<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_19_2318223</id>
	<title>Hiding From Google</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1263903060000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>penguinrecorder writes <i>"Google offers Web users a simple trade-off: Let the search giant track a substantial portion of your comings and goings around the Web, and it will offer you a free, superior online experience. Now independent security researcher <a href="http://www.thoughtcrime.org/">Moxie Marlinspike</a> is making Web users a counter-offer: <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/01/19/google\_anonymizer\_unveiled/">take Google's giveaways and keep your privacy too</a>. On Tuesday, Marlinspike launched a service he calls <a href="http://www.googlesharing.net/">GoogleSharing</a>, a plug-in for Firefox designed to give users access to Google's online offerings while cloaking their identity from the company's data collection tools. By hosting a proxy server with a collection of Google 'identities,' the privacy software will allow users temporarily to route their traffic through another computer that masks their identity by mixing their online actions with those of other users. The system is totally transparent, with no special 'alternative' websites to visit. Your normal work flow should be exactly the same."</i> GoogleSharing only works for those services not requiring a Google login; for the latter, no proxying is done.</htmltext>
<tokenext>penguinrecorder writes " Google offers Web users a simple trade-off : Let the search giant track a substantial portion of your comings and goings around the Web , and it will offer you a free , superior online experience .
Now independent security researcher Moxie Marlinspike is making Web users a counter-offer : take Google 's giveaways and keep your privacy too .
On Tuesday , Marlinspike launched a service he calls GoogleSharing , a plug-in for Firefox designed to give users access to Google 's online offerings while cloaking their identity from the company 's data collection tools .
By hosting a proxy server with a collection of Google 'identities, ' the privacy software will allow users temporarily to route their traffic through another computer that masks their identity by mixing their online actions with those of other users .
The system is totally transparent , with no special 'alternative ' websites to visit .
Your normal work flow should be exactly the same .
" GoogleSharing only works for those services not requiring a Google login ; for the latter , no proxying is done .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>penguinrecorder writes "Google offers Web users a simple trade-off: Let the search giant track a substantial portion of your comings and goings around the Web, and it will offer you a free, superior online experience.
Now independent security researcher Moxie Marlinspike is making Web users a counter-offer: take Google's giveaways and keep your privacy too.
On Tuesday, Marlinspike launched a service he calls GoogleSharing, a plug-in for Firefox designed to give users access to Google's online offerings while cloaking their identity from the company's data collection tools.
By hosting a proxy server with a collection of Google 'identities,' the privacy software will allow users temporarily to route their traffic through another computer that masks their identity by mixing their online actions with those of other users.
The system is totally transparent, with no special 'alternative' websites to visit.
Your normal work flow should be exactly the same.
" GoogleSharing only works for those services not requiring a Google login; for the latter, no proxying is done.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30835644</id>
	<title>Re:He stole my idea!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264017120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>where do I sign?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>where do I sign ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>where do I sign?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828188</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30831218</id>
	<title>Re:And we're trusting you because....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263999720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Absolutely... the best thing is to put your tinfoil hat on, and go back to BBS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Absolutely... the best thing is to put your tinfoil hat on , and go back to BBS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Absolutely... the best thing is to put your tinfoil hat on, and go back to BBS.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826954</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827130</id>
	<title>Re:And we're trusting you because....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263909900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Google is a proven risk, this guy's just a potential one.</p></div><p>This is misleading statement.
Simple risk analysis:
Google is a KNOWN risk with very substantial assets to lose if they screw up.
This guy is an UNKNOWN risk with (presumably) a lot less to lose.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google is a proven risk , this guy 's just a potential one.This is misleading statement .
Simple risk analysis : Google is a KNOWN risk with very substantial assets to lose if they screw up .
This guy is an UNKNOWN risk with ( presumably ) a lot less to lose .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google is a proven risk, this guy's just a potential one.This is misleading statement.
Simple risk analysis:
Google is a KNOWN risk with very substantial assets to lose if they screw up.
This guy is an UNKNOWN risk with (presumably) a lot less to lose.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828376</id>
	<title>Re:Woody Woodpecker says, Use Tor + SSL!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263922080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or, you could save yourself a shitload of time and just realize that<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>NO ONE GIVES A SHIT ABOUT YOUR SEARCHES OR WHAT YOU DO ONLINE.</p><p>Seriously, give it a try, trust me, no one gives a shit about you so all the crap you suggest someone setup is just a waste of time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or , you could save yourself a shitload of time and just realize that ...NO ONE GIVES A SHIT ABOUT YOUR SEARCHES OR WHAT YOU DO ONLINE.Seriously , give it a try , trust me , no one gives a shit about you so all the crap you suggest someone setup is just a waste of time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or, you could save yourself a shitload of time and just realize that ...NO ONE GIVES A SHIT ABOUT YOUR SEARCHES OR WHAT YOU DO ONLINE.Seriously, give it a try, trust me, no one gives a shit about you so all the crap you suggest someone setup is just a waste of time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826914</id>
	<title>ITYM "Inferior Services"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263908280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is Google hiding this "superior online experience"?  All I've seen is a lot of vastly inferior web crap, like Gmail.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is Google hiding this " superior online experience " ?
All I 've seen is a lot of vastly inferior web crap , like Gmail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is Google hiding this "superior online experience"?
All I've seen is a lot of vastly inferior web crap, like Gmail.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827712</id>
	<title>What's the point?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263915600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This people are using a lot of different web services but they are afraid only of this one. I can't get it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This people are using a lot of different web services but they are afraid only of this one .
I ca n't get it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This people are using a lot of different web services but they are afraid only of this one.
I can't get it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30829676</id>
	<title>a network of anonymizing proxies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263983280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At the Seeks project (http://www.seeks-project.info), we're trying to build an Open Source personal websearch proxy. Running nodes have no logging, one has SSL. Compared to googlesharing, we build a metasearch engine, so it is not limited to google.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At the Seeks project ( http : //www.seeks-project.info ) , we 're trying to build an Open Source personal websearch proxy .
Running nodes have no logging , one has SSL .
Compared to googlesharing , we build a metasearch engine , so it is not limited to google .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At the Seeks project (http://www.seeks-project.info), we're trying to build an Open Source personal websearch proxy.
Running nodes have no logging, one has SSL.
Compared to googlesharing, we build a metasearch engine, so it is not limited to google.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827594</id>
	<title>Re:Tor.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263914280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So you'd get, what, five search requests done a day?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So you 'd get , what , five search requests done a day ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you'd get, what, five search requests done a day?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826996</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30846756</id>
	<title>Another "He stole my idea"</title>
	<author>alu645</author>
	<datestamp>1264093380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am currently getting together some thoughts on similar topic. I plan to publish around 10 articles specialized on strategies to consciously manifest yourself for any information web (google is just least "enemy"). My articles should provide some ways from hiding from spam info collectors, to customize your "web", and before all to do personalised tricks on information agencies, which are able to collect anything on your person in highly global and automate way. I mean it's not problem for any "they" (from commercial agencies to background powers) to extract you as entity, and put your friends your interests and your opinions / activity into folder. Another big fail I'm trying to find improvisation ways is managing your track in web history (how do you appear if I extract all your written material from past from web). This subject is highly important for me, as I am psychically unstable, and I would welcomed unified way to delete / comment / find everything published by myself in past. But priority is antispam and customizations to "automatically extracted entity". Anyone feels destined to colaborate? Leave me a message in any case.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am currently getting together some thoughts on similar topic .
I plan to publish around 10 articles specialized on strategies to consciously manifest yourself for any information web ( google is just least " enemy " ) .
My articles should provide some ways from hiding from spam info collectors , to customize your " web " , and before all to do personalised tricks on information agencies , which are able to collect anything on your person in highly global and automate way .
I mean it 's not problem for any " they " ( from commercial agencies to background powers ) to extract you as entity , and put your friends your interests and your opinions / activity into folder .
Another big fail I 'm trying to find improvisation ways is managing your track in web history ( how do you appear if I extract all your written material from past from web ) .
This subject is highly important for me , as I am psychically unstable , and I would welcomed unified way to delete / comment / find everything published by myself in past .
But priority is antispam and customizations to " automatically extracted entity " .
Anyone feels destined to colaborate ?
Leave me a message in any case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am currently getting together some thoughts on similar topic.
I plan to publish around 10 articles specialized on strategies to consciously manifest yourself for any information web (google is just least "enemy").
My articles should provide some ways from hiding from spam info collectors, to customize your "web", and before all to do personalised tricks on information agencies, which are able to collect anything on your person in highly global and automate way.
I mean it's not problem for any "they" (from commercial agencies to background powers) to extract you as entity, and put your friends your interests and your opinions / activity into folder.
Another big fail I'm trying to find improvisation ways is managing your track in web history (how do you appear if I extract all your written material from past from web).
This subject is highly important for me, as I am psychically unstable, and I would welcomed unified way to delete / comment / find everything published by myself in past.
But priority is antispam and customizations to "automatically extracted entity".
Anyone feels destined to colaborate?
Leave me a message in any case.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827022</id>
	<title>not exactly the same</title>
	<author>memnock</author>
	<datestamp>1263909060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>since it just does searches, but what about <a href="http://scroogle.org/" title="scroogle.org" rel="nofollow">scroogle</a> [scroogle.org]?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>since it just does searches , but what about scroogle [ scroogle.org ] ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>since it just does searches, but what about scroogle [scroogle.org]?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826896</id>
	<title>Why</title>
	<author>cosm</author>
	<datestamp>1263908100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext> Is it me, or has Google started to slide in the media towards away from its 'Don't Be Evil' policy? Personally, I think they operate well within moral bounds, but to a lot of major networks, blogs, and news aggregates, the opposite seems to be opines. <br> <br>In principle, most want their usage statistics retained for a short-while, if at all. Most prefer their statistics only confided with first channel of contact as well. Are people considering that these mass usage statistics may comprise some of the magic that makes their platform so successful and useful? Continual refinement due to constant sources of usage information, IMO, seems to be working great for them.  The naysayers neigh, but until I see a genuine effort by other companies to be as philanthropic, open-source friendly, charitable, and hospitable, I will shelve my skepticism and contempt for their nosiness in hopes of a continually great service. <br> <br> How much would people complain if search became a pay-per-search model? If all those in favor of eliminating usage-statistics completely had their way, Ad-Words and dynamic advertising content would be out, and these search giants would be looking for another form of revenue. Something to think about...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is it me , or has Google started to slide in the media towards away from its 'Do n't Be Evil ' policy ?
Personally , I think they operate well within moral bounds , but to a lot of major networks , blogs , and news aggregates , the opposite seems to be opines .
In principle , most want their usage statistics retained for a short-while , if at all .
Most prefer their statistics only confided with first channel of contact as well .
Are people considering that these mass usage statistics may comprise some of the magic that makes their platform so successful and useful ?
Continual refinement due to constant sources of usage information , IMO , seems to be working great for them .
The naysayers neigh , but until I see a genuine effort by other companies to be as philanthropic , open-source friendly , charitable , and hospitable , I will shelve my skepticism and contempt for their nosiness in hopes of a continually great service .
How much would people complain if search became a pay-per-search model ?
If all those in favor of eliminating usage-statistics completely had their way , Ad-Words and dynamic advertising content would be out , and these search giants would be looking for another form of revenue .
Something to think about.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Is it me, or has Google started to slide in the media towards away from its 'Don't Be Evil' policy?
Personally, I think they operate well within moral bounds, but to a lot of major networks, blogs, and news aggregates, the opposite seems to be opines.
In principle, most want their usage statistics retained for a short-while, if at all.
Most prefer their statistics only confided with first channel of contact as well.
Are people considering that these mass usage statistics may comprise some of the magic that makes their platform so successful and useful?
Continual refinement due to constant sources of usage information, IMO, seems to be working great for them.
The naysayers neigh, but until I see a genuine effort by other companies to be as philanthropic, open-source friendly, charitable, and hospitable, I will shelve my skepticism and contempt for their nosiness in hopes of a continually great service.
How much would people complain if search became a pay-per-search model?
If all those in favor of eliminating usage-statistics completely had their way, Ad-Words and dynamic advertising content would be out, and these search giants would be looking for another form of revenue.
Something to think about...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827088</id>
	<title>What does this do that...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263909480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...not having a Google account, disabling scripts, and blocking all Google cookies including Analytics doesn't do except give Mr. Moxie a chance to track me?  Why should I trust him more than Google?  I know what Google is after.  What does he want?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...not having a Google account , disabling scripts , and blocking all Google cookies including Analytics does n't do except give Mr. Moxie a chance to track me ?
Why should I trust him more than Google ?
I know what Google is after .
What does he want ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...not having a Google account, disabling scripts, and blocking all Google cookies including Analytics doesn't do except give Mr. Moxie a chance to track me?
Why should I trust him more than Google?
I know what Google is after.
What does he want?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828066</id>
	<title>Re:"Don't trust Google, trust me!"</title>
	<author>FlyingBishop</author>
	<datestamp>1263919260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow, that's the first time I've seen that used where ???? has about eighty possible inputs, all of which make sense.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , that 's the first time I 've seen that used where ? ? ? ?
has about eighty possible inputs , all of which make sense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, that's the first time I've seen that used where ????
has about eighty possible inputs, all of which make sense.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826792</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827676</id>
	<title>We already have a solution for that:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263915180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey Google! Try to find out who I am, NOW!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey Google !
Try to find out who I am , NOW !
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey Google!
Try to find out who I am, NOW!
;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30830094</id>
	<title>Re:Woody Woodpecker says, Use Tor + SSL!</title>
	<author>eulernet</author>
	<datestamp>1263988320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or more simply, use OperaTor (Opera+Tor):</p><p><a href="http://archetwist.com/en/opera/operator" title="archetwist.com">http://archetwist.com/en/opera/operator</a> [archetwist.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or more simply , use OperaTor ( Opera + Tor ) : http : //archetwist.com/en/opera/operator [ archetwist.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or more simply, use OperaTor (Opera+Tor):http://archetwist.com/en/opera/operator [archetwist.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827652</id>
	<title>Re:And we're trusting you because....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263915000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If only the blind could see. Fanatics, extremists, and zealots, you are all deaf and dumb to reality. Google? Please, spare me, you are too much. You trusting fools, you will live and learn. Stop living in Oceania. You are all sheep. "Nineteen Eighty-Four," Orwell, read it if you \_are\_ able to read. LOL. Too funny, way too funny!! A bunch of living-at-home, guest-house weenies. Try a life away from your sweaty, stained sheets...</p><p>P.S. I would create an account, but really, why bother?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If only the blind could see .
Fanatics , extremists , and zealots , you are all deaf and dumb to reality .
Google ? Please , spare me , you are too much .
You trusting fools , you will live and learn .
Stop living in Oceania .
You are all sheep .
" Nineteen Eighty-Four , " Orwell , read it if you \ _are \ _ able to read .
LOL. Too funny , way too funny ! !
A bunch of living-at-home , guest-house weenies .
Try a life away from your sweaty , stained sheets...P.S .
I would create an account , but really , why bother ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If only the blind could see.
Fanatics, extremists, and zealots, you are all deaf and dumb to reality.
Google? Please, spare me, you are too much.
You trusting fools, you will live and learn.
Stop living in Oceania.
You are all sheep.
"Nineteen Eighty-Four," Orwell, read it if you \_are\_ able to read.
LOL. Too funny, way too funny!!
A bunch of living-at-home, guest-house weenies.
Try a life away from your sweaty, stained sheets...P.S.
I would create an account, but really, why bother?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826732</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30829022</id>
	<title>Re:Woody Woodpecker says, Use Tor + SSL!</title>
	<author>mister\_playboy</author>
	<datestamp>1263931020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>and for mail:</p><p>Safe-Mail:<br>No cookies, no script, no java, no flash required!<br><a href="https://www.safe-mail.net/" title="safe-mail.net">https://www.safe-mail.net/</a> [safe-mail.net] </p></div><p>Thanks for the link... but you do need JavaScript enabled to use Safe-Mail.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>and for mail : Safe-Mail : No cookies , no script , no java , no flash required ! https : //www.safe-mail.net/ [ safe-mail.net ] Thanks for the link... but you do need JavaScript enabled to use Safe-Mail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and for mail:Safe-Mail:No cookies, no script, no java, no flash required!https://www.safe-mail.net/ [safe-mail.net] Thanks for the link... but you do need JavaScript enabled to use Safe-Mail.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828228</id>
	<title>my easy trick</title>
	<author>AnAdventurer</author>
	<datestamp>1263920940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I use Google as a one word spell check. Make's my browsing and web habits data useless. Or at least I like to think so.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I use Google as a one word spell check .
Make 's my browsing and web habits data useless .
Or at least I like to think so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use Google as a one word spell check.
Make's my browsing and web habits data useless.
Or at least I like to think so.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30829208</id>
	<title>Re:Who has to use Google?</title>
	<author>vux984</author>
	<datestamp>1264020180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Nearly every Google product competes with at least two other brands for the same thing. If you don't like Google, you can use something else.</i></p><p>If a site integrates a google search, I cannot easily search the site without using google.<br>If a site integrates a youtube video, I cannot easily watch that video withou using google.<br>If a site uses google analytics, I would have to actively block it to avoid being tracked by google.<br>If a site displays google ads, I would have to actively block it to avoid being tracked by google.</p><p>If a friend publishes their photos on picasa, uses their blogger, etc, etc I have to actively browse through proxies or sacrifice access to the content to avoid being tracked by google.</p><p>If a friend uses a gmail account, there is little I can do except refuse to email him to avoid having my mail datamined by google; and nothing at all I can do to prevent having my address cross referenced with other gmail address books enabling google to fit me into a social network.</p><p>No, sorry, but its not as simple as just choosing another brand(s) to deal with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nearly every Google product competes with at least two other brands for the same thing .
If you do n't like Google , you can use something else.If a site integrates a google search , I can not easily search the site without using google.If a site integrates a youtube video , I can not easily watch that video withou using google.If a site uses google analytics , I would have to actively block it to avoid being tracked by google.If a site displays google ads , I would have to actively block it to avoid being tracked by google.If a friend publishes their photos on picasa , uses their blogger , etc , etc I have to actively browse through proxies or sacrifice access to the content to avoid being tracked by google.If a friend uses a gmail account , there is little I can do except refuse to email him to avoid having my mail datamined by google ; and nothing at all I can do to prevent having my address cross referenced with other gmail address books enabling google to fit me into a social network.No , sorry , but its not as simple as just choosing another brand ( s ) to deal with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nearly every Google product competes with at least two other brands for the same thing.
If you don't like Google, you can use something else.If a site integrates a google search, I cannot easily search the site without using google.If a site integrates a youtube video, I cannot easily watch that video withou using google.If a site uses google analytics, I would have to actively block it to avoid being tracked by google.If a site displays google ads, I would have to actively block it to avoid being tracked by google.If a friend publishes their photos on picasa, uses their blogger, etc, etc I have to actively browse through proxies or sacrifice access to the content to avoid being tracked by google.If a friend uses a gmail account, there is little I can do except refuse to email him to avoid having my mail datamined by google; and nothing at all I can do to prevent having my address cross referenced with other gmail address books enabling google to fit me into a social network.No, sorry, but its not as simple as just choosing another brand(s) to deal with.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826758</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826796</id>
	<title>Google offer a service for this!!</title>
	<author>myowntrueself</author>
	<datestamp>1263907440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Called "Google Opt Out":</p><p><a href="http://www.theonion.com/content/video/google\_opt\_out\_feature\_lets\_users" title="theonion.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.theonion.com/content/video/google\_opt\_out\_feature\_lets\_users</a> [theonion.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Called " Google Opt Out " : http : //www.theonion.com/content/video/google \ _opt \ _out \ _feature \ _lets \ _users [ theonion.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Called "Google Opt Out":http://www.theonion.com/content/video/google\_opt\_out\_feature\_lets\_users [theonion.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826736</id>
	<title>"Don't trust Google, trust me!"</title>
	<author>Arancaytar</author>
	<datestamp>1263906960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Instead of sending your private information to Google directly, use my awesome proxy server to send your private information to Google anonymously. I promise I will not snoop any more than Google does!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Instead of sending your private information to Google directly , use my awesome proxy server to send your private information to Google anonymously .
I promise I will not snoop any more than Google does !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Instead of sending your private information to Google directly, use my awesome proxy server to send your private information to Google anonymously.
I promise I will not snoop any more than Google does!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827372</id>
	<title>Re:Why</title>
	<author>ugen</author>
	<datestamp>1263912180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ad-words have nothing to do with data retention. They show you ads based on the current keywords you enter. While there is some targeting, Adwords and similar services would work just fine without it.<br>So there is no need to keep any information about anyone's online habits, searches etc. in order to present relevant ads and make money. This is purely a strawman argument.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ad-words have nothing to do with data retention .
They show you ads based on the current keywords you enter .
While there is some targeting , Adwords and similar services would work just fine without it.So there is no need to keep any information about anyone 's online habits , searches etc .
in order to present relevant ads and make money .
This is purely a strawman argument .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ad-words have nothing to do with data retention.
They show you ads based on the current keywords you enter.
While there is some targeting, Adwords and similar services would work just fine without it.So there is no need to keep any information about anyone's online habits, searches etc.
in order to present relevant ads and make money.
This is purely a strawman argument.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826896</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827058</id>
	<title>Re:Why</title>
	<author>lidocaineus</author>
	<datestamp>1263909240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're deluding yourself if you think "Don't Be Evil" is more than just a throwaway phrase.  While it can be argued that Google started out altruistic, it's a corporation, and by nature all corporations are there for one thing - to make money.  Don't Be Evil is just some vague guide they put out there that basically means "we'll try to not do things that would piss off the consumer but it's in no way a priority."</p><p>That said, I use google all the time.  I just understand how much to trust them (read: not very much).  It's ridiculous how many people fawn over Google as if they're holier than thou  because of one phrase, but hey, it's working.  If they were serious, they'd put together a Bill of Rights and stick hardcore to it - THEN I'd be willing to see them in a (slightly) different light.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're deluding yourself if you think " Do n't Be Evil " is more than just a throwaway phrase .
While it can be argued that Google started out altruistic , it 's a corporation , and by nature all corporations are there for one thing - to make money .
Do n't Be Evil is just some vague guide they put out there that basically means " we 'll try to not do things that would piss off the consumer but it 's in no way a priority .
" That said , I use google all the time .
I just understand how much to trust them ( read : not very much ) .
It 's ridiculous how many people fawn over Google as if they 're holier than thou because of one phrase , but hey , it 's working .
If they were serious , they 'd put together a Bill of Rights and stick hardcore to it - THEN I 'd be willing to see them in a ( slightly ) different light .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're deluding yourself if you think "Don't Be Evil" is more than just a throwaway phrase.
While it can be argued that Google started out altruistic, it's a corporation, and by nature all corporations are there for one thing - to make money.
Don't Be Evil is just some vague guide they put out there that basically means "we'll try to not do things that would piss off the consumer but it's in no way a priority.
"That said, I use google all the time.
I just understand how much to trust them (read: not very much).
It's ridiculous how many people fawn over Google as if they're holier than thou  because of one phrase, but hey, it's working.
If they were serious, they'd put together a Bill of Rights and stick hardcore to it - THEN I'd be willing to see them in a (slightly) different light.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826896</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826954</id>
	<title>Re:And we're trusting you because....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263908580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I, um, trust neither... is that an option?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I , um , trust neither... is that an option ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I, um, trust neither... is that an option?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826732</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30837034</id>
	<title>Re:Woody Woodpecker says, Use Tor + SSL!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263979740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"</p><p>Or, you could save yourself a shitload of time and just realize that<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>NO ONE GIVES A SHIT ABOUT YOUR SEARCHES OR WHAT YOU DO ONLINE.</p><p>Seriously, give it a try, trust me, no one gives a shit about you so all the crap you suggest someone setup is just a waste of time."</p><p>Typical Cointelpro type disinformation response, no doubt backed by sockpuppet accounts to mod up. The parent poster was right and those who enjoy being peeping toms have everything to lose by following his advice.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Or , you could save yourself a shitload of time and just realize that ...NO ONE GIVES A SHIT ABOUT YOUR SEARCHES OR WHAT YOU DO ONLINE.Seriously , give it a try , trust me , no one gives a shit about you so all the crap you suggest someone setup is just a waste of time .
" Typical Cointelpro type disinformation response , no doubt backed by sockpuppet accounts to mod up .
The parent poster was right and those who enjoy being peeping toms have everything to lose by following his advice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Or, you could save yourself a shitload of time and just realize that ...NO ONE GIVES A SHIT ABOUT YOUR SEARCHES OR WHAT YOU DO ONLINE.Seriously, give it a try, trust me, no one gives a shit about you so all the crap you suggest someone setup is just a waste of time.
"Typical Cointelpro type disinformation response, no doubt backed by sockpuppet accounts to mod up.
The parent poster was right and those who enjoy being peeping toms have everything to lose by following his advice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828376</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827386</id>
	<title>Re:Would you pay for Google ad-free?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263912360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They lost their "Don't be evil" cherry when the <a href="http://www.submitexpress.com/news/shownews.php?article=1143" title="submitexpress.com" rel="nofollow">Miserable Failure</a> [submitexpress.com] bomb was cleared up within days of Obama taking office, after being there for four years while Bush was in office.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They lost their " Do n't be evil " cherry when the Miserable Failure [ submitexpress.com ] bomb was cleared up within days of Obama taking office , after being there for four years while Bush was in office .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They lost their "Don't be evil" cherry when the Miserable Failure [submitexpress.com] bomb was cleared up within days of Obama taking office, after being there for four years while Bush was in office.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826898</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828148</id>
	<title>Re:Stealing by any other name still stinks as much</title>
	<author>bnenning</author>
	<datestamp>1263920040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And going to the bathroom during commercials is stealing too, right? You may have a promising legal career at Time Warner.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And going to the bathroom during commercials is stealing too , right ?
You may have a promising legal career at Time Warner .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And going to the bathroom during commercials is stealing too, right?
You may have a promising legal career at Time Warner.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827480</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30830258</id>
	<title>HTGRQ Business model</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263990240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google buys out Marlinspike in 3<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. 2<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... 1<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google buys out Marlinspike in 3 .. 2 ... 1 .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google buys out Marlinspike in 3 .. 2 ... 1 ...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827460</id>
	<title>Re:Would you pay for Google ad-free?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263912960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>$5 per month for full Google access, ad-free with strong privacy? Very tempting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>$ 5 per month for full Google access , ad-free with strong privacy ?
Very tempting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>$5 per month for full Google access, ad-free with strong privacy?
Very tempting.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826898</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828050</id>
	<title>Re:Why</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263919080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, nice job moderating me as 'flamebait' for distrusting a corporation.</p><p>That's proof right there that google has somehow gotten people to follow it with some kind of reverent attitude.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , nice job moderating me as 'flamebait ' for distrusting a corporation.That 's proof right there that google has somehow gotten people to follow it with some kind of reverent attitude .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, nice job moderating me as 'flamebait' for distrusting a corporation.That's proof right there that google has somehow gotten people to follow it with some kind of reverent attitude.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827058</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30829254</id>
	<title>Re:Why</title>
	<author>vacarul</author>
	<datestamp>1264020600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Don't be evil" is old news.. so it's no longer 100\% true for Google.<br>
To be short:<br>
-I've made a map website with a local map. My map is better than Google Maps one (made by a local company, more details), loads faster and you can search a specific street name (you can't do this in Google Maps for my location). However when you search '&lt;local word for "map"&gt; &lt;location&gt;' Google puts on top of the results it's own service widget, even if their service is worse than mine. In my opinion they should put their service together with the rest of the result, and of course, let it compete with the other websites.<br>
<br>
-I've made another website for currency exchange rates, but when you search "&lt;local currency&gt;" Google already tells you what the exchange rate is so the user will not click on any of the results. The problem is that their exchange rate is not the right one (official rate) and that their service it's not competing with the rest of the results. Instead it is always presented on top of the page, bigger fonts, right in your face etc.<br>
<br>
In the old times,  Google was only about search. Now they started creating services that are the same with services other websites offer. This is still ok. It's not ok when their services are put on top of the results, even when they are not as relevant for that keyword as other websites.<br>
<br>
<b>Before you had: </b> <br>
top of the page - paid ads<br>
first results      - most relevant websites<br>
<br>
<b>Now you have:</b> <br>
top of the page - paid ads<br>
<b>first result</b>      - Google's service, relevancy not important<br>
other results    - most relevant websites</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Do n't be evil " is old news.. so it 's no longer 100 \ % true for Google .
To be short : -I 've made a map website with a local map .
My map is better than Google Maps one ( made by a local company , more details ) , loads faster and you can search a specific street name ( you ca n't do this in Google Maps for my location ) .
However when you search ' ' Google puts on top of the results it 's own service widget , even if their service is worse than mine .
In my opinion they should put their service together with the rest of the result , and of course , let it compete with the other websites .
-I 've made another website for currency exchange rates , but when you search " " Google already tells you what the exchange rate is so the user will not click on any of the results .
The problem is that their exchange rate is not the right one ( official rate ) and that their service it 's not competing with the rest of the results .
Instead it is always presented on top of the page , bigger fonts , right in your face etc .
In the old times , Google was only about search .
Now they started creating services that are the same with services other websites offer .
This is still ok. It 's not ok when their services are put on top of the results , even when they are not as relevant for that keyword as other websites .
Before you had : top of the page - paid ads first results - most relevant websites Now you have : top of the page - paid ads first result - Google 's service , relevancy not important other results - most relevant websites</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Don't be evil" is old news.. so it's no longer 100\% true for Google.
To be short:
-I've made a map website with a local map.
My map is better than Google Maps one (made by a local company, more details), loads faster and you can search a specific street name (you can't do this in Google Maps for my location).
However when you search ' ' Google puts on top of the results it's own service widget, even if their service is worse than mine.
In my opinion they should put their service together with the rest of the result, and of course, let it compete with the other websites.
-I've made another website for currency exchange rates, but when you search "" Google already tells you what the exchange rate is so the user will not click on any of the results.
The problem is that their exchange rate is not the right one (official rate) and that their service it's not competing with the rest of the results.
Instead it is always presented on top of the page, bigger fonts, right in your face etc.
In the old times,  Google was only about search.
Now they started creating services that are the same with services other websites offer.
This is still ok. It's not ok when their services are put on top of the results, even when they are not as relevant for that keyword as other websites.
Before you had:  
top of the page - paid ads
first results      - most relevant websites

Now you have: 
top of the page - paid ads
first result      - Google's service, relevancy not important
other results    - most relevant websites</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827058</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828626</id>
	<title>MITTM?</title>
	<author>passion</author>
	<datestamp>1263924660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This sounds like a man in the middle attack to me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This sounds like a man in the middle attack to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This sounds like a man in the middle attack to me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827076</id>
	<title>Re:And we're trusting you because....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263909360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd trust a proven risk far more than an unknown risk. At least with the former, we know its limits.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd trust a proven risk far more than an unknown risk .
At least with the former , we know its limits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd trust a proven risk far more than an unknown risk.
At least with the former, we know its limits.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30836240</id>
	<title>ace in the hole</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264019640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wonder if google has anything on chinese govt officials?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder if google has anything on chinese govt officials ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder if google has anything on chinese govt officials?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827052</id>
	<title>Re:Would you pay for Google ad-free?</title>
	<author>Reilaos</author>
	<datestamp>1263909240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I dunno.  How many people would pay Slashdot to not show ads to them?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I dunno .
How many people would pay Slashdot to not show ads to them ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I dunno.
How many people would pay Slashdot to not show ads to them?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826898</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30829856</id>
	<title>Re:Why</title>
	<author>91degrees</author>
	<datestamp>1263985440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>How much would people complain if search became a pay-per-search model?</i> <br> <br>
I'd be willing to pay a small amount as a subscription to a search engine that was competitive with Google in terms of search result quality and I was certain respected privacy.  They'd probably need to throw in a bunch of other services to make it worth my while to actually sort out payment though.  No idea if there are enough others wit this opinion to make it worthwhile.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How much would people complain if search became a pay-per-search model ?
I 'd be willing to pay a small amount as a subscription to a search engine that was competitive with Google in terms of search result quality and I was certain respected privacy .
They 'd probably need to throw in a bunch of other services to make it worth my while to actually sort out payment though .
No idea if there are enough others wit this opinion to make it worthwhile .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How much would people complain if search became a pay-per-search model?
I'd be willing to pay a small amount as a subscription to a search engine that was competitive with Google in terms of search result quality and I was certain respected privacy.
They'd probably need to throw in a bunch of other services to make it worth my while to actually sort out payment though.
No idea if there are enough others wit this opinion to make it worthwhile.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826896</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827358</id>
	<title>Re:And we're trusting you because....</title>
	<author>neokushan</author>
	<datestamp>1263912120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No. And you've been warned about that kind of thinking. It's off to the Chemical sheds for you!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No .
And you 've been warned about that kind of thinking .
It 's off to the Chemical sheds for you !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.
And you've been warned about that kind of thinking.
It's off to the Chemical sheds for you!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826954</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826758</id>
	<title>Who has to use Google?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263907080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nearly every Google product competes with at least two other brands for the same thing. If you don't like Google, you can use something else.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nearly every Google product competes with at least two other brands for the same thing .
If you do n't like Google , you can use something else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nearly every Google product competes with at least two other brands for the same thing.
If you don't like Google, you can use something else.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827430</id>
	<title>take Google's giveaways</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263912660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and sacrifice your privacy to Moxie Marlinspike.</p><p>His motto is, "Don't get caught being evil."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and sacrifice your privacy to Moxie Marlinspike.His motto is , " Do n't get caught being evil .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and sacrifice your privacy to Moxie Marlinspike.His motto is, "Don't get caught being evil.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827380</id>
	<title>A joke, right?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263912360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is some kind of Google joke, right? Like, "Ha ha, silly paranoids. We set up a proxy so you could circumvent us but really it's us too and no we even know who the paranoids are that we've already been watching for nearly a decade. Oh and you're probably a terrorist too so we've already alerted the authorities."</p><p>Ok ok, so it's for reals. But am I really going to trust <a href="http://petergullberg.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/moxie-marlinspike.jpg" title="wordpress.com" rel="nofollow">this guy</a> [wordpress.com] more than I trust Google?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is some kind of Google joke , right ?
Like , " Ha ha , silly paranoids .
We set up a proxy so you could circumvent us but really it 's us too and no we even know who the paranoids are that we 've already been watching for nearly a decade .
Oh and you 're probably a terrorist too so we 've already alerted the authorities .
" Ok ok , so it 's for reals .
But am I really going to trust this guy [ wordpress.com ] more than I trust Google ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is some kind of Google joke, right?
Like, "Ha ha, silly paranoids.
We set up a proxy so you could circumvent us but really it's us too and no we even know who the paranoids are that we've already been watching for nearly a decade.
Oh and you're probably a terrorist too so we've already alerted the authorities.
"Ok ok, so it's for reals.
But am I really going to trust this guy [wordpress.com] more than I trust Google?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828142</id>
	<title>Re:Why</title>
	<author>FlyingBishop</author>
	<datestamp>1263919920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ad-words has everything to do with data retention. There is probably a limit past which more data will just give them too much of a needle in a haystack to sort through (I'd peg it at about 2 years.) However, if you think knowing search history doesn't help them improve results, you're not understanding what Google does properly.</p><p>It's not just a question of targeting. A straightforward example (though it only needs continuity over a half hour or so) is following you as you refine your search. If Google sees a lot of people searching for:<br>haiti<br>haiti earthquake<br>haiti earthquake relief<br>haiti relief organizations</p><p>Or some permutation thereof, if they see that everyone's starting at haiti and ending up at relief organizations, they might want to show some of those results when you just search for Haiti. Obviously this is a simplistic example, but you can see how in broader circumstances it's going to seriously improve search quality.</p><p>Now as far as ad-words specifically, it's very useful to know what sorts of ads people are clicking on. You don't need to know demographics so much. For a given blog X, if you can see that there's a cluster of people interested in A, B, and C, and another cluster interested in C, D, E, and F, this allows you to refine your advertisements down to just C, since everyone who reads blog X is interested in C.  Without continuity, there's no way to know that focusing on C would return much more clicks than just trying anything A-F.</p><p>And there are dozens of other ways to use the data, most of which actually are good from an end-user standpoint: better search results, more interesting ads.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ad-words has everything to do with data retention .
There is probably a limit past which more data will just give them too much of a needle in a haystack to sort through ( I 'd peg it at about 2 years .
) However , if you think knowing search history does n't help them improve results , you 're not understanding what Google does properly.It 's not just a question of targeting .
A straightforward example ( though it only needs continuity over a half hour or so ) is following you as you refine your search .
If Google sees a lot of people searching for : haitihaiti earthquakehaiti earthquake reliefhaiti relief organizationsOr some permutation thereof , if they see that everyone 's starting at haiti and ending up at relief organizations , they might want to show some of those results when you just search for Haiti .
Obviously this is a simplistic example , but you can see how in broader circumstances it 's going to seriously improve search quality.Now as far as ad-words specifically , it 's very useful to know what sorts of ads people are clicking on .
You do n't need to know demographics so much .
For a given blog X , if you can see that there 's a cluster of people interested in A , B , and C , and another cluster interested in C , D , E , and F , this allows you to refine your advertisements down to just C , since everyone who reads blog X is interested in C. Without continuity , there 's no way to know that focusing on C would return much more clicks than just trying anything A-F.And there are dozens of other ways to use the data , most of which actually are good from an end-user standpoint : better search results , more interesting ads .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ad-words has everything to do with data retention.
There is probably a limit past which more data will just give them too much of a needle in a haystack to sort through (I'd peg it at about 2 years.
) However, if you think knowing search history doesn't help them improve results, you're not understanding what Google does properly.It's not just a question of targeting.
A straightforward example (though it only needs continuity over a half hour or so) is following you as you refine your search.
If Google sees a lot of people searching for:haitihaiti earthquakehaiti earthquake reliefhaiti relief organizationsOr some permutation thereof, if they see that everyone's starting at haiti and ending up at relief organizations, they might want to show some of those results when you just search for Haiti.
Obviously this is a simplistic example, but you can see how in broader circumstances it's going to seriously improve search quality.Now as far as ad-words specifically, it's very useful to know what sorts of ads people are clicking on.
You don't need to know demographics so much.
For a given blog X, if you can see that there's a cluster of people interested in A, B, and C, and another cluster interested in C, D, E, and F, this allows you to refine your advertisements down to just C, since everyone who reads blog X is interested in C.  Without continuity, there's no way to know that focusing on C would return much more clicks than just trying anything A-F.And there are dozens of other ways to use the data, most of which actually are good from an end-user standpoint: better search results, more interesting ads.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30829384</id>
	<title>Re:Why</title>
	<author>miffo.swe</author>
	<datestamp>1263979620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The slide is a manufactured one stemming in direct link from Microsoft. If you look carefully at the bloggers, commenters, journalists etc you will start seeing a pattern. Its the same exact nicks/people lambasting Linux, dancing in joy over any new or old Microsofts product that badmouths Google. Sometime in september -09 Microsoft started a orchestred effort into throwin FUD at Google. Since finding dirt on Google is about as easy as getting a picture of Bill Gates using Linux most of it consists of lame attacks about privacy.</p><p>I dont know what Google does about this but at some point they will have to take this up into the open. No company that has tried to ignore Microsofts criminal activities and not take an open fight has ever survived.</p><p>PS. I do understand i sound like a raving lunatic to some people but please, read this and come back and tell me Microsoft is your everyday normal corporation. DS</p><p><a href="http://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php?page=2007021720190018" title="groklaw.net" rel="nofollow">http://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php?page=2007021720190018</a> [groklaw.net]<br><a href="http://antitrust.slated.org/www.iowaconsumercase.org/" title="slated.org" rel="nofollow">http://antitrust.slated.org/www.iowaconsumercase.org/</a> [slated.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The slide is a manufactured one stemming in direct link from Microsoft .
If you look carefully at the bloggers , commenters , journalists etc you will start seeing a pattern .
Its the same exact nicks/people lambasting Linux , dancing in joy over any new or old Microsofts product that badmouths Google .
Sometime in september -09 Microsoft started a orchestred effort into throwin FUD at Google .
Since finding dirt on Google is about as easy as getting a picture of Bill Gates using Linux most of it consists of lame attacks about privacy.I dont know what Google does about this but at some point they will have to take this up into the open .
No company that has tried to ignore Microsofts criminal activities and not take an open fight has ever survived.PS .
I do understand i sound like a raving lunatic to some people but please , read this and come back and tell me Microsoft is your everyday normal corporation .
DShttp : //www.groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php ? page = 2007021720190018 [ groklaw.net ] http : //antitrust.slated.org/www.iowaconsumercase.org/ [ slated.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The slide is a manufactured one stemming in direct link from Microsoft.
If you look carefully at the bloggers, commenters, journalists etc you will start seeing a pattern.
Its the same exact nicks/people lambasting Linux, dancing in joy over any new or old Microsofts product that badmouths Google.
Sometime in september -09 Microsoft started a orchestred effort into throwin FUD at Google.
Since finding dirt on Google is about as easy as getting a picture of Bill Gates using Linux most of it consists of lame attacks about privacy.I dont know what Google does about this but at some point they will have to take this up into the open.
No company that has tried to ignore Microsofts criminal activities and not take an open fight has ever survived.PS.
I do understand i sound like a raving lunatic to some people but please, read this and come back and tell me Microsoft is your everyday normal corporation.
DShttp://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php?page=2007021720190018 [groklaw.net]http://antitrust.slated.org/www.iowaconsumercase.org/ [slated.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826896</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30833966</id>
	<title>Google thinks code was stolen</title>
	<author>slyborg</author>
	<datestamp>1264010760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's why they are really mad. If it was just a few human rights activists that got hacked, jacked, and sent to prison for 10 years in China, Brin and the boys wouldn't have batted an eye.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's why they are really mad .
If it was just a few human rights activists that got hacked , jacked , and sent to prison for 10 years in China , Brin and the boys would n't have batted an eye .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's why they are really mad.
If it was just a few human rights activists that got hacked, jacked, and sent to prison for 10 years in China, Brin and the boys wouldn't have batted an eye.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827048</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30833526</id>
	<title>Re:Woody Woodpecker says, Use Tor + SSL!</title>
	<author>BJ\_Covert\_Action</author>
	<datestamp>1264009020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>For all you know, he works for a government contractor or agency. It is possible he has access to data that most folk don't. That and that alone can make him a target of various entities without him even knowing it.
<br> <br>
Of course, for the majority of people what you say is likely very true. However, it is important to note that slashdot is a very techie skewed crowd and folks who work in techie fields have a lot of attractive job options in the sensitive data world.
<br> <br>
Food for thought.</htmltext>
<tokenext>For all you know , he works for a government contractor or agency .
It is possible he has access to data that most folk do n't .
That and that alone can make him a target of various entities without him even knowing it .
Of course , for the majority of people what you say is likely very true .
However , it is important to note that slashdot is a very techie skewed crowd and folks who work in techie fields have a lot of attractive job options in the sensitive data world .
Food for thought .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For all you know, he works for a government contractor or agency.
It is possible he has access to data that most folk don't.
That and that alone can make him a target of various entities without him even knowing it.
Of course, for the majority of people what you say is likely very true.
However, it is important to note that slashdot is a very techie skewed crowd and folks who work in techie fields have a lot of attractive job options in the sensitive data world.
Food for thought.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828376</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827182</id>
	<title>Thulsa Doom speaks!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263910440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>"My child, you have come to me my son. For who now is your father if it is not me? I am the well spring, from which you flow. When I am gone, you will have never been. What would your world be, without me? My son." -Thulsa Doom<br> <br>Get down on your god damn knees and pray for the sweet salvation of Thulsa Doom you fucking slug! Who else could bring you to your full potential but Thulsa Doom? Who else could show you your place in the cosmos? You owe Thulsa Doom your eternal devotion!<br> <br>Thulsa Doom!</htmltext>
<tokenext>" My child , you have come to me my son .
For who now is your father if it is not me ?
I am the well spring , from which you flow .
When I am gone , you will have never been .
What would your world be , without me ?
My son .
" -Thulsa Doom Get down on your god damn knees and pray for the sweet salvation of Thulsa Doom you fucking slug !
Who else could bring you to your full potential but Thulsa Doom ?
Who else could show you your place in the cosmos ?
You owe Thulsa Doom your eternal devotion !
Thulsa Doom !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"My child, you have come to me my son.
For who now is your father if it is not me?
I am the well spring, from which you flow.
When I am gone, you will have never been.
What would your world be, without me?
My son.
" -Thulsa Doom Get down on your god damn knees and pray for the sweet salvation of Thulsa Doom you fucking slug!
Who else could bring you to your full potential but Thulsa Doom?
Who else could show you your place in the cosmos?
You owe Thulsa Doom your eternal devotion!
Thulsa Doom!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826854</id>
	<title>Now HE can track you on his proxy</title>
	<author>syousef</author>
	<datestamp>1263907860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nice tradeoff. Now HE can track you on his proxy. He can sell the information too (in aggregated form if he's scrupulous).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nice tradeoff .
Now HE can track you on his proxy .
He can sell the information too ( in aggregated form if he 's scrupulous ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nice tradeoff.
Now HE can track you on his proxy.
He can sell the information too (in aggregated form if he's scrupulous).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30832466</id>
	<title>Re:Proxy is overkill</title>
	<author>thePowerOfGrayskull</author>
	<datestamp>1264005480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There's also Scroogle; if you set you search URL to <a href="http://scroogle.org/cgi-bin/nbbwssl.cgi?Gw=" title="scroogle.org">http://scroogle.org/cgi-bin/nbbwssl.cgi?Gw=</a> [scroogle.org]", alternatively you can go through SSL (it's slower) at <a href="https://ssl.scroogle.org./" title="ssl.scroogle.org">https://ssl.scroogle.org./</a> [ssl.scroogle.org]  It proxies simple google searches and strips outbound tracking.
<p>
As far as whether it's trustworthy or not, I haven't been able to track down yet...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's also Scroogle ; if you set you search URL to http : //scroogle.org/cgi-bin/nbbwssl.cgi ? Gw = [ scroogle.org ] " , alternatively you can go through SSL ( it 's slower ) at https : //ssl.scroogle.org./ [ ssl.scroogle.org ] It proxies simple google searches and strips outbound tracking .
As far as whether it 's trustworthy or not , I have n't been able to track down yet.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's also Scroogle; if you set you search URL to http://scroogle.org/cgi-bin/nbbwssl.cgi?Gw= [scroogle.org]", alternatively you can go through SSL (it's slower) at https://ssl.scroogle.org./ [ssl.scroogle.org]  It proxies simple google searches and strips outbound tracking.
As far as whether it's trustworthy or not, I haven't been able to track down yet...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826752</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827576</id>
	<title>Re:And we're trusting you because....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263914160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why not just get the Ghostery extension for Firefox.  It blocks all the things like google analytics, doubleclick, etc.</p><p>I also use TrackMeNot - another free firefox extension, it sends a number of queries to Google every minute to skew their data collection on your IP.  The queries are seeded from RSS feeds selected by the user and so are basically random each time.  I just use a load of tech feeds, food blogs and that kind of thing.  Not sure how much it'll actually do, but it's transparent so i'm not fussed.</p><p>Both are free, as i said, and neither need send any data to anyone off your machine.  I really recommend Ghostery though, http://www.ghostery.com/, it's seamless and is such a useful tool.  You can set it to auto-block everything which is what I do.  It doesn't block ads or anything like that (i still use Adblock+), but it will help protect your privacy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why not just get the Ghostery extension for Firefox .
It blocks all the things like google analytics , doubleclick , etc.I also use TrackMeNot - another free firefox extension , it sends a number of queries to Google every minute to skew their data collection on your IP .
The queries are seeded from RSS feeds selected by the user and so are basically random each time .
I just use a load of tech feeds , food blogs and that kind of thing .
Not sure how much it 'll actually do , but it 's transparent so i 'm not fussed.Both are free , as i said , and neither need send any data to anyone off your machine .
I really recommend Ghostery though , http : //www.ghostery.com/ , it 's seamless and is such a useful tool .
You can set it to auto-block everything which is what I do .
It does n't block ads or anything like that ( i still use Adblock + ) , but it will help protect your privacy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why not just get the Ghostery extension for Firefox.
It blocks all the things like google analytics, doubleclick, etc.I also use TrackMeNot - another free firefox extension, it sends a number of queries to Google every minute to skew their data collection on your IP.
The queries are seeded from RSS feeds selected by the user and so are basically random each time.
I just use a load of tech feeds, food blogs and that kind of thing.
Not sure how much it'll actually do, but it's transparent so i'm not fussed.Both are free, as i said, and neither need send any data to anyone off your machine.
I really recommend Ghostery though, http://www.ghostery.com/, it's seamless and is such a useful tool.
You can set it to auto-block everything which is what I do.
It doesn't block ads or anything like that (i still use Adblock+), but it will help protect your privacy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826732</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827060</id>
	<title>Woody Woodpecker says, Use Tor + SSL!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263909300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Download, install, properly configure Tor:<br><a href="https://www.torproject.org/" title="torproject.org" rel="nofollow">https://www.torproject.org/</a> [torproject.org]</p><p>Certainly you should choose an open source and free operating system to<br>increase your security/privacy: <a href="http://www.distrowatch.com/" title="distrowatch.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.distrowatch.com/</a> [distrowatch.com]</p><p>Use one of the many tools available to build your own Linux liveCD/DVD/USB<br>with Tor installed/configured and yank out all of your HDDs or unplug them<br>while using Tor via Linux liveCD/DVD/USB, then while running Tor:</p><p>Scroogle SSL:<br><a href="https://ssl.scroogle.org/" title="scroogle.org" rel="nofollow">https://ssl.scroogle.org/</a> [scroogle.org]</p><p>and for mail:</p><p>Safe-Mail:<br>No cookies, no script, no java, no flash required!<br><a href="https://www.safe-mail.net/" title="safe-mail.net" rel="nofollow">https://www.safe-mail.net/</a> [safe-mail.net]</p><p>In the words of Woody Woodpecker:<br>Hah ha ha HAH ha, Hah ha ha HAH ha, HAHAHAHHAHAHHAAH!</p><p>Fuck you corporations, fuck you snoopers, I do it MY WAY.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Download , install , properly configure Tor : https : //www.torproject.org/ [ torproject.org ] Certainly you should choose an open source and free operating system toincrease your security/privacy : http : //www.distrowatch.com/ [ distrowatch.com ] Use one of the many tools available to build your own Linux liveCD/DVD/USBwith Tor installed/configured and yank out all of your HDDs or unplug themwhile using Tor via Linux liveCD/DVD/USB , then while running Tor : Scroogle SSL : https : //ssl.scroogle.org/ [ scroogle.org ] and for mail : Safe-Mail : No cookies , no script , no java , no flash required ! https : //www.safe-mail.net/ [ safe-mail.net ] In the words of Woody Woodpecker : Hah ha ha HAH ha , Hah ha ha HAH ha , HAHAHAHHAHAHHAAH ! Fuck you corporations , fuck you snoopers , I do it MY WAY .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Download, install, properly configure Tor:https://www.torproject.org/ [torproject.org]Certainly you should choose an open source and free operating system toincrease your security/privacy: http://www.distrowatch.com/ [distrowatch.com]Use one of the many tools available to build your own Linux liveCD/DVD/USBwith Tor installed/configured and yank out all of your HDDs or unplug themwhile using Tor via Linux liveCD/DVD/USB, then while running Tor:Scroogle SSL:https://ssl.scroogle.org/ [scroogle.org]and for mail:Safe-Mail:No cookies, no script, no java, no flash required!https://www.safe-mail.net/ [safe-mail.net]In the words of Woody Woodpecker:Hah ha ha HAH ha, Hah ha ha HAH ha, HAHAHAHHAHAHHAAH!Fuck you corporations, fuck you snoopers, I do it MY WAY.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827260</id>
	<title>now how do you hide from the hiding tool?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263911040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So yo dont trust Google, the company just told China where it gets off. Then you will trust this unknown anonymizer plug in. Great, would you like to help me cash the 9 million dollars I have stolen from the Nigerian Oil Company?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So yo dont trust Google , the company just told China where it gets off .
Then you will trust this unknown anonymizer plug in .
Great , would you like to help me cash the 9 million dollars I have stolen from the Nigerian Oil Company ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So yo dont trust Google, the company just told China where it gets off.
Then you will trust this unknown anonymizer plug in.
Great, would you like to help me cash the 9 million dollars I have stolen from the Nigerian Oil Company?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826844</id>
	<title>Re:And we're trusting you because....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263907800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you trust Google, great, but don't say "we".   Google's changed - a lot.  Given the breaches, and their <i>relentless</i> march of ever more invasive monitoring on every device and platform they can get their fingers into, I trust this random stranger more than Google.   Google is a proven risk, this guy's just a potential one.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you trust Google , great , but do n't say " we " .
Google 's changed - a lot .
Given the breaches , and their relentless march of ever more invasive monitoring on every device and platform they can get their fingers into , I trust this random stranger more than Google .
Google is a proven risk , this guy 's just a potential one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you trust Google, great, but don't say "we".
Google's changed - a lot.
Given the breaches, and their relentless march of ever more invasive monitoring on every device and platform they can get their fingers into, I trust this random stranger more than Google.
Google is a proven risk, this guy's just a potential one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826732</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30909942</id>
	<title>google toolbar invades privacy</title>
	<author>BrentRJones</author>
	<datestamp>1264500660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google Toolbar Tracks Browsing Even After Users Choose "Disable" -</p><p>
&nbsp; <a href="http://www.benedelman.org/news/012610-1.html" title="benedelman.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.benedelman.org/news/012610-1.html</a> [benedelman.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google Toolbar Tracks Browsing Even After Users Choose " Disable " -   http : //www.benedelman.org/news/012610-1.html [ benedelman.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google Toolbar Tracks Browsing Even After Users Choose "Disable" -
  http://www.benedelman.org/news/012610-1.html [benedelman.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827050</id>
	<title>Re:Would you pay for Google ad-free?</title>
	<author>asdf7890</author>
	<datestamp>1263909180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Would anybody pay Google to not show ads to them?</p></div><p>Perhaps, yes. I would, though I don't know if the amount I'd be wiling to pay woudl be enough to make it worth anyones while running such a scheme - Google's ads are not at all irritating compared to other options so I really don't mind them enough to be bothered enough to pay more than, say, a few  per year. Some might pay for "not being tracked", but that isn't going to work because if you are not tracked how will they track whether or not they should track you...</p><p>Even if there are a minority wiling to pay, and that minority would total enough income to make implementing such a system worth while, Google probably wouldn't want to go for it as they would be diluting their product which would not look good when competing with providers with undiluted product. Repeat after me: you are <i>not</i> Google's customer, you are Google's <i>product</i> which they sell to their customers. Google's customers are the advertisers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Would anybody pay Google to not show ads to them ? Perhaps , yes .
I would , though I do n't know if the amount I 'd be wiling to pay woudl be enough to make it worth anyones while running such a scheme - Google 's ads are not at all irritating compared to other options so I really do n't mind them enough to be bothered enough to pay more than , say , a few per year .
Some might pay for " not being tracked " , but that is n't going to work because if you are not tracked how will they track whether or not they should track you...Even if there are a minority wiling to pay , and that minority would total enough income to make implementing such a system worth while , Google probably would n't want to go for it as they would be diluting their product which would not look good when competing with providers with undiluted product .
Repeat after me : you are not Google 's customer , you are Google 's product which they sell to their customers .
Google 's customers are the advertisers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Would anybody pay Google to not show ads to them?Perhaps, yes.
I would, though I don't know if the amount I'd be wiling to pay woudl be enough to make it worth anyones while running such a scheme - Google's ads are not at all irritating compared to other options so I really don't mind them enough to be bothered enough to pay more than, say, a few  per year.
Some might pay for "not being tracked", but that isn't going to work because if you are not tracked how will they track whether or not they should track you...Even if there are a minority wiling to pay, and that minority would total enough income to make implementing such a system worth while, Google probably wouldn't want to go for it as they would be diluting their product which would not look good when competing with providers with undiluted product.
Repeat after me: you are not Google's customer, you are Google's product which they sell to their customers.
Google's customers are the advertisers.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826898</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826792</id>
	<title>Re:"Don't trust Google, trust me!"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263907320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>1. Setup proxy for paranoids<br>
2. Data mine the search habits of paranoids<br>
3. ????<br>
4. Profit!</htmltext>
<tokenext>1 .
Setup proxy for paranoids 2 .
Data mine the search habits of paranoids 3 .
? ? ? ? 4 .
Profit !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1.
Setup proxy for paranoids
2.
Data mine the search habits of paranoids
3.
????
4.
Profit!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826736</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30857358</id>
	<title>or if you actually want to opt out...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264152360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>you can just go here</p><p>http://www.networkadvertising.org/managing/opt\_out.asp</p><p>you can opt out of behaviorally targeted advertising from google, and a bunch of other companies as well</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you can just go herehttp : //www.networkadvertising.org/managing/opt \ _out.aspyou can opt out of behaviorally targeted advertising from google , and a bunch of other companies as well</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you can just go herehttp://www.networkadvertising.org/managing/opt\_out.aspyou can opt out of behaviorally targeted advertising from google, and a bunch of other companies as well</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826730</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826732</id>
	<title>And we're trusting you because....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263906960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>In Google we trust. In Moxie Marlinspike who wants to be in a position to collect all our Google non-logged-in content... nope.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In Google we trust .
In Moxie Marlinspike who wants to be in a position to collect all our Google non-logged-in content... nope .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Google we trust.
In Moxie Marlinspike who wants to be in a position to collect all our Google non-logged-in content... nope.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828980</id>
	<title>Re:Would you pay for Google ad-free?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263930240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> they've got to do some user tracking because that makes ads more valuable</p></div><p>And I've got to block those ads to make Google more valuable to me.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>they 've got to do some user tracking because that makes ads more valuableAnd I 've got to block those ads to make Google more valuable to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> they've got to do some user tracking because that makes ads more valuableAnd I've got to block those ads to make Google more valuable to me.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826898</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827134</id>
	<title>Firefox?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263909900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wonder why he doesn't make an extension for Google Chrome. Oh wait...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder why he does n't make an extension for Google Chrome .
Oh wait.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder why he doesn't make an extension for Google Chrome.
Oh wait...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827480</id>
	<title>Stealing by any other name still stinks as much</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263913080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Google offers you a choice.  If one doesn't want to participate then fine, don't use Google.  If one uses Google and expects them to keep their part of the bargain then they should hold up their end.  Anything less is like saying: <i>I like the yummy goodness of candy bars, but I don't like paying for them, but I am clever so I use stealth to eat them without paying for them</i>.  That "clever stealth" is, by any other name, still stealing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google offers you a choice .
If one does n't want to participate then fine , do n't use Google .
If one uses Google and expects them to keep their part of the bargain then they should hold up their end .
Anything less is like saying : I like the yummy goodness of candy bars , but I do n't like paying for them , but I am clever so I use stealth to eat them without paying for them .
That " clever stealth " is , by any other name , still stealing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google offers you a choice.
If one doesn't want to participate then fine, don't use Google.
If one uses Google and expects them to keep their part of the bargain then they should hold up their end.
Anything less is like saying: I like the yummy goodness of candy bars, but I don't like paying for them, but I am clever so I use stealth to eat them without paying for them.
That "clever stealth" is, by any other name, still stealing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827842</id>
	<title>I Call Trojan</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263916800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So I'm supposed to install this Proxy add on, then put my google account details, that has my google docs and google checkout account?</p><p>Ummm<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.... no</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So I 'm supposed to install this Proxy add on , then put my google account details , that has my google docs and google checkout account ? Ummm .... no</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So I'm supposed to install this Proxy add on, then put my google account details, that has my google docs and google checkout account?Ummm .... no</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826732</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30830684</id>
	<title>Re:And we're trusting you because....</title>
	<author>unick</author>
	<datestamp>1263995460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Indeed, but "types of users" and "buying habits" only emerge *after* collecting enough detailed data.  I do not beleive they start out with a specific classification in mind.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Indeed , but " types of users " and " buying habits " only emerge * after * collecting enough detailed data .
I do not beleive they start out with a specific classification in mind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Indeed, but "types of users" and "buying habits" only emerge *after* collecting enough detailed data.
I do not beleive they start out with a specific classification in mind.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828814</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30906728</id>
	<title>hosts files usage like that apk dude</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264530240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can avoid dns this way. there is this dude apk who uses them here to do that much by hardcodes of ip addresses into it so he never calls on dns servers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can avoid dns this way .
there is this dude apk who uses them here to do that much by hardcodes of ip addresses into it so he never calls on dns servers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can avoid dns this way.
there is this dude apk who uses them here to do that much by hardcodes of ip addresses into it so he never calls on dns servers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826730</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828188</id>
	<title>He stole my idea!</title>
	<author>Demonoid-Penguin</author>
	<datestamp>1263920520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I offer the same service - and more. I'll route your google/msn/yahoo/windows live/banking/ebay through tor for you.
You can inspect the code for my tor client and proxy (Open Source of course).
Hell I'll even offer SSL and HTTPS - both ways.
Opt out on the banking data too!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I offer the same service - and more .
I 'll route your google/msn/yahoo/windows live/banking/ebay through tor for you .
You can inspect the code for my tor client and proxy ( Open Source of course ) .
Hell I 'll even offer SSL and HTTPS - both ways .
Opt out on the banking data too !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I offer the same service - and more.
I'll route your google/msn/yahoo/windows live/banking/ebay through tor for you.
You can inspect the code for my tor client and proxy (Open Source of course).
Hell I'll even offer SSL and HTTPS - both ways.
Opt out on the banking data too!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828814</id>
	<title>Re:And we're trusting you because....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263927480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The irony is that Google probably doesn't care all that much about a specific user, or users as an individual. They're looking for types of users and their associated buying habits.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The irony is that Google probably does n't care all that much about a specific user , or users as an individual .
They 're looking for types of users and their associated buying habits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The irony is that Google probably doesn't care all that much about a specific user, or users as an individual.
They're looking for types of users and their associated buying habits.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826732</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827996</id>
	<title>Re:Stealing by any other name still stinks as much</title>
	<author>FlyMysticalDJ</author>
	<datestamp>1263918660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No, it's more like saying "I like the yummy goodness of candy bars, but I don't like getting fat, but I am clever so I use stealth to eat them without getting fat."
That clever stealth is, by any other name, bulimia.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , it 's more like saying " I like the yummy goodness of candy bars , but I do n't like getting fat , but I am clever so I use stealth to eat them without getting fat .
" That clever stealth is , by any other name , bulimia .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, it's more like saying "I like the yummy goodness of candy bars, but I don't like getting fat, but I am clever so I use stealth to eat them without getting fat.
"
That clever stealth is, by any other name, bulimia.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827480</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30829062</id>
	<title>My opinion on the data mining</title>
	<author>yuhong</author>
	<datestamp>1264018080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>IMO Google's data mining to generate targeted ads isn't too bad.<br>
Consider that if instead of for example assuming that all investors are radical economic actors, Wall Street was able to datamine investor's habits in real-time and automatically adjust it's models accordingly, the chances of an economic disaster like what happened recently would have been reduced at least, but there would be similar concerns about investor privacy.<br>
Consider that in both cases, what it is trying to do is to model human behavior.</htmltext>
<tokenext>IMO Google 's data mining to generate targeted ads is n't too bad .
Consider that if instead of for example assuming that all investors are radical economic actors , Wall Street was able to datamine investor 's habits in real-time and automatically adjust it 's models accordingly , the chances of an economic disaster like what happened recently would have been reduced at least , but there would be similar concerns about investor privacy .
Consider that in both cases , what it is trying to do is to model human behavior .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IMO Google's data mining to generate targeted ads isn't too bad.
Consider that if instead of for example assuming that all investors are radical economic actors, Wall Street was able to datamine investor's habits in real-time and automatically adjust it's models accordingly, the chances of an economic disaster like what happened recently would have been reduced at least, but there would be similar concerns about investor privacy.
Consider that in both cases, what it is trying to do is to model human behavior.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828872</id>
	<title>If you've got nothing to hide ...</title>
	<author>Mike610544</author>
	<datestamp>1263928320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I often find the choice of ads that Gmail comes up with more interesting than the actual email. It's sometimes a bit disconcerting how relevant they are (how did they know I'm a Barry Manilow Fan?!?) but if I want to be truly anonymous (which is pretty rare) I know not to use any of their services.

One thing I've noticed is if you get a "hell hath no fury like a woman scorned" email, that ad column is vacant (presumably nobody wants their company associated with that.) Also, I just checked and a message about a friend passing away was respectfully ad free.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I often find the choice of ads that Gmail comes up with more interesting than the actual email .
It 's sometimes a bit disconcerting how relevant they are ( how did they know I 'm a Barry Manilow Fan ? ! ?
) but if I want to be truly anonymous ( which is pretty rare ) I know not to use any of their services .
One thing I 've noticed is if you get a " hell hath no fury like a woman scorned " email , that ad column is vacant ( presumably nobody wants their company associated with that .
) Also , I just checked and a message about a friend passing away was respectfully ad free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I often find the choice of ads that Gmail comes up with more interesting than the actual email.
It's sometimes a bit disconcerting how relevant they are (how did they know I'm a Barry Manilow Fan?!?
) but if I want to be truly anonymous (which is pretty rare) I know not to use any of their services.
One thing I've noticed is if you get a "hell hath no fury like a woman scorned" email, that ad column is vacant (presumably nobody wants their company associated with that.
) Also, I just checked and a message about a friend passing away was respectfully ad free.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827002</id>
	<title>Re:Would you pay for Google ad-free?</title>
	<author>kestasjk</author>
	<datestamp>1263908940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I would actually, especially considering how little they must make per person via ads it surely wouldn't cost much</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would actually , especially considering how little they must make per person via ads it surely would n't cost much</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would actually, especially considering how little they must make per person via ads it surely wouldn't cost much</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826898</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827330</id>
	<title>Re:Would you pay for Google ad-free?</title>
	<author>Vegeta99</author>
	<datestamp>1263911940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You dont have to pay, just have good enough Karma =)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You dont have to pay , just have good enough Karma = )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You dont have to pay, just have good enough Karma =)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827052</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828360</id>
	<title>Re:Would you pay for Google ad-free?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263921960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"make money" and "don't be evil" are mutually exclusive to the typical wide eyed, never stepped foot in the real world geek that is the slashdotter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" make money " and " do n't be evil " are mutually exclusive to the typical wide eyed , never stepped foot in the real world geek that is the slashdotter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"make money" and "don't be evil" are mutually exclusive to the typical wide eyed, never stepped foot in the real world geek that is the slashdotter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826898</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30830786</id>
	<title>Great idea: Give your data to those people instead</title>
	<author>RichiH</author>
	<datestamp>1263996660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Alternatively you could, like, turn off cookies? At least if you are not on a static IP and/or share said IP with several others.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Alternatively you could , like , turn off cookies ?
At least if you are not on a static IP and/or share said IP with several others .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Alternatively you could, like, turn off cookies?
At least if you are not on a static IP and/or share said IP with several others.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826730</id>
	<title>Obligatory Onion</title>
	<author>Arthur Grumbine</author>
	<datestamp>1263906900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>They've had an opt out option <a href="http://www.theonion.com/content/video/google\_opt\_out\_feature\_lets\_users" title="theonion.com">for a long time</a> [theonion.com].</htmltext>
<tokenext>They 've had an opt out option for a long time [ theonion.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They've had an opt out option for a long time [theonion.com].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826972</id>
	<title>Re:Now HE can track you on his proxy</title>
	<author>indi0144</author>
	<datestamp>1263908760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>But thats better because Google is teh evilz!!!l1i<br><br>Every time you search with Bing, Bill Gates rescue a kitten from the hands of Google kitten-furnace-powered-datacenterz!<br><br>Plzzzz Bingme! that way you're more cool than windows7 lol<nobr> <wbr></nobr>//<br><br>I agree with you, Astroturfers used to be creative, good old 2004s</htmltext>
<tokenext>But thats better because Google is teh evilz ! !
! l1iEvery time you search with Bing , Bill Gates rescue a kitten from the hands of Google kitten-furnace-powered-datacenterz ! Plzzzz Bingme !
that way you 're more cool than windows7 lol //I agree with you , Astroturfers used to be creative , good old 2004s</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But thats better because Google is teh evilz!!
!l1iEvery time you search with Bing, Bill Gates rescue a kitten from the hands of Google kitten-furnace-powered-datacenterz!Plzzzz Bingme!
that way you're more cool than windows7 lol //I agree with you, Astroturfers used to be creative, good old 2004s</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826854</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827156</id>
	<title>Re:Would you pay for Google ad-free?</title>
	<author>ShiftyOne</author>
	<datestamp>1263910020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The only problem with is the privacy part.  Its like having someone look over you're shoulder at everything you do.  Does anyone actually look at the ads?  As long as its not the ads that pop out and cover half the screen when you accidentally hover over them or the ads that pop out when you hover over some text then its not really a problem.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The only problem with is the privacy part .
Its like having someone look over you 're shoulder at everything you do .
Does anyone actually look at the ads ?
As long as its not the ads that pop out and cover half the screen when you accidentally hover over them or the ads that pop out when you hover over some text then its not really a problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only problem with is the privacy part.
Its like having someone look over you're shoulder at everything you do.
Does anyone actually look at the ads?
As long as its not the ads that pop out and cover half the screen when you accidentally hover over them or the ads that pop out when you hover over some text then its not really a problem.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826898</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826916</id>
	<title>Re:"Don't trust Google, trust me!"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263908280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Data mine the search habits of paranoids</p></div></blockquote><p>
(1) "tin foil"<br>
(2) "michelle obama monkey"<br>
(2) "2d amendment"<br>
(3) "storm front"<br>
(2) "zog mashine"<br>
(4) "chick blowing a mule"<br>
(6) "hot for cousin"<br>
(7) <tt>goto 1</tt></p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Data mine the search habits of paranoids ( 1 ) " tin foil " ( 2 ) " michelle obama monkey " ( 2 ) " 2d amendment " ( 3 ) " storm front " ( 2 ) " zog mashine " ( 4 ) " chick blowing a mule " ( 6 ) " hot for cousin " ( 7 ) goto 1</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Data mine the search habits of paranoids
(1) "tin foil"
(2) "michelle obama monkey"
(2) "2d amendment"
(3) "storm front"
(2) "zog mashine"
(4) "chick blowing a mule"
(6) "hot for cousin"
(7) goto 1
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826792</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827100</id>
	<title>Re:"Don't trust Google, trust me!"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263909600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is a good point-  posting anonymously because I work in the media research industry... When I go to trade shows, I have guys coming up to me trying to sell me panelist data like it's drugs...  I'm serious.  It is people like this guy that are just trying to collect a buttload of data and then try and find someone to buy it.  You have your big players like comScore and Nielsen that rely primarily on their large panels for data, and then you have smaller players like compete or alexa that need as much data as possible.  They buy it from guys like this in order to gain greater depth of knowledge.  </p><p>Remember-  a lot of websites (including<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.) rely on getting bigger pageview and unique visitor counts.  There is a big, shady underbelly of people that can get you an increase in traffic size through the right means.  This might be one of the guys that is trying to do that, or maybe he is a good semaritan.  </p><p>As for Google-  they know a hell of a lot and will continue to learn more about us.  The larger issue now is passing legislation that keeps our private data private.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a good point- posting anonymously because I work in the media research industry... When I go to trade shows , I have guys coming up to me trying to sell me panelist data like it 's drugs... I 'm serious .
It is people like this guy that are just trying to collect a buttload of data and then try and find someone to buy it .
You have your big players like comScore and Nielsen that rely primarily on their large panels for data , and then you have smaller players like compete or alexa that need as much data as possible .
They buy it from guys like this in order to gain greater depth of knowledge .
Remember- a lot of websites ( including / .
) rely on getting bigger pageview and unique visitor counts .
There is a big , shady underbelly of people that can get you an increase in traffic size through the right means .
This might be one of the guys that is trying to do that , or maybe he is a good semaritan .
As for Google- they know a hell of a lot and will continue to learn more about us .
The larger issue now is passing legislation that keeps our private data private .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a good point-  posting anonymously because I work in the media research industry... When I go to trade shows, I have guys coming up to me trying to sell me panelist data like it's drugs...  I'm serious.
It is people like this guy that are just trying to collect a buttload of data and then try and find someone to buy it.
You have your big players like comScore and Nielsen that rely primarily on their large panels for data, and then you have smaller players like compete or alexa that need as much data as possible.
They buy it from guys like this in order to gain greater depth of knowledge.
Remember-  a lot of websites (including /.
) rely on getting bigger pageview and unique visitor counts.
There is a big, shady underbelly of people that can get you an increase in traffic size through the right means.
This might be one of the guys that is trying to do that, or maybe he is a good semaritan.
As for Google-  they know a hell of a lot and will continue to learn more about us.
The larger issue now is passing legislation that keeps our private data private.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826792</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827830</id>
	<title>Re:Stealing by any other name still stinks as much</title>
	<author>Sparx139</author>
	<datestamp>1263916680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>That "clever stealth" is, by any other name, still stealing.</p></div><p>
Why does this sound awfully close to the RIAA motto of "downloading movies is stealing"? I agree with you on the "if you don't like it, don't use it" line, but you're blowing it a tad out of proportion.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That " clever stealth " is , by any other name , still stealing .
Why does this sound awfully close to the RIAA motto of " downloading movies is stealing " ?
I agree with you on the " if you do n't like it , do n't use it " line , but you 're blowing it a tad out of proportion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That "clever stealth" is, by any other name, still stealing.
Why does this sound awfully close to the RIAA motto of "downloading movies is stealing"?
I agree with you on the "if you don't like it, don't use it" line, but you're blowing it a tad out of proportion.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827480</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826996</id>
	<title>Tor.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263908880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That is all.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That is all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827048</id>
	<title>Re:Why</title>
	<author>kestasjk</author>
	<datestamp>1263909180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm not a big Google-privacy-paranoia guy, but my faith in them had been on the decline, and their recent China thing has definitely bought them some credibility in my eyes. It's easy to have a knee-jerk cynical reaction to it, but it may well show that they really are still putting principles before profits, and that their "Don't Be Evil" motto is more than a quirky relic of their early days.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not a big Google-privacy-paranoia guy , but my faith in them had been on the decline , and their recent China thing has definitely bought them some credibility in my eyes .
It 's easy to have a knee-jerk cynical reaction to it , but it may well show that they really are still putting principles before profits , and that their " Do n't Be Evil " motto is more than a quirky relic of their early days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not a big Google-privacy-paranoia guy, but my faith in them had been on the decline, and their recent China thing has definitely bought them some credibility in my eyes.
It's easy to have a knee-jerk cynical reaction to it, but it may well show that they really are still putting principles before profits, and that their "Don't Be Evil" motto is more than a quirky relic of their early days.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826896</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828020</id>
	<title>knowing is helping</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263918840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>one of the things that helps make google great is the fact that it collects data about users.  is uses the data obtained through users to make it more accurate for you and everyone else.</p><p>if you dont like it, just use bing because we know they dont tamper with the results.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>but seriously, who cares if google knows i search for sweet sweet animated donkey porn during the day and midget porn at night?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>one of the things that helps make google great is the fact that it collects data about users .
is uses the data obtained through users to make it more accurate for you and everyone else.if you dont like it , just use bing because we know they dont tamper with the results .
; ) but seriously , who cares if google knows i search for sweet sweet animated donkey porn during the day and midget porn at night ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>one of the things that helps make google great is the fact that it collects data about users.
is uses the data obtained through users to make it more accurate for you and everyone else.if you dont like it, just use bing because we know they dont tamper with the results.
;)but seriously, who cares if google knows i search for sweet sweet animated donkey porn during the day and midget porn at night?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30836212</id>
	<title>Re:And we're trusting you because....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264019580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, the day I received a job offer from Microsoft on my GMail account I got a call from a G..gle recruiter that they are inviting me for an interview. I guess it's just a funny coincidence though I had a creepy feeling like after watching the movie 'Antitrust' - just didn't know that Gary Winston was not Bill Gates but Eric Schmidt and Synapse was not<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET but G..gle.</p><p>Anyway, probably G..gle wanted only to help me to avoid toil in the Mordor of Redmond<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , the day I received a job offer from Microsoft on my GMail account I got a call from a G..gle recruiter that they are inviting me for an interview .
I guess it 's just a funny coincidence though I had a creepy feeling like after watching the movie 'Antitrust ' - just did n't know that Gary Winston was not Bill Gates but Eric Schmidt and Synapse was not .NET but G..gle.Anyway , probably G..gle wanted only to help me to avoid toil in the Mordor of Redmond ; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, the day I received a job offer from Microsoft on my GMail account I got a call from a G..gle recruiter that they are inviting me for an interview.
I guess it's just a funny coincidence though I had a creepy feeling like after watching the movie 'Antitrust' - just didn't know that Gary Winston was not Bill Gates but Eric Schmidt and Synapse was not .NET but G..gle.Anyway, probably G..gle wanted only to help me to avoid toil in the Mordor of Redmond ;-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828814</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826752</id>
	<title>Proxy is overkill</title>
	<author>sakdoctor</author>
	<datestamp>1263907080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>www.optimizegoogle.com Tick most stuff, especially remove click tracking.</p><p>There, now Google knows what I search for, but never which link I clicked.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>www.optimizegoogle.com Tick most stuff , especially remove click tracking.There , now Google knows what I search for , but never which link I clicked .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>www.optimizegoogle.com Tick most stuff, especially remove click tracking.There, now Google knows what I search for, but never which link I clicked.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826898</id>
	<title>Would you pay for Google ad-free?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263908100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Google runs an ad network because it makes money. They still honor their "Don't be evil" promises, but they've got to do some user tracking because that makes ads more valuable. If you took advertising away from Google... how would they make money? Would anybody pay Google to not show ads to them?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google runs an ad network because it makes money .
They still honor their " Do n't be evil " promises , but they 've got to do some user tracking because that makes ads more valuable .
If you took advertising away from Google... how would they make money ?
Would anybody pay Google to not show ads to them ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google runs an ad network because it makes money.
They still honor their "Don't be evil" promises, but they've got to do some user tracking because that makes ads more valuable.
If you took advertising away from Google... how would they make money?
Would anybody pay Google to not show ads to them?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30832150</id>
	<title>Hiding or Snooping?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264004100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>True, 3/4 of websites I use regularly go through google statistics and the remaining 1/4 are searches by Google itself.</p><p>They know it all, based on my IP that never changes, so much that after a day or two browsing without closing Firefox I see in the Search Results of Google for <b>unrelated</b> subjects also the some subjects I'm reading about in other pages.</p><p>To explain it better: I'm reading about oranges, I search about pizza in another tab et voila`: pizza with oranges slips quietly on top on my search results (pizza and oranges are just examples, your mileage may vary)</p><p>Scarily said that, back to the subject:<br>1. People wants to hide from Google<br>2. I pay to set up a free proxy where, say, all google analytics query are proxied<br>3. All people that wanted to hide from google (say, those who wanted to keep secret their passion for oranges) use my proxy<br>4. I (a certainly less known someone than a big corporation) potentially know everything of who didn't want Google to know<br>5. [..]<br>6. $$$ Money!</p><p>Genial indeed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>True , 3/4 of websites I use regularly go through google statistics and the remaining 1/4 are searches by Google itself.They know it all , based on my IP that never changes , so much that after a day or two browsing without closing Firefox I see in the Search Results of Google for unrelated subjects also the some subjects I 'm reading about in other pages.To explain it better : I 'm reading about oranges , I search about pizza in another tab et voila ` : pizza with oranges slips quietly on top on my search results ( pizza and oranges are just examples , your mileage may vary ) Scarily said that , back to the subject : 1 .
People wants to hide from Google2 .
I pay to set up a free proxy where , say , all google analytics query are proxied3 .
All people that wanted to hide from google ( say , those who wanted to keep secret their passion for oranges ) use my proxy4 .
I ( a certainly less known someone than a big corporation ) potentially know everything of who did n't want Google to know5 .
[ .. ] 6. $ $ $ Money ! Genial indeed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>True, 3/4 of websites I use regularly go through google statistics and the remaining 1/4 are searches by Google itself.They know it all, based on my IP that never changes, so much that after a day or two browsing without closing Firefox I see in the Search Results of Google for unrelated subjects also the some subjects I'm reading about in other pages.To explain it better: I'm reading about oranges, I search about pizza in another tab et voila`: pizza with oranges slips quietly on top on my search results (pizza and oranges are just examples, your mileage may vary)Scarily said that, back to the subject:1.
People wants to hide from Google2.
I pay to set up a free proxy where, say, all google analytics query are proxied3.
All people that wanted to hide from google (say, those who wanted to keep secret their passion for oranges) use my proxy4.
I (a certainly less known someone than a big corporation) potentially know everything of who didn't want Google to know5.
[..]6. $$$ Money!Genial indeed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826954
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826732
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30829384
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30830684
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828814
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826732
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30835644
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828188
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30833526
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828376
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827060
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826792
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826736
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826898
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827100
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826792
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826736
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826732
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30829856
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827576
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826732
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827076
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826732
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826732
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30831218
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826954
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826732
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827050
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826898
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827460
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826898
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827156
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826898
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828360
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826898
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827652
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826732
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30829254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827058
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827386
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826898
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826972
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826854
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826996
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30830094
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827060
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828980
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826898
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828050
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827058
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30857358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826792
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826736
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828142
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827330
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827052
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826898
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30833966
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827048
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30906728
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30829208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826758
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30836212
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828814
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826732
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30829022
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827060
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30832466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_2318223_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30837034
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828376
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827060
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_2318223.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827088
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_2318223.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826996
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827594
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_2318223.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826730
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30906728
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30857358
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_2318223.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826732
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827842
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827652
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826844
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827076
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827130
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827576
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826954
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827358
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30831218
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828814
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30830684
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30836212
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_2318223.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826898
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827386
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827052
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827330
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827460
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827002
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827050
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827156
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828360
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828980
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_2318223.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827060
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30830094
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828376
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30837034
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30833526
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30829022
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_2318223.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826758
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30829208
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_2318223.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826736
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826792
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828066
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826916
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827100
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_2318223.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826752
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30832466
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_2318223.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827260
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_2318223.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828188
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30835644
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_2318223.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826854
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826972
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_2318223.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30829062
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_2318223.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30826896
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827372
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828142
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30829856
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827048
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30833966
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827058
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828050
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30829254
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30829384
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_2318223.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827480
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827830
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30827996
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_2318223.30828148
</commentlist>
</conversation>
