<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_12_2117250</id>
	<title>US and Russia Open Talks On Limits To Cyberwar</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1260635160000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>andy1307 passes on this from the NY Times: <i>"The <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/13/science/13cyber.html?\_r=1&amp;hp">United States has begun talks with Russia</a> and a United Nations arms control committee about strengthening Internet security and limiting military use of cyberspace. American and Russian officials have different interpretations of the talks so far, but the mere fact that the United States is participating represents a significant policy shift after years of rejecting Russia's overtures. Officials familiar with the talks said the Obama administration realized that more nations were developing cyberweapons and that a new approach was needed to blunt an international arms race ... While the Russians have continued to focus on treaties that may restrict weapons development, the United States is hoping to use the talks to increase international cooperation in opposing Internet crime. Strengthening defenses against Internet criminals would also strengthen defenses against any military-directed cyberattacks, the United States maintains."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>andy1307 passes on this from the NY Times : " The United States has begun talks with Russia and a United Nations arms control committee about strengthening Internet security and limiting military use of cyberspace .
American and Russian officials have different interpretations of the talks so far , but the mere fact that the United States is participating represents a significant policy shift after years of rejecting Russia 's overtures .
Officials familiar with the talks said the Obama administration realized that more nations were developing cyberweapons and that a new approach was needed to blunt an international arms race ... While the Russians have continued to focus on treaties that may restrict weapons development , the United States is hoping to use the talks to increase international cooperation in opposing Internet crime .
Strengthening defenses against Internet criminals would also strengthen defenses against any military-directed cyberattacks , the United States maintains .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>andy1307 passes on this from the NY Times: "The United States has begun talks with Russia and a United Nations arms control committee about strengthening Internet security and limiting military use of cyberspace.
American and Russian officials have different interpretations of the talks so far, but the mere fact that the United States is participating represents a significant policy shift after years of rejecting Russia's overtures.
Officials familiar with the talks said the Obama administration realized that more nations were developing cyberweapons and that a new approach was needed to blunt an international arms race ... While the Russians have continued to focus on treaties that may restrict weapons development, the United States is hoping to use the talks to increase international cooperation in opposing Internet crime.
Strengthening defenses against Internet criminals would also strengthen defenses against any military-directed cyberattacks, the United States maintains.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420054</id>
	<title>Re:"In Soviet Russia..."</title>
	<author>Shakrai</author>
	<datestamp>1260639960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Ah, I just can't do it. Can somebody else say it?</p></div><p>In Soviet Russia, meme fails you?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ah , I just ca n't do it .
Can somebody else say it ? In Soviet Russia , meme fails you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ah, I just can't do it.
Can somebody else say it?In Soviet Russia, meme fails you?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30419916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420456</id>
	<title>Re:Here's a good first step ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260643680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Too much untrustworthy modified firmware has been coming out of China lately for me to place any faith in it.</p> </div><p>Citation needed.</p><p>I don't doubt this is possible, but a network component manufacturer having product built in China is probably able to tell if the unit is not to spec.</p><p>China uses commodity chips, (some of which is also manufactured in China) but the finished product has to run the home manufacturer's software.</p><p>The assumption that the engineers that designed it couldn't tell if the the design has been altered and back doors inserted seems a bit of a hyperventilation to me.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Too much untrustworthy modified firmware has been coming out of China lately for me to place any faith in it .
Citation needed.I do n't doubt this is possible , but a network component manufacturer having product built in China is probably able to tell if the unit is not to spec.China uses commodity chips , ( some of which is also manufactured in China ) but the finished product has to run the home manufacturer 's software.The assumption that the engineers that designed it could n't tell if the the design has been altered and back doors inserted seems a bit of a hyperventilation to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Too much untrustworthy modified firmware has been coming out of China lately for me to place any faith in it.
Citation needed.I don't doubt this is possible, but a network component manufacturer having product built in China is probably able to tell if the unit is not to spec.China uses commodity chips, (some of which is also manufactured in China) but the finished product has to run the home manufacturer's software.The assumption that the engineers that designed it couldn't tell if the the design has been altered and back doors inserted seems a bit of a hyperventilation to me.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30419904</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30421918</id>
	<title>Re:Big mistake</title>
	<author>orange47</author>
	<datestamp>1260709620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>hey, you forgot the Nigeria and its royalty..</htmltext>
<tokenext>hey , you forgot the Nigeria and its royalty. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>hey, you forgot the Nigeria and its royalty..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420174</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420884</id>
	<title>Re:Here's a good first step ...</title>
	<author>TubeSteak</author>
	<datestamp>1260734640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>State Actors have the resources to cause chaos with or without hardware exploits.<br>It'd be nice to not have backdoors into the routers, but when some guy in England can hack into<br>classified databases over a 56K modem... there are much simpler problems that need addressing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>State Actors have the resources to cause chaos with or without hardware exploits.It 'd be nice to not have backdoors into the routers , but when some guy in England can hack intoclassified databases over a 56K modem... there are much simpler problems that need addressing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>State Actors have the resources to cause chaos with or without hardware exploits.It'd be nice to not have backdoors into the routers, but when some guy in England can hack intoclassified databases over a 56K modem... there are much simpler problems that need addressing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30419904</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30427608</id>
	<title>When two Evil Empires cooperate, everyone loses!</title>
	<author>AlexLibman</author>
	<datestamp>1260721440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This will inevitably be used to introduce more government controls, and thus to limit Internet freedom for everyone...</p><p>I wouldn't be surprised if this was in part inspired by the heroic "Climategate" hacktivism (the responsibility for which I personally neither confirm nor deny at this time), liberating and bringing to light just a tiny crumb of the government's dirty laundry on just one of its power-grabbing scams...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This will inevitably be used to introduce more government controls , and thus to limit Internet freedom for everyone...I would n't be surprised if this was in part inspired by the heroic " Climategate " hacktivism ( the responsibility for which I personally neither confirm nor deny at this time ) , liberating and bringing to light just a tiny crumb of the government 's dirty laundry on just one of its power-grabbing scams.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This will inevitably be used to introduce more government controls, and thus to limit Internet freedom for everyone...I wouldn't be surprised if this was in part inspired by the heroic "Climategate" hacktivism (the responsibility for which I personally neither confirm nor deny at this time), liberating and bringing to light just a tiny crumb of the government's dirty laundry on just one of its power-grabbing scams...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420174</id>
	<title>Big mistake</title>
	<author>WindBourne</author>
	<datestamp>1260641100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Negotiating with Russia on this, would be like America doing a treaty with UK to limit nukes; It is useless Without including China, Iran, Burma, and North Korea, then we will be missing a large part of this equation. China, Iran, and North Korea are in very active development of attack systems (as well as real systems such as new missiles, warheads, nuke subs, etc). Heck, a big part of that Chinese firewall, is not just to control their citizens, but it is also to control the outside world coming in.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Negotiating with Russia on this , would be like America doing a treaty with UK to limit nukes ; It is useless Without including China , Iran , Burma , and North Korea , then we will be missing a large part of this equation .
China , Iran , and North Korea are in very active development of attack systems ( as well as real systems such as new missiles , warheads , nuke subs , etc ) .
Heck , a big part of that Chinese firewall , is not just to control their citizens , but it is also to control the outside world coming in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Negotiating with Russia on this, would be like America doing a treaty with UK to limit nukes; It is useless Without including China, Iran, Burma, and North Korea, then we will be missing a large part of this equation.
China, Iran, and North Korea are in very active development of attack systems (as well as real systems such as new missiles, warheads, nuke subs, etc).
Heck, a big part of that Chinese firewall, is not just to control their citizens, but it is also to control the outside world coming in.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30429888</id>
	<title>Internet Borders</title>
	<author>pacinpm</author>
	<datestamp>1260798420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let's count down time to introduction of internet borders. You will have to have a internet passport to connect to site in foreign countries. It will stop cyberwars, terrorists and (you guessed it) child pornography.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's count down time to introduction of internet borders .
You will have to have a internet passport to connect to site in foreign countries .
It will stop cyberwars , terrorists and ( you guessed it ) child pornography .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's count down time to introduction of internet borders.
You will have to have a internet passport to connect to site in foreign countries.
It will stop cyberwars, terrorists and (you guessed it) child pornography.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30422578</id>
	<title>Re:Pirates == terrorists?</title>
	<author>cpghost</author>
	<datestamp>1260719760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>How much do you want to bet that "Internet criminals" in this case are people pirating music and movies?</p></div></blockquote><p>

Pirates use WMD (weapons of mass dissemination) too...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How much do you want to bet that " Internet criminals " in this case are people pirating music and movies ?
Pirates use WMD ( weapons of mass dissemination ) too.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How much do you want to bet that "Internet criminals" in this case are people pirating music and movies?
Pirates use WMD (weapons of mass dissemination) too...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420580</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30430114</id>
	<title>Re:Here's a good first step ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260800760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>Too much untrustworthy modified firmware has been coming out of China lately for me to place any faith in it.</p></div><p>Citation needed.</p><p>I don't doubt this is possible, but a network component manufacturer having product built in China is probably able to tell if the unit is not to spec.</p><p>China uses commodity chips, (some of which is also manufactured in China) but the finished product has to run the home manufacturer's software.</p><p>The assumption that the engineers that designed it couldn't tell if the the design has been altered and back doors inserted seems a bit of a hyperventilation to me.</p></div><p>The chips and final assembly is done in China for companies in other countries who contract out the firmware design to India. It would be interesting to watch a cyber war between China and India. I'm not sure who'd win.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Too much untrustworthy modified firmware has been coming out of China lately for me to place any faith in it.Citation needed.I do n't doubt this is possible , but a network component manufacturer having product built in China is probably able to tell if the unit is not to spec.China uses commodity chips , ( some of which is also manufactured in China ) but the finished product has to run the home manufacturer 's software.The assumption that the engineers that designed it could n't tell if the the design has been altered and back doors inserted seems a bit of a hyperventilation to me.The chips and final assembly is done in China for companies in other countries who contract out the firmware design to India .
It would be interesting to watch a cyber war between China and India .
I 'm not sure who 'd win .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Too much untrustworthy modified firmware has been coming out of China lately for me to place any faith in it.Citation needed.I don't doubt this is possible, but a network component manufacturer having product built in China is probably able to tell if the unit is not to spec.China uses commodity chips, (some of which is also manufactured in China) but the finished product has to run the home manufacturer's software.The assumption that the engineers that designed it couldn't tell if the the design has been altered and back doors inserted seems a bit of a hyperventilation to me.The chips and final assembly is done in China for companies in other countries who contract out the firmware design to India.
It would be interesting to watch a cyber war between China and India.
I'm not sure who'd win.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420016</id>
	<title>Internet crime?</title>
	<author>iammani</author>
	<datestamp>1260639660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or do they actually mean internet 'pirates'?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or do they actually mean internet 'pirates ' ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or do they actually mean internet 'pirates'?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420714</id>
	<title>Re:Pirates == terrorists?</title>
	<author>courseofhumanevents</author>
	<datestamp>1260646200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Pirates aren't engaging in cyberwar. While I wouldn't think for a minute that the copyright cartels would pass up sticking their noses in this, it's not the main issue here.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Pirates are n't engaging in cyberwar .
While I would n't think for a minute that the copyright cartels would pass up sticking their noses in this , it 's not the main issue here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pirates aren't engaging in cyberwar.
While I wouldn't think for a minute that the copyright cartels would pass up sticking their noses in this, it's not the main issue here.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420580</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30421578</id>
	<title>Re:Reliable infrastructure....</title>
	<author>mcrbids</author>
	<datestamp>1260703440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I really don't see the point in "cyber warfare" other than small-scale attacks on a certain site or ISP, a large scale plan could never fully work because any country could simply switch to basically a huge local network. Would it be hard? Yes. Is it able to be done? Yes.</i></p><p>I think your post betrays a surprising amount of naivete. The Internet is, by definition, international. The amount of foreign transacting that would be decimated by switching to "basically a huge local network" is unfathomable. The Internet is fast becoming the heart and soul of our economy - and cutting it off at the knees is never an acceptable solution. The cost is always too high to justify.</p><p><i>Plus, other than attacks on military infrastructure, the coming diversity of OSes, CPU platforms, and networks would make attacks on civilian devices nearly impossible. You might be able to write an iPhone worm, but you wouldn't be able to write an iPhone/Android/Java/BREW worm that attacks anyone on any cell network. That worm would also not work on a PC running Windows/OS X/Linux/BSD. And the diversity in browsers make exploit-based attacks even harder. It used to be you could attack the weak IE browser and get 90\% of web surfers, now you would only get slightly more than half, and you would need to attack Firefox (both 3.0 and 3.5 along with perhaps older versions), Safari, Chrome, Opera and many smaller browsers.</i></p><p>Anybody with a DSL-class Internet connection can take out large swaths of the Internet using common, widely known exploits, such as <a href="http://www.securiteam.com/securityreviews/5GP0L00I0W.html" title="securiteam.com"> DNS spoofing attacks</a> [securiteam.com]. Since this is a DOS attack, it would affect anything at the target points.</p><p>You are right in that the Internet is increasingly heterogeneous, but while alternate platforms have flowered, the Internet was never homogeneous! Sure, you could attack 90\% of client browsers with an IE attack, but never 90\% of the Internet hosts! And certainly not 90\% of the "core servers" - high bandwidth servers at the logical center of the Internet.</p><p>The Russian mob runs a fairly profitable extortion racket with the force of DDOS attacks. While they currently target semi-legal websites (such as gambling and extreme porn sites) in order to keep their profile low, as their stature grows, they will become an increasing risk to companies doing core, legitimate business.</p><p>And the problem is severe. Like I said, <b>anybody with a DSL-class connection can do terrible things - what do you think a mob gang with 125,000 infected hosts can do?</b></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I really do n't see the point in " cyber warfare " other than small-scale attacks on a certain site or ISP , a large scale plan could never fully work because any country could simply switch to basically a huge local network .
Would it be hard ?
Yes. Is it able to be done ?
Yes.I think your post betrays a surprising amount of naivete .
The Internet is , by definition , international .
The amount of foreign transacting that would be decimated by switching to " basically a huge local network " is unfathomable .
The Internet is fast becoming the heart and soul of our economy - and cutting it off at the knees is never an acceptable solution .
The cost is always too high to justify.Plus , other than attacks on military infrastructure , the coming diversity of OSes , CPU platforms , and networks would make attacks on civilian devices nearly impossible .
You might be able to write an iPhone worm , but you would n't be able to write an iPhone/Android/Java/BREW worm that attacks anyone on any cell network .
That worm would also not work on a PC running Windows/OS X/Linux/BSD .
And the diversity in browsers make exploit-based attacks even harder .
It used to be you could attack the weak IE browser and get 90 \ % of web surfers , now you would only get slightly more than half , and you would need to attack Firefox ( both 3.0 and 3.5 along with perhaps older versions ) , Safari , Chrome , Opera and many smaller browsers.Anybody with a DSL-class Internet connection can take out large swaths of the Internet using common , widely known exploits , such as DNS spoofing attacks [ securiteam.com ] .
Since this is a DOS attack , it would affect anything at the target points.You are right in that the Internet is increasingly heterogeneous , but while alternate platforms have flowered , the Internet was never homogeneous !
Sure , you could attack 90 \ % of client browsers with an IE attack , but never 90 \ % of the Internet hosts !
And certainly not 90 \ % of the " core servers " - high bandwidth servers at the logical center of the Internet.The Russian mob runs a fairly profitable extortion racket with the force of DDOS attacks .
While they currently target semi-legal websites ( such as gambling and extreme porn sites ) in order to keep their profile low , as their stature grows , they will become an increasing risk to companies doing core , legitimate business.And the problem is severe .
Like I said , anybody with a DSL-class connection can do terrible things - what do you think a mob gang with 125,000 infected hosts can do ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I really don't see the point in "cyber warfare" other than small-scale attacks on a certain site or ISP, a large scale plan could never fully work because any country could simply switch to basically a huge local network.
Would it be hard?
Yes. Is it able to be done?
Yes.I think your post betrays a surprising amount of naivete.
The Internet is, by definition, international.
The amount of foreign transacting that would be decimated by switching to "basically a huge local network" is unfathomable.
The Internet is fast becoming the heart and soul of our economy - and cutting it off at the knees is never an acceptable solution.
The cost is always too high to justify.Plus, other than attacks on military infrastructure, the coming diversity of OSes, CPU platforms, and networks would make attacks on civilian devices nearly impossible.
You might be able to write an iPhone worm, but you wouldn't be able to write an iPhone/Android/Java/BREW worm that attacks anyone on any cell network.
That worm would also not work on a PC running Windows/OS X/Linux/BSD.
And the diversity in browsers make exploit-based attacks even harder.
It used to be you could attack the weak IE browser and get 90\% of web surfers, now you would only get slightly more than half, and you would need to attack Firefox (both 3.0 and 3.5 along with perhaps older versions), Safari, Chrome, Opera and many smaller browsers.Anybody with a DSL-class Internet connection can take out large swaths of the Internet using common, widely known exploits, such as  DNS spoofing attacks [securiteam.com].
Since this is a DOS attack, it would affect anything at the target points.You are right in that the Internet is increasingly heterogeneous, but while alternate platforms have flowered, the Internet was never homogeneous!
Sure, you could attack 90\% of client browsers with an IE attack, but never 90\% of the Internet hosts!
And certainly not 90\% of the "core servers" - high bandwidth servers at the logical center of the Internet.The Russian mob runs a fairly profitable extortion racket with the force of DDOS attacks.
While they currently target semi-legal websites (such as gambling and extreme porn sites) in order to keep their profile low, as their stature grows, they will become an increasing risk to companies doing core, legitimate business.And the problem is severe.
Like I said, anybody with a DSL-class connection can do terrible things - what do you think a mob gang with 125,000 infected hosts can do?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420048</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420430</id>
	<title>Do yourself and watch this....</title>
	<author>Jackie\_Chan\_Fan</author>
	<datestamp>1260643500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXlzci1rKNM" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXlzci1rKNM</a> [youtube.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = hXlzci1rKNM [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXlzci1rKNM [youtube.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30423924</id>
	<title>Re:Here's a good first step ...</title>
	<author>WilliamBaughman</author>
	<datestamp>1260732480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Citation needed.</p></div><p> <a href="http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/02/29/1642221" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">Slashdot | Feds Seize $78M of Bogus Chinese Cisco Gear</a> [slashdot.org] </p><p> <a href="http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/05/09/164201" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">Slashdot | FBI Says Military Had Counterfeit Cisco Routers</a> [slashdot.org] </p><p><div class="quote"><p>Modding "Disagree" is censorship. A rational rebuttal makes Slashdot better.</p></div><p>Modding "Disagree" is not censorship.  It's an important tool to safeguard other readers from thinking your post was anywhere near "Insightful."  If you really thought the original post required citations, why not add them yourself?  Or better yet, why not edit your post now that you have some.  Maybe Slashdot should add a "Dangerously Ignorant" or "Falsely Claims that a Different Opinion Lacks Supporting Evidence" mod for posts like yours.  If you really thought that a "rational rebuttal" would make Slashdot better, why didn't you do some trivial research before you posted?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Citation needed .
Slashdot | Feds Seize $ 78M of Bogus Chinese Cisco Gear [ slashdot.org ] Slashdot | FBI Says Military Had Counterfeit Cisco Routers [ slashdot.org ] Modding " Disagree " is censorship .
A rational rebuttal makes Slashdot better.Modding " Disagree " is not censorship .
It 's an important tool to safeguard other readers from thinking your post was anywhere near " Insightful .
" If you really thought the original post required citations , why not add them yourself ?
Or better yet , why not edit your post now that you have some .
Maybe Slashdot should add a " Dangerously Ignorant " or " Falsely Claims that a Different Opinion Lacks Supporting Evidence " mod for posts like yours .
If you really thought that a " rational rebuttal " would make Slashdot better , why did n't you do some trivial research before you posted ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Citation needed.
Slashdot | Feds Seize $78M of Bogus Chinese Cisco Gear [slashdot.org]  Slashdot | FBI Says Military Had Counterfeit Cisco Routers [slashdot.org] Modding "Disagree" is censorship.
A rational rebuttal makes Slashdot better.Modding "Disagree" is not censorship.
It's an important tool to safeguard other readers from thinking your post was anywhere near "Insightful.
"  If you really thought the original post required citations, why not add them yourself?
Or better yet, why not edit your post now that you have some.
Maybe Slashdot should add a "Dangerously Ignorant" or "Falsely Claims that a Different Opinion Lacks Supporting Evidence" mod for posts like yours.
If you really thought that a "rational rebuttal" would make Slashdot better, why didn't you do some trivial research before you posted?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420580</id>
	<title>Pirates == terrorists?</title>
	<author>Angst Badger</author>
	<datestamp>1260644880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Strengthening defenses against Internet criminals would also strengthen defenses against any military-directed cyberattacks, the United States maintains.</p></div><p>How much do you want to bet that "Internet criminals" in this case are people pirating music and movies? While I'm glad to see that we're finally engaging the Russians, it'd be nice if our foreign policy wasn't being directed by the RIAA and the MPAA.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Strengthening defenses against Internet criminals would also strengthen defenses against any military-directed cyberattacks , the United States maintains.How much do you want to bet that " Internet criminals " in this case are people pirating music and movies ?
While I 'm glad to see that we 're finally engaging the Russians , it 'd be nice if our foreign policy was n't being directed by the RIAA and the MPAA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Strengthening defenses against Internet criminals would also strengthen defenses against any military-directed cyberattacks, the United States maintains.How much do you want to bet that "Internet criminals" in this case are people pirating music and movies?
While I'm glad to see that we're finally engaging the Russians, it'd be nice if our foreign policy wasn't being directed by the RIAA and the MPAA.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420940</id>
	<title>What about limiting war in general?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260735540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's funny how governments, especially the US government, are so worried about how cyberwarfare could affect their businesses, etc.  However, they really couldn't give a rat's ass about human lives.  Case in point, 100k+ Iraqi citizens killed in the war.  What a horrible travesty and a crime against humanity that war was.  I don't see them talking about how countries could stop attacking regular civilians, but oh, don't do anything that might destabilize our business infrastructure!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's funny how governments , especially the US government , are so worried about how cyberwarfare could affect their businesses , etc .
However , they really could n't give a rat 's ass about human lives .
Case in point , 100k + Iraqi citizens killed in the war .
What a horrible travesty and a crime against humanity that war was .
I do n't see them talking about how countries could stop attacking regular civilians , but oh , do n't do anything that might destabilize our business infrastructure !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's funny how governments, especially the US government, are so worried about how cyberwarfare could affect their businesses, etc.
However, they really couldn't give a rat's ass about human lives.
Case in point, 100k+ Iraqi citizens killed in the war.
What a horrible travesty and a crime against humanity that war was.
I don't see them talking about how countries could stop attacking regular civilians, but oh, don't do anything that might destabilize our business infrastructure!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30421938</id>
	<title>The US has no real choice.</title>
	<author>miffo.swe</author>
	<datestamp>1260709860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As long as the US in general relies heavily on Microsoft windows they better keep out of any real cyberwar.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As long as the US in general relies heavily on Microsoft windows they better keep out of any real cyberwar .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As long as the US in general relies heavily on Microsoft windows they better keep out of any real cyberwar.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30421816</id>
	<title>Re:Here's a good first step ...</title>
	<author>Jurily</author>
	<datestamp>1260708000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Besides, the whole idea is completely missing the point. Cyberwar cannot be limited the way nuclear arms can, because a civilian attack is not fundamentally different froma military one: unlike with nuclear weapons, the civilians have access to all the tools and knowledge the military does. Oh, and their motivations don't fundamentally alter the approach they take. It's like bankrobbers routinely nuking cities.</p><p>If a 100k botnet attacks your site, how do you determine if they're the Russian military or a bored teenager?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Besides , the whole idea is completely missing the point .
Cyberwar can not be limited the way nuclear arms can , because a civilian attack is not fundamentally different froma military one : unlike with nuclear weapons , the civilians have access to all the tools and knowledge the military does .
Oh , and their motivations do n't fundamentally alter the approach they take .
It 's like bankrobbers routinely nuking cities.If a 100k botnet attacks your site , how do you determine if they 're the Russian military or a bored teenager ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Besides, the whole idea is completely missing the point.
Cyberwar cannot be limited the way nuclear arms can, because a civilian attack is not fundamentally different froma military one: unlike with nuclear weapons, the civilians have access to all the tools and knowledge the military does.
Oh, and their motivations don't fundamentally alter the approach they take.
It's like bankrobbers routinely nuking cities.If a 100k botnet attacks your site, how do you determine if they're the Russian military or a bored teenager?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420182</id>
	<title>Re:Internet crime?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260641160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Marked as troll, but I would be surprised if piracy is not part of Internet crime talks, especially since Russia openly host ftp sites full of movies.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Marked as troll , but I would be surprised if piracy is not part of Internet crime talks , especially since Russia openly host ftp sites full of movies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Marked as troll, but I would be surprised if piracy is not part of Internet crime talks, especially since Russia openly host ftp sites full of movies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420016</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420216</id>
	<title>a Lot of kids in Russia are hackers and gov does n</title>
	<author>Joe The Dragon</author>
	<datestamp>1260641460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>a Lot of kids in Russia are hackers and gov does not have the man power to stop it and some of them make money form hacking banks and can pay off local cops as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>a Lot of kids in Russia are hackers and gov does not have the man power to stop it and some of them make money form hacking banks and can pay off local cops as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>a Lot of kids in Russia are hackers and gov does not have the man power to stop it and some of them make money form hacking banks and can pay off local cops as well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420116</id>
	<title>Corroboration?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260640440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How the heck are you going to limit military use? This isn't like nukes where there are facilities to visit. I can't help but think that language is just smokescreen for the public, and this is really about cooperation on policing the internet. (Cue more secret talks ala ACTA.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How the heck are you going to limit military use ?
This is n't like nukes where there are facilities to visit .
I ca n't help but think that language is just smokescreen for the public , and this is really about cooperation on policing the internet .
( Cue more secret talks ala ACTA .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How the heck are you going to limit military use?
This isn't like nukes where there are facilities to visit.
I can't help but think that language is just smokescreen for the public, and this is really about cooperation on policing the internet.
(Cue more secret talks ala ACTA.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30423384</id>
	<title>Re:Reliable infrastructure....</title>
	<author>BlackBloq</author>
	<datestamp>1260727500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>   You speak as if they only connected things that make sense to the web. Alas tis not the case, for we have nuke plants, traffic controls, you name it... all directly connected!</htmltext>
<tokenext>You speak as if they only connected things that make sense to the web .
Alas t is not the case , for we have nuke plants , traffic controls , you name it... all directly connected !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>   You speak as if they only connected things that make sense to the web.
Alas tis not the case, for we have nuke plants, traffic controls, you name it... all directly connected!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420048</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30422084</id>
	<title>Re:Big mistake</title>
	<author>iritant</author>
	<datestamp>1260713580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Many many nations have signed the Council of Europe's Convention on Cybercrime.  At least one study in Singapore showed that acceding to the treaty, or even implementing provisions without acceding to it, reduces cybercrime within borders.  See <a href="http://weis09.infosecon.net/" title="infosecon.net">http://weis09.infosecon.net/</a> [infosecon.net] for the paper.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Many many nations have signed the Council of Europe 's Convention on Cybercrime .
At least one study in Singapore showed that acceding to the treaty , or even implementing provisions without acceding to it , reduces cybercrime within borders .
See http : //weis09.infosecon.net/ [ infosecon.net ] for the paper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Many many nations have signed the Council of Europe's Convention on Cybercrime.
At least one study in Singapore showed that acceding to the treaty, or even implementing provisions without acceding to it, reduces cybercrime within borders.
See http://weis09.infosecon.net/ [infosecon.net] for the paper.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420174</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30423922</id>
	<title>Isn't this a waste of time?</title>
	<author>maillemaker</author>
	<datestamp>1260732480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does anyone think anyone will REALLY honor these treaties?  I am 100\% convinced that they will say, "OK, we will stop cyber warfare work" and then they will get their geeks right back to work on it in their laboratories again.</p><p>I would put ZERO confidence in any treaty of this sort.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does anyone think anyone will REALLY honor these treaties ?
I am 100 \ % convinced that they will say , " OK , we will stop cyber warfare work " and then they will get their geeks right back to work on it in their laboratories again.I would put ZERO confidence in any treaty of this sort .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does anyone think anyone will REALLY honor these treaties?
I am 100\% convinced that they will say, "OK, we will stop cyber warfare work" and then they will get their geeks right back to work on it in their laboratories again.I would put ZERO confidence in any treaty of this sort.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420592</id>
	<title>Frist 4soT</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260645060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you ha7e</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you ha7e</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you ha7e</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420600</id>
	<title>Re:Here's a good first step ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260645120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Do you mean whole <a href="https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/" title="cia.gov">266</a> [cia.gov] (even you cut that into half) different country to build their own networking hardware? If not, why any under-developed country should trust a developed country, then? Especially if some of those countries have a bad record of bullying weaker ones for any imaginary reason. <br> <br>
Sooner or later developed countries will realize this arrogance will backfire. If anyone is looking for a solution for a real security, it's hidden under understanding every human being living on this planet have the same rights as you have. Once you realize this fact, whoever produces these products will lose its meaning, and you won't waste your time to build machines that kill others.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you mean whole 266 [ cia.gov ] ( even you cut that into half ) different country to build their own networking hardware ?
If not , why any under-developed country should trust a developed country , then ?
Especially if some of those countries have a bad record of bullying weaker ones for any imaginary reason .
Sooner or later developed countries will realize this arrogance will backfire .
If anyone is looking for a solution for a real security , it 's hidden under understanding every human being living on this planet have the same rights as you have .
Once you realize this fact , whoever produces these products will lose its meaning , and you wo n't waste your time to build machines that kill others .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you mean whole 266 [cia.gov] (even you cut that into half) different country to build their own networking hardware?
If not, why any under-developed country should trust a developed country, then?
Especially if some of those countries have a bad record of bullying weaker ones for any imaginary reason.
Sooner or later developed countries will realize this arrogance will backfire.
If anyone is looking for a solution for a real security, it's hidden under understanding every human being living on this planet have the same rights as you have.
Once you realize this fact, whoever produces these products will lose its meaning, and you won't waste your time to build machines that kill others.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30419904</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30422254</id>
	<title>Re:Here's a good first step ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260716220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>...has been abusing its position as a dominant...</p></div></blockquote><p>How refreshing to see the name of a country other than the US as part of this sentence.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...has been abusing its position as a dominant...How refreshing to see the name of a country other than the US as part of this sentence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...has been abusing its position as a dominant...How refreshing to see the name of a country other than the US as part of this sentence.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30419904</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420618</id>
	<title>Re:Internet crime?</title>
	<author>Tibia1</author>
	<datestamp>1260645360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They mean crime as in malware and infectious software developers in the US. They believe that they are the only tools they need to build internet defenses.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They mean crime as in malware and infectious software developers in the US .
They believe that they are the only tools they need to build internet defenses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They mean crime as in malware and infectious software developers in the US.
They believe that they are the only tools they need to build internet defenses.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420016</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420236</id>
	<title>Now play nice Russia.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260641640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No more exposing our Global Warming fraud or else we will get mad you Ruskies!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No more exposing our Global Warming fraud or else we will get mad you Ruskies !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No more exposing our Global Warming fraud or else we will get mad you Ruskies!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30419916</id>
	<title>"In Soviet Russia..."</title>
	<author>inode\_buddha</author>
	<datestamp>1260638880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ah, I just can't do it. Can somebody else say it?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ah , I just ca n't do it .
Can somebody else say it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ah, I just can't do it.
Can somebody else say it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30419998</id>
	<title>ACTA</title>
	<author>wizardforce</author>
	<datestamp>1260639480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>the United States is hoping to use the talks to increase international cooperation in opposing Internet crime. Strengthening defenses against Internet criminals would also strengthen defenses against any military-directed cyberattacks, the United States maintains."</p></div></blockquote><p> Now we know why ACTA is a secret treaty...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>the United States is hoping to use the talks to increase international cooperation in opposing Internet crime .
Strengthening defenses against Internet criminals would also strengthen defenses against any military-directed cyberattacks , the United States maintains .
" Now we know why ACTA is a secret treaty.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the United States is hoping to use the talks to increase international cooperation in opposing Internet crime.
Strengthening defenses against Internet criminals would also strengthen defenses against any military-directed cyberattacks, the United States maintains.
" Now we know why ACTA is a secret treaty...
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420814</id>
	<title>Poopst!</title>
	<author>pete6677</author>
	<datestamp>1260647220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Poopst!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Poopst !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Poopst!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30421036</id>
	<title>Excellent juxtap0osition</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260737040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The following article is titled, "The Limits To Skepticism".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The following article is titled , " The Limits To Skepticism " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The following article is titled, "The Limits To Skepticism".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30419904</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420048</id>
	<title>Reliable infrastructure....</title>
	<author>Darkness404</author>
	<datestamp>1260639960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I really don't see the point in "cyber warfare" other than small-scale attacks on a certain site or ISP, a large scale plan could never fully work because any country could simply switch to basically a huge local network. Would it be hard? Yes. Is it able to be done? Yes. <br> <br>

Plus, other than attacks on military infrastructure, the coming diversity of OSes, CPU platforms, and networks would make attacks on civilian devices nearly impossible. You might be able to write an iPhone worm, but you wouldn't be able to write an iPhone/Android/Java/BREW worm that attacks anyone on any cell network. That worm would also not work on a PC running Windows/OS X/Linux/BSD. And the diversity in browsers make exploit-based attacks even harder. It used to be you could attack the weak IE browser and get 90\% of web surfers, now you would only get slightly more than half, and you would need to attack Firefox (both 3.0 and 3.5 along with perhaps older versions), Safari, Chrome, Opera and many smaller browsers. <br> <br>

In short, cyber warfare is a possibility on infrastructure and is quickly approaching impossible on large amounts of devices.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I really do n't see the point in " cyber warfare " other than small-scale attacks on a certain site or ISP , a large scale plan could never fully work because any country could simply switch to basically a huge local network .
Would it be hard ?
Yes. Is it able to be done ?
Yes . Plus , other than attacks on military infrastructure , the coming diversity of OSes , CPU platforms , and networks would make attacks on civilian devices nearly impossible .
You might be able to write an iPhone worm , but you would n't be able to write an iPhone/Android/Java/BREW worm that attacks anyone on any cell network .
That worm would also not work on a PC running Windows/OS X/Linux/BSD .
And the diversity in browsers make exploit-based attacks even harder .
It used to be you could attack the weak IE browser and get 90 \ % of web surfers , now you would only get slightly more than half , and you would need to attack Firefox ( both 3.0 and 3.5 along with perhaps older versions ) , Safari , Chrome , Opera and many smaller browsers .
In short , cyber warfare is a possibility on infrastructure and is quickly approaching impossible on large amounts of devices .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I really don't see the point in "cyber warfare" other than small-scale attacks on a certain site or ISP, a large scale plan could never fully work because any country could simply switch to basically a huge local network.
Would it be hard?
Yes. Is it able to be done?
Yes.  

Plus, other than attacks on military infrastructure, the coming diversity of OSes, CPU platforms, and networks would make attacks on civilian devices nearly impossible.
You might be able to write an iPhone worm, but you wouldn't be able to write an iPhone/Android/Java/BREW worm that attacks anyone on any cell network.
That worm would also not work on a PC running Windows/OS X/Linux/BSD.
And the diversity in browsers make exploit-based attacks even harder.
It used to be you could attack the weak IE browser and get 90\% of web surfers, now you would only get slightly more than half, and you would need to attack Firefox (both 3.0 and 3.5 along with perhaps older versions), Safari, Chrome, Opera and many smaller browsers.
In short, cyber warfare is a possibility on infrastructure and is quickly approaching impossible on large amounts of devices.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30419974</id>
	<title>Re:"In Soviet Russia..."</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260639300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>In Soviet Russia Government Cybers You<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..wait that's a different kind of cybering</htmltext>
<tokenext>In Soviet Russia Government Cybers You ..wait that 's a different kind of cybering</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Soviet Russia Government Cybers You ..wait that's a different kind of cybering</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30419916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30424224</id>
	<title>Re:What about limiting war in general?</title>
	<author>couchslug</author>
	<datestamp>1260735360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Force trumps law, hence any "law" limiting war relies on violence for enforcement.</p><p>Lawfare only restricts the lawful thus weakening them relative to the law-free.</p><p>As for Iraq, when Iraqis tire of killing each other they will stop. Being law-free, they are free to kill each other except where constrained by internal opposition.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Force trumps law , hence any " law " limiting war relies on violence for enforcement.Lawfare only restricts the lawful thus weakening them relative to the law-free.As for Iraq , when Iraqis tire of killing each other they will stop .
Being law-free , they are free to kill each other except where constrained by internal opposition .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Force trumps law, hence any "law" limiting war relies on violence for enforcement.Lawfare only restricts the lawful thus weakening them relative to the law-free.As for Iraq, when Iraqis tire of killing each other they will stop.
Being law-free, they are free to kill each other except where constrained by internal opposition.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420940</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30419904</id>
	<title>Here's a good first step ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260638820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Stop buying networking hardware from China, and build (or re-build) domestic suppliers of such equipment. That applies to any nation that wants to maintain security: China has been abusing its position as a dominant hardware supplier for some time now. You can have all the network security in place that money can buy, but if the Internet-facing defenses have been compromised from the manufacturer you're pretty much screwed. Too much untrustworthy modified firmware has been coming out of China lately for me to place any faith in it. Well, all right<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I suppose that if the boards are made in China but a domestic vendor supplies the firmware locally it would be okay<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... but that's not how it usually works.
<br> <br>
Now, some of you may think that I'm picking on Chinese vendors<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... and I am, but the criticism is well-deserved in this case. Not that I believe the individual manufacturers are doing this of their own accord, necessarily. But there's a lot of intrusion attempts coming out of that country, and you can bet the people behind it look at selling compromised hardware to other countries as a legitimate tool. How many of those attempts are successful because a firewall or router has hidden code in it I suppose we'll never know.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Stop buying networking hardware from China , and build ( or re-build ) domestic suppliers of such equipment .
That applies to any nation that wants to maintain security : China has been abusing its position as a dominant hardware supplier for some time now .
You can have all the network security in place that money can buy , but if the Internet-facing defenses have been compromised from the manufacturer you 're pretty much screwed .
Too much untrustworthy modified firmware has been coming out of China lately for me to place any faith in it .
Well , all right ... I suppose that if the boards are made in China but a domestic vendor supplies the firmware locally it would be okay ... but that 's not how it usually works .
Now , some of you may think that I 'm picking on Chinese vendors ... and I am , but the criticism is well-deserved in this case .
Not that I believe the individual manufacturers are doing this of their own accord , necessarily .
But there 's a lot of intrusion attempts coming out of that country , and you can bet the people behind it look at selling compromised hardware to other countries as a legitimate tool .
How many of those attempts are successful because a firewall or router has hidden code in it I suppose we 'll never know .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stop buying networking hardware from China, and build (or re-build) domestic suppliers of such equipment.
That applies to any nation that wants to maintain security: China has been abusing its position as a dominant hardware supplier for some time now.
You can have all the network security in place that money can buy, but if the Internet-facing defenses have been compromised from the manufacturer you're pretty much screwed.
Too much untrustworthy modified firmware has been coming out of China lately for me to place any faith in it.
Well, all right ... I suppose that if the boards are made in China but a domestic vendor supplies the firmware locally it would be okay ... but that's not how it usually works.
Now, some of you may think that I'm picking on Chinese vendors ... and I am, but the criticism is well-deserved in this case.
Not that I believe the individual manufacturers are doing this of their own accord, necessarily.
But there's a lot of intrusion attempts coming out of that country, and you can bet the people behind it look at selling compromised hardware to other countries as a legitimate tool.
How many of those attempts are successful because a firewall or router has hidden code in it I suppose we'll never know.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420644</id>
	<title>I can point them in the right direction.</title>
	<author>oliverthered</author>
	<datestamp>1260645540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First,<br>Start by actually patching your machines and implementing some very basic security stuff..</p><p>You know, the kind of stuff that a script kiddie, with aspergers, searching for evidence of UFO's won't be able to get passed.</p><p>Or if you can't even manage to do that, or find out which systems you need to do it to, then when he finally get's extrodited at your request, instead of humiliating yourself further by giving him a trial and locking him up for the rest of his life. Give him a computer, let him download a few hacking tools of the internet, get him to press the GO button and write down a list of everything that gets hacked into.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First,Start by actually patching your machines and implementing some very basic security stuff..You know , the kind of stuff that a script kiddie , with aspergers , searching for evidence of UFO 's wo n't be able to get passed.Or if you ca n't even manage to do that , or find out which systems you need to do it to , then when he finally get 's extrodited at your request , instead of humiliating yourself further by giving him a trial and locking him up for the rest of his life .
Give him a computer , let him download a few hacking tools of the internet , get him to press the GO button and write down a list of everything that gets hacked into .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First,Start by actually patching your machines and implementing some very basic security stuff..You know, the kind of stuff that a script kiddie, with aspergers, searching for evidence of UFO's won't be able to get passed.Or if you can't even manage to do that, or find out which systems you need to do it to, then when he finally get's extrodited at your request, instead of humiliating yourself further by giving him a trial and locking him up for the rest of his life.
Give him a computer, let him download a few hacking tools of the internet, get him to press the GO button and write down a list of everything that gets hacked into.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420276</id>
	<title>Re:Reliable infrastructure....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260641940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You might be able to write an iPhone worm, but you wouldn't be able to write an iPhone/Android/Java/BREW worm that attacks anyone on any cell network.</p></div><p>why not ? give me the 0.001 brightest of a 1.2 billion country (China or India I dont care) and I shall build that thing</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You might be able to write an iPhone worm , but you would n't be able to write an iPhone/Android/Java/BREW worm that attacks anyone on any cell network.why not ?
give me the 0.001 brightest of a 1.2 billion country ( China or India I dont care ) and I shall build that thing</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You might be able to write an iPhone worm, but you wouldn't be able to write an iPhone/Android/Java/BREW worm that attacks anyone on any cell network.why not ?
give me the 0.001 brightest of a 1.2 billion country (China or India I dont care) and I shall build that thing
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420048</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420130</id>
	<title>Re:Here's a good first step ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260640560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Stop buying networking hardware from China, and build (or re-build) domestic suppliers of such equipment. That applies to any nation that wants to maintain security: China has been abusing its position as a dominant hardware supplier for some time now. You can have all the network security in place that money can buy, but if the Internet-facing defenses have been compromised from the manufacturer you're pretty much screwed. Too much untrustworthy modified firmware has been coming out of China lately for me to place any faith in it. Well, all right<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I suppose that if the boards are made in China but a domestic vendor supplies the firmware locally it would be okay<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... but that's not how it usually works.</p><p>Now, some of you may think that I'm picking on Chinese vendors<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... and I am, but the criticism is well-deserved in this case. Not that I believe the individual manufacturers are doing this of their own accord, necessarily. But there's a lot of intrusion attempts coming out of that country, and you can bet the people behind it look at selling compromised hardware to other countries as a legitimate tool. How many of those attempts are successful because a firewall or router has hidden code in it I suppose we'll never know.</p></div><p><div class="quote"><p>Stop buying networking hardware from China, and build (or re-build) domestic suppliers of such equipment. That applies to any nation that wants to maintain security: China has been abusing its position as a dominant hardware supplier for some time now. You can have all the network security in place that money can buy, but if the Internet-facing defenses have been compromised from the manufacturer you're pretty much screwed. Too much untrustworthy modified firmware has been coming out of China lately for me to place any faith in it. Well, all right<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I suppose that if the boards are made in China but a domestic vendor supplies the firmware locally it would be okay<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... but that's not how it usually works.</p><p>Now, some of you may think that I'm picking on Chinese vendors<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... and I am, but the criticism is well-deserved in this case. Not that I believe the individual manufacturers are doing this of their own accord, necessarily. But there's a lot of intrusion attempts coming out of that country, and you can bet the people behind it look at selling compromised hardware to other countries as a legitimate tool. How many of those attempts are successful because a firewall or router has hidden code in it I suppose we'll never know.</p></div><p><div class="quote"><p>Stop buying networking hardware from China, and build (or re-build) domestic suppliers of such equipment. That applies to any nation that wants to maintain security: China has been abusing its position as a dominant hardware supplier for some time now. You can have all the network security in place that money can buy, but if the Internet-facing defenses have been compromised from the manufacturer you're pretty much screwed. Too much untrustworthy modified firmware has been coming out of China lately for me to place any faith in it. Well, all right<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I suppose that if the boards are made in China but a domestic vendor supplies the firmware locally it would be okay<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... but that's not how it usually works.</p><p>Now, some of you may think that I'm picking on Chinese vendors<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... and I am, but the criticism is well-deserved in this case. Not that I believe the individual manufacturers are doing this of their own accord, necessarily. But there's a lot of intrusion attempts coming out of that country, and you can bet the people behind it look at selling compromised hardware to other countries as a legitimate tool. How many of those attempts are successful because a firewall or router has hidden code in it I suppose we'll never know.</p></div><p>I think we should blame ourselves for allowing them to have control over it. The factories might be crap and there might be poeple wishing to take advantage of it... If our pcps were build in our own region we wouldnt have this problem. But I dont think it depends on us?..</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Stop buying networking hardware from China , and build ( or re-build ) domestic suppliers of such equipment .
That applies to any nation that wants to maintain security : China has been abusing its position as a dominant hardware supplier for some time now .
You can have all the network security in place that money can buy , but if the Internet-facing defenses have been compromised from the manufacturer you 're pretty much screwed .
Too much untrustworthy modified firmware has been coming out of China lately for me to place any faith in it .
Well , all right ... I suppose that if the boards are made in China but a domestic vendor supplies the firmware locally it would be okay ... but that 's not how it usually works.Now , some of you may think that I 'm picking on Chinese vendors ... and I am , but the criticism is well-deserved in this case .
Not that I believe the individual manufacturers are doing this of their own accord , necessarily .
But there 's a lot of intrusion attempts coming out of that country , and you can bet the people behind it look at selling compromised hardware to other countries as a legitimate tool .
How many of those attempts are successful because a firewall or router has hidden code in it I suppose we 'll never know.Stop buying networking hardware from China , and build ( or re-build ) domestic suppliers of such equipment .
That applies to any nation that wants to maintain security : China has been abusing its position as a dominant hardware supplier for some time now .
You can have all the network security in place that money can buy , but if the Internet-facing defenses have been compromised from the manufacturer you 're pretty much screwed .
Too much untrustworthy modified firmware has been coming out of China lately for me to place any faith in it .
Well , all right ... I suppose that if the boards are made in China but a domestic vendor supplies the firmware locally it would be okay ... but that 's not how it usually works.Now , some of you may think that I 'm picking on Chinese vendors ... and I am , but the criticism is well-deserved in this case .
Not that I believe the individual manufacturers are doing this of their own accord , necessarily .
But there 's a lot of intrusion attempts coming out of that country , and you can bet the people behind it look at selling compromised hardware to other countries as a legitimate tool .
How many of those attempts are successful because a firewall or router has hidden code in it I suppose we 'll never know.Stop buying networking hardware from China , and build ( or re-build ) domestic suppliers of such equipment .
That applies to any nation that wants to maintain security : China has been abusing its position as a dominant hardware supplier for some time now .
You can have all the network security in place that money can buy , but if the Internet-facing defenses have been compromised from the manufacturer you 're pretty much screwed .
Too much untrustworthy modified firmware has been coming out of China lately for me to place any faith in it .
Well , all right ... I suppose that if the boards are made in China but a domestic vendor supplies the firmware locally it would be okay ... but that 's not how it usually works.Now , some of you may think that I 'm picking on Chinese vendors ... and I am , but the criticism is well-deserved in this case .
Not that I believe the individual manufacturers are doing this of their own accord , necessarily .
But there 's a lot of intrusion attempts coming out of that country , and you can bet the people behind it look at selling compromised hardware to other countries as a legitimate tool .
How many of those attempts are successful because a firewall or router has hidden code in it I suppose we 'll never know.I think we should blame ourselves for allowing them to have control over it .
The factories might be crap and there might be poeple wishing to take advantage of it... If our pcps were build in our own region we wouldnt have this problem .
But I dont think it depends on us ? . .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stop buying networking hardware from China, and build (or re-build) domestic suppliers of such equipment.
That applies to any nation that wants to maintain security: China has been abusing its position as a dominant hardware supplier for some time now.
You can have all the network security in place that money can buy, but if the Internet-facing defenses have been compromised from the manufacturer you're pretty much screwed.
Too much untrustworthy modified firmware has been coming out of China lately for me to place any faith in it.
Well, all right ... I suppose that if the boards are made in China but a domestic vendor supplies the firmware locally it would be okay ... but that's not how it usually works.Now, some of you may think that I'm picking on Chinese vendors ... and I am, but the criticism is well-deserved in this case.
Not that I believe the individual manufacturers are doing this of their own accord, necessarily.
But there's a lot of intrusion attempts coming out of that country, and you can bet the people behind it look at selling compromised hardware to other countries as a legitimate tool.
How many of those attempts are successful because a firewall or router has hidden code in it I suppose we'll never know.Stop buying networking hardware from China, and build (or re-build) domestic suppliers of such equipment.
That applies to any nation that wants to maintain security: China has been abusing its position as a dominant hardware supplier for some time now.
You can have all the network security in place that money can buy, but if the Internet-facing defenses have been compromised from the manufacturer you're pretty much screwed.
Too much untrustworthy modified firmware has been coming out of China lately for me to place any faith in it.
Well, all right ... I suppose that if the boards are made in China but a domestic vendor supplies the firmware locally it would be okay ... but that's not how it usually works.Now, some of you may think that I'm picking on Chinese vendors ... and I am, but the criticism is well-deserved in this case.
Not that I believe the individual manufacturers are doing this of their own accord, necessarily.
But there's a lot of intrusion attempts coming out of that country, and you can bet the people behind it look at selling compromised hardware to other countries as a legitimate tool.
How many of those attempts are successful because a firewall or router has hidden code in it I suppose we'll never know.Stop buying networking hardware from China, and build (or re-build) domestic suppliers of such equipment.
That applies to any nation that wants to maintain security: China has been abusing its position as a dominant hardware supplier for some time now.
You can have all the network security in place that money can buy, but if the Internet-facing defenses have been compromised from the manufacturer you're pretty much screwed.
Too much untrustworthy modified firmware has been coming out of China lately for me to place any faith in it.
Well, all right ... I suppose that if the boards are made in China but a domestic vendor supplies the firmware locally it would be okay ... but that's not how it usually works.Now, some of you may think that I'm picking on Chinese vendors ... and I am, but the criticism is well-deserved in this case.
Not that I believe the individual manufacturers are doing this of their own accord, necessarily.
But there's a lot of intrusion attempts coming out of that country, and you can bet the people behind it look at selling compromised hardware to other countries as a legitimate tool.
How many of those attempts are successful because a firewall or router has hidden code in it I suppose we'll never know.I think we should blame ourselves for allowing them to have control over it.
The factories might be crap and there might be poeple wishing to take advantage of it... If our pcps were build in our own region we wouldnt have this problem.
But I dont think it depends on us?..
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30419904</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30428234</id>
	<title>What about Russian cyber attacks?</title>
	<author>JBaustian</author>
	<datestamp>1260728700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Georgia, Ukraine, and one or more of the Baltic states have been attacked by Russia or from Russia. Are these talks going to lead to Russia promising not to do it again?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Georgia , Ukraine , and one or more of the Baltic states have been attacked by Russia or from Russia .
Are these talks going to lead to Russia promising not to do it again ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Georgia, Ukraine, and one or more of the Baltic states have been attacked by Russia or from Russia.
Are these talks going to lead to Russia promising not to do it again?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420174</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420726</id>
	<title>Cyber . . . oh fuck, the retards are on duty</title>
	<author>SlappyBastard</author>
	<datestamp>1260646320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When you start hearing about "cyber" anything it's time to worry.  Misappropriated prefixes are never fun.</htmltext>
<tokenext>When you start hearing about " cyber " anything it 's time to worry .
Misappropriated prefixes are never fun .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When you start hearing about "cyber" anything it's time to worry.
Misappropriated prefixes are never fun.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30423488</id>
	<title>Re:Here's a good first step ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260728640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>[Citation Needed]</p><p>Please link some evidence pointing to this.  Not to persuade some random AC who might be considered trolling, but to sway a PHB to buy American when it comes to their network fabric instead of dodgy equipment from overseas.  Equipment that might just have a ssh port appear if the right knock sequence is done which allows full access to the router and its config.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>[ Citation Needed ] Please link some evidence pointing to this .
Not to persuade some random AC who might be considered trolling , but to sway a PHB to buy American when it comes to their network fabric instead of dodgy equipment from overseas .
Equipment that might just have a ssh port appear if the right knock sequence is done which allows full access to the router and its config .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[Citation Needed]Please link some evidence pointing to this.
Not to persuade some random AC who might be considered trolling, but to sway a PHB to buy American when it comes to their network fabric instead of dodgy equipment from overseas.
Equipment that might just have a ssh port appear if the right knock sequence is done which allows full access to the router and its config.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30419904</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420372</id>
	<title>Replacement Propoganda:</title>
	<author>Anci3nt of Days</author>
	<datestamp>1260643020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Support World Peace!</p><p>CORRECTION: Support WWW Police!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Support World Peace ! CORRECTION : Support WWW Police !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Support World Peace!CORRECTION: Support WWW Police!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420574</id>
	<title>Landmines.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260644820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd be glad if there was no money in the maufacture of landmines. Who cares about cyber-whatever?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd be glad if there was no money in the maufacture of landmines .
Who cares about cyber-whatever ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd be glad if there was no money in the maufacture of landmines.
Who cares about cyber-whatever?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30422098</id>
	<title>Re:Here's a good first step ...</title>
	<author>Sulphur</author>
	<datestamp>1260713940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are you having file system problems?</p><p>It looked like the post was preceded and followed by the post.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you having file system problems ? It looked like the post was preceded and followed by the post .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you having file system problems?It looked like the post was preceded and followed by the post.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420130</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_2117250_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30424224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420940
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_2117250_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420048
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_2117250_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30423924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30419904
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_2117250_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30423488
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30419904
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_2117250_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30421036
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30419904
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_2117250_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420600
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30419904
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_2117250_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420618
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420016
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_2117250_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30422578
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420580
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_2117250_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30422084
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420174
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_2117250_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420714
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420580
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_2117250_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30422098
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30419904
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_2117250_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30421918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420174
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_2117250_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420182
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420016
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_2117250_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30423384
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420048
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_2117250_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30428234
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420174
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_2117250_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30421578
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420048
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_2117250_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30421816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30419904
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_2117250_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30430114
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30419904
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_2117250_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30422254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30419904
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_2117250_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30419904
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_2117250_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30419974
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30419916
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_12_2117250_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420054
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30419916
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_12_2117250.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420048
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420276
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30423384
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30421578
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_12_2117250.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420174
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30428234
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30421918
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30422084
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_12_2117250.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420644
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_12_2117250.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30419916
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30419974
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420054
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_12_2117250.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420940
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30424224
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_12_2117250.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30419904
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420456
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30430114
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30421816
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30423924
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420600
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420884
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30422254
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30421036
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30423488
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420130
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30422098
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_12_2117250.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420016
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420618
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420182
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_12_2117250.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420580
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30422578
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_12_2117250.30420714
</commentlist>
</conversation>
