<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_26_236232</id>
	<title>Virgin Media To Trial Filesharing Monitoring In UK</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1259237700000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Shokaster writes <i>"The Register reports that <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/26/virgin\_media\_detica/">Virgin Media are to begin monitoring file sharing using a deep packet inspection system</a>, CView, provided by Deltica, a BAE subsidiary. The trial will cover about 40\% of customers, although those involved will not be informed. CView's deep packet inspection is the same technology that powered Phorm's advertising system. Initially Virgin Media's implementation will focus on music sharing and will inspect packets to determine whether the content is licensed or unlicensed, based on data provided by the record industry. Virgin Media emphasised that records will not be kept on individual customers and that data on the level of copyright infringement will be aggregated and anonymised."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Shokaster writes " The Register reports that Virgin Media are to begin monitoring file sharing using a deep packet inspection system , CView , provided by Deltica , a BAE subsidiary .
The trial will cover about 40 \ % of customers , although those involved will not be informed .
CView 's deep packet inspection is the same technology that powered Phorm 's advertising system .
Initially Virgin Media 's implementation will focus on music sharing and will inspect packets to determine whether the content is licensed or unlicensed , based on data provided by the record industry .
Virgin Media emphasised that records will not be kept on individual customers and that data on the level of copyright infringement will be aggregated and anonymised .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shokaster writes "The Register reports that Virgin Media are to begin monitoring file sharing using a deep packet inspection system, CView, provided by Deltica, a BAE subsidiary.
The trial will cover about 40\% of customers, although those involved will not be informed.
CView's deep packet inspection is the same technology that powered Phorm's advertising system.
Initially Virgin Media's implementation will focus on music sharing and will inspect packets to determine whether the content is licensed or unlicensed, based on data provided by the record industry.
Virgin Media emphasised that records will not be kept on individual customers and that data on the level of copyright infringement will be aggregated and anonymised.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30242166</id>
	<title>I see a larger motive:</title>
	<author>prograde</author>
	<datestamp>1259252640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The cynic in me thinks it will go this way:  They make this announcement today.  For the next few months, they do absolutely nothing.  Then, they fabricate a bunch of data, and announce that they've determined that 99\% of all P2P traffic is protected by copyright.  Authorities cowtow, and those "three-strikes" laws get put in place (and enforced) everywhere.  </p><p>It doesn't matter that the data was faked...they expressly stated that it would all be anonymised and not linked to any specific customer...so how can anyone prove it's been faked?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The cynic in me thinks it will go this way : They make this announcement today .
For the next few months , they do absolutely nothing .
Then , they fabricate a bunch of data , and announce that they 've determined that 99 \ % of all P2P traffic is protected by copyright .
Authorities cowtow , and those " three-strikes " laws get put in place ( and enforced ) everywhere .
It does n't matter that the data was faked...they expressly stated that it would all be anonymised and not linked to any specific customer...so how can anyone prove it 's been faked ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The cynic in me thinks it will go this way:  They make this announcement today.
For the next few months, they do absolutely nothing.
Then, they fabricate a bunch of data, and announce that they've determined that 99\% of all P2P traffic is protected by copyright.
Authorities cowtow, and those "three-strikes" laws get put in place (and enforced) everywhere.
It doesn't matter that the data was faked...they expressly stated that it would all be anonymised and not linked to any specific customer...so how can anyone prove it's been faked?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244156</id>
	<title>Re:Is any form of trivial encryption sufficient?</title>
	<author>Bert64</author>
	<datestamp>1259320920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Modern CPUs are fast enough that for any typical connection, a relatively modern cpu is able to do wirespeed AES256...<br>For users on the service described on the article, the most they will ever have is 50mbit downstream and considerably less upstream, unless you're trying to torrent from an embedded device like a phone almost anything should be able to handle that... I'm sure even the atom based netbooks could handle encrypting that without issues, and some of the embedded cpus like the ones from via have hardware aes engines.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Modern CPUs are fast enough that for any typical connection , a relatively modern cpu is able to do wirespeed AES256...For users on the service described on the article , the most they will ever have is 50mbit downstream and considerably less upstream , unless you 're trying to torrent from an embedded device like a phone almost anything should be able to handle that... I 'm sure even the atom based netbooks could handle encrypting that without issues , and some of the embedded cpus like the ones from via have hardware aes engines .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Modern CPUs are fast enough that for any typical connection, a relatively modern cpu is able to do wirespeed AES256...For users on the service described on the article, the most they will ever have is 50mbit downstream and considerably less upstream, unless you're trying to torrent from an embedded device like a phone almost anything should be able to handle that... I'm sure even the atom based netbooks could handle encrypting that without issues, and some of the embedded cpus like the ones from via have hardware aes engines.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30242918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241508</id>
	<title>Re:How do they know?</title>
	<author>Darkness404</author>
	<datestamp>1259245440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Look, the RIAA and their equivalents in other countries do not see losses in profit as "hey, we better do something different", no they say "PIRACY!!!11!1111!1!1" and use that to fuel more crap laws to extend copyright. Boycotts do not work. Even if indie records outsell RIAA records, the big labels would simply buy the smaller labels.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Look , the RIAA and their equivalents in other countries do not see losses in profit as " hey , we better do something different " , no they say " PIRACY ! !
! 11 ! 1111 ! 1 ! 1 " and use that to fuel more crap laws to extend copyright .
Boycotts do not work .
Even if indie records outsell RIAA records , the big labels would simply buy the smaller labels .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Look, the RIAA and their equivalents in other countries do not see losses in profit as "hey, we better do something different", no they say "PIRACY!!
!11!1111!1!1" and use that to fuel more crap laws to extend copyright.
Boycotts do not work.
Even if indie records outsell RIAA records, the big labels would simply buy the smaller labels.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241182</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244214</id>
	<title>Re:Well I am leaving.</title>
	<author>TheDarkMaster</author>
	<datestamp>1259322060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Modern companies do not care about people rights, ethics or even human lives. All that matters to them is only... profit.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Modern companies do not care about people rights , ethics or even human lives .
All that matters to them is only... profit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Modern companies do not care about people rights, ethics or even human lives.
All that matters to them is only... profit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241650</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243224</id>
	<title>Re:This won't work</title>
	<author>Malc</author>
	<datestamp>1259352000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't fully understand how BT works, but it seems that most people accept all peers, so does that mean they can use a modified BT client to connect to your system and get information irrespective of encryption?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't fully understand how BT works , but it seems that most people accept all peers , so does that mean they can use a modified BT client to connect to your system and get information irrespective of encryption ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't fully understand how BT works, but it seems that most people accept all peers, so does that mean they can use a modified BT client to connect to your system and get information irrespective of encryption?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241622</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243546</id>
	<title>Re:Six months from now</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259313060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, on May 27th 2010 all UK headlines will be:</p><p>"Tories. Sheeeeeeit."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , on May 27th 2010 all UK headlines will be : " Tories .
Sheeeeeeit. "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, on May 27th 2010 all UK headlines will be:"Tories.
Sheeeeeeit."</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241152</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241642</id>
	<title>misnomer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259246640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Judging by their behaviour they should probably rebrand themselves Whore Media.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Judging by their behaviour they should probably rebrand themselves Whore Media .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Judging by their behaviour they should probably rebrand themselves Whore Media.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30242132</id>
	<title>Re:How do they know?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259252220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I believe their new policy regarding music as set by the UKRIA is...</p><p>"All music is considered unlicensed unless pre-arranged and approved by UKRIA solicitor in writing at least 4 weeks prior to attempted copying"</p><p>CAPTCHA: sucker</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe their new policy regarding music as set by the UKRIA is... " All music is considered unlicensed unless pre-arranged and approved by UKRIA solicitor in writing at least 4 weeks prior to attempted copying " CAPTCHA : sucker</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe their new policy regarding music as set by the UKRIA is..."All music is considered unlicensed unless pre-arranged and approved by UKRIA solicitor in writing at least 4 weeks prior to attempted copying"CAPTCHA: sucker</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241072</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241294</id>
	<title>Re:How do they know?Christmas sale, free shipping</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259243580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.coolforsale.com/" title="coolforsale.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.coolforsale.com/</a> [coolforsale.com]
Dear ladies and gentlemen Hello, In order to meet Christmas, Site launched Christmas spree, welcome new and old customers come to participate in the  there are unexpected surprises, look forward to your arrival. Only this site have this treatmentOur goal is "Best quality, Best reputation , Best services". Your satisfaction is our main pursue. You can find the best products from us, meeting your different needs.
Ladies and Gentlemen  weicome  to  my  coolforsale.com.Here,there  are   the   most   fashion   products . Pass by but don't   miss  it.Select  your  favorite  clothing!  Welcome  to come  next   time ! Thank you!     <a href="http://www.coolforsale.com/productlist.asp?id=s76" title="coolforsale.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.coolforsale.com/productlist.asp?id=s76</a> [coolforsale.com] (Tracksuit w)
ugg boot,POLO hoody,Jacket,
Air jordan(1-24)shoes $33
Nike shox(R4,NZ,OZ,TL1,TL2,TL3) $35
Handbags(Coach lv fendi d&amp;g) $35
Tshirts (Polo<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,ed hardy,lacoste) $16
free shipping
Thanks!!! Advance wish you a merry Christmas.</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.coolforsale.com/ [ coolforsale.com ] Dear ladies and gentlemen Hello , In order to meet Christmas , Site launched Christmas spree , welcome new and old customers come to participate in the there are unexpected surprises , look forward to your arrival .
Only this site have this treatmentOur goal is " Best quality , Best reputation , Best services " .
Your satisfaction is our main pursue .
You can find the best products from us , meeting your different needs .
Ladies and Gentlemen weicome to my coolforsale.com.Here,there are the most fashion products .
Pass by but do n't miss it.Select your favorite clothing !
Welcome to come next time !
Thank you !
http : //www.coolforsale.com/productlist.asp ? id = s76 [ coolforsale.com ] ( Tracksuit w ) ugg boot,POLO hoody,Jacket , Air jordan ( 1-24 ) shoes $ 33 Nike shox ( R4,NZ,OZ,TL1,TL2,TL3 ) $ 35 Handbags ( Coach lv fendi d&amp;g ) $ 35 Tshirts ( Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste ) $ 16 free shipping Thanks ! ! !
Advance wish you a merry Christmas .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.coolforsale.com/ [coolforsale.com]
Dear ladies and gentlemen Hello, In order to meet Christmas, Site launched Christmas spree, welcome new and old customers come to participate in the  there are unexpected surprises, look forward to your arrival.
Only this site have this treatmentOur goal is "Best quality, Best reputation , Best services".
Your satisfaction is our main pursue.
You can find the best products from us, meeting your different needs.
Ladies and Gentlemen  weicome  to  my  coolforsale.com.Here,there  are   the   most   fashion   products .
Pass by but don't   miss  it.Select  your  favorite  clothing!
Welcome  to come  next   time !
Thank you!
http://www.coolforsale.com/productlist.asp?id=s76 [coolforsale.com] (Tracksuit w)
ugg boot,POLO hoody,Jacket,
Air jordan(1-24)shoes $33
Nike shox(R4,NZ,OZ,TL1,TL2,TL3) $35
Handbags(Coach lv fendi d&amp;g) $35
Tshirts (Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste) $16
free shipping
Thanks!!!
Advance wish you a merry Christmas.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241072</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30242126</id>
	<title>the uk is a primitive culture</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259252100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>filled with fags and barbarians.</htmltext>
<tokenext>filled with fags and barbarians .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>filled with fags and barbarians.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244142</id>
	<title>Re:Six months from now</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259320740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Being a VM customer I would actually like to see this happen if they insist on exploring this avenue.<br>However, it would something more profound to tip the scales for me to leave VM.</p><p>The problem - I dare say - most VM customers like myself face is that we're effectively joined at the hip with VM as a telecoms provider; the reason being that VM are by and large the only one that their business over cable (which is great).</p><p>This means that, to leave VM for another provider, one would be facing hefty fees for getting connected (ADSL) with another telecoms provider.</p><p>Unless you're lucky enough to live in an area where you can jump provider using the same cable. I am not even sure if this is possible.</p><p>In a nutshell; VM have most of their customers by the ghoolies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Being a VM customer I would actually like to see this happen if they insist on exploring this avenue.However , it would something more profound to tip the scales for me to leave VM.The problem - I dare say - most VM customers like myself face is that we 're effectively joined at the hip with VM as a telecoms provider ; the reason being that VM are by and large the only one that their business over cable ( which is great ) .This means that , to leave VM for another provider , one would be facing hefty fees for getting connected ( ADSL ) with another telecoms provider.Unless you 're lucky enough to live in an area where you can jump provider using the same cable .
I am not even sure if this is possible.In a nutshell ; VM have most of their customers by the ghoolies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Being a VM customer I would actually like to see this happen if they insist on exploring this avenue.However, it would something more profound to tip the scales for me to leave VM.The problem - I dare say - most VM customers like myself face is that we're effectively joined at the hip with VM as a telecoms provider; the reason being that VM are by and large the only one that their business over cable (which is great).This means that, to leave VM for another provider, one would be facing hefty fees for getting connected (ADSL) with another telecoms provider.Unless you're lucky enough to live in an area where you can jump provider using the same cable.
I am not even sure if this is possible.In a nutshell; VM have most of their customers by the ghoolies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241152</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241082</id>
	<title>I say lets try to confuse them.</title>
	<author>bintech</author>
	<datestamp>1259241660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Quick, everyone start sharing Barry Manilow songs.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Quick , everyone start sharing Barry Manilow songs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Quick, everyone start sharing Barry Manilow songs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244206</id>
	<title>Re:misnomer</title>
	<author>Nerdfest</author>
	<datestamp>1259321700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... it's not them getting screwed.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why ... it 's not them getting screwed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why ... it's not them getting screwed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241642</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243560</id>
	<title>Re:Is any form of trivial encryption sufficient?</title>
	<author>u38cg</author>
	<datestamp>1259313240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It might be if the DMCA applied outside the US.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It might be if the DMCA applied outside the US .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It might be if the DMCA applied outside the US.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30242918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241694</id>
	<title>Re:Could this cause legal problems for them?</title>
	<author>d36</author>
	<datestamp>1259247060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>because they have enough money to buy the government?</htmltext>
<tokenext>because they have enough money to buy the government ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>because they have enough money to buy the government?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241458</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30245718</id>
	<title>Re:How do they know?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259339100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is exactly the problem I've had with a lot of automatic DRM schemes and devices over the years. I ranted about it related to the Sony NetMD minidisc players a number of years ago, whose DRM software assume that all music you want to put on your player is owned by Sony, is DRM'ed, and therefore disallowed to be copied to the player is prohibited. Which, if you think about it, makes the device completely useless. It does this even for unlicensed, un-DRM'ed tracks that, potentially, belong to you.</p><p>I think the insult involved with this is two-pronged: First up, the insult of not being able to do what you want with your data and your device that you paid perfectly good money for. But more insulting still is the notion that Sony (or whoever, Virgin Media in this case) are making the implicit statement that all media not belonging to them, coming from them, or not involved with their label in some way is illegitimate. Which is complete rubbish. You can't paint the world of copyright and content creation with such a wide brush because it doesn't work.</p><p>So your point about figuring out what's authorized and unauthorized is a perfectly valid one up to a point. Virgin can snoop your datastream and listen to the MP3 the bits fit together to make, and say "you downloaded a copy of X song that belongs to us." But as more and more users run encryption and/or download completely random things that Virgin can't figure out (like the standby example, Linux ISO's...) I predict that the mentality will be "you're using Bittorrent and/or running encryption, therefore you are automatically guilty of something (that we will determine at a later time)."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is exactly the problem I 've had with a lot of automatic DRM schemes and devices over the years .
I ranted about it related to the Sony NetMD minidisc players a number of years ago , whose DRM software assume that all music you want to put on your player is owned by Sony , is DRM'ed , and therefore disallowed to be copied to the player is prohibited .
Which , if you think about it , makes the device completely useless .
It does this even for unlicensed , un-DRM'ed tracks that , potentially , belong to you.I think the insult involved with this is two-pronged : First up , the insult of not being able to do what you want with your data and your device that you paid perfectly good money for .
But more insulting still is the notion that Sony ( or whoever , Virgin Media in this case ) are making the implicit statement that all media not belonging to them , coming from them , or not involved with their label in some way is illegitimate .
Which is complete rubbish .
You ca n't paint the world of copyright and content creation with such a wide brush because it does n't work.So your point about figuring out what 's authorized and unauthorized is a perfectly valid one up to a point .
Virgin can snoop your datastream and listen to the MP3 the bits fit together to make , and say " you downloaded a copy of X song that belongs to us .
" But as more and more users run encryption and/or download completely random things that Virgin ca n't figure out ( like the standby example , Linux ISO 's... ) I predict that the mentality will be " you 're using Bittorrent and/or running encryption , therefore you are automatically guilty of something ( that we will determine at a later time ) .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is exactly the problem I've had with a lot of automatic DRM schemes and devices over the years.
I ranted about it related to the Sony NetMD minidisc players a number of years ago, whose DRM software assume that all music you want to put on your player is owned by Sony, is DRM'ed, and therefore disallowed to be copied to the player is prohibited.
Which, if you think about it, makes the device completely useless.
It does this even for unlicensed, un-DRM'ed tracks that, potentially, belong to you.I think the insult involved with this is two-pronged: First up, the insult of not being able to do what you want with your data and your device that you paid perfectly good money for.
But more insulting still is the notion that Sony (or whoever, Virgin Media in this case) are making the implicit statement that all media not belonging to them, coming from them, or not involved with their label in some way is illegitimate.
Which is complete rubbish.
You can't paint the world of copyright and content creation with such a wide brush because it doesn't work.So your point about figuring out what's authorized and unauthorized is a perfectly valid one up to a point.
Virgin can snoop your datastream and listen to the MP3 the bits fit together to make, and say "you downloaded a copy of X song that belongs to us.
" But as more and more users run encryption and/or download completely random things that Virgin can't figure out (like the standby example, Linux ISO's...) I predict that the mentality will be "you're using Bittorrent and/or running encryption, therefore you are automatically guilty of something (that we will determine at a later time).
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241072</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241194</id>
	<title>Encrypted Anonymous File Sharing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259242560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Which is worse: All data being free, including data you don't personally like?  Or regimes of data control?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Which is worse : All data being free , including data you do n't personally like ?
Or regimes of data control ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which is worse: All data being free, including data you don't personally like?
Or regimes of data control?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241072</id>
	<title>How do they know?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259241540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a friend who's an amateur musician and devices (his mobile phone) have started to deny him the ability to play his own music due to it being "unlicensed".</p><p>How the hell do these clowns expect to be able to figure out what's unauthorised copying?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a friend who 's an amateur musician and devices ( his mobile phone ) have started to deny him the ability to play his own music due to it being " unlicensed " .How the hell do these clowns expect to be able to figure out what 's unauthorised copying ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a friend who's an amateur musician and devices (his mobile phone) have started to deny him the ability to play his own music due to it being "unlicensed".How the hell do these clowns expect to be able to figure out what's unauthorised copying?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243914</id>
	<title>Deltica isn't real</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259317920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's Detica not Deltica</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's Detica not Deltica</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's Detica not Deltica</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244546</id>
	<title>Re:Could this cause legal problems for them?</title>
	<author>Xest</author>
	<datestamp>1259326860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, it's because they're doing it for the government who are pushing it for the music industry.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , it 's because they 're doing it for the government who are pushing it for the music industry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, it's because they're doing it for the government who are pushing it for the music industry.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241694</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241102</id>
	<title>Re:How do they know?</title>
	<author>timmarhy</author>
	<datestamp>1259241840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>why would they bother? all they have to do is make legal threats and demand payment or they will haul you into court which will be even more expensive for you.<p>
people on here think they have somehow been winning this fight to control media, when they have been kidding themselfs. the fight hasn't even STARTED yet...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>why would they bother ?
all they have to do is make legal threats and demand payment or they will haul you into court which will be even more expensive for you .
people on here think they have somehow been winning this fight to control media , when they have been kidding themselfs .
the fight has n't even STARTED yet.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>why would they bother?
all they have to do is make legal threats and demand payment or they will haul you into court which will be even more expensive for you.
people on here think they have somehow been winning this fight to control media, when they have been kidding themselfs.
the fight hasn't even STARTED yet...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241072</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243886</id>
	<title>Re:How do they know?</title>
	<author>the\_womble</author>
	<datestamp>1259317680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I have a friend who's an amateur musician and devices (his mobile phone) have started to deny him the ability to play his own music due to it being "unlicensed".</p></div><p>Its not his music. All music belongs to the properly recognised music industry. You see the music industry is God, therefore nothing can be created except by them or with their help.</p><p>He is clearly some sort of hippy communist terrorist music thief.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a friend who 's an amateur musician and devices ( his mobile phone ) have started to deny him the ability to play his own music due to it being " unlicensed " .Its not his music .
All music belongs to the properly recognised music industry .
You see the music industry is God , therefore nothing can be created except by them or with their help.He is clearly some sort of hippy communist terrorist music thief .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a friend who's an amateur musician and devices (his mobile phone) have started to deny him the ability to play his own music due to it being "unlicensed".Its not his music.
All music belongs to the properly recognised music industry.
You see the music industry is God, therefore nothing can be created except by them or with their help.He is clearly some sort of hippy communist terrorist music thief.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241072</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30242094</id>
	<title>Remember, everything the...</title>
	<author>soporific16</author>
	<datestamp>1259251620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nazis did in Germany was legal. DO NOT BUY INTO THE LEGALITY ARGUMENT. If for some reason hell freezes over and Big Music proposes legal limits to the profits they can make out of the changing face of music distribution, then and only then would they begin to have an argument for their 'laws'. I'm not holding my breath.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nazis did in Germany was legal .
DO NOT BUY INTO THE LEGALITY ARGUMENT .
If for some reason hell freezes over and Big Music proposes legal limits to the profits they can make out of the changing face of music distribution , then and only then would they begin to have an argument for their 'laws' .
I 'm not holding my breath .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nazis did in Germany was legal.
DO NOT BUY INTO THE LEGALITY ARGUMENT.
If for some reason hell freezes over and Big Music proposes legal limits to the profits they can make out of the changing face of music distribution, then and only then would they begin to have an argument for their 'laws'.
I'm not holding my breath.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244412</id>
	<title>Make encryption mandatory</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259324880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If enough file sharers use encryption Virgin will report back that DPI is a waste of money. Then we can all move on to the anonymity problem.</p><p>To make encryption the norm ordinary people need to enable it.<br>Sadly the average joe will not even read about this and also tends to ignore things like bug fixes and security patches so the chances of them downloading an update to enable encryption is not high enough.</p><p>But maybe the makers of the most successful apps could release a patch that offers potentially improved download speeds (so average users will actually get the thing) and more importantly enables forced encryption, sets it to the default and gives lots of warnings if you disable it. (sneaky I know but hey desperate times). that way the user is as unlikeley to disable encryption as they were to enable it.</p><p>If they already do, my apologies. I've been out of the windows p2p world for a long time and transmission comes with encryption enabled by default with my operating system<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>Incidentally, I really hope virgin do publish statistics on the percentage encrypting their traffic!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If enough file sharers use encryption Virgin will report back that DPI is a waste of money .
Then we can all move on to the anonymity problem.To make encryption the norm ordinary people need to enable it.Sadly the average joe will not even read about this and also tends to ignore things like bug fixes and security patches so the chances of them downloading an update to enable encryption is not high enough.But maybe the makers of the most successful apps could release a patch that offers potentially improved download speeds ( so average users will actually get the thing ) and more importantly enables forced encryption , sets it to the default and gives lots of warnings if you disable it .
( sneaky I know but hey desperate times ) .
that way the user is as unlikeley to disable encryption as they were to enable it.If they already do , my apologies .
I 've been out of the windows p2p world for a long time and transmission comes with encryption enabled by default with my operating system : ) Incidentally , I really hope virgin do publish statistics on the percentage encrypting their traffic !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If enough file sharers use encryption Virgin will report back that DPI is a waste of money.
Then we can all move on to the anonymity problem.To make encryption the norm ordinary people need to enable it.Sadly the average joe will not even read about this and also tends to ignore things like bug fixes and security patches so the chances of them downloading an update to enable encryption is not high enough.But maybe the makers of the most successful apps could release a patch that offers potentially improved download speeds (so average users will actually get the thing) and more importantly enables forced encryption, sets it to the default and gives lots of warnings if you disable it.
(sneaky I know but hey desperate times).
that way the user is as unlikeley to disable encryption as they were to enable it.If they already do, my apologies.
I've been out of the windows p2p world for a long time and transmission comes with encryption enabled by default with my operating system :)Incidentally, I really hope virgin do publish statistics on the percentage encrypting their traffic!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244794</id>
	<title>This probably illegal under EU law</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259331240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The EU directive 2002/58/ec does not permit<br>content monitoring without prior consent.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The EU directive 2002/58/ec does not permitcontent monitoring without prior consent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The EU directive 2002/58/ec does not permitcontent monitoring without prior consent.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243248</id>
	<title>Re:Encrypt</title>
	<author>Bios\_Hakr</author>
	<datestamp>1259352360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It won't help much.  Thanks to Bit Torrent, it's rather easy to identify file sharers; they connect to thousands of peers.  You draft a AUP that states file sharing will not be tollerated.  Then you use NTOP to identify potential file sharers.  Finally, you redirect them to a web page explaining what they need to do if they want to get back online.</p><p>For repeatr offenders, you kick them completely.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It wo n't help much .
Thanks to Bit Torrent , it 's rather easy to identify file sharers ; they connect to thousands of peers .
You draft a AUP that states file sharing will not be tollerated .
Then you use NTOP to identify potential file sharers .
Finally , you redirect them to a web page explaining what they need to do if they want to get back online.For repeatr offenders , you kick them completely .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It won't help much.
Thanks to Bit Torrent, it's rather easy to identify file sharers; they connect to thousands of peers.
You draft a AUP that states file sharing will not be tollerated.
Then you use NTOP to identify potential file sharers.
Finally, you redirect them to a web page explaining what they need to do if they want to get back online.For repeatr offenders, you kick them completely.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241472</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243926</id>
	<title>How do you suggest we do this?</title>
	<author>jonaskoelker</author>
	<datestamp>1259317980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Encrypt everything.</p></div><p>That's fine, except slashdot.org:80 doesn't think "jqncugir8o486" looks like a valid HTTP request.  I've also had problems on other sites, and with torrenting linux ISOs, world of warcraft, streaming media, SMTP, IRC, instant messaging and many other applications.</p><p>I could of course force the other end to decrypt my stuff, but that involves controlling computers I don't own, which means if that's how we play I should expect others to take control of <em>my</em> computers.  No.  Bad.  Very bad.  (It's probably also illegal.)</p><p>We can only encrypt our communication when we're talking to people who want to decrypt what we send them.  Given that this costs CPU cycles (electricity, money), we shouldn't expect profit-driven organizations to do this much; given how complex IT security is and how we want HTTPS to protect our slashdot password, we might come off as paranoid ("why are you making a big deal out of it?  It's just another internet forum, why would anyone steal your account, and why do you care so much?").  That makes it a hard sell.</p><p>Saying "encrypt everything" is fine, and I think that's what we <em>ought</em> to be doing.  But how do we get to there from here?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Encrypt everything.That 's fine , except slashdot.org : 80 does n't think " jqncugir8o486 " looks like a valid HTTP request .
I 've also had problems on other sites , and with torrenting linux ISOs , world of warcraft , streaming media , SMTP , IRC , instant messaging and many other applications.I could of course force the other end to decrypt my stuff , but that involves controlling computers I do n't own , which means if that 's how we play I should expect others to take control of my computers .
No. Bad .
Very bad .
( It 's probably also illegal .
) We can only encrypt our communication when we 're talking to people who want to decrypt what we send them .
Given that this costs CPU cycles ( electricity , money ) , we should n't expect profit-driven organizations to do this much ; given how complex IT security is and how we want HTTPS to protect our slashdot password , we might come off as paranoid ( " why are you making a big deal out of it ?
It 's just another internet forum , why would anyone steal your account , and why do you care so much ? " ) .
That makes it a hard sell.Saying " encrypt everything " is fine , and I think that 's what we ought to be doing .
But how do we get to there from here ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Encrypt everything.That's fine, except slashdot.org:80 doesn't think "jqncugir8o486" looks like a valid HTTP request.
I've also had problems on other sites, and with torrenting linux ISOs, world of warcraft, streaming media, SMTP, IRC, instant messaging and many other applications.I could of course force the other end to decrypt my stuff, but that involves controlling computers I don't own, which means if that's how we play I should expect others to take control of my computers.
No.  Bad.
Very bad.
(It's probably also illegal.
)We can only encrypt our communication when we're talking to people who want to decrypt what we send them.
Given that this costs CPU cycles (electricity, money), we shouldn't expect profit-driven organizations to do this much; given how complex IT security is and how we want HTTPS to protect our slashdot password, we might come off as paranoid ("why are you making a big deal out of it?
It's just another internet forum, why would anyone steal your account, and why do you care so much?").
That makes it a hard sell.Saying "encrypt everything" is fine, and I think that's what we ought to be doing.
But how do we get to there from here?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241472</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244228</id>
	<title>Re:How do they know?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259322300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everyone seems to be presuming that his phone is at fault, but there are 2 parts to this equation, the phone and the music file.</p><p>Did your friend happen to encode his music in some god awful file format, that has DRM built in?</p><p>I can't imagine how a phone would label something as 'unlicensed' if it was in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.MP3 format for example; there would be no difference between a licensed<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.MP3 and an unlicensed copy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everyone seems to be presuming that his phone is at fault , but there are 2 parts to this equation , the phone and the music file.Did your friend happen to encode his music in some god awful file format , that has DRM built in ? I ca n't imagine how a phone would label something as 'unlicensed ' if it was in .MP3 format for example ; there would be no difference between a licensed .MP3 and an unlicensed copy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everyone seems to be presuming that his phone is at fault, but there are 2 parts to this equation, the phone and the music file.Did your friend happen to encode his music in some god awful file format, that has DRM built in?I can't imagine how a phone would label something as 'unlicensed' if it was in .MP3 format for example; there would be no difference between a licensed .MP3 and an unlicensed copy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241072</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244088</id>
	<title>Re:Six months from now</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259319660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The chances are the DPI won't cost that much as the hardware is already mandated for RIPA compliance and this will likely just be a software load on top of that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The chances are the DPI wo n't cost that much as the hardware is already mandated for RIPA compliance and this will likely just be a software load on top of that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The chances are the DPI won't cost that much as the hardware is already mandated for RIPA compliance and this will likely just be a software load on top of that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241152</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244632</id>
	<title>To trial?</title>
	<author>Porchroof</author>
	<datestamp>1259328660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To trial? To trial?</p><p>What's wrong with "to try"?</p><p>God, what is happening to our language?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To trial ?
To trial ? What 's wrong with " to try " ? God , what is happening to our language ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To trial?
To trial?What's wrong with "to try"?God, what is happening to our language?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241110</id>
	<title>Re:How do they know?</title>
	<author>Ethanol-fueled</author>
	<datestamp>1259241840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>The more false-positives they measure, the more they can make the case for increasingly intrusive DPI which will inevitably include personally identifying users and meddling with their traffic if not disconnecting them. <br> <br>

It's nice to see the military industrial complex involved in the music industry's problem.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The more false-positives they measure , the more they can make the case for increasingly intrusive DPI which will inevitably include personally identifying users and meddling with their traffic if not disconnecting them .
It 's nice to see the military industrial complex involved in the music industry 's problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The more false-positives they measure, the more they can make the case for increasingly intrusive DPI which will inevitably include personally identifying users and meddling with their traffic if not disconnecting them.
It's nice to see the military industrial complex involved in the music industry's problem.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241072</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241472</id>
	<title>Encrypt</title>
	<author>some\_guy\_88</author>
	<datestamp>1259245200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everything.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everything.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244210</id>
	<title>Typo:   its Detica not Deltica</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259321940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>see www.detica.com/ for more info</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>see www.detica.com/ for more info</tokentext>
<sentencetext>see www.detica.com/ for more info</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241182</id>
	<title>Re:How do they know?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259242500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Only the RIAA is allowed to distribute music there will be no other source or at least that is looking like their plan.</p><p>I suggest a boycott during the 3rd Quarter: April 1, 2010- June 30, 2010, and 4th Quarter: July 1, 2010 - September 30, 2010<br>Someone could set up a nice website, people could vote on a list of demands/consumer rights, and people could start an email/facebook campaign.  A dent in the industries profits might get these people's attention.</p><p>I for one think the Public Domain needs to be given back the original copyright was 14 years with a one time extension.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Only the RIAA is allowed to distribute music there will be no other source or at least that is looking like their plan.I suggest a boycott during the 3rd Quarter : April 1 , 2010- June 30 , 2010 , and 4th Quarter : July 1 , 2010 - September 30 , 2010Someone could set up a nice website , people could vote on a list of demands/consumer rights , and people could start an email/facebook campaign .
A dent in the industries profits might get these people 's attention.I for one think the Public Domain needs to be given back the original copyright was 14 years with a one time extension .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only the RIAA is allowed to distribute music there will be no other source or at least that is looking like their plan.I suggest a boycott during the 3rd Quarter: April 1, 2010- June 30, 2010, and 4th Quarter: July 1, 2010 - September 30, 2010Someone could set up a nice website, people could vote on a list of demands/consumer rights, and people could start an email/facebook campaign.
A dent in the industries profits might get these people's attention.I for one think the Public Domain needs to be given back the original copyright was 14 years with a one time extension.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241072</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241836</id>
	<title>Re:How do they know?</title>
	<author>Dr. Evil</author>
	<datestamp>1259248680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't worry.  It'll all be throttled soon.  I predict that anyone who wants to produce content will need a special business line.

</p><p>To use VoIP, that'll be throttled, as will non-branded chat apps.  Anything that will allow a telco-style grab for features.  The most expensive will be the one which permits encryption for working from home... unless you're a big company who can afford a mutual kickback relationship with the telco.

</p><p>The days of the free Internet are coming to an end.  It'll be as dead as devoid of creative talent as radio and television soon.  Because, well, we have to protect the artist.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't worry .
It 'll all be throttled soon .
I predict that anyone who wants to produce content will need a special business line .
To use VoIP , that 'll be throttled , as will non-branded chat apps .
Anything that will allow a telco-style grab for features .
The most expensive will be the one which permits encryption for working from home... unless you 're a big company who can afford a mutual kickback relationship with the telco .
The days of the free Internet are coming to an end .
It 'll be as dead as devoid of creative talent as radio and television soon .
Because , well , we have to protect the artist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't worry.
It'll all be throttled soon.
I predict that anyone who wants to produce content will need a special business line.
To use VoIP, that'll be throttled, as will non-branded chat apps.
Anything that will allow a telco-style grab for features.
The most expensive will be the one which permits encryption for working from home... unless you're a big company who can afford a mutual kickback relationship with the telco.
The days of the free Internet are coming to an end.
It'll be as dead as devoid of creative talent as radio and television soon.
Because, well, we have to protect the artist.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241072</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30242092</id>
	<title>That'll violate their immunity</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259251620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The inability to inspect cargo is the principle behind common carrier status. If they can inspect their traffic for copyright infringement then they can police their traffic for everything else.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The inability to inspect cargo is the principle behind common carrier status .
If they can inspect their traffic for copyright infringement then they can police their traffic for everything else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The inability to inspect cargo is the principle behind common carrier status.
If they can inspect their traffic for copyright infringement then they can police their traffic for everything else.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244014</id>
	<title>Re:Encrypt</title>
	<author>ObsessiveMathsFreak</author>
	<datestamp>1259318760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How?</p><p>Not many programs support encryption of any kind. PGP requires setup that most email clients simply do not support. Thanks to Mozilla's self signed certs policy, we are farther away from encrypted web surfing than we have been at any time. The currently most accessible form of file encryption for most is to use password protected zip or rar files. All chat clients operate in plain text mode by default. The most common form of actually useful encryption most people use is that on bittorrent clients, and that is putting a strain on on the Tor network that cannot be sustained.</p><p>The internet is wide open; the geeks have failed. Where are the encryption add ons for apache? Why don't thunderbird clients <b>try</b> to use PGP by default? Where is distributed and secure DNS? Why has bittorrent still not been decentralized from trackers?</p><p>Geeks have failed users. People should be enjoying a freer net. Instead, we've thrown them to the wolves while we spend our time editing Wikipedia, writing aps for Google APIs, and playing World of Warcraft. The disruptive encryption technologies that should have arrived by now are conpicuously absent.  These technologies need to be developed and need to be present <b>by default</b> on most FOSS software. Anything less simply perpetuates the status quo.</p><p>The status quo is that everything you do online is recorded, archived and owned in full by your ISP, Google, marketers, and whichever governments pay enough to intercept the traffic. The status quo is that the Great Firewall of China has succeeded in censoring the internet where so many scoffed that it would fail; and now the technologies behind it are being brought to bear on the countries and societies that developed them. I suppose it's poetic justice in that sense. We spent our time developing technologies that restrict freedom instead of promoting it; small wonder we should see the weapons we created turned against us.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How ? Not many programs support encryption of any kind .
PGP requires setup that most email clients simply do not support .
Thanks to Mozilla 's self signed certs policy , we are farther away from encrypted web surfing than we have been at any time .
The currently most accessible form of file encryption for most is to use password protected zip or rar files .
All chat clients operate in plain text mode by default .
The most common form of actually useful encryption most people use is that on bittorrent clients , and that is putting a strain on on the Tor network that can not be sustained.The internet is wide open ; the geeks have failed .
Where are the encryption add ons for apache ?
Why do n't thunderbird clients try to use PGP by default ?
Where is distributed and secure DNS ?
Why has bittorrent still not been decentralized from trackers ? Geeks have failed users .
People should be enjoying a freer net .
Instead , we 've thrown them to the wolves while we spend our time editing Wikipedia , writing aps for Google APIs , and playing World of Warcraft .
The disruptive encryption technologies that should have arrived by now are conpicuously absent .
These technologies need to be developed and need to be present by default on most FOSS software .
Anything less simply perpetuates the status quo.The status quo is that everything you do online is recorded , archived and owned in full by your ISP , Google , marketers , and whichever governments pay enough to intercept the traffic .
The status quo is that the Great Firewall of China has succeeded in censoring the internet where so many scoffed that it would fail ; and now the technologies behind it are being brought to bear on the countries and societies that developed them .
I suppose it 's poetic justice in that sense .
We spent our time developing technologies that restrict freedom instead of promoting it ; small wonder we should see the weapons we created turned against us .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How?Not many programs support encryption of any kind.
PGP requires setup that most email clients simply do not support.
Thanks to Mozilla's self signed certs policy, we are farther away from encrypted web surfing than we have been at any time.
The currently most accessible form of file encryption for most is to use password protected zip or rar files.
All chat clients operate in plain text mode by default.
The most common form of actually useful encryption most people use is that on bittorrent clients, and that is putting a strain on on the Tor network that cannot be sustained.The internet is wide open; the geeks have failed.
Where are the encryption add ons for apache?
Why don't thunderbird clients try to use PGP by default?
Where is distributed and secure DNS?
Why has bittorrent still not been decentralized from trackers?Geeks have failed users.
People should be enjoying a freer net.
Instead, we've thrown them to the wolves while we spend our time editing Wikipedia, writing aps for Google APIs, and playing World of Warcraft.
The disruptive encryption technologies that should have arrived by now are conpicuously absent.
These technologies need to be developed and need to be present by default on most FOSS software.
Anything less simply perpetuates the status quo.The status quo is that everything you do online is recorded, archived and owned in full by your ISP, Google, marketers, and whichever governments pay enough to intercept the traffic.
The status quo is that the Great Firewall of China has succeeded in censoring the internet where so many scoffed that it would fail; and now the technologies behind it are being brought to bear on the countries and societies that developed them.
I suppose it's poetic justice in that sense.
We spent our time developing technologies that restrict freedom instead of promoting it; small wonder we should see the weapons we created turned against us.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241472</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30242236</id>
	<title>Re:What sort of overhead would be need to encrypt</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259253480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>openssl speed aes-128-cbc aes-256-cbc</p><p>type             16 bytes     64 bytes    256 bytes   1024 bytes   8192 bytes<br>aes-128 cbc      93137.34k   124663.87k   140590.61k   144921.90k   145808.33k<br>aes-256 cbc      60556.97k    91740.58k   103621.96k   107994.02k   108521.49k</p><p>Those benchmarks are on a 3 year old CPU (single core only). Hence encryption is not a limiting factor for end users - instead, network bandwidth is the limiting factor. I'd argue that encryption isn't a limiting factor for mass data surveillance either. In public anonymous networks without any sort of trust between users, encryption is not overly beneficial.</p><p>Some reasoning why:</p><p>1) You can rotate your taps between your customers so that they may only be monitored twice a year for a day at a time. You're still going to catch MANY people this way. And for the stated purpose of this system they're installing, they're apparently only after statistics (I doubt anyone is stupid enough to believe this though). For statistical (and scare tactic) purposes, taking small samples from different customers at different times is just as effective as maintaining a 24/7 tap on everyone's connection.</p><p>2) The eavesdropper can bulk purchase cheap dedicated ASIC chips that are optimised for decryption of encrypted file sharing traffic. End users have to put up with CPUs that are designed for other purposes and thus they have to spend more per encrypted byte than the eavesdroppers do per decrypted byte.</p><p>3) Imagine an eavesdropper that plants 1000's of fake monitoring peers onto the network. These peers would be indistinguishable to you from other legitimate anonymous peers on the other side of the world. These fake monitoring peers would behave exactly like any other legitimate peer would, except that they make a record of who is downloading files.</p><p>No matter what technical solution you use (such as encryption), at the end of the day you're still communicating and sharing with random anonymous people on the internet. You haven't established any sort of trust with them. Without trust, that other party in your communication could just as likely be a fake monitoring peer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>openssl speed aes-128-cbc aes-256-cbctype 16 bytes 64 bytes 256 bytes 1024 bytes 8192 bytesaes-128 cbc 93137.34k 124663.87k 140590.61k 144921.90k 145808.33kaes-256 cbc 60556.97k 91740.58k 103621.96k 107994.02k 108521.49kThose benchmarks are on a 3 year old CPU ( single core only ) .
Hence encryption is not a limiting factor for end users - instead , network bandwidth is the limiting factor .
I 'd argue that encryption is n't a limiting factor for mass data surveillance either .
In public anonymous networks without any sort of trust between users , encryption is not overly beneficial.Some reasoning why : 1 ) You can rotate your taps between your customers so that they may only be monitored twice a year for a day at a time .
You 're still going to catch MANY people this way .
And for the stated purpose of this system they 're installing , they 're apparently only after statistics ( I doubt anyone is stupid enough to believe this though ) .
For statistical ( and scare tactic ) purposes , taking small samples from different customers at different times is just as effective as maintaining a 24/7 tap on everyone 's connection.2 ) The eavesdropper can bulk purchase cheap dedicated ASIC chips that are optimised for decryption of encrypted file sharing traffic .
End users have to put up with CPUs that are designed for other purposes and thus they have to spend more per encrypted byte than the eavesdroppers do per decrypted byte.3 ) Imagine an eavesdropper that plants 1000 's of fake monitoring peers onto the network .
These peers would be indistinguishable to you from other legitimate anonymous peers on the other side of the world .
These fake monitoring peers would behave exactly like any other legitimate peer would , except that they make a record of who is downloading files.No matter what technical solution you use ( such as encryption ) , at the end of the day you 're still communicating and sharing with random anonymous people on the internet .
You have n't established any sort of trust with them .
Without trust , that other party in your communication could just as likely be a fake monitoring peer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>openssl speed aes-128-cbc aes-256-cbctype             16 bytes     64 bytes    256 bytes   1024 bytes   8192 bytesaes-128 cbc      93137.34k   124663.87k   140590.61k   144921.90k   145808.33kaes-256 cbc      60556.97k    91740.58k   103621.96k   107994.02k   108521.49kThose benchmarks are on a 3 year old CPU (single core only).
Hence encryption is not a limiting factor for end users - instead, network bandwidth is the limiting factor.
I'd argue that encryption isn't a limiting factor for mass data surveillance either.
In public anonymous networks without any sort of trust between users, encryption is not overly beneficial.Some reasoning why:1) You can rotate your taps between your customers so that they may only be monitored twice a year for a day at a time.
You're still going to catch MANY people this way.
And for the stated purpose of this system they're installing, they're apparently only after statistics (I doubt anyone is stupid enough to believe this though).
For statistical (and scare tactic) purposes, taking small samples from different customers at different times is just as effective as maintaining a 24/7 tap on everyone's connection.2) The eavesdropper can bulk purchase cheap dedicated ASIC chips that are optimised for decryption of encrypted file sharing traffic.
End users have to put up with CPUs that are designed for other purposes and thus they have to spend more per encrypted byte than the eavesdroppers do per decrypted byte.3) Imagine an eavesdropper that plants 1000's of fake monitoring peers onto the network.
These peers would be indistinguishable to you from other legitimate anonymous peers on the other side of the world.
These fake monitoring peers would behave exactly like any other legitimate peer would, except that they make a record of who is downloading files.No matter what technical solution you use (such as encryption), at the end of the day you're still communicating and sharing with random anonymous people on the internet.
You haven't established any sort of trust with them.
Without trust, that other party in your communication could just as likely be a fake monitoring peer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241922</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241066</id>
	<title>Virgin media?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259241540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Deep packet inspection? All sounds like a porn operation to me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Deep packet inspection ?
All sounds like a porn operation to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Deep packet inspection?
All sounds like a porn operation to me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30246484</id>
	<title>DIY MUSIC COPYRIGHT</title>
	<author>oxanag</author>
	<datestamp>1259344080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The world of music copyright is evolving. Monopolies of collecting societies are under pressure. Songwriters complain about a lack of benefit, music users about non-transparent and high tariffs. Collecting societies are old-fashioned. Now is the time for online DIY copyright management.

VillaMusicRights is a website in English, Spanish and Dutch, and plays a role as a facilitator in the contacts between songwriters and users of their music. This means you can upload your music and arrange your rights. The music will be stored in a database and users can download it.
Downloads for home users are free, but business users have to pay a modest amount of money. Both songwriters and users have to register. Songwriters have to declare to own the rights to the music and users have to declare that they won&rsquo;t use the music for other purposes than agreed.
VillaMusicRights takes care of payments between songwriters and business users and receives a commission in remuneration of the cost of display, advice and transactions.

A lot of music genres already are represented in the database, from rock to reggae and from blues to easy listening.

Website: <a href="http://www.villamusicrights.com/" title="villamusicrights.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.villamusicrights.com/</a> [villamusicrights.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>The world of music copyright is evolving .
Monopolies of collecting societies are under pressure .
Songwriters complain about a lack of benefit , music users about non-transparent and high tariffs .
Collecting societies are old-fashioned .
Now is the time for online DIY copyright management .
VillaMusicRights is a website in English , Spanish and Dutch , and plays a role as a facilitator in the contacts between songwriters and users of their music .
This means you can upload your music and arrange your rights .
The music will be stored in a database and users can download it .
Downloads for home users are free , but business users have to pay a modest amount of money .
Both songwriters and users have to register .
Songwriters have to declare to own the rights to the music and users have to declare that they won    t use the music for other purposes than agreed .
VillaMusicRights takes care of payments between songwriters and business users and receives a commission in remuneration of the cost of display , advice and transactions .
A lot of music genres already are represented in the database , from rock to reggae and from blues to easy listening .
Website : http : //www.villamusicrights.com/ [ villamusicrights.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The world of music copyright is evolving.
Monopolies of collecting societies are under pressure.
Songwriters complain about a lack of benefit, music users about non-transparent and high tariffs.
Collecting societies are old-fashioned.
Now is the time for online DIY copyright management.
VillaMusicRights is a website in English, Spanish and Dutch, and plays a role as a facilitator in the contacts between songwriters and users of their music.
This means you can upload your music and arrange your rights.
The music will be stored in a database and users can download it.
Downloads for home users are free, but business users have to pay a modest amount of money.
Both songwriters and users have to register.
Songwriters have to declare to own the rights to the music and users have to declare that they won’t use the music for other purposes than agreed.
VillaMusicRights takes care of payments between songwriters and business users and receives a commission in remuneration of the cost of display, advice and transactions.
A lot of music genres already are represented in the database, from rock to reggae and from blues to easy listening.
Website: http://www.villamusicrights.com/ [villamusicrights.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241922</id>
	<title>What sort of overhead would be need to encrypt BT?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259249400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For torrents, encrypting them to block this sort of thing would appear to be straightforward.  Just include the encryption key in the *.torrent file itself.  Make it a nice long randomly generated key using lots of bits with whatever freely available encryption algorithm is thought to be the most secure.</p><p>What sort of CPU overhead is needed for this kind of encryption processing, though?  Would it add up to anything significant on modern 1 GHZ+ multicore CPUs at the current data rates?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For torrents , encrypting them to block this sort of thing would appear to be straightforward .
Just include the encryption key in the * .torrent file itself .
Make it a nice long randomly generated key using lots of bits with whatever freely available encryption algorithm is thought to be the most secure.What sort of CPU overhead is needed for this kind of encryption processing , though ?
Would it add up to anything significant on modern 1 GHZ + multicore CPUs at the current data rates ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For torrents, encrypting them to block this sort of thing would appear to be straightforward.
Just include the encryption key in the *.torrent file itself.
Make it a nice long randomly generated key using lots of bits with whatever freely available encryption algorithm is thought to be the most secure.What sort of CPU overhead is needed for this kind of encryption processing, though?
Would it add up to anything significant on modern 1 GHZ+ multicore CPUs at the current data rates?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243042</id>
	<title>Re:More details here:</title>
	<author>martin-boundary</author>
	<datestamp>1259263080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Excellent! I presume that Virgin Media have also built the infrastructure
to comply with EU/UK privacy regulations?
<p>
Such as, e.g., a facility to allow *every* broadband customer to be informed of and if they so choose to view *all* the information being gathered about themselves, and allow *any* of this data to be edited for accuracy by the customer, and allow *all* of this data to be deleted from *all* their servers if the customer decides to end the contract with Virgin at any time, etc.
</p><p>
Moreover, I presume that Virgin Media have ensured that the nature of
the data they do collect is technically necessary for the provision of
their ISP service to each customer, and not simply a gratuitous and
illegal collection of data that is requested for a completely independent
purpose set out in a completely different contract with another
entity, and to which the customer himself is not actually a party.
</p><p>
These are bad economic times, and it would be a pity if some idle British lawyer were to look a little too closely at this announcement...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Excellent !
I presume that Virgin Media have also built the infrastructure to comply with EU/UK privacy regulations ?
Such as , e.g. , a facility to allow * every * broadband customer to be informed of and if they so choose to view * all * the information being gathered about themselves , and allow * any * of this data to be edited for accuracy by the customer , and allow * all * of this data to be deleted from * all * their servers if the customer decides to end the contract with Virgin at any time , etc .
Moreover , I presume that Virgin Media have ensured that the nature of the data they do collect is technically necessary for the provision of their ISP service to each customer , and not simply a gratuitous and illegal collection of data that is requested for a completely independent purpose set out in a completely different contract with another entity , and to which the customer himself is not actually a party .
These are bad economic times , and it would be a pity if some idle British lawyer were to look a little too closely at this announcement.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Excellent!
I presume that Virgin Media have also built the infrastructure
to comply with EU/UK privacy regulations?
Such as, e.g., a facility to allow *every* broadband customer to be informed of and if they so choose to view *all* the information being gathered about themselves, and allow *any* of this data to be edited for accuracy by the customer, and allow *all* of this data to be deleted from *all* their servers if the customer decides to end the contract with Virgin at any time, etc.
Moreover, I presume that Virgin Media have ensured that the nature of
the data they do collect is technically necessary for the provision of
their ISP service to each customer, and not simply a gratuitous and
illegal collection of data that is requested for a completely independent
purpose set out in a completely different contract with another
entity, and to which the customer himself is not actually a party.
These are bad economic times, and it would be a pity if some idle British lawyer were to look a little too closely at this announcement...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241154</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243178</id>
	<title>Re:Virgin media?</title>
	<author>auric\_dude</author>
	<datestamp>1259265120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not a porn operation but a Phorm operation.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not a porn operation but a Phorm operation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not a porn operation but a Phorm operation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241502</id>
	<title>Re:How do they know?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259245440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well duh, as the article summary says, they're going to ask the music industry<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... therefore, obviously, EVERYTHING that looks like music is copyrighted in their opinion.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well duh , as the article summary says , they 're going to ask the music industry ... therefore , obviously , EVERYTHING that looks like music is copyrighted in their opinion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well duh, as the article summary says, they're going to ask the music industry ... therefore, obviously, EVERYTHING that looks like music is copyrighted in their opinion.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241072</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244012</id>
	<title>Re:Could this cause legal problems for them?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1259318760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Legal! What laws? There is only one rule: The law of power. The law of the jungle. Everything else is only a result of those in power letting you do it.</p><p>Ever heard of &ldquo;double standards&rsquo;?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Legal !
What laws ?
There is only one rule : The law of power .
The law of the jungle .
Everything else is only a result of those in power letting you do it.Ever heard of    double standards    ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Legal!
What laws?
There is only one rule: The law of power.
The law of the jungle.
Everything else is only a result of those in power letting you do it.Ever heard of “double standards’?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241458</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241582</id>
	<title>first\_ post?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259246100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">fear the re4per real problems that BUWLA, or BSD for membership.</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>fear the re4per real problems that BUWLA , or BSD for membership .
[ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>fear the re4per real problems that BUWLA, or BSD for membership.
[goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244866</id>
	<title>Re:How do you suggest we do this?</title>
	<author>Toy G</author>
	<datestamp>1259331960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is an evolutionary process. Browsers and http servers didn't all support HTTPS from the very beginning, but serious ones gradually accepted it as a critical part of the web infrastructure, and now you wouldn't dream to do ecommerce on HTTP.<br>The same is slowly happening for other applications where secrecy and data integrity increasingly get to be seen as essential. Pretty much all serious torrent clients already support encryption, but they haven't switched off "legacy" support in their default configurations yet. It will take for a "big country" (like France or the UK) to start seriously enforcing laws through DPI for plaintext-mode to be disabled by default. Then they will start doing the "mediasentry thing", impersonating peers etc etc, which is where webs of trust will come into play. Until someone will come up with a better business model for producing and distributing entertainment, making loads of bucks and showing the old cartels as irrelevant.</p><p>We predicted all this a decade ago, and it's happening exactly as we thought it would: centralized nets -&gt; decentralized nets -&gt; decentralized and encrypted nets -&gt; decentralized, encrypted and trusted nets. Cat&amp;mouse will continue. It will take another decade or so to get rid of this particularly evil sort of candlemakers we now call "the entertainment industry", because they wasted the current one on doomed strategies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is an evolutionary process .
Browsers and http servers did n't all support HTTPS from the very beginning , but serious ones gradually accepted it as a critical part of the web infrastructure , and now you would n't dream to do ecommerce on HTTP.The same is slowly happening for other applications where secrecy and data integrity increasingly get to be seen as essential .
Pretty much all serious torrent clients already support encryption , but they have n't switched off " legacy " support in their default configurations yet .
It will take for a " big country " ( like France or the UK ) to start seriously enforcing laws through DPI for plaintext-mode to be disabled by default .
Then they will start doing the " mediasentry thing " , impersonating peers etc etc , which is where webs of trust will come into play .
Until someone will come up with a better business model for producing and distributing entertainment , making loads of bucks and showing the old cartels as irrelevant.We predicted all this a decade ago , and it 's happening exactly as we thought it would : centralized nets - &gt; decentralized nets - &gt; decentralized and encrypted nets - &gt; decentralized , encrypted and trusted nets .
Cat&amp;mouse will continue .
It will take another decade or so to get rid of this particularly evil sort of candlemakers we now call " the entertainment industry " , because they wasted the current one on doomed strategies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is an evolutionary process.
Browsers and http servers didn't all support HTTPS from the very beginning, but serious ones gradually accepted it as a critical part of the web infrastructure, and now you wouldn't dream to do ecommerce on HTTP.The same is slowly happening for other applications where secrecy and data integrity increasingly get to be seen as essential.
Pretty much all serious torrent clients already support encryption, but they haven't switched off "legacy" support in their default configurations yet.
It will take for a "big country" (like France or the UK) to start seriously enforcing laws through DPI for plaintext-mode to be disabled by default.
Then they will start doing the "mediasentry thing", impersonating peers etc etc, which is where webs of trust will come into play.
Until someone will come up with a better business model for producing and distributing entertainment, making loads of bucks and showing the old cartels as irrelevant.We predicted all this a decade ago, and it's happening exactly as we thought it would: centralized nets -&gt; decentralized nets -&gt; decentralized and encrypted nets -&gt; decentralized, encrypted and trusted nets.
Cat&amp;mouse will continue.
It will take another decade or so to get rid of this particularly evil sort of candlemakers we now call "the entertainment industry", because they wasted the current one on doomed strategies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243926</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243980</id>
	<title>Re:How do they know?</title>
	<author>L4t3r4lu5</author>
	<datestamp>1259318400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Has he cancelled the contract, sent the phone back, and moved to another company? Sounds like there's a serious issue with that telephone, and it's unfit for purpose.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Has he cancelled the contract , sent the phone back , and moved to another company ?
Sounds like there 's a serious issue with that telephone , and it 's unfit for purpose .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Has he cancelled the contract, sent the phone back, and moved to another company?
Sounds like there's a serious issue with that telephone, and it's unfit for purpose.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241072</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243566</id>
	<title>Re:Six months from now</title>
	<author>jimicus</author>
	<datestamp>1259313420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Virgin are in a strong position in the UK and they know it.</p><p>Firstly, ADSL 2 has yet to see widespread rollout.  If you're in a cabled area, they hold a nationwide monopoly over that cable and it's far and away the fastest option for Internet access.</p><p>Secondly, every time something like this is announced virtually every other ISP is not far behind.  It's unlikely - nay, unthinkable - that the company flogging this to Virgin isn't trying to flog it to every other ISP and with the government seriously advocating a "three strikes and you're out" rule, I can see such a product being quite attractive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Virgin are in a strong position in the UK and they know it.Firstly , ADSL 2 has yet to see widespread rollout .
If you 're in a cabled area , they hold a nationwide monopoly over that cable and it 's far and away the fastest option for Internet access.Secondly , every time something like this is announced virtually every other ISP is not far behind .
It 's unlikely - nay , unthinkable - that the company flogging this to Virgin is n't trying to flog it to every other ISP and with the government seriously advocating a " three strikes and you 're out " rule , I can see such a product being quite attractive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Virgin are in a strong position in the UK and they know it.Firstly, ADSL 2 has yet to see widespread rollout.
If you're in a cabled area, they hold a nationwide monopoly over that cable and it's far and away the fastest option for Internet access.Secondly, every time something like this is announced virtually every other ISP is not far behind.
It's unlikely - nay, unthinkable - that the company flogging this to Virgin isn't trying to flog it to every other ISP and with the government seriously advocating a "three strikes and you're out" rule, I can see such a product being quite attractive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241152</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30247304</id>
	<title>Re:How do they know?</title>
	<author>mpe</author>
	<datestamp>1259349600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Only the RIAA is allowed to distribute music there will be no other source or at least that is looking like their plan.</i> <br> <br>This has been an obvious conclusion for quite some time.<br> <br> <i>I suggest a boycott during the 3rd Quarter: April 1, 2010- June 30, 2010, and 4th Quarter: July 1, 2010 - September 30, 2010</i> <br> <br>At best this would do nothing, at worst it would give them "proof" that piracy was a serious issue.<br> <br> <i>I for one think the Public Domain needs to be given back the original copyright was 14 years with a one time extension.</i> <br> <br>If anything copyright terms should be <b>shorter</b> than they were in the 18th century, which was pre mass telecommunications and vehicles capable of speeds far in excess of any living creature.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Only the RIAA is allowed to distribute music there will be no other source or at least that is looking like their plan .
This has been an obvious conclusion for quite some time .
I suggest a boycott during the 3rd Quarter : April 1 , 2010- June 30 , 2010 , and 4th Quarter : July 1 , 2010 - September 30 , 2010 At best this would do nothing , at worst it would give them " proof " that piracy was a serious issue .
I for one think the Public Domain needs to be given back the original copyright was 14 years with a one time extension .
If anything copyright terms should be shorter than they were in the 18th century , which was pre mass telecommunications and vehicles capable of speeds far in excess of any living creature .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only the RIAA is allowed to distribute music there will be no other source or at least that is looking like their plan.
This has been an obvious conclusion for quite some time.
I suggest a boycott during the 3rd Quarter: April 1, 2010- June 30, 2010, and 4th Quarter: July 1, 2010 - September 30, 2010  At best this would do nothing, at worst it would give them "proof" that piracy was a serious issue.
I for one think the Public Domain needs to be given back the original copyright was 14 years with a one time extension.
If anything copyright terms should be shorter than they were in the 18th century, which was pre mass telecommunications and vehicles capable of speeds far in excess of any living creature.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241182</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241154</id>
	<title>More details here:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259242200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Virgin Media executive director of broadband, Jon James, told ZDNet UK on Thursday that the trial will go live "within days". He added that the use of such traffic-monitoring technology was part of its distribution deal with media company Universal."

<a href="http://news.zdnet.co.uk/security/0,1000000189,39906062,00.htm" title="zdnet.co.uk" rel="nofollow">http://news.zdnet.co.uk/security/0,1000000189,39906062,00.htm</a> [zdnet.co.uk]</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Virgin Media executive director of broadband , Jon James , told ZDNet UK on Thursday that the trial will go live " within days " .
He added that the use of such traffic-monitoring technology was part of its distribution deal with media company Universal .
" http : //news.zdnet.co.uk/security/0,1000000189,39906062,00.htm [ zdnet.co.uk ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Virgin Media executive director of broadband, Jon James, told ZDNet UK on Thursday that the trial will go live "within days".
He added that the use of such traffic-monitoring technology was part of its distribution deal with media company Universal.
"

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/security/0,1000000189,39906062,00.htm [zdnet.co.uk]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30245332</id>
	<title>Re:Six months from now</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1259336520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That would be the bandwidth hogs who are paying the highest rates for the fastest connection?</p><p>And if Virgin Media are implementing this invasive system because their business model is so broken that they can't provide the service that people are paying them for, I think that says all we need to know.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That would be the bandwidth hogs who are paying the highest rates for the fastest connection ? And if Virgin Media are implementing this invasive system because their business model is so broken that they ca n't provide the service that people are paying them for , I think that says all we need to know .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That would be the bandwidth hogs who are paying the highest rates for the fastest connection?And if Virgin Media are implementing this invasive system because their business model is so broken that they can't provide the service that people are paying them for, I think that says all we need to know.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241612</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241730</id>
	<title>Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics</title>
	<author>turtleshadow</author>
	<datestamp>1259247540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The  project is solely designed to bolster the corporate/industry agenda.  Their lack of intent to immediately prosecute show their intent is to datamine to build up their overall case.</p><p>Even if it was found that 95\% of the traffic was legitimate they would hold up the 5\% as proof of the devastating loss to their profits and will ask for more severe legislation and fiscal relief in tough economic times.</p><p>Until governments and real people understand the recording industry's practice of not paying the artists in a "normal" arrangement this will continue endlessly.<br>Really would any engineer just hired at YoyoDyne agree to a 5-10 year exclusive contract, the company immediately deduct all profits off his work to pay off his "advance," be willing to pay for all the publicists, agents, middlemen, nepotism in the exec's office, sycophants of their entourage, etc... Have their evaluation based on popularity polls given by radio/tv/internet which sometimes are skewed with payola.</p><p>What is the biggest of the 3 big "sinks" of copyrighted data in the internets - Pirated Binaries, p0rn, or music and associated videos?<br>We only hear 2 out of three industries most of the time never all three united before the Govenment.</p><p>I feel for Prince (whatever his name is now) as he is both artist and producer personally defending his copyrights but most of it is by nameless lawyers on behalf of their clients.<br>I'd take a few big names to give up a few hours to film some adverts just saying - when you DL my album I thank you, When you pay for that DL I will eventually get paid by the record company so I can pay all the people in the band and that support us in making music (soundstudio, roadies, catering, babysitting, mistress (ahem)...) I encourage you to pay for it and tell your friends to please pay for it else I can not produce more because Im a indentured to the music industry.</p><p>For the music industry I meh at their pathetic grasp for money, for the p0rn producers and "artists" I laugh because they can not even do the same thing and are being "driven out of business" will all their copyrighted stuff being the flotsam in the internets.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The project is solely designed to bolster the corporate/industry agenda .
Their lack of intent to immediately prosecute show their intent is to datamine to build up their overall case.Even if it was found that 95 \ % of the traffic was legitimate they would hold up the 5 \ % as proof of the devastating loss to their profits and will ask for more severe legislation and fiscal relief in tough economic times.Until governments and real people understand the recording industry 's practice of not paying the artists in a " normal " arrangement this will continue endlessly.Really would any engineer just hired at YoyoDyne agree to a 5-10 year exclusive contract , the company immediately deduct all profits off his work to pay off his " advance , " be willing to pay for all the publicists , agents , middlemen , nepotism in the exec 's office , sycophants of their entourage , etc... Have their evaluation based on popularity polls given by radio/tv/internet which sometimes are skewed with payola.What is the biggest of the 3 big " sinks " of copyrighted data in the internets - Pirated Binaries , p0rn , or music and associated videos ? We only hear 2 out of three industries most of the time never all three united before the Govenment.I feel for Prince ( whatever his name is now ) as he is both artist and producer personally defending his copyrights but most of it is by nameless lawyers on behalf of their clients.I 'd take a few big names to give up a few hours to film some adverts just saying - when you DL my album I thank you , When you pay for that DL I will eventually get paid by the record company so I can pay all the people in the band and that support us in making music ( soundstudio , roadies , catering , babysitting , mistress ( ahem ) ... ) I encourage you to pay for it and tell your friends to please pay for it else I can not produce more because Im a indentured to the music industry.For the music industry I meh at their pathetic grasp for money , for the p0rn producers and " artists " I laugh because they can not even do the same thing and are being " driven out of business " will all their copyrighted stuff being the flotsam in the internets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The  project is solely designed to bolster the corporate/industry agenda.
Their lack of intent to immediately prosecute show their intent is to datamine to build up their overall case.Even if it was found that 95\% of the traffic was legitimate they would hold up the 5\% as proof of the devastating loss to their profits and will ask for more severe legislation and fiscal relief in tough economic times.Until governments and real people understand the recording industry's practice of not paying the artists in a "normal" arrangement this will continue endlessly.Really would any engineer just hired at YoyoDyne agree to a 5-10 year exclusive contract, the company immediately deduct all profits off his work to pay off his "advance," be willing to pay for all the publicists, agents, middlemen, nepotism in the exec's office, sycophants of their entourage, etc... Have their evaluation based on popularity polls given by radio/tv/internet which sometimes are skewed with payola.What is the biggest of the 3 big "sinks" of copyrighted data in the internets - Pirated Binaries, p0rn, or music and associated videos?We only hear 2 out of three industries most of the time never all three united before the Govenment.I feel for Prince (whatever his name is now) as he is both artist and producer personally defending his copyrights but most of it is by nameless lawyers on behalf of their clients.I'd take a few big names to give up a few hours to film some adverts just saying - when you DL my album I thank you, When you pay for that DL I will eventually get paid by the record company so I can pay all the people in the band and that support us in making music (soundstudio, roadies, catering, babysitting, mistress (ahem)...) I encourage you to pay for it and tell your friends to please pay for it else I can not produce more because Im a indentured to the music industry.For the music industry I meh at their pathetic grasp for money, for the p0rn producers and "artists" I laugh because they can not even do the same thing and are being "driven out of business" will all their copyrighted stuff being the flotsam in the internets.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30242100</id>
	<title>Packet Inspection</title>
	<author>Rocketship Underpant</author>
	<datestamp>1259251680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not only that, those packets they're "inspecting" could be for anything. If you back up your Mac (including your music collection) to MobileMe, does it flag your file transfers as unauthorized filesharing? What about if you access your files over a VPN? What if you email your favourite music to your Gmail account so you can listen to it from work or on vacation? What if you upload them to your phone to use as a ringtone?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not only that , those packets they 're " inspecting " could be for anything .
If you back up your Mac ( including your music collection ) to MobileMe , does it flag your file transfers as unauthorized filesharing ?
What about if you access your files over a VPN ?
What if you email your favourite music to your Gmail account so you can listen to it from work or on vacation ?
What if you upload them to your phone to use as a ringtone ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not only that, those packets they're "inspecting" could be for anything.
If you back up your Mac (including your music collection) to MobileMe, does it flag your file transfers as unauthorized filesharing?
What about if you access your files over a VPN?
What if you email your favourite music to your Gmail account so you can listen to it from work or on vacation?
What if you upload them to your phone to use as a ringtone?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241072</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244474</id>
	<title>Re:Is any form of trivial encryption sufficient?</title>
	<author>Skapare</author>
	<datestamp>1259325840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Generally speaking, it takes more effort to crack encryption than doing it with the known keys.  How much more depends on the algorithm.  If you do encryption at a level sufficient to just use up a modern CPU (all cores), then it will take a lot more of them to crack it.</p><p>But there catches.  File sharers are not always communicating continuously, but their cracking computers would be available for that purpose all the time.  And they only need to detect if you are doing something suspicious and can batch the cracking until later in many cases.  My summary would be: go ahead and use encryption.  Once a PK exchange is done, the core cipher is not that much.  This stuff is done in integers and GPUs can help speed it up, too.  Would they start buying all that compute power just to do the cracking?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Generally speaking , it takes more effort to crack encryption than doing it with the known keys .
How much more depends on the algorithm .
If you do encryption at a level sufficient to just use up a modern CPU ( all cores ) , then it will take a lot more of them to crack it.But there catches .
File sharers are not always communicating continuously , but their cracking computers would be available for that purpose all the time .
And they only need to detect if you are doing something suspicious and can batch the cracking until later in many cases .
My summary would be : go ahead and use encryption .
Once a PK exchange is done , the core cipher is not that much .
This stuff is done in integers and GPUs can help speed it up , too .
Would they start buying all that compute power just to do the cracking ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Generally speaking, it takes more effort to crack encryption than doing it with the known keys.
How much more depends on the algorithm.
If you do encryption at a level sufficient to just use up a modern CPU (all cores), then it will take a lot more of them to crack it.But there catches.
File sharers are not always communicating continuously, but their cracking computers would be available for that purpose all the time.
And they only need to detect if you are doing something suspicious and can batch the cracking until later in many cases.
My summary would be: go ahead and use encryption.
Once a PK exchange is done, the core cipher is not that much.
This stuff is done in integers and GPUs can help speed it up, too.
Would they start buying all that compute power just to do the cracking?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30242918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243988</id>
	<title>Re:Six months from now</title>
	<author>imakemusic</author>
	<datestamp>1259318460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would wager that's got more to do with their service being crap and getting worse. I recently moved house between two houses with Virgin media broadband. One was 10Mbps the other was 2Mbps. Guess which was quicker.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would wager that 's got more to do with their service being crap and getting worse .
I recently moved house between two houses with Virgin media broadband .
One was 10Mbps the other was 2Mbps .
Guess which was quicker .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would wager that's got more to do with their service being crap and getting worse.
I recently moved house between two houses with Virgin media broadband.
One was 10Mbps the other was 2Mbps.
Guess which was quicker.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241152</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241720</id>
	<title>Awesome !</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259247480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I, for one, welcome our copyright-infringement-detecting overlords.</p><p>Suck it, pirates.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I , for one , welcome our copyright-infringement-detecting overlords.Suck it , pirates .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I, for one, welcome our copyright-infringement-detecting overlords.Suck it, pirates.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241622</id>
	<title>This won't work</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259246460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This won't work, most modern bittorrent clients use encryption by default now anyway.

Shame they don't just save the money and spend it on upgrading their infrastructure instead...</htmltext>
<tokenext>This wo n't work , most modern bittorrent clients use encryption by default now anyway .
Shame they do n't just save the money and spend it on upgrading their infrastructure instead.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This won't work, most modern bittorrent clients use encryption by default now anyway.
Shame they don't just save the money and spend it on upgrading their infrastructure instead...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243770</id>
	<title>Re:I say lets try to confuse them.</title>
	<author>IBBoard</author>
	<datestamp>1259316180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or flood it out - everyone share public domain versions of classical music etc! (Stuff that will be recognised as "a known song that doesn't need a license").</p><p>Either that or everyone should just torrent large amounts Linux ISOs so that the DPI system generally has to monitor loads of stuff anyway before it determines that it isn't relevant.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or flood it out - everyone share public domain versions of classical music etc !
( Stuff that will be recognised as " a known song that does n't need a license " ) .Either that or everyone should just torrent large amounts Linux ISOs so that the DPI system generally has to monitor loads of stuff anyway before it determines that it is n't relevant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or flood it out - everyone share public domain versions of classical music etc!
(Stuff that will be recognised as "a known song that doesn't need a license").Either that or everyone should just torrent large amounts Linux ISOs so that the DPI system generally has to monitor loads of stuff anyway before it determines that it isn't relevant.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241082</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30245158</id>
	<title>Re:Six months from now</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259335020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And where exactly did you get those figures? 90\% of their top customers have cancelled? 82\% of mid and 47\% of low?... I smell BS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And where exactly did you get those figures ?
90 \ % of their top customers have cancelled ?
82 \ % of mid and 47 \ % of low ? .. .
I smell BS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And where exactly did you get those figures?
90\% of their top customers have cancelled?
82\% of mid and 47\% of low?...
I smell BS.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241152</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241822</id>
	<title>Re:Six months from now</title>
	<author>Attaturk</author>
	<datestamp>1259248440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well here's one Virgin cable customer (&pound;30/month) that'll definitely be cancelling next week and specifying the reason for cancelling as deep packet inspection.  Hopefully I won't be the only one with the sense to send that message.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well here 's one Virgin cable customer (   30/month ) that 'll definitely be cancelling next week and specifying the reason for cancelling as deep packet inspection .
Hopefully I wo n't be the only one with the sense to send that message .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well here's one Virgin cable customer (£30/month) that'll definitely be cancelling next week and specifying the reason for cancelling as deep packet inspection.
Hopefully I won't be the only one with the sense to send that message.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241152</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244518</id>
	<title>Re:This won't work</title>
	<author>Xest</author>
	<datestamp>1259326440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is why the whole "Digital Economy Bill" is a complete farce. All measures that would improve connectivity and the digital economy have been removed/indefinitely delayed, whilst the only measures that remain are things like this which require investment in technologies that inevitably have to slow down the network and that sidetrack money away from infrastructure improvements.</p><p>The net effect of the "Digital Economy Bill" is to lessen innovation and worsen the UK's internet infrastructure. The fact this bill goes completely against what is intended demonstrates how hopelessly incompetent government ministers, and the opposition that also support this are.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is why the whole " Digital Economy Bill " is a complete farce .
All measures that would improve connectivity and the digital economy have been removed/indefinitely delayed , whilst the only measures that remain are things like this which require investment in technologies that inevitably have to slow down the network and that sidetrack money away from infrastructure improvements.The net effect of the " Digital Economy Bill " is to lessen innovation and worsen the UK 's internet infrastructure .
The fact this bill goes completely against what is intended demonstrates how hopelessly incompetent government ministers , and the opposition that also support this are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is why the whole "Digital Economy Bill" is a complete farce.
All measures that would improve connectivity and the digital economy have been removed/indefinitely delayed, whilst the only measures that remain are things like this which require investment in technologies that inevitably have to slow down the network and that sidetrack money away from infrastructure improvements.The net effect of the "Digital Economy Bill" is to lessen innovation and worsen the UK's internet infrastructure.
The fact this bill goes completely against what is intended demonstrates how hopelessly incompetent government ministers, and the opposition that also support this are.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241622</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30245962</id>
	<title>Re:More details here:</title>
	<author>AmiMoJo</author>
	<datestamp>1259340360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Data Protection Act does allow you access to this data for a nominal &pound;10 fee. In a month or two I'll be sending them a cheque with a request for all data held about me.</p><p>What is not clear is how this works with anonymous data. It's still my data, even if it can no longer be associated with me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Data Protection Act does allow you access to this data for a nominal   10 fee .
In a month or two I 'll be sending them a cheque with a request for all data held about me.What is not clear is how this works with anonymous data .
It 's still my data , even if it can no longer be associated with me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Data Protection Act does allow you access to this data for a nominal £10 fee.
In a month or two I'll be sending them a cheque with a request for all data held about me.What is not clear is how this works with anonymous data.
It's still my data, even if it can no longer be associated with me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243042</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241128</id>
	<title>encryption</title>
	<author>LividBlivet</author>
	<datestamp>1259242020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>obfuscated connection in 3..2...1</htmltext>
<tokenext>obfuscated connection in 3..2...1</tokentext>
<sentencetext>obfuscated connection in 3..2...1</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241612</id>
	<title>Re:Six months from now</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259246340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh, you mean their biggest bandwidth hogs will be going to other ISPs?  Newsflash: Virgin Media would be cracking open the champange and dancing in the streets if that happened.  And the other ISPs would be falling all over themselves to implement the same DPI system.</p><p>It's funny how little people understand how the Internet works, even on Slashdot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , you mean their biggest bandwidth hogs will be going to other ISPs ?
Newsflash : Virgin Media would be cracking open the champange and dancing in the streets if that happened .
And the other ISPs would be falling all over themselves to implement the same DPI system.It 's funny how little people understand how the Internet works , even on Slashdot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, you mean their biggest bandwidth hogs will be going to other ISPs?
Newsflash: Virgin Media would be cracking open the champange and dancing in the streets if that happened.
And the other ISPs would be falling all over themselves to implement the same DPI system.It's funny how little people understand how the Internet works, even on Slashdot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241152</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241458</id>
	<title>Could this cause legal problems for them?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259245020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ok.  They're monitoring their customers for illegal file sharing, even going so far as to identify whether or not the copied material has been licensed by the copyright holders.  Does this not make them guilty of contributory infringement?  They are providing the networks which allow users to infringe copyright.  They know that infringement is taking place via their deep packets inspection, down to the level of individual acts of infringement.  Then they are destroying data which can identify infringers, but they continue to provide them with networks service.  How is this legal?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok. They 're monitoring their customers for illegal file sharing , even going so far as to identify whether or not the copied material has been licensed by the copyright holders .
Does this not make them guilty of contributory infringement ?
They are providing the networks which allow users to infringe copyright .
They know that infringement is taking place via their deep packets inspection , down to the level of individual acts of infringement .
Then they are destroying data which can identify infringers , but they continue to provide them with networks service .
How is this legal ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok.  They're monitoring their customers for illegal file sharing, even going so far as to identify whether or not the copied material has been licensed by the copyright holders.
Does this not make them guilty of contributory infringement?
They are providing the networks which allow users to infringe copyright.
They know that infringement is taking place via their deep packets inspection, down to the level of individual acts of infringement.
Then they are destroying data which can identify infringers, but they continue to provide them with networks service.
How is this legal?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243944</id>
	<title>Re:How do they know?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1259318160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Simple: Everything that is not encrypted with the RIAA(-equivalent) stamp of DRM control.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Simple : Everything that is not encrypted with the RIAA ( -equivalent ) stamp of DRM control .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Simple: Everything that is not encrypted with the RIAA(-equivalent) stamp of DRM control.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241072</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244974</id>
	<title>Re:Six months from now</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259333220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Other ISPs need to move in and offer a reasonable alternative. I don't know of any other Home Broadband ISPs willing to provide without a BT line in the UK, which makes Virgin the most popular choice for students in the area I live in</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Other ISPs need to move in and offer a reasonable alternative .
I do n't know of any other Home Broadband ISPs willing to provide without a BT line in the UK , which makes Virgin the most popular choice for students in the area I live in</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Other ISPs need to move in and offer a reasonable alternative.
I don't know of any other Home Broadband ISPs willing to provide without a BT line in the UK, which makes Virgin the most popular choice for students in the area I live in</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241152</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244168</id>
	<title>Re:Could this cause legal problems for them?</title>
	<author>Xest</author>
	<datestamp>1259321160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, I think it's actually illegal, but for different reasons. From what I can tell this is exactly why the UK is facing legal procedings from the EU over Phorm.</p><p>It's effectively a breach of the European Declaration of Human Rights which we are signatories to, specifically it is a clear breach of the right to privacy.</p><p>I think realistically this will end up in European courts. It wont end up in British courts or be looked into by the police here because they are merely puppets of the Labour government here which supports this as demonstrated by the new supreme court refusing to hear McKinnon, the refusal of investigations into Phorm even though it was blatantly illegal and so on.</p><p>Nowadays in Britain we have to rely on the European courts for any semblance of justice on these sorts of things, but on the upside they do generally rule in favour of the citizen on things like this where it is a clear breach of law. God knows where we as citizens of Britain would be if it weren't for Europe, I'd imagine it would resemble something like Germany circa 1937. In fact, there's a certain irony in that whole sentence, how times change eh?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , I think it 's actually illegal , but for different reasons .
From what I can tell this is exactly why the UK is facing legal procedings from the EU over Phorm.It 's effectively a breach of the European Declaration of Human Rights which we are signatories to , specifically it is a clear breach of the right to privacy.I think realistically this will end up in European courts .
It wont end up in British courts or be looked into by the police here because they are merely puppets of the Labour government here which supports this as demonstrated by the new supreme court refusing to hear McKinnon , the refusal of investigations into Phorm even though it was blatantly illegal and so on.Nowadays in Britain we have to rely on the European courts for any semblance of justice on these sorts of things , but on the upside they do generally rule in favour of the citizen on things like this where it is a clear breach of law .
God knows where we as citizens of Britain would be if it were n't for Europe , I 'd imagine it would resemble something like Germany circa 1937 .
In fact , there 's a certain irony in that whole sentence , how times change eh ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, I think it's actually illegal, but for different reasons.
From what I can tell this is exactly why the UK is facing legal procedings from the EU over Phorm.It's effectively a breach of the European Declaration of Human Rights which we are signatories to, specifically it is a clear breach of the right to privacy.I think realistically this will end up in European courts.
It wont end up in British courts or be looked into by the police here because they are merely puppets of the Labour government here which supports this as demonstrated by the new supreme court refusing to hear McKinnon, the refusal of investigations into Phorm even though it was blatantly illegal and so on.Nowadays in Britain we have to rely on the European courts for any semblance of justice on these sorts of things, but on the upside they do generally rule in favour of the citizen on things like this where it is a clear breach of law.
God knows where we as citizens of Britain would be if it weren't for Europe, I'd imagine it would resemble something like Germany circa 1937.
In fact, there's a certain irony in that whole sentence, how times change eh?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241458</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30247012</id>
	<title>Re:In Other News...</title>
	<author>jimicus</author>
	<datestamp>1259347680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Great idea - I think we should apply it to MPs as well.  Particularly after the expenses scandal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Great idea - I think we should apply it to MPs as well .
Particularly after the expenses scandal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Great idea - I think we should apply it to MPs as well.
Particularly after the expenses scandal.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30242438</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241152</id>
	<title>Six months from now</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259242140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>27th May 2010</p><p>Just 6 months after the announcement to monitor their network for illegal filesharers, Virgin Media has seen a dramatic decline in subscribers.<br>90\% of their top tier customers (renting 20Mb/sec) have canceled their subscriptions<br>This figure is similar (82\%) for their 10Mb/sec tier</p><p>Furthermore, the cost of the controversial detection methods (Deep Packet Inspection) has meant that the company has had to increase monthly subscription costs across all tiers by 10-20\%<br>This has seen decline (albeit much smaller, at 47\%) in their lowest tier of service</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>27th May 2010Just 6 months after the announcement to monitor their network for illegal filesharers , Virgin Media has seen a dramatic decline in subscribers.90 \ % of their top tier customers ( renting 20Mb/sec ) have canceled their subscriptionsThis figure is similar ( 82 \ % ) for their 10Mb/sec tierFurthermore , the cost of the controversial detection methods ( Deep Packet Inspection ) has meant that the company has had to increase monthly subscription costs across all tiers by 10-20 \ % This has seen decline ( albeit much smaller , at 47 \ % ) in their lowest tier of service</tokentext>
<sentencetext>27th May 2010Just 6 months after the announcement to monitor their network for illegal filesharers, Virgin Media has seen a dramatic decline in subscribers.90\% of their top tier customers (renting 20Mb/sec) have canceled their subscriptionsThis figure is similar (82\%) for their 10Mb/sec tierFurthermore, the cost of the controversial detection methods (Deep Packet Inspection) has meant that the company has had to increase monthly subscription costs across all tiers by 10-20\%This has seen decline (albeit much smaller, at 47\%) in their lowest tier of service</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243620</id>
	<title>Re:What sort of overhead would be need to encrypt</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259314200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, not at all. Encryption can be heavy on an Atom, but fine on most other CPUs.</p><p>At least 60-70\% of torrent traffic is already encrypted, it's on in uTorrent by default, and if you change it to "Forced" and untick accepting legacy connections, it'll always use it. You probably won't notice <i>any</i> noticeable CPU usage; this is 2009, not 1999!</p><p>Torrent's obfuscation scheme uses the RC4 stream cipher, RSA-1024 key exchanges and uses the infohash of the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.torrent to authenticate the key exchange, if I recall. It's there specifically to deter DPI. There are some possible issues: I don't know what the UDP transport uTP uses (if anything), and I don't know how this affects DHT (it probably doesn't, that's probably in the clear). Also, tracker communication <i>can</i> be by https: and this is probably the right way to do it, but with DHT enabled and people moving to UDP trackers or none at all, it's going the other way.</p><p>However, I don't think these boxes are as smart as Sandvine (because they handle much higher volumes). They look at the transfer payloads, and I don't think they look at the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.torrent or tracker communications like Sandvine does.</p><p>Also, they only handle torrent, eDonkey (does this include KAD or not?) and Gnutella (I don't know if this includes G2). I note eMule's KAD traffic is also often encrypted now, and Gnutella (i.e. Bearshare, Limewire) is full of shit anyway.</p><p>Frankly it sounds as though they're being peddled out-of-date, easily-crashable equipment...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , not at all .
Encryption can be heavy on an Atom , but fine on most other CPUs.At least 60-70 \ % of torrent traffic is already encrypted , it 's on in uTorrent by default , and if you change it to " Forced " and untick accepting legacy connections , it 'll always use it .
You probably wo n't notice any noticeable CPU usage ; this is 2009 , not 1999 ! Torrent 's obfuscation scheme uses the RC4 stream cipher , RSA-1024 key exchanges and uses the infohash of the .torrent to authenticate the key exchange , if I recall .
It 's there specifically to deter DPI .
There are some possible issues : I do n't know what the UDP transport uTP uses ( if anything ) , and I do n't know how this affects DHT ( it probably does n't , that 's probably in the clear ) .
Also , tracker communication can be by https : and this is probably the right way to do it , but with DHT enabled and people moving to UDP trackers or none at all , it 's going the other way.However , I do n't think these boxes are as smart as Sandvine ( because they handle much higher volumes ) .
They look at the transfer payloads , and I do n't think they look at the .torrent or tracker communications like Sandvine does.Also , they only handle torrent , eDonkey ( does this include KAD or not ?
) and Gnutella ( I do n't know if this includes G2 ) .
I note eMule 's KAD traffic is also often encrypted now , and Gnutella ( i.e .
Bearshare , Limewire ) is full of shit anyway.Frankly it sounds as though they 're being peddled out-of-date , easily-crashable equipment.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, not at all.
Encryption can be heavy on an Atom, but fine on most other CPUs.At least 60-70\% of torrent traffic is already encrypted, it's on in uTorrent by default, and if you change it to "Forced" and untick accepting legacy connections, it'll always use it.
You probably won't notice any noticeable CPU usage; this is 2009, not 1999!Torrent's obfuscation scheme uses the RC4 stream cipher, RSA-1024 key exchanges and uses the infohash of the .torrent to authenticate the key exchange, if I recall.
It's there specifically to deter DPI.
There are some possible issues: I don't know what the UDP transport uTP uses (if anything), and I don't know how this affects DHT (it probably doesn't, that's probably in the clear).
Also, tracker communication can be by https: and this is probably the right way to do it, but with DHT enabled and people moving to UDP trackers or none at all, it's going the other way.However, I don't think these boxes are as smart as Sandvine (because they handle much higher volumes).
They look at the transfer payloads, and I don't think they look at the .torrent or tracker communications like Sandvine does.Also, they only handle torrent, eDonkey (does this include KAD or not?
) and Gnutella (I don't know if this includes G2).
I note eMule's KAD traffic is also often encrypted now, and Gnutella (i.e.
Bearshare, Limewire) is full of shit anyway.Frankly it sounds as though they're being peddled out-of-date, easily-crashable equipment...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241922</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241430</id>
	<title>there BIG LACK of HD is killing off subscribers as</title>
	<author>Joe The Dragon</author>
	<datestamp>1259244780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>there BIG LACK of HD is killing off subscribers as well and this maybe to topper as people will give faster internet for FULL INTERNET.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>there BIG LACK of HD is killing off subscribers as well and this maybe to topper as people will give faster internet for FULL INTERNET .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>there BIG LACK of HD is killing off subscribers as well and this maybe to topper as people will give faster internet for FULL INTERNET.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241152</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243400</id>
	<title>Re:More details here:</title>
	<author>BiggerIsBetter</author>
	<datestamp>1259354400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So are they an entertainment delivery company or an ISP?  Do you want to buy content or connectivity?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So are they an entertainment delivery company or an ISP ?
Do you want to buy content or connectivity ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So are they an entertainment delivery company or an ISP?
Do you want to buy content or connectivity?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241154</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30242438</id>
	<title>In Other News...</title>
	<author>florescent\_beige</author>
	<datestamp>1259255220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All public and private communications of all executives of companies in the UK valued at 500 million or more will be monitored for illegal, unethical, and undesired behaviour.</p><p>
"If we had only known what certain Wall Street bankers had been up to the world could have avoided financial losses in the trillions. In a world of high speed communication and free flowing capital, the expectations of privacy have to be balanced against the interests of all stakeholders." said noted expert florescent\_beige.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All public and private communications of all executives of companies in the UK valued at 500 million or more will be monitored for illegal , unethical , and undesired behaviour .
" If we had only known what certain Wall Street bankers had been up to the world could have avoided financial losses in the trillions .
In a world of high speed communication and free flowing capital , the expectations of privacy have to be balanced against the interests of all stakeholders .
" said noted expert florescent \ _beige .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All public and private communications of all executives of companies in the UK valued at 500 million or more will be monitored for illegal, unethical, and undesired behaviour.
"If we had only known what certain Wall Street bankers had been up to the world could have avoided financial losses in the trillions.
In a world of high speed communication and free flowing capital, the expectations of privacy have to be balanced against the interests of all stakeholders.
" said noted expert florescent\_beige.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241994</id>
	<title>Implied</title>
	<author>Shadyman</author>
	<datestamp>1259250180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"Virgin Media emphasised that records will not be kept on individual customers and that data on the level of copyright infringement will be aggregated and anonymised."</i> <br> <br>For Now. Later? Who knows.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Virgin Media emphasised that records will not be kept on individual customers and that data on the level of copyright infringement will be aggregated and anonymised .
" For Now .
Later ? Who knows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Virgin Media emphasised that records will not be kept on individual customers and that data on the level of copyright infringement will be aggregated and anonymised.
"  For Now.
Later? Who knows.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30242088</id>
	<title>Re:Encrypt</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259251560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>KS##FGSkl#KL@\%$^2452kjfsDk;12012iflkjds235235asd0-di23j=-=-2ls,.s`1#\%fdkl</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>KS # # FGSkl # KL @ \ % $ ^ 2452kjfsDk ; 12012iflkjds235235asd0-di23j = - = -2ls,.s ` 1 # \ % fdkl</tokentext>
<sentencetext>KS##FGSkl#KL@\%$^2452kjfsDk;12012iflkjds235235asd0-di23j=-=-2ls,.s`1#\%fdkl</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241472</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243776</id>
	<title>Re:Six months from now</title>
	<author>freddej</author>
	<datestamp>1259316360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, I've heard operators think that getting rid of the top tier customers is a good thing, since that means that the other customers would have more bandwidth to play with, and the can postpone investments in network upgrades (and node splits)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , I 've heard operators think that getting rid of the top tier customers is a good thing , since that means that the other customers would have more bandwidth to play with , and the can postpone investments in network upgrades ( and node splits )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, I've heard operators think that getting rid of the top tier customers is a good thing, since that means that the other customers would have more bandwidth to play with, and the can postpone investments in network upgrades (and node splits)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241152</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30242918</id>
	<title>Is any form of trivial encryption sufficient?</title>
	<author>atmurray</author>
	<datestamp>1259261220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The way I see it, the problem with encryption is that it's generally computationally expensive and there are bandwidth overheads in performing strong worthwhile encryption. BUT, with the DMCA and other localised laws forbidding cracking of encryption, is strong encryption needed?

Is it worth just encrypting things using a trivial dictionary or some such computationally trivial and zero bandwidth overhead system?
That way if someone wants to look at the data, they'll need a warrant or else they'd be breaking the law.

Is my thinking here valid?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The way I see it , the problem with encryption is that it 's generally computationally expensive and there are bandwidth overheads in performing strong worthwhile encryption .
BUT , with the DMCA and other localised laws forbidding cracking of encryption , is strong encryption needed ?
Is it worth just encrypting things using a trivial dictionary or some such computationally trivial and zero bandwidth overhead system ?
That way if someone wants to look at the data , they 'll need a warrant or else they 'd be breaking the law .
Is my thinking here valid ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The way I see it, the problem with encryption is that it's generally computationally expensive and there are bandwidth overheads in performing strong worthwhile encryption.
BUT, with the DMCA and other localised laws forbidding cracking of encryption, is strong encryption needed?
Is it worth just encrypting things using a trivial dictionary or some such computationally trivial and zero bandwidth overhead system?
That way if someone wants to look at the data, they'll need a warrant or else they'd be breaking the law.
Is my thinking here valid?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241650</id>
	<title>Well I am leaving.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259246760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's all, no long post about rights,ethics and shitty ISP's. Terminating my line tomorrow, I am done with this stupid company.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's all , no long post about rights,ethics and shitty ISP 's .
Terminating my line tomorrow , I am done with this stupid company .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's all, no long post about rights,ethics and shitty ISP's.
Terminating my line tomorrow, I am done with this stupid company.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243776
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241152
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241072
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244518
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241622
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241502
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241072
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30242132
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241072
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243620
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241922
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244168
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241458
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241694
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241458
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241152
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30242918
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244866
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241472
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244014
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241472
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244974
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241152
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244088
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241152
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241458
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241082
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241072
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30242100
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241072
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244206
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241642
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244142
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241152
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243248
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241472
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243886
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241072
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241650
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30245962
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241154
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30247012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30242438
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241430
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241152
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30242236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241922
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243178
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241066
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241182
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241072
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241152
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241622
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30245332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241612
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241152
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241152
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243566
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241152
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244474
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30242918
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243980
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241072
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30247304
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241182
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241072
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243944
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241072
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241110
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241072
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30245158
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241152
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241102
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241072
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244156
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30242918
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243400
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241154
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30242088
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241472
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30245718
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241072
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_26_236232_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241294
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241072
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_26_236232.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241194
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_26_236232.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30242438
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30247012
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_26_236232.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241458
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241694
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244546
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244012
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244168
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_26_236232.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241152
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244088
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241822
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244142
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243566
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241612
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30245332
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241430
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30245158
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243776
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243988
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243546
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244974
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_26_236232.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241650
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244214
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_26_236232.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30242918
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244156
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243560
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244474
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_26_236232.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241154
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243042
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30245962
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243400
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_26_236232.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241642
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244206
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_26_236232.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30242166
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_26_236232.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244794
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_26_236232.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241922
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30242236
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243620
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_26_236232.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241072
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243886
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241182
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30247304
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241508
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30242132
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244228
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30242100
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241294
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30245718
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241836
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243980
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243944
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241102
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241110
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241502
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_26_236232.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241066
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243178
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_26_236232.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241082
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243770
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_26_236232.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241622
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244518
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243224
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_26_236232.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30241472
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30242088
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244014
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243248
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30243926
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30244866
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_26_236232.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_26_236232.30242092
</commentlist>
</conversation>
