<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_11_2318247</id>
	<title>Making Carriers Shoulder Smartphone Security</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1257939180000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>alphadogg writes <i>"Georgia Tech researchers have received a $450,000 NSF grant to boost security of iPhones, BlackBerries and other smartphones and the wireless networks on which they run. And it's those <a href="http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/111109-smartphone-security-georgia-tech.html?hpg1=bn">networks where the researchers are really zeroing in</a>. The researchers are looking into ways wireless carriers such as AT&amp;T and Verizon can detect malware on devices and clean up the devices before they do further damage. 'While a single user might realize that a phone is behaving differently, that person probably won't know why,' says Patrick Traynor, assistant professor at Georgia Tech&rsquo;s School of Computer Science. 'But a cell phone provider may see a thousand devices behaving in the same way and have the ability to do something about it.' Georgia Tech is going to build out a cellular network test bed to try out its remote repair techniques."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>alphadogg writes " Georgia Tech researchers have received a $ 450,000 NSF grant to boost security of iPhones , BlackBerries and other smartphones and the wireless networks on which they run .
And it 's those networks where the researchers are really zeroing in .
The researchers are looking into ways wireless carriers such as AT&amp;T and Verizon can detect malware on devices and clean up the devices before they do further damage .
'While a single user might realize that a phone is behaving differently , that person probably wo n't know why, ' says Patrick Traynor , assistant professor at Georgia Tech    s School of Computer Science .
'But a cell phone provider may see a thousand devices behaving in the same way and have the ability to do something about it .
' Georgia Tech is going to build out a cellular network test bed to try out its remote repair techniques .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>alphadogg writes "Georgia Tech researchers have received a $450,000 NSF grant to boost security of iPhones, BlackBerries and other smartphones and the wireless networks on which they run.
And it's those networks where the researchers are really zeroing in.
The researchers are looking into ways wireless carriers such as AT&amp;T and Verizon can detect malware on devices and clean up the devices before they do further damage.
'While a single user might realize that a phone is behaving differently, that person probably won't know why,' says Patrick Traynor, assistant professor at Georgia Tech’s School of Computer Science.
'But a cell phone provider may see a thousand devices behaving in the same way and have the ability to do something about it.
' Georgia Tech is going to build out a cellular network test bed to try out its remote repair techniques.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30070760</id>
	<title>Do govs really want Smartphone security?</title>
	<author>AHuxley</author>
	<datestamp>1258025160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What would the NSA's, CIA's, DIA's, GCHQ's ect do if the public started running heavy encryption in their pockets?<br>
Part of the charm is tracking, easy to tap, seeing who you phone and getting a voice print.<br>
Some computer company could upset this balance of total information awareness that is the phone.<br>
Costas Tsalikidis, the Greek telco whistleblower who was found hanged.<br>
Adamo Bove head of security at Telecom Italia who exposed the CIA renditions via cell phones &lsquo;fell&rsquo; to his death.<br>
Or <a href="http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/07/blackberry-spies/" title="wired.com">http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/07/blackberry-spies/</a> [wired.com] <br>
So an average this is all just warmed over epic Magic Lantern for your pocket. <br>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic\_Lantern\_(software)" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic\_Lantern\_(software)</a> [wikipedia.org] <br>
An always on zfoneproject.com like layer would be great<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>What would the NSA 's , CIA 's , DIA 's , GCHQ 's ect do if the public started running heavy encryption in their pockets ?
Part of the charm is tracking , easy to tap , seeing who you phone and getting a voice print .
Some computer company could upset this balance of total information awareness that is the phone .
Costas Tsalikidis , the Greek telco whistleblower who was found hanged .
Adamo Bove head of security at Telecom Italia who exposed the CIA renditions via cell phones    fell    to his death .
Or http : //www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/07/blackberry-spies/ [ wired.com ] So an average this is all just warmed over epic Magic Lantern for your pocket .
http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic \ _Lantern \ _ ( software ) [ wikipedia.org ] An always on zfoneproject.com like layer would be great : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What would the NSA's, CIA's, DIA's, GCHQ's ect do if the public started running heavy encryption in their pockets?
Part of the charm is tracking, easy to tap, seeing who you phone and getting a voice print.
Some computer company could upset this balance of total information awareness that is the phone.
Costas Tsalikidis, the Greek telco whistleblower who was found hanged.
Adamo Bove head of security at Telecom Italia who exposed the CIA renditions via cell phones ‘fell’ to his death.
Or http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/07/blackberry-spies/ [wired.com] 
So an average this is all just warmed over epic Magic Lantern for your pocket.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic\_Lantern\_(software) [wikipedia.org] 
An always on zfoneproject.com like layer would be great :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067540</id>
	<title>Oh great</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257079860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So they are going to deploy the ability to remotely update the users device. Because the bad guys will never figure out how the company does it. I can see it now. An entire carriers smart cell line bricked by a remote exploit that updates phones.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So they are going to deploy the ability to remotely update the users device .
Because the bad guys will never figure out how the company does it .
I can see it now .
An entire carriers smart cell line bricked by a remote exploit that updates phones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So they are going to deploy the ability to remotely update the users device.
Because the bad guys will never figure out how the company does it.
I can see it now.
An entire carriers smart cell line bricked by a remote exploit that updates phones.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067812</id>
	<title>Non-sufficient funds</title>
	<author>JaZz0r</author>
	<datestamp>1257081600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And to think that each time I get an NSF check, *I* have to pay.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And to think that each time I get an NSF check , * I * have to pay .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And to think that each time I get an NSF check, *I* have to pay.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067670</id>
	<title>Bitpipe</title>
	<author>BodeNGE</author>
	<datestamp>1257080640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wireless Internet Providers are just that, ISP's.  They should have the same level of monitoring and control of the sites I surf and the applications I run as a terrestrial ISP, ie NONE.  I can see that they would welcome this move, it helps them disguise the fact that they have become dumb bitpipes and are losing money on value added services.<p>
In the corporate space however there are device management solutions available for Windows Mobile, Blackberry and Symbian that have seldom been rolled out at carrier level.  These can lock down devices so that malware cannot be installed, and unauthorized applications removed.  I cannot see that working as a consumer proposition, it really doesn't work well at the corporate level either.  importantly these solutions are all at the IP layer (dumb bitpipe) and don't care how the device connects to the management server.  ActiveSync, WiFi, cellular connection (and yes, via SMS too) will all trigger a wiped device or an app uninstall.</p><p>
Nothing to do with telcos.  Move along.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wireless Internet Providers are just that , ISP 's .
They should have the same level of monitoring and control of the sites I surf and the applications I run as a terrestrial ISP , ie NONE .
I can see that they would welcome this move , it helps them disguise the fact that they have become dumb bitpipes and are losing money on value added services .
In the corporate space however there are device management solutions available for Windows Mobile , Blackberry and Symbian that have seldom been rolled out at carrier level .
These can lock down devices so that malware can not be installed , and unauthorized applications removed .
I can not see that working as a consumer proposition , it really does n't work well at the corporate level either .
importantly these solutions are all at the IP layer ( dumb bitpipe ) and do n't care how the device connects to the management server .
ActiveSync , WiFi , cellular connection ( and yes , via SMS too ) will all trigger a wiped device or an app uninstall .
Nothing to do with telcos .
Move along .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wireless Internet Providers are just that, ISP's.
They should have the same level of monitoring and control of the sites I surf and the applications I run as a terrestrial ISP, ie NONE.
I can see that they would welcome this move, it helps them disguise the fact that they have become dumb bitpipes and are losing money on value added services.
In the corporate space however there are device management solutions available for Windows Mobile, Blackberry and Symbian that have seldom been rolled out at carrier level.
These can lock down devices so that malware cannot be installed, and unauthorized applications removed.
I cannot see that working as a consumer proposition, it really doesn't work well at the corporate level either.
importantly these solutions are all at the IP layer (dumb bitpipe) and don't care how the device connects to the management server.
ActiveSync, WiFi, cellular connection (and yes, via SMS too) will all trigger a wiped device or an app uninstall.
Nothing to do with telcos.
Move along.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067860</id>
	<title>Stay Out Of My Phone!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257081900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>'nuff said.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>'nuff said .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'nuff said.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067488</id>
	<title>Contract addendums</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257079320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Next, they'll add into their contracts:  'Costumer does not own their phone.  We reserve the right to make whatever changes to the device we deem acceptable.  Any and all changes made that cause injury or loss of use of the device are not cause for release from this contract.'</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Next , they 'll add into their contracts : 'Costumer does not own their phone .
We reserve the right to make whatever changes to the device we deem acceptable .
Any and all changes made that cause injury or loss of use of the device are not cause for release from this contract .
'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Next, they'll add into their contracts:  'Costumer does not own their phone.
We reserve the right to make whatever changes to the device we deem acceptable.
Any and all changes made that cause injury or loss of use of the device are not cause for release from this contract.
'</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067576</id>
	<title>Rather not...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257080100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd really rather not allow a company access to "clean up" my devices.  While this might be good in certain corporate or university based environments where all the equipment is owned by a central group, is isn't a good idea for public cellular networks where individuals own the phones.  That is, unless we go to a phone lease system instead of purchase.  I should really shutup before I give the networks more ideas on how to screw us over...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd really rather not allow a company access to " clean up " my devices .
While this might be good in certain corporate or university based environments where all the equipment is owned by a central group , is is n't a good idea for public cellular networks where individuals own the phones .
That is , unless we go to a phone lease system instead of purchase .
I should really shutup before I give the networks more ideas on how to screw us over.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd really rather not allow a company access to "clean up" my devices.
While this might be good in certain corporate or university based environments where all the equipment is owned by a central group, is isn't a good idea for public cellular networks where individuals own the phones.
That is, unless we go to a phone lease system instead of purchase.
I should really shutup before I give the networks more ideas on how to screw us over...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067834</id>
	<title>Not a big issue...</title>
	<author>Darkness404</author>
	<datestamp>1257081780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There is hardly any malware for mobile platforms out in the wild. I don't see how security is a huge issue. Sure, some may point to the jailbroken iPhone worms but that is because they were running SSH with a default password! I'm surprised it took this long, whats next having the government sniff our Facebooks in the name of "security" because a few people with the password of "password" were hacked? This is opening a can of worms we should leave unopened.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is hardly any malware for mobile platforms out in the wild .
I do n't see how security is a huge issue .
Sure , some may point to the jailbroken iPhone worms but that is because they were running SSH with a default password !
I 'm surprised it took this long , whats next having the government sniff our Facebooks in the name of " security " because a few people with the password of " password " were hacked ?
This is opening a can of worms we should leave unopened .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is hardly any malware for mobile platforms out in the wild.
I don't see how security is a huge issue.
Sure, some may point to the jailbroken iPhone worms but that is because they were running SSH with a default password!
I'm surprised it took this long, whats next having the government sniff our Facebooks in the name of "security" because a few people with the password of "password" were hacked?
This is opening a can of worms we should leave unopened.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30069550</id>
	<title>Re:Bitpipe</title>
	<author>TubeSteak</author>
	<datestamp>1257098940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Wireless Internet Providers are just that, ISP's. They should have the same level of monitoring and control of the sites I surf and the applications I run as a terrestrial ISP, ie NONE.</p></div><p>The difference between wired and wireless is that one is a shared &amp; finite resource.<br>Your suggestion, that they both get treated the same way, ignores reality.</p><p>The worst thing a wired internet connection can do is max its own bandwidth.<br>One mobile device behaving badly can bring an area's network to a standstill.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wireless Internet Providers are just that , ISP 's .
They should have the same level of monitoring and control of the sites I surf and the applications I run as a terrestrial ISP , ie NONE.The difference between wired and wireless is that one is a shared &amp; finite resource.Your suggestion , that they both get treated the same way , ignores reality.The worst thing a wired internet connection can do is max its own bandwidth.One mobile device behaving badly can bring an area 's network to a standstill .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wireless Internet Providers are just that, ISP's.
They should have the same level of monitoring and control of the sites I surf and the applications I run as a terrestrial ISP, ie NONE.The difference between wired and wireless is that one is a shared &amp; finite resource.Your suggestion, that they both get treated the same way, ignores reality.The worst thing a wired internet connection can do is max its own bandwidth.One mobile device behaving badly can bring an area's network to a standstill.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067670</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30069496</id>
	<title>Re:Why is the NSF?</title>
	<author>CodeBuster</author>
	<datestamp>1257098340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>NSF should not be paying a cent for this.</p></div><p>That is absolutely correct. Why should public money go to yet another private company? Is Apple going to give the US Treasury a cut of the profits from future iPhone sales (not likely)? The whole bailout mentality is such bullshit; what ever happened to taking responsibility for one's own successes and failures? Another 200,000 ordinary Americans lost their jobs last month, joining millions already on the unemployment rolls. The taxpayer is drowning in red ink, our kids will curse us when they are old enough to realize what we have done, and NSF spends $450,000 on a bullshit project to improve corporate products on the public dime. Apple, RIM, and AT&amp;T have more then two nickles to rub together, <i> <b>let them pay for their own damn product improvement</b> </i>. These damn NSF bureaucrats should spend a month or two working a real job for ordinary working class wages; maybe then they would better appreciate the real value of the money they so frivolously spend.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>NSF should not be paying a cent for this.That is absolutely correct .
Why should public money go to yet another private company ?
Is Apple going to give the US Treasury a cut of the profits from future iPhone sales ( not likely ) ?
The whole bailout mentality is such bullshit ; what ever happened to taking responsibility for one 's own successes and failures ?
Another 200,000 ordinary Americans lost their jobs last month , joining millions already on the unemployment rolls .
The taxpayer is drowning in red ink , our kids will curse us when they are old enough to realize what we have done , and NSF spends $ 450,000 on a bullshit project to improve corporate products on the public dime .
Apple , RIM , and AT&amp;T have more then two nickles to rub together , let them pay for their own damn product improvement .
These damn NSF bureaucrats should spend a month or two working a real job for ordinary working class wages ; maybe then they would better appreciate the real value of the money they so frivolously spend .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NSF should not be paying a cent for this.That is absolutely correct.
Why should public money go to yet another private company?
Is Apple going to give the US Treasury a cut of the profits from future iPhone sales (not likely)?
The whole bailout mentality is such bullshit; what ever happened to taking responsibility for one's own successes and failures?
Another 200,000 ordinary Americans lost their jobs last month, joining millions already on the unemployment rolls.
The taxpayer is drowning in red ink, our kids will curse us when they are old enough to realize what we have done, and NSF spends $450,000 on a bullshit project to improve corporate products on the public dime.
Apple, RIM, and AT&amp;T have more then two nickles to rub together,  let them pay for their own damn product improvement .
These damn NSF bureaucrats should spend a month or two working a real job for ordinary working class wages; maybe then they would better appreciate the real value of the money they so frivolously spend.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067742</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067902</id>
	<title>netphone-neutrality</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257082260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>is netphone-neutrality politically different than net-neutrality?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>is netphone-neutrality politically different than net-neutrality ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is netphone-neutrality politically different than net-neutrality?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30072376</id>
	<title>Re:Anyone else have a bad feeling about this?</title>
	<author>pnblake</author>
	<datestamp>1258040220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Agreed. There better be a way to shut it off too.  I'm not really afraid of the whole big brother thing, rather I don't want anything inhibiting my ability to run apps that I want to run.  That is why I switched to a blackberry from an iphone.  I loved the iphone (except for the keyboard) but the appstore was full of shit that had to be approved.  With the blackberry I can install/develop whatever I want and not worry about it getting approved before it can be run on the device.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed .
There better be a way to shut it off too .
I 'm not really afraid of the whole big brother thing , rather I do n't want anything inhibiting my ability to run apps that I want to run .
That is why I switched to a blackberry from an iphone .
I loved the iphone ( except for the keyboard ) but the appstore was full of shit that had to be approved .
With the blackberry I can install/develop whatever I want and not worry about it getting approved before it can be run on the device .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed.
There better be a way to shut it off too.
I'm not really afraid of the whole big brother thing, rather I don't want anything inhibiting my ability to run apps that I want to run.
That is why I switched to a blackberry from an iphone.
I loved the iphone (except for the keyboard) but the appstore was full of shit that had to be approved.
With the blackberry I can install/develop whatever I want and not worry about it getting approved before it can be run on the device.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067418</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30074410</id>
	<title>Re:Oh great</title>
	<author>CRiMSON</author>
	<datestamp>1258048620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I personally can't wait for everyone smartphone in North America to just one damn stop working lol.</p><p>I think it would be fucking hilarious.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I personally ca n't wait for everyone smartphone in North America to just one damn stop working lol.I think it would be fucking hilarious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I personally can't wait for everyone smartphone in North America to just one damn stop working lol.I think it would be fucking hilarious.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30068542</id>
	<title>Uuum what??</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1257087840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are we cattle or what?</p><p>"Ohh, I don't know what's... happening to me."<br>"Ohh, it all happens... automatically."<br>"Ohh, you keep me well and safe."<br>"Ohh, you rule all of my life."</p><p>"You are just... too kind my masters."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are we cattle or what ?
" Ohh , I do n't know what 's... happening to me .
" " Ohh , it all happens.. .
automatically. " " Ohh , you keep me well and safe .
" " Ohh , you rule all of my life .
" " You are just... too kind my masters .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are we cattle or what?
"Ohh, I don't know what's... happening to me.
""Ohh, it all happens...
automatically.""Ohh, you keep me well and safe.
""Ohh, you rule all of my life.
""You are just... too kind my masters.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30076958</id>
	<title>Froth much?</title>
	<author>chihowa</author>
	<datestamp>1258056540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>NSF should not be paying a cent for this.</p></div><p>That is absolutely correct. Why should public money go to yet another private company? </p></div><p>Where did you read that the NSF was giving money to a private company? This is a research grant that is being paid to faculty at a university to fund research on how to make smartphones more secure. This is spelled out in the first sentence of the summary.</p><p>Seriously, sometimes the game of rabid-emotional-frenzy telephone that goes on here is a little much.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>NSF should not be paying a cent for this.That is absolutely correct .
Why should public money go to yet another private company ?
Where did you read that the NSF was giving money to a private company ?
This is a research grant that is being paid to faculty at a university to fund research on how to make smartphones more secure .
This is spelled out in the first sentence of the summary.Seriously , sometimes the game of rabid-emotional-frenzy telephone that goes on here is a little much .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NSF should not be paying a cent for this.That is absolutely correct.
Why should public money go to yet another private company?
Where did you read that the NSF was giving money to a private company?
This is a research grant that is being paid to faculty at a university to fund research on how to make smartphones more secure.
This is spelled out in the first sentence of the summary.Seriously, sometimes the game of rabid-emotional-frenzy telephone that goes on here is a little much.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30069496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30068748</id>
	<title>Re:Oh great</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257089820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So they are going to <strong>deploy</strong> the ability to remotely update the users device.</p></div><p>What "deploy"? Is there a carrier/phone combo which doesn't have this right now?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So they are going to deploy the ability to remotely update the users device.What " deploy " ?
Is there a carrier/phone combo which does n't have this right now ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So they are going to deploy the ability to remotely update the users device.What "deploy"?
Is there a carrier/phone combo which doesn't have this right now?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067530</id>
	<title>signs your smartphone's been p0wned</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257079740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Upon turning on your phone, it demands a cookie.</p><p>Your phone tells you it needs antivirus installed.</p><p>Hold music is replaced by a twisted AI that sings about cake and says it's okay if you want to leave (a message).<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Upon turning on your phone , it demands a cookie.Your phone tells you it needs antivirus installed.Hold music is replaced by a twisted AI that sings about cake and says it 's okay if you want to leave ( a message ) .
.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Upon turning on your phone, it demands a cookie.Your phone tells you it needs antivirus installed.Hold music is replaced by a twisted AI that sings about cake and says it's okay if you want to leave (a message).
...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30070364</id>
	<title>Re:Oh great</title>
	<author>Mike1024</author>
	<datestamp>1258019100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So they are going to deploy the ability to remotely update the users device. Because the bad guys will never figure out how the company does it. I can see it now. An entire carriers smart cell line bricked by a remote exploit that updates phones.</p></div><p>People often say things like this here on Slashdot, but automatic update tools like Debian's apt-get and Microsoft's Windows Update have never been hacked and used to distribute virus-ridden updates*. My Ubuntu netbook has never been "bricked by a remote exploit" even though it's open source, so be bad guys know exactly how the update mechanism works.</p><p>In other words, we have the technology to make secure remote update software. Technology like public/private key cryptography to digitally sign updates, and only apply those with a valid, trusted signature.</p><p>What makes you think remote updates for cell phones would be any less secure?</p><p><i>*Unless you count [WGA /<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET / Ubuntu 9.10 (delete as appropriate)]. Rimshot!</i></p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So they are going to deploy the ability to remotely update the users device .
Because the bad guys will never figure out how the company does it .
I can see it now .
An entire carriers smart cell line bricked by a remote exploit that updates phones.People often say things like this here on Slashdot , but automatic update tools like Debian 's apt-get and Microsoft 's Windows Update have never been hacked and used to distribute virus-ridden updates * .
My Ubuntu netbook has never been " bricked by a remote exploit " even though it 's open source , so be bad guys know exactly how the update mechanism works.In other words , we have the technology to make secure remote update software .
Technology like public/private key cryptography to digitally sign updates , and only apply those with a valid , trusted signature.What makes you think remote updates for cell phones would be any less secure ?
* Unless you count [ WGA / .NET / Ubuntu 9.10 ( delete as appropriate ) ] .
Rimshot !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So they are going to deploy the ability to remotely update the users device.
Because the bad guys will never figure out how the company does it.
I can see it now.
An entire carriers smart cell line bricked by a remote exploit that updates phones.People often say things like this here on Slashdot, but automatic update tools like Debian's apt-get and Microsoft's Windows Update have never been hacked and used to distribute virus-ridden updates*.
My Ubuntu netbook has never been "bricked by a remote exploit" even though it's open source, so be bad guys know exactly how the update mechanism works.In other words, we have the technology to make secure remote update software.
Technology like public/private key cryptography to digitally sign updates, and only apply those with a valid, trusted signature.What makes you think remote updates for cell phones would be any less secure?
*Unless you count [WGA / .NET / Ubuntu 9.10 (delete as appropriate)].
Rimshot!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30070082</id>
	<title>Re:Anyone else have a bad feeling about this?</title>
	<author>linhux</author>
	<datestamp>1258057860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mind you, they don't necessarily need access to the device internals to detect that it's running malware. There are products for ISP's that detect traffic patterns that indicate an infected computer, and then isolate the computer in question in a sandbox network where all HTTP requests go to a support page with cleanup tools and links to anti-virus vendors. I guess you can employ a similar strategy for wireless networks.</p><p>(My employer used to have such a product, I think it's still in use in some Finnish broadband companies.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mind you , they do n't necessarily need access to the device internals to detect that it 's running malware .
There are products for ISP 's that detect traffic patterns that indicate an infected computer , and then isolate the computer in question in a sandbox network where all HTTP requests go to a support page with cleanup tools and links to anti-virus vendors .
I guess you can employ a similar strategy for wireless networks .
( My employer used to have such a product , I think it 's still in use in some Finnish broadband companies .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mind you, they don't necessarily need access to the device internals to detect that it's running malware.
There are products for ISP's that detect traffic patterns that indicate an infected computer, and then isolate the computer in question in a sandbox network where all HTTP requests go to a support page with cleanup tools and links to anti-virus vendors.
I guess you can employ a similar strategy for wireless networks.
(My employer used to have such a product, I think it's still in use in some Finnish broadband companies.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067418</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30078638</id>
	<title>Re:Anyone else have a bad feeling about this?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258019340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, what happens when you make registry changes for better performance and disable features/apps that came with the phone to clean it up...  Then the Cell phone provider will be able to "undo" your hacks and put their garbage programs back on.  No thanks!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , what happens when you make registry changes for better performance and disable features/apps that came with the phone to clean it up... Then the Cell phone provider will be able to " undo " your hacks and put their garbage programs back on .
No thanks !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, what happens when you make registry changes for better performance and disable features/apps that came with the phone to clean it up...  Then the Cell phone provider will be able to "undo" your hacks and put their garbage programs back on.
No thanks!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067418</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067546</id>
	<title>Re:Anyone else have a bad feeling about this?</title>
	<author>nine-times</author>
	<datestamp>1257079920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, it seems like it has to be a fine line.  Like what gets defined as "malware"?  Anything that uses more bandwidth than the carrier likes?
</p><p>It reminds me slightly of broadband providers blocking port 25 in order to prevent spam.  I don't mind that as a concept, but if so they should be willing to open it on request without too much of a hassle.  Charging an extra $15 a month to open it seems like they're not really trying to cut down on spam, but rather trying to milk their customers by charging for things that really should come free with access.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , it seems like it has to be a fine line .
Like what gets defined as " malware " ?
Anything that uses more bandwidth than the carrier likes ?
It reminds me slightly of broadband providers blocking port 25 in order to prevent spam .
I do n't mind that as a concept , but if so they should be willing to open it on request without too much of a hassle .
Charging an extra $ 15 a month to open it seems like they 're not really trying to cut down on spam , but rather trying to milk their customers by charging for things that really should come free with access .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, it seems like it has to be a fine line.
Like what gets defined as "malware"?
Anything that uses more bandwidth than the carrier likes?
It reminds me slightly of broadband providers blocking port 25 in order to prevent spam.
I don't mind that as a concept, but if so they should be willing to open it on request without too much of a hassle.
Charging an extra $15 a month to open it seems like they're not really trying to cut down on spam, but rather trying to milk their customers by charging for things that really should come free with access.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067418</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30068844</id>
	<title>Re:Why is the NSF?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257090720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The amount and the fact the principal investigators are both assistant professors makes this sound like a CAREER grant from NSF. It's meant to help out new faculty and is pretty far-ranging in scope. Basically, if you're an assistant professor and you have some project that'll cost around $400k, you can write up a proposal for this particular NSF program. It's unlikely that NSF asked for people to submit proposals about cellular networks, that's just what these guys chose to write up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The amount and the fact the principal investigators are both assistant professors makes this sound like a CAREER grant from NSF .
It 's meant to help out new faculty and is pretty far-ranging in scope .
Basically , if you 're an assistant professor and you have some project that 'll cost around $ 400k , you can write up a proposal for this particular NSF program .
It 's unlikely that NSF asked for people to submit proposals about cellular networks , that 's just what these guys chose to write up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The amount and the fact the principal investigators are both assistant professors makes this sound like a CAREER grant from NSF.
It's meant to help out new faculty and is pretty far-ranging in scope.
Basically, if you're an assistant professor and you have some project that'll cost around $400k, you can write up a proposal for this particular NSF program.
It's unlikely that NSF asked for people to submit proposals about cellular networks, that's just what these guys chose to write up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067742</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30068400</id>
	<title>I'm from ATT and I'll be your admin</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257086520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The concept of traffic analysis to identify malware seems credible at first glance from a technical perspective. But the last thing we need is another justification the mobile operators can use to assert admin control over our devices.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The concept of traffic analysis to identify malware seems credible at first glance from a technical perspective .
But the last thing we need is another justification the mobile operators can use to assert admin control over our devices .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The concept of traffic analysis to identify malware seems credible at first glance from a technical perspective.
But the last thing we need is another justification the mobile operators can use to assert admin control over our devices.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067770</id>
	<title>Re:signs your smartphone's been p0wned</title>
	<author>highbulp</author>
	<datestamp>1257081240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Upon turning on your phone, it demands a cookie.</p></div><p>And if you give your phone a cookie, it's going to ask for a glass of milk. One thing will lead to another, and soon it will want your social security number.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Upon turning on your phone , it demands a cookie.And if you give your phone a cookie , it 's going to ask for a glass of milk .
One thing will lead to another , and soon it will want your social security number .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Upon turning on your phone, it demands a cookie.And if you give your phone a cookie, it's going to ask for a glass of milk.
One thing will lead to another, and soon it will want your social security number.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067530</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30068328</id>
	<title>My Phone, No Touch!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257085980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hate to be an obnoxious twit, but I REALLY don't like the idea of a carrier messing with my phone, even for the sake of carrier network stability. I would rather have the phone's carrier network access locked down so all IP traffic is stopped and all non-emergency voice calls get redirected to a call center who can inform me that my phone behaves like a virus laden whore. When and if I want to modify my phone OS and applications is my call. At least for GSM, the SIM card is by design an easily transferable token confering network access and an authentication token. Whomever holds this token is authorized as far as the system is concerned.</p><p>
&nbsp; While putting a stop to virus outbreaks may be altruistic, fundamentally allowing such functionality is dangerious. That recent incident of carrier spyware being slipped into a fake blackberry update (in Dubai?) illustrates this, and that's probably only the tip of the iceberg. Only until very recently, consumers have put up with carriers getting root access to their phones.</p><p>Fuck that noise.</p><p>If I need an OS update, I get it from the phone manufacturer. If I need mobile antivirus, I get that from a vendor. The carriers are still living in the fantasyland that they are not a provider of dumb bandwidth pipes and can bleed their customers dry for things from bluetooth activation to single character charges in SMS.</p><p>If anything, this is the reason why a real opensource phone like OpenMoko was necessary.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hate to be an obnoxious twit , but I REALLY do n't like the idea of a carrier messing with my phone , even for the sake of carrier network stability .
I would rather have the phone 's carrier network access locked down so all IP traffic is stopped and all non-emergency voice calls get redirected to a call center who can inform me that my phone behaves like a virus laden whore .
When and if I want to modify my phone OS and applications is my call .
At least for GSM , the SIM card is by design an easily transferable token confering network access and an authentication token .
Whomever holds this token is authorized as far as the system is concerned .
  While putting a stop to virus outbreaks may be altruistic , fundamentally allowing such functionality is dangerious .
That recent incident of carrier spyware being slipped into a fake blackberry update ( in Dubai ?
) illustrates this , and that 's probably only the tip of the iceberg .
Only until very recently , consumers have put up with carriers getting root access to their phones.Fuck that noise.If I need an OS update , I get it from the phone manufacturer .
If I need mobile antivirus , I get that from a vendor .
The carriers are still living in the fantasyland that they are not a provider of dumb bandwidth pipes and can bleed their customers dry for things from bluetooth activation to single character charges in SMS.If anything , this is the reason why a real opensource phone like OpenMoko was necessary .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hate to be an obnoxious twit, but I REALLY don't like the idea of a carrier messing with my phone, even for the sake of carrier network stability.
I would rather have the phone's carrier network access locked down so all IP traffic is stopped and all non-emergency voice calls get redirected to a call center who can inform me that my phone behaves like a virus laden whore.
When and if I want to modify my phone OS and applications is my call.
At least for GSM, the SIM card is by design an easily transferable token confering network access and an authentication token.
Whomever holds this token is authorized as far as the system is concerned.
  While putting a stop to virus outbreaks may be altruistic, fundamentally allowing such functionality is dangerious.
That recent incident of carrier spyware being slipped into a fake blackberry update (in Dubai?
) illustrates this, and that's probably only the tip of the iceberg.
Only until very recently, consumers have put up with carriers getting root access to their phones.Fuck that noise.If I need an OS update, I get it from the phone manufacturer.
If I need mobile antivirus, I get that from a vendor.
The carriers are still living in the fantasyland that they are not a provider of dumb bandwidth pipes and can bleed their customers dry for things from bluetooth activation to single character charges in SMS.If anything, this is the reason why a real opensource phone like OpenMoko was necessary.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067418</id>
	<title>Anyone else have a bad feeling about this?</title>
	<author>rolfwind</author>
	<datestamp>1257078960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The researchers are looking into ways wireless carriers such as AT&amp;T and Verizon can detect malware on devices and clean up the devices before they do further damage.</p></div></blockquote><p>Last time a company had access to the contents of a device (Amazon -&gt; Kindle), they caused a really big uproar.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The researchers are looking into ways wireless carriers such as AT&amp;T and Verizon can detect malware on devices and clean up the devices before they do further damage.Last time a company had access to the contents of a device ( Amazon - &gt; Kindle ) , they caused a really big uproar .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The researchers are looking into ways wireless carriers such as AT&amp;T and Verizon can detect malware on devices and clean up the devices before they do further damage.Last time a company had access to the contents of a device (Amazon -&gt; Kindle), they caused a really big uproar.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30068780</id>
	<title>Mobile devices are the same as your computer!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257090120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously, how many people think it's a good idea to let your ISP into your computer.  Controlling it, installing/removing software, etc.  Nobody would stand for that.</p><p>Mobile devices are not that different.  They are still your personal computer and nobody should be screwing with it unless you explicitly allow it.</p><p>Now the phone company is certainly within their rights to degrade or isolate malfunctioning devices on their network but they better be doing that at the network level and not actually touch your device.  They also better not completely disconnect a device just because it's malfunctioning.  People's lives can depend on a phone working.  In the case of a virus infected or otherwise malfunctioning device they could isolate its functionality on the network so that it can only be used with certain critical functions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , how many people think it 's a good idea to let your ISP into your computer .
Controlling it , installing/removing software , etc .
Nobody would stand for that.Mobile devices are not that different .
They are still your personal computer and nobody should be screwing with it unless you explicitly allow it.Now the phone company is certainly within their rights to degrade or isolate malfunctioning devices on their network but they better be doing that at the network level and not actually touch your device .
They also better not completely disconnect a device just because it 's malfunctioning .
People 's lives can depend on a phone working .
In the case of a virus infected or otherwise malfunctioning device they could isolate its functionality on the network so that it can only be used with certain critical functions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, how many people think it's a good idea to let your ISP into your computer.
Controlling it, installing/removing software, etc.
Nobody would stand for that.Mobile devices are not that different.
They are still your personal computer and nobody should be screwing with it unless you explicitly allow it.Now the phone company is certainly within their rights to degrade or isolate malfunctioning devices on their network but they better be doing that at the network level and not actually touch your device.
They also better not completely disconnect a device just because it's malfunctioning.
People's lives can depend on a phone working.
In the case of a virus infected or otherwise malfunctioning device they could isolate its functionality on the network so that it can only be used with certain critical functions.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30068434</id>
	<title>Re:Anyone else have a bad feeling about this?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257086760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am leery of giving unfettered regulatory power to a gatekeeper that has obvious financial interests to act in a manner that conflicts with my own:</p><p>No, I dont run spam botnets, nor do I write malware; however, what about people that write SSH proxies to bypass walled garden policies on their devices?  If the verbiage of the "agreement" about malware is poorly written, this useful software could (and likely would) be classified as "Malware", and systematically removed from connected devices.</p><p>I would settle for the following scenario though:</p><p>$Telco detects that I have $Malware installed on $Device. They call me on either my landline or my cell, and inform me of the infection-- THEN-- OFFER to remove it for me.</p><p>Depending on my decision, they remove it remotely, or they don't remove it.</p><p>This way, the control of what is running on my phone is still ultimately MY decision as the consumer, and is not the authority of an outside and financially motivated regulator.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am leery of giving unfettered regulatory power to a gatekeeper that has obvious financial interests to act in a manner that conflicts with my own : No , I dont run spam botnets , nor do I write malware ; however , what about people that write SSH proxies to bypass walled garden policies on their devices ?
If the verbiage of the " agreement " about malware is poorly written , this useful software could ( and likely would ) be classified as " Malware " , and systematically removed from connected devices.I would settle for the following scenario though : $ Telco detects that I have $ Malware installed on $ Device .
They call me on either my landline or my cell , and inform me of the infection-- THEN-- OFFER to remove it for me.Depending on my decision , they remove it remotely , or they do n't remove it.This way , the control of what is running on my phone is still ultimately MY decision as the consumer , and is not the authority of an outside and financially motivated regulator .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am leery of giving unfettered regulatory power to a gatekeeper that has obvious financial interests to act in a manner that conflicts with my own:No, I dont run spam botnets, nor do I write malware; however, what about people that write SSH proxies to bypass walled garden policies on their devices?
If the verbiage of the "agreement" about malware is poorly written, this useful software could (and likely would) be classified as "Malware", and systematically removed from connected devices.I would settle for the following scenario though:$Telco detects that I have $Malware installed on $Device.
They call me on either my landline or my cell, and inform me of the infection-- THEN-- OFFER to remove it for me.Depending on my decision, they remove it remotely, or they don't remove it.This way, the control of what is running on my phone is still ultimately MY decision as the consumer, and is not the authority of an outside and financially motivated regulator.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067418</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30068724</id>
	<title>Georgia tech</title>
	<author>t3chn0n3rd</author>
	<datestamp>1257089460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Georgia tech is a good school</htmltext>
<tokenext>Georgia tech is a good school</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Georgia tech is a good school</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067742</id>
	<title>Why is the NSF?</title>
	<author>joocemann</author>
	<datestamp>1257081120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Spending money to facilitate better service for these private businesses who have not only made billions from customers, but took billions of tax dollars and screwed us as citizens.</p><p>NSF should not be paying a cent for this.  The issues need to become prominent enough for the customers to demand better products from the oligopoly of telcos.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Spending money to facilitate better service for these private businesses who have not only made billions from customers , but took billions of tax dollars and screwed us as citizens.NSF should not be paying a cent for this .
The issues need to become prominent enough for the customers to demand better products from the oligopoly of telcos .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Spending money to facilitate better service for these private businesses who have not only made billions from customers, but took billions of tax dollars and screwed us as citizens.NSF should not be paying a cent for this.
The issues need to become prominent enough for the customers to demand better products from the oligopoly of telcos.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30068140</id>
	<title>how about stop useing network locks &amp; custom s</title>
	<author>Joe The Dragon</author>
	<datestamp>1257084360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>how about stop useing network locks &amp; custom software this more like the same carp that you get on new pc's.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>how about stop useing network locks &amp; custom software this more like the same carp that you get on new pc 's .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>how about stop useing network locks &amp; custom software this more like the same carp that you get on new pc's.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_2318247_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067530
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_2318247_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30069550
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_2318247_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30078638
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067418
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_2318247_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067418
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_2318247_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30068748
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067540
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_2318247_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30072376
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067418
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_2318247_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30070082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067418
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_2318247_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30070364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067540
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_2318247_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30076958
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30069496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067742
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_2318247_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30068434
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067418
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_2318247_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30068844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067742
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_2318247_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30074410
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067540
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_11_2318247.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067418
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067546
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30072376
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30070082
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30068434
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30078638
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_11_2318247.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067540
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30074410
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30068748
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30070364
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_11_2318247.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30068780
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_11_2318247.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067812
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_11_2318247.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067488
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_11_2318247.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067530
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067770
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_11_2318247.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067834
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_11_2318247.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067742
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30069496
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30076958
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30068844
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_11_2318247.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30067670
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_2318247.30069550
</commentlist>
</conversation>
