div></blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From TFA ( reformatting/emphasis mine ) : The resulting Connectify differs from ICS that Windows already supports via an " ad hoc " network connection , which lets several Windows computers share a single connection .
1 ) It shows up as a real wireless access point .
2 ) ICS returns to default settings every time you shut down a connection .
3 ) You can join another wireless network and still run the Connectify Hotspot on the same Wi-Fi card .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From TFA (reformatting/emphasis mine):The resulting Connectify differs from ICS that Windows already supports via an "ad hoc" network connection, which lets several Windows computers share a single connection.
1) It shows up as a real wireless access point.
2) ICS returns to default settings every time you shut down a connection.
3) You can join another wireless network and still run the Connectify Hotspot on the same Wi-Fi card.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966126</id>
	<title>Re:"Virtual" hotspot?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257275700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>From what I understand, they virtualize the WiFi card into two devices, the access point (so other computers can connect to your "access point") and the client (so you can get the internet access from a wireless access point).</htmltext>
<tokenext>From what I understand , they virtualize the WiFi card into two devices , the access point ( so other computers can connect to your " access point " ) and the client ( so you can get the internet access from a wireless access point ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From what I understand, they virtualize the WiFi card into two devices, the access point (so other computers can connect to your "access point") and the client (so you can get the internet access from a wireless access point).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967350</id>
	<title>Unixxx</title>
	<author>ufoolme</author>
	<datestamp>1257238920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>any unix machine can do this, like a billion years ago.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>any unix machine can do this , like a billion years ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>any unix machine can do this, like a billion years ago.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29971102</id>
	<title>Re:"Virtual" hotspot?</title>
	<author>daveime</author>
	<datestamp>1257252960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>"2.0" could be added as a suffix, if it used Javascript</i></p><p>Only if it also used an obscene amount of unnecessary XML to transmit 1 byte of information !</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" 2.0 " could be added as a suffix , if it used JavascriptOnly if it also used an obscene amount of unnecessary XML to transmit 1 byte of information !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"2.0" could be added as a suffix, if it used JavascriptOnly if it also used an obscene amount of unnecessary XML to transmit 1 byte of information !</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965996</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966320</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>ProfessionalCookie</author>
	<datestamp>1257276600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Uhhh...yes it does, and always has.  Sorry you were living in the stone age<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Uhhh...yes it does , and always has .
Sorry you were living in the stone age ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uhhh...yes it does, and always has.
Sorry you were living in the stone age ;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29977712</id>
	<title>Re:Can someone please tell me..</title>
	<author>mspohr</author>
	<datestamp>1257002700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Copyright office allows you to claim copyright for the following year for works published in the last few months of a year.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Copyright office allows you to claim copyright for the following year for works published in the last few months of a year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Copyright office allows you to claim copyright for the following year for works published in the last few months of a year.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965078</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965356</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>EkriirkE</author>
	<datestamp>1257272220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just like you could do with Windows 98 since, well, 1998.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just like you could do with Windows 98 since , well , 1998 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just like you could do with Windows 98 since, well, 1998.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.30027254</id>
	<title>Sniffing traffic?</title>
	<author>TripShock</author>
	<datestamp>1257688920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If I have multiple clients connected to my access point and using my internet, can I sniff their traffic somehow?</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I have multiple clients connected to my access point and using my internet , can I sniff their traffic somehow ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I have multiple clients connected to my access point and using my internet, can I sniff their traffic somehow?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965234</id>
	<title>Old news</title>
	<author>SirJorgelOfBorgel</author>
	<datestamp>1257271680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow, you haven't been able to do this using any Windows since... long ago? With only about 10 clicks too. Not to mention my cellphone could already do this for ages. This news is approximately 8 years old, congrats Slashdot!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , you have n't been able to do this using any Windows since... long ago ?
With only about 10 clicks too .
Not to mention my cellphone could already do this for ages .
This news is approximately 8 years old , congrats Slashdot !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, you haven't been able to do this using any Windows since... long ago?
With only about 10 clicks too.
Not to mention my cellphone could already do this for ages.
This news is approximately 8 years old, congrats Slashdot!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965996</id>
	<title>Re:"Virtual" hotspot?</title>
	<author>Toonol</author>
	<datestamp>1257275220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Virtual" because it's on a computer, duh.  "Cyber" would be an acceptable alternative prefix.<br> <br>

"2.0" could be added as a suffix, if it used Javascript.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Virtual " because it 's on a computer , duh .
" Cyber " would be an acceptable alternative prefix .
" 2.0 " could be added as a suffix , if it used Javascript .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Virtual" because it's on a computer, duh.
"Cyber" would be an acceptable alternative prefix.
"2.0" could be added as a suffix, if it used Javascript.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29975682</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>spongman</author>
	<datestamp>1256986320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> Just like I could do on a Mac with the included OS since 2001.</p></div></blockquote><p>what, run AP client &amp; server on the same WNIC at the same time? doubt it...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just like I could do on a Mac with the included OS since 2001.what , run AP client &amp; server on the same WNIC at the same time ?
doubt it.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Just like I could do on a Mac with the included OS since 2001.what, run AP client &amp; server on the same WNIC at the same time?
doubt it...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966198</id>
	<title>Been around since 2005</title>
	<author>modemboy</author>
	<datestamp>1257276000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So this feature was created by Microsoft Research back in 2005, and has been available for download ever since: <a href="http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/downloads/994abd5f-53d1-4dba-a9d8-8ba1dcccead7/" title="microsoft.com">http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/downloads/994abd5f-53d1-4dba-a9d8-8ba1dcccead7/</a> [microsoft.com]</p><p>I fail to see how this is news, they included it by default in Win 7 and someone accessed it, yay. This has been doable for 4 years...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So this feature was created by Microsoft Research back in 2005 , and has been available for download ever since : http : //research.microsoft.com/en-us/downloads/994abd5f-53d1-4dba-a9d8-8ba1dcccead7/ [ microsoft.com ] I fail to see how this is news , they included it by default in Win 7 and someone accessed it , yay .
This has been doable for 4 years.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So this feature was created by Microsoft Research back in 2005, and has been available for download ever since: http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/downloads/994abd5f-53d1-4dba-a9d8-8ba1dcccead7/ [microsoft.com]I fail to see how this is news, they included it by default in Win 7 and someone accessed it, yay.
This has been doable for 4 years...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29974672</id>
	<title>Re:It'll be gone shortly</title>
	<author>rdnetto</author>
	<datestamp>1257019380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If these are undocumented APIs, then you can bet that they'll be removed or otherwise disabled in the first service pack.</p></div><p>It's not an undocumented feature: <a href="http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd815243(VS.85).aspx" title="microsoft.com">http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd815243(VS.85).aspx</a> [microsoft.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If these are undocumented APIs , then you can bet that they 'll be removed or otherwise disabled in the first service pack.It 's not an undocumented feature : http : //msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd815243 ( VS.85 ) .aspx [ microsoft.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If these are undocumented APIs, then you can bet that they'll be removed or otherwise disabled in the first service pack.It's not an undocumented feature: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd815243(VS.85).aspx [microsoft.com]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965382</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>Ziekheid</author>
	<datestamp>1257272280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Congratulations, I could do this on XP too (without 3rd party tools).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Congratulations , I could do this on XP too ( without 3rd party tools ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Congratulations, I could do this on XP too (without 3rd party tools).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967690</id>
	<title>On ny ancient Mac iBook</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257240600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Worked on Mac OS X 10.3</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Worked on Mac OS X 10.3</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Worked on Mac OS X 10.3</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29968924</id>
	<title>Same as Intel MyWiFi</title>
	<author>modemboy</author>
	<datestamp>1257245520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Intel has a very similar tech called MyWifi in their newer cards, it uses Windows ICS so it differs in implementation, but does offer a full AP mode while being connected to an external wifi network.<br><a href="http://ces.cnet.com/8301-19167\_1-10139172-100.html" title="cnet.com">http://ces.cnet.com/8301-19167\_1-10139172-100.html</a> [cnet.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Intel has a very similar tech called MyWifi in their newer cards , it uses Windows ICS so it differs in implementation , but does offer a full AP mode while being connected to an external wifi network.http : //ces.cnet.com/8301-19167 \ _1-10139172-100.html [ cnet.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Intel has a very similar tech called MyWifi in their newer cards, it uses Windows ICS so it differs in implementation, but does offer a full AP mode while being connected to an external wifi network.http://ces.cnet.com/8301-19167\_1-10139172-100.html [cnet.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966882</id>
	<title>no wonder it got removed</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257279780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well no wonder it got removed!  What a stupid feature!  I mean it kinda sounds neat but my spare wireless router is about 5x smaller and 20x lighter than even my smallest laptop.  I'd rather stick that in my pocket than lug around an entire computer.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well no wonder it got removed !
What a stupid feature !
I mean it kinda sounds neat but my spare wireless router is about 5x smaller and 20x lighter than even my smallest laptop .
I 'd rather stick that in my pocket than lug around an entire computer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well no wonder it got removed!
What a stupid feature!
I mean it kinda sounds neat but my spare wireless router is about 5x smaller and 20x lighter than even my smallest laptop.
I'd rather stick that in my pocket than lug around an entire computer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965112</id>
	<title>Bloat...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257271140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not surprising really.  The secret formula for CokeCola is probably hidden in there too.</p><p>I wonder how many 'libraries of congress' could fit in the space occupied by unused but deployed windows code.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not surprising really .
The secret formula for CokeCola is probably hidden in there too.I wonder how many 'libraries of congress ' could fit in the space occupied by unused but deployed windows code .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not surprising really.
The secret formula for CokeCola is probably hidden in there too.I wonder how many 'libraries of congress' could fit in the space occupied by unused but deployed windows code.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965440</id>
	<title>Re:just like.. internet sharing</title>
	<author>Useful Wheat</author>
	<datestamp>1257272460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now slow down a minute.</p><p>My very first laptop that I purchased back in 2003 could do this, and it was running Windows XP. I used this feature almost every day in the dorms to put up a wireless network with Internet so that we could have some small lan parties. The Internet was a little slow with a huge group of people using a single connection, but it worked really well. This feature worked naively in Windows XP and didn't require an additional software or special tinkering, you just had link the Ethernet to the wireless port. It also worked in reverse (You just had to swap a check box), but I never had the opportunity to try it.</p><p>What this feature does (in addition to that) is reshare a wifi connection with a single wifi card. That way 1 person could pay for the wireless Internet, and then immediately reshare it on the same computer.</p><p>Just because you didn't know a windows machine could do it, doesn't mean it can't. Apple is not the foundation of all ideas when it comes to computers. Sometimes Microsoft gets something right too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now slow down a minute.My very first laptop that I purchased back in 2003 could do this , and it was running Windows XP .
I used this feature almost every day in the dorms to put up a wireless network with Internet so that we could have some small lan parties .
The Internet was a little slow with a huge group of people using a single connection , but it worked really well .
This feature worked naively in Windows XP and did n't require an additional software or special tinkering , you just had link the Ethernet to the wireless port .
It also worked in reverse ( You just had to swap a check box ) , but I never had the opportunity to try it.What this feature does ( in addition to that ) is reshare a wifi connection with a single wifi card .
That way 1 person could pay for the wireless Internet , and then immediately reshare it on the same computer.Just because you did n't know a windows machine could do it , does n't mean it ca n't .
Apple is not the foundation of all ideas when it comes to computers .
Sometimes Microsoft gets something right too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now slow down a minute.My very first laptop that I purchased back in 2003 could do this, and it was running Windows XP.
I used this feature almost every day in the dorms to put up a wireless network with Internet so that we could have some small lan parties.
The Internet was a little slow with a huge group of people using a single connection, but it worked really well.
This feature worked naively in Windows XP and didn't require an additional software or special tinkering, you just had link the Ethernet to the wireless port.
It also worked in reverse (You just had to swap a check box), but I never had the opportunity to try it.What this feature does (in addition to that) is reshare a wifi connection with a single wifi card.
That way 1 person could pay for the wireless Internet, and then immediately reshare it on the same computer.Just because you didn't know a windows machine could do it, doesn't mean it can't.
Apple is not the foundation of all ideas when it comes to computers.
Sometimes Microsoft gets something right too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965176</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965486</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>jim\_v2000</author>
	<datestamp>1257272760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Your Mac will show up as an actual access point instead of an ad-hoc wireless network with ICS enabled?  No, it won't.  This is different then what Windows, OS X, and desktop Linux distros have been doing before.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Your Mac will show up as an actual access point instead of an ad-hoc wireless network with ICS enabled ?
No , it wo n't .
This is different then what Windows , OS X , and desktop Linux distros have been doing before .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your Mac will show up as an actual access point instead of an ad-hoc wireless network with ICS enabled?
No, it won't.
This is different then what Windows, OS X, and desktop Linux distros have been doing before.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967914</id>
	<title>More likely, patched out by EULA</title>
	<author>Nick Driver</author>
	<datestamp>1257241560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Expect the next release of the EULA to say something like any future and unknown at the moment uses of the operating system or its APIs that MS doesn't approve of at some future date, become automatic EULA violations even if those uses are unknown at the time the end user first agreed to the EULA.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Expect the next release of the EULA to say something like any future and unknown at the moment uses of the operating system or its APIs that MS does n't approve of at some future date , become automatic EULA violations even if those uses are unknown at the time the end user first agreed to the EULA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Expect the next release of the EULA to say something like any future and unknown at the moment uses of the operating system or its APIs that MS doesn't approve of at some future date, become automatic EULA violations even if those uses are unknown at the time the end user first agreed to the EULA.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29968288</id>
	<title>Intel My WiFi</title>
	<author>strstr</author>
	<datestamp>1257243180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does this mean Intel has been "exploiting" Windows Virtual WiFi with the "My WiFi" feature on their <a href="http://www.intel.com/network/connectivity/products/wireless/adapters/5000/index.htm" title="intel.com" rel="nofollow">5000</a> [intel.com] series WiFi adapters all this time?</p><p>Old news, it's absolutely not an exploit or some hack and has already been in use by Intel for months if not the past year.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does this mean Intel has been " exploiting " Windows Virtual WiFi with the " My WiFi " feature on their 5000 [ intel.com ] series WiFi adapters all this time ? Old news , it 's absolutely not an exploit or some hack and has already been in use by Intel for months if not the past year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does this mean Intel has been "exploiting" Windows Virtual WiFi with the "My WiFi" feature on their 5000 [intel.com] series WiFi adapters all this time?Old news, it's absolutely not an exploit or some hack and has already been in use by Intel for months if not the past year.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967390</id>
	<title>Re:Bloat...</title>
	<author>Bill, Shooter of Bul</author>
	<datestamp>1257239100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The problem with bloat isn't disk space, its code complexity. The more bloat, the more complex the code is, the more security problems, the more bugs, the more difficult it is to implement a good, useful feature. Of course, one man's bloat is another man's killer feature, so its sort of relative. But still, windows has too many ways of doing things in their api's. Then again, even Linus has called his own kernel bloated. Maybe that's the price we pay for the functionality we crave these days.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem with bloat is n't disk space , its code complexity .
The more bloat , the more complex the code is , the more security problems , the more bugs , the more difficult it is to implement a good , useful feature .
Of course , one man 's bloat is another man 's killer feature , so its sort of relative .
But still , windows has too many ways of doing things in their api 's .
Then again , even Linus has called his own kernel bloated .
Maybe that 's the price we pay for the functionality we crave these days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem with bloat isn't disk space, its code complexity.
The more bloat, the more complex the code is, the more security problems, the more bugs, the more difficult it is to implement a good, useful feature.
Of course, one man's bloat is another man's killer feature, so its sort of relative.
But still, windows has too many ways of doing things in their api's.
Then again, even Linus has called his own kernel bloated.
Maybe that's the price we pay for the functionality we crave these days.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965788</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967900</id>
	<title>Re:"Virtual" hotspot?</title>
	<author>Stevecrox</author>
	<datestamp>1257241500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I heard they considered calling it a "Cyberpoint".</htmltext>
<tokenext>I heard they considered calling it a " Cyberpoint " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I heard they considered calling it a "Cyberpoint".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965996</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965920</id>
	<title>Re:Stealing</title>
	<author>phizix</author>
	<datestamp>1257274800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>That coffee shop has to pay for its connection, and bandwidth is a limited resource.</p></div><p>Which is why they should charge by the MB.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That coffee shop has to pay for its connection , and bandwidth is a limited resource.Which is why they should charge by the MB .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That coffee shop has to pay for its connection, and bandwidth is a limited resource.Which is why they should charge by the MB.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965246</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29980114</id>
	<title>Additionally "symbolset"? There is an "SEWindows"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257010740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><div class="quote"><p><b>"It's time for a Security Enhanced Windows. The federal government has a batch of policies and registry settings people can adopt as templates for locking down workstations and servers. Now might be a good time to roll out a similar offering." </b> - by symbolset (646467) on Tuesday November 03, @11:03PM (#29973298)</p></div><p>It's already been done 2x for the United States Armed forces symbolset (just shows how much YOU KNOW (not)), ask ForeDecker about that, or refer to these URL's:</p><p><b>US military gets its own secure version of Windows:</b></p><p><a href="http://news.techworld.com/operating-systems/2666/us-military-gets-its-own-secure-version-of-windows/" title="techworld.com" rel="nofollow">http://news.techworld.com/operating-systems/2666/us-military-gets-its-own-secure-version-of-windows/</a> [techworld.com]</p><p>AND, they also got such a secured Windows issued their way, BEFORE THAT TOO, in 2003, to the US Armed forces, before... think, or LOOK, before you speak, symbolset. Learn a few things first, then, open your mouth... "m'kay"?</p><p>(Ask foredecker, our resident MS dev. mgr. here)</p><p>AND, for those lacking that (only the US Armed forces gets that)?</p><p>Well, there is the list by the gov't. that works well as symbolset notes, but iirc, One I wrote one is from FAR before it, circa 1997-2001 that was featured @ NTCompatible.com as their "Article #1" &amp; was noted as "GOOD STUFF" @ NEOWIN forums, here as proof thereof (from 2001, when they finally discovered it) -&gt;</p><p><a href="http://www.neowin.net/news/main/01/11/29/apk-a-to-z-internet-speedup--security-text" title="neowin.net" rel="nofollow">http://www.neowin.net/news/main/01/11/29/apk-a-to-z-internet-speedup--security-text</a> [neowin.net]</p><p>I only FURTHER IMPROVED THAT GUIDE, which across the 20 forums it is currently on, has been rated "5/5 stars", or made an "Essential Guide", or "Sticky/Pinned Thread" and even got me PAID for winning PCPitStop's January 2008 "Article of the Month" no less for producing it.</p><p><b>Searching "HOW TO SECURE Windows 2000/XP" online @ GOOGLE can show ANYONE proof of THAT much, as it "owns" nearly the "TOP 30 SPOTS" consecutively there.</b></p><p>An example thereof? OK:</p><p><a href="http://www.tcmagazine.com/forums/index.php?s=954cd919a263e7fa80bd77a69a08b157&amp;showtopic=2662" title="tcmagazine.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.tcmagazine.com/forums/index.php?s=954cd919a263e7fa80bd77a69a08b157&amp;showtopic=2662</a> [tcmagazine.com]</p><p>Where it is over 53,500++ views currently, in less than 1.5 yrs.' time online... &amp; over 250,000++ views strong, with folks saying "Good stuff" or finding them NOT SHOWING ANY VULNERABILITIES or PENETRATIONS by malware in general even, IF they followed my security guide for Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 (even VISTA onwards, to an extent) to the letter!</p><p>----</p><p>People such as THRONKA @ XtremePCCentral.com here stated, verbatim by he:</p><p><a href="http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=29ca0dfc286bf1e7ff52028336149ce0&amp;t=28430&amp;page=3" title="xtremepccentral.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=29ca0dfc286bf1e7ff52028336149ce0&amp;t=28430&amp;page=3</a> [xtremepccentral.com]</p><p>"Its 2009 - still trouble free! I was told last week by a co worker who does active directory administration, and he said I was doing overkill. I told him yes, but I just eliminated the half life in windows that you usually get. He said good point. So from 2008 till 2009. No speed decreases, its been to a lan party, moved around in a move, and it still NEVER has had the OS reinstalled besides the fact I imaged the drive over in 2008. Great stuff!"</p><p>----</p><p>Symbolset? You TALK OUT YOUR BEHIND, without knowing any facts...</p><p>(It tends to NOW make sense why you only make speculations that have already been done, and that you perform "adhominem attacks" on those that post valid points, and you avoid disputing or disproving those points, beacause you clearly do not know much about this art &amp; science/field, period)</p><p>APK</p><p>P.S.=&gt; Better luck next time, Symbolset (you pitiful ignorant adhominem attack utilizing TROLL) - lol! "too, Too, TOO EASY!"... and, the day YOU can show us you've done ALL THIS, as I have, "Symbolset":</p><p>I have appeared or had my work appear in, international publications AND COMPETITIONS + TECH TRADE SHOWS (in addition to commercial code to my name no less), since 1996, in these places:</p><p>----</p><p>WINDOWS NT-Magazine (forerunner of today's<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET magazine) 1997 (iirc, Oct. issue pg. 83) issue review by Mr. John Enck!</p><p>Mr. Enck is a technical editor of theirs @ Windows IT Pro incidentally, a world-reknowned publication.</p><p>That was for my work on both SuperCache &amp; SuperDisk by EEC Systems (now SuperSpeed.com - first part was writing up an article featured on their corp. website alongside Mr. Enck no less, about the technical effective uses of Ramdisks, &amp; the latter was on PAID CONTRACT to improve the mathematics &amp; algorithm for tuning their SuperCache product w/ a programmatic addon they shipped w/ their product, &amp; now is incorporated into the main program itself (Mr. Eric Dickman is their CEO iirc, &amp; offered me a job w/ them back in 2003, but life took me to NYC instead of BOSTON) - they ARE A CERTIFIED Microsoft Partner you know, by the by)</p><p>* This also landed myself &amp; EEC Systems/SuperSpeed.com a spot for SuperDisk/SuperVolume being a finalist in the Tech-Ed 2002 show, in its hardest category:</p><p>Boosting SQLServer Performance, the toughest category there is @ MsTechEd.</p><p>The work done for wares that took ideas on ramdisks to a finalist with EEC Systems/SuperSpeed.com in the HARDEST category there was, SQLServer performance enhancement, as well as doing work to boost their SuperCache II product to up to 40\% better than its stock performance on a paid contract in commercial wares &amp; was reviewed VERY favorably in 1997 Oct. issue for SuperCache and SuperDisk by Mr. John Enck, a fellow technical editor to Mark Russinovich of Microsoft and writer for the same magazine that features M.R. in it, Windows NT/2000/.NET/IT Pro magazine.</p><p>----</p><p>WINDOWS MAGAZINE, 1997, "Top Freeware &amp; Shareware of the Year" issue page 210, #1/first entry in fact.</p><p>----</p><p>PC-WELT FEB 1998 - page 84</p><p>----</p><p>PC-WELT FEB 1999 - page 83</p><p>----</p><p>CHIP Magazine 7/99 - page 100</p><p>----</p><p>WINDOWS MAGAZINE, WINTER 1998 - page 92, insert section, MUST HAVE WARES</p><p>----</p><p>GERMAN PC BOOK, Data Becker publisher "PC Aufrusten und Repairen"</p><p>----</p><p>HOT SHAREWARE Numero 46 issue, pg. 54 (PC ware mag from Spain)</p><p>====</p><p>Well, symbolset, when YOU HAVE DONE THE SAME (same amount &amp; same number of times)? Maybe, JUST MAYBE, then you can talk... maybe! apk</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" It 's time for a Security Enhanced Windows .
The federal government has a batch of policies and registry settings people can adopt as templates for locking down workstations and servers .
Now might be a good time to roll out a similar offering .
" - by symbolset ( 646467 ) on Tuesday November 03 , @ 11 : 03PM ( # 29973298 ) It 's already been done 2x for the United States Armed forces symbolset ( just shows how much YOU KNOW ( not ) ) , ask ForeDecker about that , or refer to these URL 's : US military gets its own secure version of Windows : http : //news.techworld.com/operating-systems/2666/us-military-gets-its-own-secure-version-of-windows/ [ techworld.com ] AND , they also got such a secured Windows issued their way , BEFORE THAT TOO , in 2003 , to the US Armed forces , before... think , or LOOK , before you speak , symbolset .
Learn a few things first , then , open your mouth.. .
" m'kay " ? ( Ask foredecker , our resident MS dev .
mgr. here ) AND , for those lacking that ( only the US Armed forces gets that ) ? Well , there is the list by the gov't .
that works well as symbolset notes , but iirc , One I wrote one is from FAR before it , circa 1997-2001 that was featured @ NTCompatible.com as their " Article # 1 " &amp; was noted as " GOOD STUFF " @ NEOWIN forums , here as proof thereof ( from 2001 , when they finally discovered it ) - &gt; http : //www.neowin.net/news/main/01/11/29/apk-a-to-z-internet-speedup--security-text [ neowin.net ] I only FURTHER IMPROVED THAT GUIDE , which across the 20 forums it is currently on , has been rated " 5/5 stars " , or made an " Essential Guide " , or " Sticky/Pinned Thread " and even got me PAID for winning PCPitStop 's January 2008 " Article of the Month " no less for producing it.Searching " HOW TO SECURE Windows 2000/XP " online @ GOOGLE can show ANYONE proof of THAT much , as it " owns " nearly the " TOP 30 SPOTS " consecutively there.An example thereof ?
OK : http : //www.tcmagazine.com/forums/index.php ? s = 954cd919a263e7fa80bd77a69a08b157&amp;showtopic = 2662 [ tcmagazine.com ] Where it is over 53,500 + + views currently , in less than 1.5 yrs .
' time online... &amp; over 250,000 + + views strong , with folks saying " Good stuff " or finding them NOT SHOWING ANY VULNERABILITIES or PENETRATIONS by malware in general even , IF they followed my security guide for Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 ( even VISTA onwards , to an extent ) to the letter ! ----People such as THRONKA @ XtremePCCentral.com here stated , verbatim by he : http : //www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php ? s = 29ca0dfc286bf1e7ff52028336149ce0&amp;t = 28430&amp;page = 3 [ xtremepccentral.com ] " Its 2009 - still trouble free !
I was told last week by a co worker who does active directory administration , and he said I was doing overkill .
I told him yes , but I just eliminated the half life in windows that you usually get .
He said good point .
So from 2008 till 2009 .
No speed decreases , its been to a lan party , moved around in a move , and it still NEVER has had the OS reinstalled besides the fact I imaged the drive over in 2008 .
Great stuff ! " ----Symbolset ?
You TALK OUT YOUR BEHIND , without knowing any facts... ( It tends to NOW make sense why you only make speculations that have already been done , and that you perform " adhominem attacks " on those that post valid points , and you avoid disputing or disproving those points , beacause you clearly do not know much about this art &amp; science/field , period ) APKP.S. = &gt; Better luck next time , Symbolset ( you pitiful ignorant adhominem attack utilizing TROLL ) - lol !
" too , Too , TOO EASY ! " .. .
and , the day YOU can show us you 've done ALL THIS , as I have , " Symbolset " : I have appeared or had my work appear in , international publications AND COMPETITIONS + TECH TRADE SHOWS ( in addition to commercial code to my name no less ) , since 1996 , in these places : ----WINDOWS NT-Magazine ( forerunner of today 's .NET magazine ) 1997 ( iirc , Oct. issue pg .
83 ) issue review by Mr. John Enck ! Mr .
Enck is a technical editor of theirs @ Windows IT Pro incidentally , a world-reknowned publication.That was for my work on both SuperCache &amp; SuperDisk by EEC Systems ( now SuperSpeed.com - first part was writing up an article featured on their corp. website alongside Mr. Enck no less , about the technical effective uses of Ramdisks , &amp; the latter was on PAID CONTRACT to improve the mathematics &amp; algorithm for tuning their SuperCache product w/ a programmatic addon they shipped w/ their product , &amp; now is incorporated into the main program itself ( Mr. Eric Dickman is their CEO iirc , &amp; offered me a job w/ them back in 2003 , but life took me to NYC instead of BOSTON ) - they ARE A CERTIFIED Microsoft Partner you know , by the by ) * This also landed myself &amp; EEC Systems/SuperSpeed.com a spot for SuperDisk/SuperVolume being a finalist in the Tech-Ed 2002 show , in its hardest category : Boosting SQLServer Performance , the toughest category there is @ MsTechEd.The work done for wares that took ideas on ramdisks to a finalist with EEC Systems/SuperSpeed.com in the HARDEST category there was , SQLServer performance enhancement , as well as doing work to boost their SuperCache II product to up to 40 \ % better than its stock performance on a paid contract in commercial wares &amp; was reviewed VERY favorably in 1997 Oct. issue for SuperCache and SuperDisk by Mr. John Enck , a fellow technical editor to Mark Russinovich of Microsoft and writer for the same magazine that features M.R .
in it , Windows NT/2000/.NET/IT Pro magazine.----WINDOWS MAGAZINE , 1997 , " Top Freeware &amp; Shareware of the Year " issue page 210 , # 1/first entry in fact.----PC-WELT FEB 1998 - page 84----PC-WELT FEB 1999 - page 83----CHIP Magazine 7/99 - page 100----WINDOWS MAGAZINE , WINTER 1998 - page 92 , insert section , MUST HAVE WARES----GERMAN PC BOOK , Data Becker publisher " PC Aufrusten und Repairen " ----HOT SHAREWARE Numero 46 issue , pg .
54 ( PC ware mag from Spain ) = = = = Well , symbolset , when YOU HAVE DONE THE SAME ( same amount &amp; same number of times ) ?
Maybe , JUST MAYBE , then you can talk... maybe ! apk</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"It's time for a Security Enhanced Windows.
The federal government has a batch of policies and registry settings people can adopt as templates for locking down workstations and servers.
Now might be a good time to roll out a similar offering.
"  - by symbolset (646467) on Tuesday November 03, @11:03PM (#29973298)It's already been done 2x for the United States Armed forces symbolset (just shows how much YOU KNOW (not)), ask ForeDecker about that, or refer to these URL's:US military gets its own secure version of Windows:http://news.techworld.com/operating-systems/2666/us-military-gets-its-own-secure-version-of-windows/ [techworld.com]AND, they also got such a secured Windows issued their way, BEFORE THAT TOO, in 2003, to the US Armed forces, before... think, or LOOK, before you speak, symbolset.
Learn a few things first, then, open your mouth...
"m'kay"?(Ask foredecker, our resident MS dev.
mgr. here)AND, for those lacking that (only the US Armed forces gets that)?Well, there is the list by the gov't.
that works well as symbolset notes, but iirc, One I wrote one is from FAR before it, circa 1997-2001 that was featured @ NTCompatible.com as their "Article #1" &amp; was noted as "GOOD STUFF" @ NEOWIN forums, here as proof thereof (from 2001, when they finally discovered it) -&gt;http://www.neowin.net/news/main/01/11/29/apk-a-to-z-internet-speedup--security-text [neowin.net]I only FURTHER IMPROVED THAT GUIDE, which across the 20 forums it is currently on, has been rated "5/5 stars", or made an "Essential Guide", or "Sticky/Pinned Thread" and even got me PAID for winning PCPitStop's January 2008 "Article of the Month" no less for producing it.Searching "HOW TO SECURE Windows 2000/XP" online @ GOOGLE can show ANYONE proof of THAT much, as it "owns" nearly the "TOP 30 SPOTS" consecutively there.An example thereof?
OK:http://www.tcmagazine.com/forums/index.php?s=954cd919a263e7fa80bd77a69a08b157&amp;showtopic=2662 [tcmagazine.com]Where it is over 53,500++ views currently, in less than 1.5 yrs.
' time online... &amp; over 250,000++ views strong, with folks saying "Good stuff" or finding them NOT SHOWING ANY VULNERABILITIES or PENETRATIONS by malware in general even, IF they followed my security guide for Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 (even VISTA onwards, to an extent) to the letter!----People such as THRONKA @ XtremePCCentral.com here stated, verbatim by he:http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=29ca0dfc286bf1e7ff52028336149ce0&amp;t=28430&amp;page=3 [xtremepccentral.com]"Its 2009 - still trouble free!
I was told last week by a co worker who does active directory administration, and he said I was doing overkill.
I told him yes, but I just eliminated the half life in windows that you usually get.
He said good point.
So from 2008 till 2009.
No speed decreases, its been to a lan party, moved around in a move, and it still NEVER has had the OS reinstalled besides the fact I imaged the drive over in 2008.
Great stuff!"----Symbolset?
You TALK OUT YOUR BEHIND, without knowing any facts...(It tends to NOW make sense why you only make speculations that have already been done, and that you perform "adhominem attacks" on those that post valid points, and you avoid disputing or disproving those points, beacause you clearly do not know much about this art &amp; science/field, period)APKP.S.=&gt; Better luck next time, Symbolset (you pitiful ignorant adhominem attack utilizing TROLL) - lol!
"too, Too, TOO EASY!"...
and, the day YOU can show us you've done ALL THIS, as I have, "Symbolset":I have appeared or had my work appear in, international publications AND COMPETITIONS + TECH TRADE SHOWS (in addition to commercial code to my name no less), since 1996, in these places:----WINDOWS NT-Magazine (forerunner of today's .NET magazine) 1997 (iirc, Oct. issue pg.
83) issue review by Mr. John Enck!Mr.
Enck is a technical editor of theirs @ Windows IT Pro incidentally, a world-reknowned publication.That was for my work on both SuperCache &amp; SuperDisk by EEC Systems (now SuperSpeed.com - first part was writing up an article featured on their corp. website alongside Mr. Enck no less, about the technical effective uses of Ramdisks, &amp; the latter was on PAID CONTRACT to improve the mathematics &amp; algorithm for tuning their SuperCache product w/ a programmatic addon they shipped w/ their product, &amp; now is incorporated into the main program itself (Mr. Eric Dickman is their CEO iirc, &amp; offered me a job w/ them back in 2003, but life took me to NYC instead of BOSTON) - they ARE A CERTIFIED Microsoft Partner you know, by the by)* This also landed myself &amp; EEC Systems/SuperSpeed.com a spot for SuperDisk/SuperVolume being a finalist in the Tech-Ed 2002 show, in its hardest category:Boosting SQLServer Performance, the toughest category there is @ MsTechEd.The work done for wares that took ideas on ramdisks to a finalist with EEC Systems/SuperSpeed.com in the HARDEST category there was, SQLServer performance enhancement, as well as doing work to boost their SuperCache II product to up to 40\% better than its stock performance on a paid contract in commercial wares &amp; was reviewed VERY favorably in 1997 Oct. issue for SuperCache and SuperDisk by Mr. John Enck, a fellow technical editor to Mark Russinovich of Microsoft and writer for the same magazine that features M.R.
in it, Windows NT/2000/.NET/IT Pro magazine.----WINDOWS MAGAZINE, 1997, "Top Freeware &amp; Shareware of the Year" issue page 210, #1/first entry in fact.----PC-WELT FEB 1998 - page 84----PC-WELT FEB 1999 - page 83----CHIP Magazine 7/99 - page 100----WINDOWS MAGAZINE, WINTER 1998 - page 92, insert section, MUST HAVE WARES----GERMAN PC BOOK, Data Becker publisher "PC Aufrusten und Repairen"----HOT SHAREWARE Numero 46 issue, pg.
54 (PC ware mag from Spain)====Well, symbolset, when YOU HAVE DONE THE SAME (same amount &amp; same number of times)?
Maybe, JUST MAYBE, then you can talk... maybe! apk
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29973298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29975834</id>
	<title>Rogue AP made easy</title>
	<author>noppy</author>
	<datestamp>1256987760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now available in GUI</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now available in GUI</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now available in GUI</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965232</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>Thantik</author>
	<datestamp>1257271680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You could do this since Windows 95 with ICS easily...nothing to see here, please move along.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You could do this since Windows 95 with ICS easily...nothing to see here , please move along .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You could do this since Windows 95 with ICS easily...nothing to see here, please move along.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966114</id>
	<title>Re:Stealing</title>
	<author>vertinox</author>
	<datestamp>1257275640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Is Engadget going to instruct us on how to distract the employees while you pour free coffee into your thermos too?</i></p><p>Hrm... Bad analogy.</p><p>The Cofeeshop already sold you the coffee (bandwidth) by the temporary key and you are simply pouring it in someone else's cup free of charge by running windows 7.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is Engadget going to instruct us on how to distract the employees while you pour free coffee into your thermos too ? Hrm... Bad analogy.The Cofeeshop already sold you the coffee ( bandwidth ) by the temporary key and you are simply pouring it in someone else 's cup free of charge by running windows 7 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is Engadget going to instruct us on how to distract the employees while you pour free coffee into your thermos too?Hrm... Bad analogy.The Cofeeshop already sold you the coffee (bandwidth) by the temporary key and you are simply pouring it in someone else's cup free of charge by running windows 7.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965246</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29979500</id>
	<title>Symbolset AND Foredecker - Step inside please: apk</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257008880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><div class="quote"><p><b>"This APK guy goes away if you ignore him for a while. He needs meds."</b> - by symbolset (646467) on Tuesday November 03, @11:03PM (#29973298)</p></div><p>Symbolset, this isn't the 1st time you've used an "adhominem" style attack of myself on me, rather than attacking my points (so, I thought I'd let that be known, first of all). Secondly, I tend to agree with what was said here by others:</p><p><a href="http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1429510&amp;cid=29977664" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1429510&amp;cid=29977664</a> [slashdot.org]</p><p>And, you'd need an attorney (if not meds for being the crazy one here), if you keep libelling others that way, online or otherwise, symbolset (if not an iron jaw, because sooner or later? You'll run into a "real bad motor scooter" that's going to "punch out your lites" for your libellous mouth).</p><p>Above all else - Do you possess a license to practice psychiatry &amp; to dispense such diagnoses? No?? Didn't think so. Did you perform a formal psychiatric examination on myself to come up with your "sidewalk surgeon/quack" immediate "prognosis/diagnosis"??? No again????</p><p>So much for YOU, and, if THAT is "the best you have"????? I suggest you get over your "wannabe PHD in psychiatry status"...</p><p>====</p><p>And, another "added note" on HOSTS files, from SECURITYFOCUS.COM (just to put the "icing on the cake" from my original post, &amp; this IS IN FAVOR OF HOSTS FILES, again):</p><p><b>RESURRECTING THE KILLFILE:</b></p><p>(by Mr. Oliver Day)</p><p><a href="http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491" title="securityfocus.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491</a> [securityfocus.com]</p><p><b>PERTINENT EXCERPTS/QUOTES:</b></p><p>"The host file on my day-to-day laptop is now over 16,000 lines long. Accessing the Internet  particularly browsing the Web  is actually faster now."</p><p>"From what I have seen in my research, major efforts to share lists of unwanted hosts began gaining serious momentum earlier this decade. The most popular appear to have started as a means to block advertising and as a way to avoid being tracked by sites that use cookies to gather data on the user across Web properties. More recently, projects like Spybot Search and Destroy offer lists of known malicious servers to add a layer of defense against trojans and other forms of malware."</p><p>----</p><p>A noted security expert/journallist is even "seeing the light" as to HOSTS files benefits for both SPEED, AND SECURITY, as I stated to foredecker (our alleged MS dev mgr. here on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.)</p><p>AND, of course, there IS the issue of the single/dual layer "WFP" firewall design in Windows being EASIER TO "UNHOOK", by rootkit.com's analysts as well (once more):</p><p><a href="http://www.rootkit.com/newsread.php?newsid=952" title="rootkit.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.rootkit.com/newsread.php?newsid=952</a> [rootkit.com]</p><p><b>PERTINENT EXCERPT/QUOTE:</b></p><p>"BTW, the firewalls based on NDIS v6, which was introduced in Windows Vista, are much easier to unhook and bypass."</p><p>====</p><p>The main thing is, WHY DOESN'T FOREDECKER RESPOND? Have I, "little ole' me", caught MS with their "pants down"? Wouldn't be a first: Ask Dr. Mark Russinovich about that, &amp; his "rookie hardcodes" in his pagedefrag.exe tool I pointed out he hardcoded C:\ into, &amp; that I told he EXACTLY why/where/how to fix it + he thanked me for it.</p><p>(Nuff said... &amp;, "too, Too EASY")</p><p>APK</p><p>P.S.=&gt; Of course, above ALL else, is the fact that this alleged development manager from Microsoft, in Foredecker, is refusing to respond here, vs. my original initial points as well on both HOSTS files in VISTA/Server 2008/Windows 7 and the WFP firewall design (vs. the older &amp; NOT EASILY UNHOOKED firewall designs in Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 in my original post to here, here -&gt; <a href="http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1429510&amp;threshold=-1&amp;commentsort=0&amp;mode=thread&amp;pid=29967174" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1429510&amp;threshold=-1&amp;commentsort=0&amp;mode=thread&amp;pid=29967174</a> [slashdot.org] )... apk</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" This APK guy goes away if you ignore him for a while .
He needs meds .
" - by symbolset ( 646467 ) on Tuesday November 03 , @ 11 : 03PM ( # 29973298 ) Symbolset , this is n't the 1st time you 've used an " adhominem " style attack of myself on me , rather than attacking my points ( so , I thought I 'd let that be known , first of all ) .
Secondly , I tend to agree with what was said here by others : http : //slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 1429510&amp;cid = 29977664 [ slashdot.org ] And , you 'd need an attorney ( if not meds for being the crazy one here ) , if you keep libelling others that way , online or otherwise , symbolset ( if not an iron jaw , because sooner or later ?
You 'll run into a " real bad motor scooter " that 's going to " punch out your lites " for your libellous mouth ) .Above all else - Do you possess a license to practice psychiatry &amp; to dispense such diagnoses ?
No ? ? Did n't think so .
Did you perform a formal psychiatric examination on myself to come up with your " sidewalk surgeon/quack " immediate " prognosis/diagnosis " ? ? ?
No again ? ? ?
? So much for YOU , and , if THAT is " the best you have " ? ? ? ? ?
I suggest you get over your " wannabe PHD in psychiatry status " ... = = = = And , another " added note " on HOSTS files , from SECURITYFOCUS.COM ( just to put the " icing on the cake " from my original post , &amp; this IS IN FAVOR OF HOSTS FILES , again ) : RESURRECTING THE KILLFILE : ( by Mr. Oliver Day ) http : //www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491 [ securityfocus.com ] PERTINENT EXCERPTS/QUOTES : " The host file on my day-to-day laptop is now over 16,000 lines long .
Accessing the Internet particularly browsing the Web is actually faster now .
" " From what I have seen in my research , major efforts to share lists of unwanted hosts began gaining serious momentum earlier this decade .
The most popular appear to have started as a means to block advertising and as a way to avoid being tracked by sites that use cookies to gather data on the user across Web properties .
More recently , projects like Spybot Search and Destroy offer lists of known malicious servers to add a layer of defense against trojans and other forms of malware .
" ----A noted security expert/journallist is even " seeing the light " as to HOSTS files benefits for both SPEED , AND SECURITY , as I stated to foredecker ( our alleged MS dev mgr .
here on / .
) AND , of course , there IS the issue of the single/dual layer " WFP " firewall design in Windows being EASIER TO " UNHOOK " , by rootkit.com 's analysts as well ( once more ) : http : //www.rootkit.com/newsread.php ? newsid = 952 [ rootkit.com ] PERTINENT EXCERPT/QUOTE : " BTW , the firewalls based on NDIS v6 , which was introduced in Windows Vista , are much easier to unhook and bypass .
" = = = = The main thing is , WHY DOES N'T FOREDECKER RESPOND ?
Have I , " little ole ' me " , caught MS with their " pants down " ?
Would n't be a first : Ask Dr. Mark Russinovich about that , &amp; his " rookie hardcodes " in his pagedefrag.exe tool I pointed out he hardcoded C : \ into , &amp; that I told he EXACTLY why/where/how to fix it + he thanked me for it .
( Nuff said... &amp; , " too , Too EASY " ) APKP.S. = &gt; Of course , above ALL else , is the fact that this alleged development manager from Microsoft , in Foredecker , is refusing to respond here , vs. my original initial points as well on both HOSTS files in VISTA/Server 2008/Windows 7 and the WFP firewall design ( vs. the older &amp; NOT EASILY UNHOOKED firewall designs in Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 in my original post to here , here - &gt; http : //slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 1429510&amp;threshold = -1&amp;commentsort = 0&amp;mode = thread&amp;pid = 29967174 [ slashdot.org ] ) ... apk</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"This APK guy goes away if you ignore him for a while.
He needs meds.
" - by symbolset (646467) on Tuesday November 03, @11:03PM (#29973298)Symbolset, this isn't the 1st time you've used an "adhominem" style attack of myself on me, rather than attacking my points (so, I thought I'd let that be known, first of all).
Secondly, I tend to agree with what was said here by others:http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1429510&amp;cid=29977664 [slashdot.org]And, you'd need an attorney (if not meds for being the crazy one here), if you keep libelling others that way, online or otherwise, symbolset (if not an iron jaw, because sooner or later?
You'll run into a "real bad motor scooter" that's going to "punch out your lites" for your libellous mouth).Above all else - Do you possess a license to practice psychiatry &amp; to dispense such diagnoses?
No?? Didn't think so.
Did you perform a formal psychiatric examination on myself to come up with your "sidewalk surgeon/quack" immediate "prognosis/diagnosis"???
No again???
?So much for YOU, and, if THAT is "the best you have"?????
I suggest you get over your "wannabe PHD in psychiatry status"...====And, another "added note" on HOSTS files, from SECURITYFOCUS.COM (just to put the "icing on the cake" from my original post, &amp; this IS IN FAVOR OF HOSTS FILES, again):RESURRECTING THE KILLFILE:(by Mr. Oliver Day)http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491 [securityfocus.com]PERTINENT EXCERPTS/QUOTES:"The host file on my day-to-day laptop is now over 16,000 lines long.
Accessing the Internet  particularly browsing the Web  is actually faster now.
""From what I have seen in my research, major efforts to share lists of unwanted hosts began gaining serious momentum earlier this decade.
The most popular appear to have started as a means to block advertising and as a way to avoid being tracked by sites that use cookies to gather data on the user across Web properties.
More recently, projects like Spybot Search and Destroy offer lists of known malicious servers to add a layer of defense against trojans and other forms of malware.
"----A noted security expert/journallist is even "seeing the light" as to HOSTS files benefits for both SPEED, AND SECURITY, as I stated to foredecker (our alleged MS dev mgr.
here on /.
)AND, of course, there IS the issue of the single/dual layer "WFP" firewall design in Windows being EASIER TO "UNHOOK", by rootkit.com's analysts as well (once more):http://www.rootkit.com/newsread.php?newsid=952 [rootkit.com]PERTINENT EXCERPT/QUOTE:"BTW, the firewalls based on NDIS v6, which was introduced in Windows Vista, are much easier to unhook and bypass.
"====The main thing is, WHY DOESN'T FOREDECKER RESPOND?
Have I, "little ole' me", caught MS with their "pants down"?
Wouldn't be a first: Ask Dr. Mark Russinovich about that, &amp; his "rookie hardcodes" in his pagedefrag.exe tool I pointed out he hardcoded C:\ into, &amp; that I told he EXACTLY why/where/how to fix it + he thanked me for it.
(Nuff said... &amp;, "too, Too EASY")APKP.S.=&gt; Of course, above ALL else, is the fact that this alleged development manager from Microsoft, in Foredecker, is refusing to respond here, vs. my original initial points as well on both HOSTS files in VISTA/Server 2008/Windows 7 and the WFP firewall design (vs. the older &amp; NOT EASILY UNHOOKED firewall designs in Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 in my original post to here, here -&gt; http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1429510&amp;threshold=-1&amp;commentsort=0&amp;mode=thread&amp;pid=29967174 [slashdot.org] )... apk
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29973298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965682</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>harrumph</author>
	<datestamp>1257273600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No, you're only thinking of Mac OS X. It was in the classic Mac OS, too, starting several years earlier.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , you 're only thinking of Mac OS X. It was in the classic Mac OS , too , starting several years earlier .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, you're only thinking of Mac OS X. It was in the classic Mac OS, too, starting several years earlier.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29972570</id>
	<title>Meh...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257261720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is nothing new. Once, in a pinch, I turned my old PIII laptop running linux into a wireless AP. Worked really well, just not very economical.<br>It's pretty easy to do.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is nothing new .
Once , in a pinch , I turned my old PIII laptop running linux into a wireless AP .
Worked really well , just not very economical.It 's pretty easy to do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is nothing new.
Once, in a pinch, I turned my old PIII laptop running linux into a wireless AP.
Worked really well, just not very economical.It's pretty easy to do.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29973298</id>
	<title>Re:It'll be gone shortly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257267780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This APK guy goes away if you ignore him for a while.  He needs meds.
</p><p>I wanted to take an opportunity to point out that I'm batting 1000 against your other sources of information: Blu-ray is still dead, you didn't go far enough with autorun, security issues are still killing you in the press.  W7 is out, and it works.  We'll see if it also has compelling features.  A lot of folks got roped into the Redmond software lifecycle and forgot that running your services as their mission critical applications meant they were stuck without a migration path away from IE6.  It will take them some time to migrate to SharePoint and IE8, at which point you've got them for another 6 years unless they have the hindsight to realize "hey, didn't we make this mistake before?"
</p><p>It's time for a Security Enhanced Windows.  The federal government has a batch of policies and registry settings people can adopt as templates for locking down workstations and servers.  Now might be a good time to roll out a similar offering.  ZFS has dedupe now, so it's time to give whoever's working on that a kick in the ass.  Tell somebody that we all know about Roz. It's time for her to leave the shire to go slay a dragon and bring back its corpse to prove her loyalty and ability, as is the practice up there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This APK guy goes away if you ignore him for a while .
He needs meds .
I wanted to take an opportunity to point out that I 'm batting 1000 against your other sources of information : Blu-ray is still dead , you did n't go far enough with autorun , security issues are still killing you in the press .
W7 is out , and it works .
We 'll see if it also has compelling features .
A lot of folks got roped into the Redmond software lifecycle and forgot that running your services as their mission critical applications meant they were stuck without a migration path away from IE6 .
It will take them some time to migrate to SharePoint and IE8 , at which point you 've got them for another 6 years unless they have the hindsight to realize " hey , did n't we make this mistake before ?
" It 's time for a Security Enhanced Windows .
The federal government has a batch of policies and registry settings people can adopt as templates for locking down workstations and servers .
Now might be a good time to roll out a similar offering .
ZFS has dedupe now , so it 's time to give whoever 's working on that a kick in the ass .
Tell somebody that we all know about Roz .
It 's time for her to leave the shire to go slay a dragon and bring back its corpse to prove her loyalty and ability , as is the practice up there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This APK guy goes away if you ignore him for a while.
He needs meds.
I wanted to take an opportunity to point out that I'm batting 1000 against your other sources of information: Blu-ray is still dead, you didn't go far enough with autorun, security issues are still killing you in the press.
W7 is out, and it works.
We'll see if it also has compelling features.
A lot of folks got roped into the Redmond software lifecycle and forgot that running your services as their mission critical applications meant they were stuck without a migration path away from IE6.
It will take them some time to migrate to SharePoint and IE8, at which point you've got them for another 6 years unless they have the hindsight to realize "hey, didn't we make this mistake before?
"
It's time for a Security Enhanced Windows.
The federal government has a batch of policies and registry settings people can adopt as templates for locking down workstations and servers.
Now might be a good time to roll out a similar offering.
ZFS has dedupe now, so it's time to give whoever's working on that a kick in the ass.
Tell somebody that we all know about Roz.
It's time for her to leave the shire to go slay a dragon and bring back its corpse to prove her loyalty and ability, as is the practice up there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967174</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965746</id>
	<title>&ldquo;Microsoft Research&rdquo;</title>
	<author>harrumph</author>
	<datestamp>1257273840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Seriously? It took their &ldquo;research&rdquo; division to come up with NAT, DHCP, and DNS caching or proxy? Seriously?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously ?
It took their    research    division to come up with NAT , DHCP , and DNS caching or proxy ?
Seriously ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously?
It took their “research” division to come up with NAT, DHCP, and DNS caching or proxy?
Seriously?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29968210</id>
	<title>Re:Stealing</title>
	<author>pete6677</author>
	<datestamp>1257242880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Any business who relies on making money this way will be short-lived. With the proliferation of mobile internet devices and the coming rollout of new technologies such as WiMax, WiFi won't be the valuable commodity it is today.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Any business who relies on making money this way will be short-lived .
With the proliferation of mobile internet devices and the coming rollout of new technologies such as WiMax , WiFi wo n't be the valuable commodity it is today .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any business who relies on making money this way will be short-lived.
With the proliferation of mobile internet devices and the coming rollout of new technologies such as WiMax, WiFi won't be the valuable commodity it is today.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965246</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967796</id>
	<title>Re:no wonder it got removed</title>
	<author>TaggartAleslayer</author>
	<datestamp>1257240960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't tell if you're being sarcastic, so I'm going to uncomfortably laugh here and peer at you awaiting a conclusive response...</p><p>Hehehee... O\_o</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't tell if you 're being sarcastic , so I 'm going to uncomfortably laugh here and peer at you awaiting a conclusive response...Hehehee... O \ _o</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't tell if you're being sarcastic, so I'm going to uncomfortably laugh here and peer at you awaiting a conclusive response...Hehehee... O\_o</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966366</id>
	<title>Re:It'll be gone shortly</title>
	<author>amicusNYCL</author>
	<datestamp>1257276840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, all this work developing a useful feature since 2006 waiting for driver support that wasn't coming, might as well just get that out of the OS to stop everyone from using it and enjoying the feature.</p><p>Or, more likely, the first service pack will contain the necessary updates to enable this natively without needing the third party software.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , all this work developing a useful feature since 2006 waiting for driver support that was n't coming , might as well just get that out of the OS to stop everyone from using it and enjoying the feature.Or , more likely , the first service pack will contain the necessary updates to enable this natively without needing the third party software .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, all this work developing a useful feature since 2006 waiting for driver support that wasn't coming, might as well just get that out of the OS to stop everyone from using it and enjoying the feature.Or, more likely, the first service pack will contain the necessary updates to enable this natively without needing the third party software.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966034</id>
	<title>Parallels</title>
	<author>HomelessInLaJolla</author>
	<datestamp>1257275400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>or even tether a number of laptops together at a coffee shop that charges for WiFi</p></div><p>It sounds very similar to a case of <a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/story/09/11/03/0331227/Feds-Bust-Cable-Modem-Hacker" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">conspiracy, aiding and abetting computer intrusion, and wire fraud</a> [slashdot.org].</p><p>Maybe Microsoft could be prosecuted for producing software which may be manipulated.</p><p>Or maybe Motorola could be prosecuted for making hardware which could be modified to circumvent ToS.</p><p>Or maybe Sony could be prosecuted for making PlayStations which can be hacked.</p><p>Why are the innovative individuals always the ones bearing the legal load?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>or even tether a number of laptops together at a coffee shop that charges for WiFiIt sounds very similar to a case of conspiracy , aiding and abetting computer intrusion , and wire fraud [ slashdot.org ] .Maybe Microsoft could be prosecuted for producing software which may be manipulated.Or maybe Motorola could be prosecuted for making hardware which could be modified to circumvent ToS.Or maybe Sony could be prosecuted for making PlayStations which can be hacked.Why are the innovative individuals always the ones bearing the legal load ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>or even tether a number of laptops together at a coffee shop that charges for WiFiIt sounds very similar to a case of conspiracy, aiding and abetting computer intrusion, and wire fraud [slashdot.org].Maybe Microsoft could be prosecuted for producing software which may be manipulated.Or maybe Motorola could be prosecuted for making hardware which could be modified to circumvent ToS.Or maybe Sony could be prosecuted for making PlayStations which can be hacked.Why are the innovative individuals always the ones bearing the legal load?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965484</id>
	<title>Netfilter?</title>
	<author>TunaPhish</author>
	<datestamp>1257272760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I swear I've been doing this with linux for years, routing this and routing that...<br> <br>

It's just two interfaces, an echo "1" to the ip\_forward, and a little masquerading and we're good to go.<br> <br>

Windows 7 is cool though.  Wish they kept the "E" edition.<br> <br>

~@~</htmltext>
<tokenext>I swear I 've been doing this with linux for years , routing this and routing that.. . It 's just two interfaces , an echo " 1 " to the ip \ _forward , and a little masquerading and we 're good to go .
Windows 7 is cool though .
Wish they kept the " E " edition .
~ @ ~</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I swear I've been doing this with linux for years, routing this and routing that... 

It's just two interfaces, an echo "1" to the ip\_forward, and a little masquerading and we're good to go.
Windows 7 is cool though.
Wish they kept the "E" edition.
~@~</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965942</id>
	<title>In other news...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257274980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Half baked Windows 7 feature is actually used by people!</p><p>Where is the exploit here?!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Half baked Windows 7 feature is actually used by people ! Where is the exploit here ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Half baked Windows 7 feature is actually used by people!Where is the exploit here?
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965092</id>
	<title>It'll be gone shortly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257271080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>If these are undocumented APIs, then you can bet that they'll be removed or otherwise disabled in the first service pack.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If these are undocumented APIs , then you can bet that they 'll be removed or otherwise disabled in the first service pack .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If these are undocumented APIs, then you can bet that they'll be removed or otherwise disabled in the first service pack.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966206</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257276060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>bla bla bla bla bla mac bla bla Os bla bla 2001</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>bla bla bla bla bla mac bla bla Os bla bla 2001</tokentext>
<sentencetext>bla bla bla bla bla mac bla bla Os bla bla 2001</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965764</id>
	<title>"Virtual" hotspot?</title>
	<author>Captain\_Chaos</author>
	<datestamp>1257273960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why a "virtual" hotspot? What's virtual about it? If this turns a Windows PC into a Wi-Fi access point, then surely that's a hotspot plain and simple?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why a " virtual " hotspot ?
What 's virtual about it ?
If this turns a Windows PC into a Wi-Fi access point , then surely that 's a hotspot plain and simple ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why a "virtual" hotspot?
What's virtual about it?
If this turns a Windows PC into a Wi-Fi access point, then surely that's a hotspot plain and simple?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965408</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257272400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>You could do this in Mac OS 9 even.. Apple introduced "AirPort" in 1999 and ad-hoc Internet sharing was available from day one, iirc. I've been doing this kind of bridging to and from a variety of interfaces regularly for a long long time. Wifi, Ethernet, Bluetooth, Firewire, dial-up..
What are we missing here? Really?</htmltext>
<tokenext>You could do this in Mac OS 9 even.. Apple introduced " AirPort " in 1999 and ad-hoc Internet sharing was available from day one , iirc .
I 've been doing this kind of bridging to and from a variety of interfaces regularly for a long long time .
Wifi , Ethernet , Bluetooth , Firewire , dial-up. . What are we missing here ?
Really ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You could do this in Mac OS 9 even.. Apple introduced "AirPort" in 1999 and ad-hoc Internet sharing was available from day one, iirc.
I've been doing this kind of bridging to and from a variety of interfaces regularly for a long long time.
Wifi, Ethernet, Bluetooth, Firewire, dial-up..
What are we missing here?
Really?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967014</id>
	<title>Re:Standard functionality...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257280560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, you can do virtual access points with the Mad WiFi drivers, but I'm not aware of any other drivers that support that.  I use this to have my Linux home server provide both a public open network and a private encrypted network with a single physical wireless card.</p><p>But it's certainly not standard functionality, or I could have used any supported WiFi card and not be tied to a specific driver.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , you can do virtual access points with the Mad WiFi drivers , but I 'm not aware of any other drivers that support that .
I use this to have my Linux home server provide both a public open network and a private encrypted network with a single physical wireless card.But it 's certainly not standard functionality , or I could have used any supported WiFi card and not be tied to a specific driver .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, you can do virtual access points with the Mad WiFi drivers, but I'm not aware of any other drivers that support that.
I use this to have my Linux home server provide both a public open network and a private encrypted network with a single physical wireless card.But it's certainly not standard functionality, or I could have used any supported WiFi card and not be tied to a specific driver.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966574</id>
	<title>Are you trying to tell me ...</title>
	<author>damn\_registrars</author>
	<datestamp>1257277920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>... that an OS was just released with incomplete, unimplemented, undocumented, untested code?  Has that ever happened in the history of computing before?  This sounds incredible!  Maybe MS can get a patent on it!</htmltext>
<tokenext>... that an OS was just released with incomplete , unimplemented , undocumented , untested code ?
Has that ever happened in the history of computing before ?
This sounds incredible !
Maybe MS can get a patent on it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... that an OS was just released with incomplete, unimplemented, undocumented, untested code?
Has that ever happened in the history of computing before?
This sounds incredible!
Maybe MS can get a patent on it!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967794</id>
	<title>Re:"Virtual" hotspot?</title>
	<author>selven</author>
	<datestamp>1257240960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because virtualization is the 2009 buzzword of the year. Next year it'll be a cloud hotspot or something.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because virtualization is the 2009 buzzword of the year .
Next year it 'll be a cloud hotspot or something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because virtualization is the 2009 buzzword of the year.
Next year it'll be a cloud hotspot or something.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965146</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257271320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just like I could do on any recent Windows OS with ICS and wireless adapters, ethernet cables, bluetooth devices, or fucking firewire.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just like I could do on any recent Windows OS with ICS and wireless adapters , ethernet cables , bluetooth devices , or fucking firewire .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just like I could do on any recent Windows OS with ICS and wireless adapters, ethernet cables, bluetooth devices, or fucking firewire.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965204</id>
	<title>Re:Bloat...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257271560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You Windows haters need to get a life.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You Windows haters need to get a life .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You Windows haters need to get a life.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965112</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967956</id>
	<title>Re:It'll be gone shortly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257241740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You seem to have microsoft confused with apple. msft doesn't pull that kinda crap.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You seem to have microsoft confused with apple .
msft does n't pull that kinda crap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You seem to have microsoft confused with apple.
msft doesn't pull that kinda crap.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29972128</id>
	<title>CokeCola?</title>
	<author>sharkey</author>
	<datestamp>1257258540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Bart:  Don't be a sap, Dad.  These are just crappy knock-offs.<br>
Homer: Pfft.  I know a genuine Panaphonics when I see it.  And look,
	  there's Magnetbox and Sorny.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bart : Do n't be a sap , Dad .
These are just crappy knock-offs .
Homer : Pfft .
I know a genuine Panaphonics when I see it .
And look , there 's Magnetbox and Sorny .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bart:  Don't be a sap, Dad.
These are just crappy knock-offs.
Homer: Pfft.
I know a genuine Panaphonics when I see it.
And look,
	  there's Magnetbox and Sorny.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965112</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966946</id>
	<title>Re:Stealing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257280080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>Is Engadget going to instruct us on how to distract the employees while you pour free coffee into your thermos too?</p></div><p>Hrm... Bad analogy.</p><p>The Cofeeshop already sold you the coffee (bandwidth) by the temporary key and you are simply pouring it in someone else's cup free of charge by running windows 7.</p></div><p>Another bad analogy. Okay, my turn to play the silly moral analogy game...</p><p>This is more akin to visiting a place that gives free refills, and you constantly pouring it in someone else's cup, then doing the same for all your friends, in the process using far more coffee than you would reasonably have drunk yourself. You know damn well that wasn't the deal that was being offered. (*)</p><p>You're ultimately gaming the system- regardless of what "agreement" you think you have with them, it's probably against the spirit of the deal. Doing this type of thing with (e.g.) small businesses that aren't too assholish is ultimately what forces them to include irritating small-print restrictions on such services which I'm willing to bet people would be the first to whine about.</p><p>(*) Please *don't* say "that was the agreement I get an hour's free Internet with my $1.50 coffee, it's mine, I can do what I like with it, their bad business model isn't my problem". There probably wasn't an "agreement" in that much detail- lots of thing in a given society function on implicit understanding of how they work (e.g. you don't get arrested for trespassing if you enter some random shop because any reasonable person would say that's how shops work). Or they may well have some small print in some terms and conditions that you (understandably) didn't want to read before you took up their offer. Or whatever... even if it was "legal", see the final paragraph above.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is Engadget going to instruct us on how to distract the employees while you pour free coffee into your thermos too ? Hrm... Bad analogy.The Cofeeshop already sold you the coffee ( bandwidth ) by the temporary key and you are simply pouring it in someone else 's cup free of charge by running windows 7.Another bad analogy .
Okay , my turn to play the silly moral analogy game...This is more akin to visiting a place that gives free refills , and you constantly pouring it in someone else 's cup , then doing the same for all your friends , in the process using far more coffee than you would reasonably have drunk yourself .
You know damn well that was n't the deal that was being offered .
( * ) You 're ultimately gaming the system- regardless of what " agreement " you think you have with them , it 's probably against the spirit of the deal .
Doing this type of thing with ( e.g .
) small businesses that are n't too assholish is ultimately what forces them to include irritating small-print restrictions on such services which I 'm willing to bet people would be the first to whine about .
( * ) Please * do n't * say " that was the agreement I get an hour 's free Internet with my $ 1.50 coffee , it 's mine , I can do what I like with it , their bad business model is n't my problem " .
There probably was n't an " agreement " in that much detail- lots of thing in a given society function on implicit understanding of how they work ( e.g .
you do n't get arrested for trespassing if you enter some random shop because any reasonable person would say that 's how shops work ) .
Or they may well have some small print in some terms and conditions that you ( understandably ) did n't want to read before you took up their offer .
Or whatever... even if it was " legal " , see the final paragraph above .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is Engadget going to instruct us on how to distract the employees while you pour free coffee into your thermos too?Hrm... Bad analogy.The Cofeeshop already sold you the coffee (bandwidth) by the temporary key and you are simply pouring it in someone else's cup free of charge by running windows 7.Another bad analogy.
Okay, my turn to play the silly moral analogy game...This is more akin to visiting a place that gives free refills, and you constantly pouring it in someone else's cup, then doing the same for all your friends, in the process using far more coffee than you would reasonably have drunk yourself.
You know damn well that wasn't the deal that was being offered.
(*)You're ultimately gaming the system- regardless of what "agreement" you think you have with them, it's probably against the spirit of the deal.
Doing this type of thing with (e.g.
) small businesses that aren't too assholish is ultimately what forces them to include irritating small-print restrictions on such services which I'm willing to bet people would be the first to whine about.
(*) Please *don't* say "that was the agreement I get an hour's free Internet with my $1.50 coffee, it's mine, I can do what I like with it, their bad business model isn't my problem".
There probably wasn't an "agreement" in that much detail- lots of thing in a given society function on implicit understanding of how they work (e.g.
you don't get arrested for trespassing if you enter some random shop because any reasonable person would say that's how shops work).
Or they may well have some small print in some terms and conditions that you (understandably) didn't want to read before you took up their offer.
Or whatever... even if it was "legal", see the final paragraph above.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966114</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965068</id>
	<title>Botnet, ho! (nt)</title>
	<author>mujadaddy</author>
	<datestamp>1257270960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Amirite?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Amirite ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Amirite?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966794</id>
	<title>Hardware Supported / Limitations</title>
	<author>clyde\_cadiddlehopper</author>
	<datestamp>1257279180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>This comes from the FAQ at the download site (www.connectify.me)<p>
"These older devices are known to be compatible:</p><p>
Intel 5100/5300 (with latest drivers from Intel's site, version 13.0.0.107)</p><p>
Ralink RT2870 (in many 802.11n USB dongles)</p><p>
Broadcom 4310-series (in many Dell laptops)</p><p>
Realtek RTL8187SE (with the drivers that came with Windows 7)</p><p>
D-link AirPlus G DWL-G510 Wireless PCI Adapter (driver version 3.0.1.0)</p><p>
Dell 5520 (builtin many Dell laptops)</p><p>
Atheros AR5007EG with 8.0.0.238 firmware</p><p>
These older devices are known to be incompatible:</p><p>

Intel 3945/4965,2200BG (most Intel cards, unfortunately)</p><p>
Realtek RTL8187 (like in older 802.11bg USB dongles)</p><p>
Zydas ZD1211 (also in 802.11bg USB dongles)</p><p>
Broadcom 4320-series (in many Dell laptops)</p><p>
Atheros AR9285 (likely others too)</p><p>
D-Link AirPlus G DWL-G122</p><p>
Mac Book Builtin Broadcom devices"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This comes from the FAQ at the download site ( www.connectify.me ) " These older devices are known to be compatible : Intel 5100/5300 ( with latest drivers from Intel 's site , version 13.0.0.107 ) Ralink RT2870 ( in many 802.11n USB dongles ) Broadcom 4310-series ( in many Dell laptops ) Realtek RTL8187SE ( with the drivers that came with Windows 7 ) D-link AirPlus G DWL-G510 Wireless PCI Adapter ( driver version 3.0.1.0 ) Dell 5520 ( builtin many Dell laptops ) Atheros AR5007EG with 8.0.0.238 firmware These older devices are known to be incompatible : Intel 3945/4965,2200BG ( most Intel cards , unfortunately ) Realtek RTL8187 ( like in older 802.11bg USB dongles ) Zydas ZD1211 ( also in 802.11bg USB dongles ) Broadcom 4320-series ( in many Dell laptops ) Atheros AR9285 ( likely others too ) D-Link AirPlus G DWL-G122 Mac Book Builtin Broadcom devices "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This comes from the FAQ at the download site (www.connectify.me)
"These older devices are known to be compatible:
Intel 5100/5300 (with latest drivers from Intel's site, version 13.0.0.107)
Ralink RT2870 (in many 802.11n USB dongles)
Broadcom 4310-series (in many Dell laptops)
Realtek RTL8187SE (with the drivers that came with Windows 7)
D-link AirPlus G DWL-G510 Wireless PCI Adapter (driver version 3.0.1.0)
Dell 5520 (builtin many Dell laptops)
Atheros AR5007EG with 8.0.0.238 firmware
These older devices are known to be incompatible:

Intel 3945/4965,2200BG (most Intel cards, unfortunately)
Realtek RTL8187 (like in older 802.11bg USB dongles)
Zydas ZD1211 (also in 802.11bg USB dongles)
Broadcom 4320-series (in many Dell laptops)
Atheros AR9285 (likely others too)
D-Link AirPlus G DWL-G122
Mac Book Builtin Broadcom devices"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965282</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965682
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965066
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966206
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965066
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965764
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29969466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965066
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965246
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967956
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29974654
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965078
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965176
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29980114
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29973298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967174
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965066
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967796
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966882
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965788
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967014
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965512
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29971102
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965764
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966366
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965066
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965764
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29975682
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965066
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965534
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965282
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967914
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967398
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965204
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965066
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29974672
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29977712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965078
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965394
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965246
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965590
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965066
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29999514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965066
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967900
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965764
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967346
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966114
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965246
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965408
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965066
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965176
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965246
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965246
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966240
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965176
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965066
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965232
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965066
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29972128
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967376
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965246
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965888
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965078
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965066
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29979500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29973298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967174
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965282
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965382
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965066
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965066
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965920
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965246
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965238
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965066
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965764
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966448
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965066
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965176
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29968210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965246
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_1649246_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965648
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965246
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_1649246.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966882
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967796
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_1649246.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965066
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29975682
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965238
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965486
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965848
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966320
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965614
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966206
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965356
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965682
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29969466
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965408
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965382
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967350
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965146
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965590
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965232
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29999514
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967272
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966448
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_1649246.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965246
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966200
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965394
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29968210
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965648
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966444
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965920
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966114
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966946
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965854
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966830
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967376
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_1649246.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965484
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967346
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_1649246.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965282
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966794
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965534
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_1649246.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965112
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965204
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967398
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29972128
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965788
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967390
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_1649246.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965512
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967014
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_1649246.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965234
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_1649246.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965176
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965296
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965440
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966240
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965274
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965348
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_1649246.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965078
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29977712
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965888
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29974654
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_1649246.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29968288
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_1649246.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965092
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967914
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967956
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966366
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29974672
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967878
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967174
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29973298
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29979500
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29980114
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_1649246.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965064
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_1649246.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965764
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965996
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967296
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967900
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29971102
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966126
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29967794
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_1649246.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29966198
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_1649246.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_1649246.29965746
</commentlist>
</conversation>
