<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_27_1331243</id>
	<title>Google Toolbar Tracks Your Browsing, Even When Off</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1264600860000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>garg0yle writes <i>"Google's Toolbar is supposed to allow the user to disable it.  However, it was discovered by a researcher that it was still sending information <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/01/27/google\_toolbar\_caught\_transmitting\_data\_when\_disabled/">even when disabled</a>.  A patch is now available, and Google claims this was just a bug, not a feature."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>garg0yle writes " Google 's Toolbar is supposed to allow the user to disable it .
However , it was discovered by a researcher that it was still sending information even when disabled .
A patch is now available , and Google claims this was just a bug , not a feature .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>garg0yle writes "Google's Toolbar is supposed to allow the user to disable it.
However, it was discovered by a researcher that it was still sending information even when disabled.
A patch is now available, and Google claims this was just a bug, not a feature.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30918760</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, but...</title>
	<author>TheLink</author>
	<datestamp>1264613100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Do no double plus ungood you mean.<br><br>Trust Google, Google is your friend.<br><br>Do you still doubt Google? Perhaps you should visit the Bright Vision Re-Education Center to get things straightened out.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do no double plus ungood you mean.Trust Google , Google is your friend.Do you still doubt Google ?
Perhaps you should visit the Bright Vision Re-Education Center to get things straightened out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do no double plus ungood you mean.Trust Google, Google is your friend.Do you still doubt Google?
Perhaps you should visit the Bright Vision Re-Education Center to get things straightened out.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916684</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30920704</id>
	<title>Sure, And The Botnets Are Endorsed</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264620420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>by the Russian Government.</p><p>Yours In Perm,<br>Kilgore Trout</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>by the Russian Government.Yours In Perm,Kilgore Trout</tokentext>
<sentencetext>by the Russian Government.Yours In Perm,Kilgore Trout</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916756</id>
	<title>Re:Oops</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264605300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, it is right, this is a "bug".</p><p>Google's statement was completely correct, they just used a form of the word "bug" that you might not have expected them to use in that context.</p><p>That is the common vernacular for a wiretap device, right?  A "bug"?</p><p>It bugs me that they would bug me then call it a bug.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , it is right , this is a " bug " .Google 's statement was completely correct , they just used a form of the word " bug " that you might not have expected them to use in that context.That is the common vernacular for a wiretap device , right ?
A " bug " ? It bugs me that they would bug me then call it a bug .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, it is right, this is a "bug".Google's statement was completely correct, they just used a form of the word "bug" that you might not have expected them to use in that context.That is the common vernacular for a wiretap device, right?
A "bug"?It bugs me that they would bug me then call it a bug.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916600</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917026</id>
	<title>So just rename "Toolbars" into "Foolbars" . . .</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264606560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> . . . that should remove any responsibility of indemnity of the Foolbar vendor.
</p><p>Corporate Defense Lawyer: "Your Honor, the plaintiff, Mr. Terry Fuckwit, who is suing for privacy violations, did knowingly install and use our product, appropriately named 'Foolbar'."
</p><p>Judge: "Anyone who uses such a product is a dumb-ass and has shit for brains.  Case dismissed."
</p><p>Judge: "Now on to the next case, concerning another of your products, 'KieferSutherlandsCattlePonziScheme' for Windows 7 . .<nobr> <wbr></nobr>."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>.
. .
that should remove any responsibility of indemnity of the Foolbar vendor .
Corporate Defense Lawyer : " Your Honor , the plaintiff , Mr. Terry Fuckwit , who is suing for privacy violations , did knowingly install and use our product , appropriately named 'Foolbar' .
" Judge : " Anyone who uses such a product is a dumb-ass and has shit for brains .
Case dismissed .
" Judge : " Now on to the next case , concerning another of your products , 'KieferSutherlandsCattlePonziScheme ' for Windows 7 .
. .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext> .
. .
that should remove any responsibility of indemnity of the Foolbar vendor.
Corporate Defense Lawyer: "Your Honor, the plaintiff, Mr. Terry Fuckwit, who is suing for privacy violations, did knowingly install and use our product, appropriately named 'Foolbar'.
"
Judge: "Anyone who uses such a product is a dumb-ass and has shit for brains.
Case dismissed.
"
Judge: "Now on to the next case, concerning another of your products, 'KieferSutherlandsCattlePonziScheme' for Windows 7 .
. .
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916846</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264605780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everything is gonna be alright.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everything is gon na be alright .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everything is gonna be alright.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916684</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916892</id>
	<title>Googlebar Lite</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264605960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you have Firefox, use <a href="https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/492" title="mozilla.org" rel="nofollow">Googlebar Lite</a> [mozilla.org] instead.  It has all the same goodies without the corporasity.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you have Firefox , use Googlebar Lite [ mozilla.org ] instead .
It has all the same goodies without the corporasity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you have Firefox, use Googlebar Lite [mozilla.org] instead.
It has all the same goodies without the corporasity.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917254</id>
	<title>Re:Say it ain't so</title>
	<author>WraithCube</author>
	<datestamp>1264607580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While I do agree with most of what you said and 99.9\% of toolbars are nothing but useless spyware, there are a few actual useful ones. Just because so many companies have built useless toolbars doesn't mean that there can't be a legitimately useful one amoung the clutter. The <a href="https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/60" title="mozilla.org" rel="nofollow">Web Developer</a> [mozilla.org] toolbar is a favorite I usually have installed in firefox as it has a lot of useful tools/shortcuts. Then again I also usually even disable the bookmarks toolbar as the dropdown menu works quite well and i don't like giving up screen space.</p><p>Also, a lot of those users with 4-6 toolbars usually manage to hide at least a few of them in the browser window without uninstalling them. Pulling up add-remove programs while removing something else and seeing a list of toolbars is alway an unwelcome surprise. Especially when they need to be convinced that they really don't need all 6 toolbars...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While I do agree with most of what you said and 99.9 \ % of toolbars are nothing but useless spyware , there are a few actual useful ones .
Just because so many companies have built useless toolbars does n't mean that there ca n't be a legitimately useful one amoung the clutter .
The Web Developer [ mozilla.org ] toolbar is a favorite I usually have installed in firefox as it has a lot of useful tools/shortcuts .
Then again I also usually even disable the bookmarks toolbar as the dropdown menu works quite well and i do n't like giving up screen space.Also , a lot of those users with 4-6 toolbars usually manage to hide at least a few of them in the browser window without uninstalling them .
Pulling up add-remove programs while removing something else and seeing a list of toolbars is alway an unwelcome surprise .
Especially when they need to be convinced that they really do n't need all 6 toolbars.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While I do agree with most of what you said and 99.9\% of toolbars are nothing but useless spyware, there are a few actual useful ones.
Just because so many companies have built useless toolbars doesn't mean that there can't be a legitimately useful one amoung the clutter.
The Web Developer [mozilla.org] toolbar is a favorite I usually have installed in firefox as it has a lot of useful tools/shortcuts.
Then again I also usually even disable the bookmarks toolbar as the dropdown menu works quite well and i don't like giving up screen space.Also, a lot of those users with 4-6 toolbars usually manage to hide at least a few of them in the browser window without uninstalling them.
Pulling up add-remove programs while removing something else and seeing a list of toolbars is alway an unwelcome surprise.
Especially when they need to be convinced that they really don't need all 6 toolbars...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917598</id>
	<title>Re:Say it ain't so</title>
	<author>KC7JHO</author>
	<datestamp>1264609020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No idea what is wrong with Chrome, I have NEVER seen it install on a windows machine with out editing the install package first! I am SO SICK of google advertising the stupid thing and then having it CRASH EVERY STINKING TIME I try to run it! Granted I haven't tried to install it on windows vista or 7 yet but out of 4 machines i have tried it on (3 XP Pro latest patches, 1 Windows 2k3 server latest patches) it installs then crashes EVERY time it is ran. I manages to hack enough of it to get it to occasionally run on the w2k3 server but that is all. YMMV of course but I am not the only one who has found this to be true!</htmltext>
<tokenext>No idea what is wrong with Chrome , I have NEVER seen it install on a windows machine with out editing the install package first !
I am SO SICK of google advertising the stupid thing and then having it CRASH EVERY STINKING TIME I try to run it !
Granted I have n't tried to install it on windows vista or 7 yet but out of 4 machines i have tried it on ( 3 XP Pro latest patches , 1 Windows 2k3 server latest patches ) it installs then crashes EVERY time it is ran .
I manages to hack enough of it to get it to occasionally run on the w2k3 server but that is all .
YMMV of course but I am not the only one who has found this to be true !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No idea what is wrong with Chrome, I have NEVER seen it install on a windows machine with out editing the install package first!
I am SO SICK of google advertising the stupid thing and then having it CRASH EVERY STINKING TIME I try to run it!
Granted I haven't tried to install it on windows vista or 7 yet but out of 4 machines i have tried it on (3 XP Pro latest patches, 1 Windows 2k3 server latest patches) it installs then crashes EVERY time it is ran.
I manages to hack enough of it to get it to occasionally run on the w2k3 server but that is all.
YMMV of course but I am not the only one who has found this to be true!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917374</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916676</id>
	<title>Nobody believed me</title>
	<author>For a Free Internet</author>
	<datestamp>1264604940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nobody believed me when I warned that G$$Gle was in league with the Italian islamocommunist spymasters who want to track Christian Americans so they can steal our Wives and Daughters and brainwash them at their secret camps in Mexico. Now you know the truth... what will you do?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nobody believed me when I warned that G $ $ Gle was in league with the Italian islamocommunist spymasters who want to track Christian Americans so they can steal our Wives and Daughters and brainwash them at their secret camps in Mexico .
Now you know the truth... what will you do ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nobody believed me when I warned that G$$Gle was in league with the Italian islamocommunist spymasters who want to track Christian Americans so they can steal our Wives and Daughters and brainwash them at their secret camps in Mexico.
Now you know the truth... what will you do?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30918196</id>
	<title>Re:Say it ain't so</title>
	<author>Tim C</author>
	<datestamp>1264611060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>No techie I know installs any toolbar in IE or Firefox.</i></p><p>Does <a href="https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/60" title="mozilla.org">this</a> [mozilla.org] not count as a toolbar? Because while admittedly I work in the web, almost all the developers I know use it.</p><p>That is the only one though, and I'd certainly never install any other that didn't have a clear benefit - and alerting me to new emails isn't a benefit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No techie I know installs any toolbar in IE or Firefox.Does this [ mozilla.org ] not count as a toolbar ?
Because while admittedly I work in the web , almost all the developers I know use it.That is the only one though , and I 'd certainly never install any other that did n't have a clear benefit - and alerting me to new emails is n't a benefit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No techie I know installs any toolbar in IE or Firefox.Does this [mozilla.org] not count as a toolbar?
Because while admittedly I work in the web, almost all the developers I know use it.That is the only one though, and I'd certainly never install any other that didn't have a clear benefit - and alerting me to new emails isn't a benefit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30928492</id>
	<title>Re:Misleading title</title>
	<author>aldld</author>
	<datestamp>1264602900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You got a webcam? It might be time to cover it up.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You got a webcam ?
It might be time to cover it up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You got a webcam?
It might be time to cover it up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916636</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30918250</id>
	<title>Re:Oops</title>
	<author>Junior J. Junior III</author>
	<datestamp>1264611240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, it <em>was</em> a bug... like the kind the FBI plans when they're trying to spy on suspected criminals.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , it was a bug... like the kind the FBI plans when they 're trying to spy on suspected criminals .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, it was a bug... like the kind the FBI plans when they're trying to spy on suspected criminals.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916600</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917122</id>
	<title>Re:Oops</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1264606980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My guess is rather than a bug or feature, it's a design flaw. Kind of like DRM is a design flaw in CDs (data and programs alike).</p><p>It's humorous to me that it's the phrase Microsoft uses so often, "it's a feature, not a bug" turned on its head.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My guess is rather than a bug or feature , it 's a design flaw .
Kind of like DRM is a design flaw in CDs ( data and programs alike ) .It 's humorous to me that it 's the phrase Microsoft uses so often , " it 's a feature , not a bug " turned on its head .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My guess is rather than a bug or feature, it's a design flaw.
Kind of like DRM is a design flaw in CDs (data and programs alike).It's humorous to me that it's the phrase Microsoft uses so often, "it's a feature, not a bug" turned on its head.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916600</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916730</id>
	<title>how to protect non-techies...</title>
	<author>H4x0r Jim Duggan</author>
	<datestamp>1264605180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>No techie I know installs any toolbar...</i> </p><p>Same here, but most of my family and friends probably would<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-/</p><p>I don't see any easy solutions, but maybe one good idea would be for browsers that exist for their users (i.e. <a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html" title="gnu.org">free software</a> [gnu.org] web-browsers) should consider adding the functionality in an optional way with the best privacy possible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No techie I know installs any toolbar... Same here , but most of my family and friends probably would : -/I do n't see any easy solutions , but maybe one good idea would be for browsers that exist for their users ( i.e .
free software [ gnu.org ] web-browsers ) should consider adding the functionality in an optional way with the best privacy possible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> No techie I know installs any toolbar... Same here, but most of my family and friends probably would :-/I don't see any easy solutions, but maybe one good idea would be for browsers that exist for their users (i.e.
free software [gnu.org] web-browsers) should consider adding the functionality in an optional way with the best privacy possible.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916744</id>
	<title>Another reason to be vigilant about your privacy</title>
	<author>dmomo</author>
	<datestamp>1264605240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Even if the company "does no evil"(tm), no system is perfect. I remember fiddling with Facebook's API a while back. I was astounded by by what I had access to. I could see friend ids/names that I am not so sure should have been accessible to me given the privacy options selected by those people.</p><p>So, even if a company's morality is perfect, this isn't to say that their software is. Don't expect anyone to protect your privacy except you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Even if the company " does no evil " ( tm ) , no system is perfect .
I remember fiddling with Facebook 's API a while back .
I was astounded by by what I had access to .
I could see friend ids/names that I am not so sure should have been accessible to me given the privacy options selected by those people.So , even if a company 's morality is perfect , this is n't to say that their software is .
Do n't expect anyone to protect your privacy except you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even if the company "does no evil"(tm), no system is perfect.
I remember fiddling with Facebook's API a while back.
I was astounded by by what I had access to.
I could see friend ids/names that I am not so sure should have been accessible to me given the privacy options selected by those people.So, even if a company's morality is perfect, this isn't to say that their software is.
Don't expect anyone to protect your privacy except you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916956</id>
	<title>Re:Say it ain't so</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264606260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The last guy whose computer I worked on must have had 5 or 6 toolbars in his browser, countless viruses, and he had been phished so many times that his browser had all but stopped working under the load (it loaded up about ten different phishing sites and at least a dozen porn pop-ups at every boot). This idiot basically clicked on any link or attachment he got, and had no doubt caused his credit card company no end of grief. I took one look at his system and told him he needed to take it to Best Buy and have them do a fresh install of Windows. Much as I hate to send the business to those shyster monkeys at BB, this is now the advice I give to ANYONE who asks me to fix their computer ("fix" usually being synoymous with "I've got a bunch of viruses/crapware/malware/etc., and I will get it all again days after you reinstall Windows").

I just wish we could institute a licensing process for accessing the information superhighway, much like we have for accessing our real highways.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The last guy whose computer I worked on must have had 5 or 6 toolbars in his browser , countless viruses , and he had been phished so many times that his browser had all but stopped working under the load ( it loaded up about ten different phishing sites and at least a dozen porn pop-ups at every boot ) .
This idiot basically clicked on any link or attachment he got , and had no doubt caused his credit card company no end of grief .
I took one look at his system and told him he needed to take it to Best Buy and have them do a fresh install of Windows .
Much as I hate to send the business to those shyster monkeys at BB , this is now the advice I give to ANYONE who asks me to fix their computer ( " fix " usually being synoymous with " I 've got a bunch of viruses/crapware/malware/etc. , and I will get it all again days after you reinstall Windows " ) .
I just wish we could institute a licensing process for accessing the information superhighway , much like we have for accessing our real highways .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The last guy whose computer I worked on must have had 5 or 6 toolbars in his browser, countless viruses, and he had been phished so many times that his browser had all but stopped working under the load (it loaded up about ten different phishing sites and at least a dozen porn pop-ups at every boot).
This idiot basically clicked on any link or attachment he got, and had no doubt caused his credit card company no end of grief.
I took one look at his system and told him he needed to take it to Best Buy and have them do a fresh install of Windows.
Much as I hate to send the business to those shyster monkeys at BB, this is now the advice I give to ANYONE who asks me to fix their computer ("fix" usually being synoymous with "I've got a bunch of viruses/crapware/malware/etc., and I will get it all again days after you reinstall Windows").
I just wish we could institute a licensing process for accessing the information superhighway, much like we have for accessing our real highways.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916684</id>
	<title>Yeah, but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264605000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>They'll do no evil, right?  Google's our friend, right?  right?  guys...?</htmltext>
<tokenext>They 'll do no evil , right ?
Google 's our friend , right ?
right ? guys... ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They'll do no evil, right?
Google's our friend, right?
right?  guys...?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917098</id>
	<title>Re:Oops</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264606860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Google Toolbar Tracks Your Browsing, Even When Off</p></div><p>In other news, Google announces move of corporate offices to <b>Soviet Russia!</b></p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google Toolbar Tracks Your Browsing , Even When OffIn other news , Google announces move of corporate offices to Soviet Russia !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google Toolbar Tracks Your Browsing, Even When OffIn other news, Google announces move of corporate offices to Soviet Russia!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916600</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917582</id>
	<title>Re:found a search engine with privacy: ixquick.com</title>
	<author>ArundelCastle</author>
	<datestamp>1264608960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's a meta search engine that focusses on privacy by not logging your IP address and your searches.</p></div><p>I don't feel that the deliberate absence of something makes it a focus, even if it happens to be contrary to the norm. "Come to my website, it doesn't care who you are and just displays funny 404 screens based on buttons you click. We support your privacy."</p><p>It's not as if logging IP addresses and searches is mandatory.  It has to be coded in.  There are aspects of that data that can improve how a search engine works.  The rest is either user convenience or marketing data.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a meta search engine that focusses on privacy by not logging your IP address and your searches.I do n't feel that the deliberate absence of something makes it a focus , even if it happens to be contrary to the norm .
" Come to my website , it does n't care who you are and just displays funny 404 screens based on buttons you click .
We support your privacy .
" It 's not as if logging IP addresses and searches is mandatory .
It has to be coded in .
There are aspects of that data that can improve how a search engine works .
The rest is either user convenience or marketing data .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a meta search engine that focusses on privacy by not logging your IP address and your searches.I don't feel that the deliberate absence of something makes it a focus, even if it happens to be contrary to the norm.
"Come to my website, it doesn't care who you are and just displays funny 404 screens based on buttons you click.
We support your privacy.
"It's not as if logging IP addresses and searches is mandatory.
It has to be coded in.
There are aspects of that data that can improve how a search engine works.
The rest is either user convenience or marketing data.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916656</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917074</id>
	<title>A note to the pious believers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264606740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>$542.42. That was GOOG's closing price yesterday. Just what do they have to support that price? Nothing. Nothing except your data, and they're going to sell it Buster, as much as they can, before investors begin to notice the markup on that $135.00 stock of theirs. Oh sure, The Market says it's worth $500+ and it's never wrong, right? Just like what The Market said about your house. Of course, your house didn't have hip coolness did it. Google Goggles! Google Goggles! Google Goggles! It's even fun to say!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>$ 542.42 .
That was GOOG 's closing price yesterday .
Just what do they have to support that price ?
Nothing. Nothing except your data , and they 're going to sell it Buster , as much as they can , before investors begin to notice the markup on that $ 135.00 stock of theirs .
Oh sure , The Market says it 's worth $ 500 + and it 's never wrong , right ?
Just like what The Market said about your house .
Of course , your house did n't have hip coolness did it .
Google Goggles !
Google Goggles !
Google Goggles !
It 's even fun to say !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>$542.42.
That was GOOG's closing price yesterday.
Just what do they have to support that price?
Nothing. Nothing except your data, and they're going to sell it Buster, as much as they can, before investors begin to notice the markup on that $135.00 stock of theirs.
Oh sure, The Market says it's worth $500+ and it's never wrong, right?
Just like what The Market said about your house.
Of course, your house didn't have hip coolness did it.
Google Goggles!
Google Goggles!
Google Goggles!
It's even fun to say!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30918072</id>
	<title>There is a secondary offswitch...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264610640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wouldn't put it past google for this to be an honest "bug" concidering their recent "calling 911 crashes my phone" problems.  QA?  (Blank retarded stare) Why does a **marketing** company need QA?</p><p>Its hard to see this being an isolated instance.  For example google updater isn't simply disabled by stopping and disabling the google updater service installed without your knowledge.  You have to go into the fricking scheduler of all places and get rid of it there too.  I suppose its better than hooking dispatch tables.</p><p>Schmidts infamous revelation "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place" isn't particularly helpful either.</p><p>Their brand will continue to go the way of Apple and *cringe* MS if they keep acting evil.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would n't put it past google for this to be an honest " bug " concidering their recent " calling 911 crashes my phone " problems .
QA ? ( Blank retarded stare ) Why does a * * marketing * * company need QA ? Its hard to see this being an isolated instance .
For example google updater is n't simply disabled by stopping and disabling the google updater service installed without your knowledge .
You have to go into the fricking scheduler of all places and get rid of it there too .
I suppose its better than hooking dispatch tables.Schmidts infamous revelation " If you have something that you do n't want anyone to know , maybe you should n't be doing it in the first place " is n't particularly helpful either.Their brand will continue to go the way of Apple and * cringe * MS if they keep acting evil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wouldn't put it past google for this to be an honest "bug" concidering their recent "calling 911 crashes my phone" problems.
QA?  (Blank retarded stare) Why does a **marketing** company need QA?Its hard to see this being an isolated instance.
For example google updater isn't simply disabled by stopping and disabling the google updater service installed without your knowledge.
You have to go into the fricking scheduler of all places and get rid of it there too.
I suppose its better than hooking dispatch tables.Schmidts infamous revelation "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place" isn't particularly helpful either.Their brand will continue to go the way of Apple and *cringe* MS if they keep acting evil.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30929944</id>
	<title>Re:Misleading title</title>
	<author>plover</author>
	<datestamp>1264617120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <i>Google Toolbar Tracks Your Browsing, Even When Off</i> </p><p>At first I thought that this meant that Google was tracking my movements even when my computer was off. I wondered how they'd do this and then I remembered about Google Street View.</p><p>Sly bastards.</p></div><p>When my wife showed her mother their house on Google's satellite view, she wanted to go outside to wave at the camera.</p><p>Oh, they're good.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google Toolbar Tracks Your Browsing , Even When Off At first I thought that this meant that Google was tracking my movements even when my computer was off .
I wondered how they 'd do this and then I remembered about Google Street View.Sly bastards.When my wife showed her mother their house on Google 's satellite view , she wanted to go outside to wave at the camera.Oh , they 're good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Google Toolbar Tracks Your Browsing, Even When Off At first I thought that this meant that Google was tracking my movements even when my computer was off.
I wondered how they'd do this and then I remembered about Google Street View.Sly bastards.When my wife showed her mother their house on Google's satellite view, she wanted to go outside to wave at the camera.Oh, they're good.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916636</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30930414</id>
	<title>Re:Say it ain't so</title>
	<author>ajs</author>
	<datestamp>1264709820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>\As far as I'm concerned toolbar == spy-ware. Google jumped the shark and joined the ranks of Yahoo, MSN and Happy-smiley-spy-ware-toolbar the day they created one and started shoving it down people's throat.</p><p>No techie I know installs any toolbar in IE or Firefox.</p></div><p>Programmer, admin, etc. of 20+ years. I've used Google Toolbar for 2 years. It's a nice tool. I like the highlighting features and the page-rank display. Translate integration is nice. I could get everything that Google's toolbar gives me in a suite of other addons, but I don't need to. I never use the various funky buttons, but i do like the gmail mailto: integration.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The only poor souls that seems to be stuck with them are non-techies, who usually have at least 3-4 toolbars and they "don't know how it happened".</p></div><p>I explicitly download and install it. I don't know who these people you know are, but their browser fail is not my problem.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>It's also amazing to watch them browse the web, they almost never use the address bar, it's either the Google or Yahoo toolbar's search box</p></div><p>I almost never use the toolbar's search, and I don't turn on the integrated search feature (where it replaces the basic search widget) because I use many other forms of search (corporate intranet search, amazon, Wikipedia, etc.)</p><p><div class="quote"><p>I would be surprised if this was actually a "bug" and not a feature, sounds like a great bug to have for a data mining company.</p></div><p>Why on Earth would they want to do such a thing. They practically drown in data. Pissing off customers in order to get a dribble more (from what I understand the bug showed up in IE8 when you turned off the feedback but had not yet restarted the browser... which is an awfully narrow segment of their user-base).</p><p><div class="quote"><p>My love for Google is diminishing faster than the DOW in 2008.</p></div><p>Yes, I can understand. A company that puts out a toolbar cannot possibly restore your faith in them by continuing to be the largest <a href="http://code.google.com/opensource/" title="google.com">backer of open source development as well as a massive contributor</a> [google.com], backing large <a href="http://www.google.org/" title="google.org">humanitarian and charitable efforts</a> [google.org] and <a href="http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2006/03/judge-tells-doj-no-on-search-queries.html" title="blogspot.com">speaking out against government violations of privacy</a> [blogspot.com] that go far beyond giving you the choice of installing a toolbar.</p><p>How could you have been blinded to their abuses.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>\ As far as I 'm concerned toolbar = = spy-ware .
Google jumped the shark and joined the ranks of Yahoo , MSN and Happy-smiley-spy-ware-toolbar the day they created one and started shoving it down people 's throat.No techie I know installs any toolbar in IE or Firefox.Programmer , admin , etc .
of 20 + years .
I 've used Google Toolbar for 2 years .
It 's a nice tool .
I like the highlighting features and the page-rank display .
Translate integration is nice .
I could get everything that Google 's toolbar gives me in a suite of other addons , but I do n't need to .
I never use the various funky buttons , but i do like the gmail mailto : integration.The only poor souls that seems to be stuck with them are non-techies , who usually have at least 3-4 toolbars and they " do n't know how it happened " .I explicitly download and install it .
I do n't know who these people you know are , but their browser fail is not my problem.It 's also amazing to watch them browse the web , they almost never use the address bar , it 's either the Google or Yahoo toolbar 's search boxI almost never use the toolbar 's search , and I do n't turn on the integrated search feature ( where it replaces the basic search widget ) because I use many other forms of search ( corporate intranet search , amazon , Wikipedia , etc .
) I would be surprised if this was actually a " bug " and not a feature , sounds like a great bug to have for a data mining company.Why on Earth would they want to do such a thing .
They practically drown in data .
Pissing off customers in order to get a dribble more ( from what I understand the bug showed up in IE8 when you turned off the feedback but had not yet restarted the browser... which is an awfully narrow segment of their user-base ) .My love for Google is diminishing faster than the DOW in 2008.Yes , I can understand .
A company that puts out a toolbar can not possibly restore your faith in them by continuing to be the largest backer of open source development as well as a massive contributor [ google.com ] , backing large humanitarian and charitable efforts [ google.org ] and speaking out against government violations of privacy [ blogspot.com ] that go far beyond giving you the choice of installing a toolbar.How could you have been blinded to their abuses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>\As far as I'm concerned toolbar == spy-ware.
Google jumped the shark and joined the ranks of Yahoo, MSN and Happy-smiley-spy-ware-toolbar the day they created one and started shoving it down people's throat.No techie I know installs any toolbar in IE or Firefox.Programmer, admin, etc.
of 20+ years.
I've used Google Toolbar for 2 years.
It's a nice tool.
I like the highlighting features and the page-rank display.
Translate integration is nice.
I could get everything that Google's toolbar gives me in a suite of other addons, but I don't need to.
I never use the various funky buttons, but i do like the gmail mailto: integration.The only poor souls that seems to be stuck with them are non-techies, who usually have at least 3-4 toolbars and they "don't know how it happened".I explicitly download and install it.
I don't know who these people you know are, but their browser fail is not my problem.It's also amazing to watch them browse the web, they almost never use the address bar, it's either the Google or Yahoo toolbar's search boxI almost never use the toolbar's search, and I don't turn on the integrated search feature (where it replaces the basic search widget) because I use many other forms of search (corporate intranet search, amazon, Wikipedia, etc.
)I would be surprised if this was actually a "bug" and not a feature, sounds like a great bug to have for a data mining company.Why on Earth would they want to do such a thing.
They practically drown in data.
Pissing off customers in order to get a dribble more (from what I understand the bug showed up in IE8 when you turned off the feedback but had not yet restarted the browser... which is an awfully narrow segment of their user-base).My love for Google is diminishing faster than the DOW in 2008.Yes, I can understand.
A company that puts out a toolbar cannot possibly restore your faith in them by continuing to be the largest backer of open source development as well as a massive contributor [google.com], backing large humanitarian and charitable efforts [google.org] and speaking out against government violations of privacy [blogspot.com] that go far beyond giving you the choice of installing a toolbar.How could you have been blinded to their abuses.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30918884</id>
	<title>Re:Say it ain't so</title>
	<author>nitehawk214</author>
	<datestamp>1264613700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>picture of an average home users's  browser:</p><p><a href="http://jimcofer.com/personal/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/toolbar400gif-thumb.gif" title="jimcofer.com">toolbar overload</a> [jimcofer.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>picture of an average home users 's browser : toolbar overload [ jimcofer.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>picture of an average home users's  browser:toolbar overload [jimcofer.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30919014</id>
	<title>Re:found a search engine with privacy: ixquick.com</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264614180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="https://ssl.scroogle.org/" title="scroogle.org" rel="nofollow">Scroogle</a> [scroogle.org] is another search that doesn't log, but uses Google to do the searches.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Scroogle [ scroogle.org ] is another search that does n't log , but uses Google to do the searches .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Scroogle [scroogle.org] is another search that doesn't log, but uses Google to do the searches.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916656</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916832</id>
	<title>Just Say No</title>
	<author>CodeHog</author>
	<datestamp>1264605660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is why I don't install toolbars. And you know who else likes to install toolbars? Yeah, Zynga. You trust them with your info?</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is why I do n't install toolbars .
And you know who else likes to install toolbars ?
Yeah , Zynga .
You trust them with your info ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is why I don't install toolbars.
And you know who else likes to install toolbars?
Yeah, Zynga.
You trust them with your info?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30920390</id>
	<title>Re:Say it ain't so</title>
	<author>fmoliveira</author>
	<datestamp>1264619520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>He should have said "nuked the fridge"</htmltext>
<tokenext>He should have said " nuked the fridge "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He should have said "nuked the fridge"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916678</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916696</id>
	<title>Re:Say it ain't so</title>
	<author>sopssa</author>
	<datestamp>1264605000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Google toolbar, analytics, ad sense, double click, chrome... My love for Google is diminishing faster than the DOW in 2008.</p></div><p>Google has always been about datamining and advertising and you're always been losing your privacy to them. It's just now that people are starting to get it. And now <a href="http://slashdot.org/story/10/01/23/1756220/Larry-amp-Sergey-To-Cash-In-55B-of-Google-Chips" title="slashdot.org"> Larry &amp; Sergey are selling their shares</a> [slashdot.org] and other more business oriented people will get more saying on the company. Even if Google wasn't being so intrusive before (and it kind of was), being a publicly traded company you never know what happens with your data in future.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google toolbar , analytics , ad sense , double click , chrome... My love for Google is diminishing faster than the DOW in 2008.Google has always been about datamining and advertising and you 're always been losing your privacy to them .
It 's just now that people are starting to get it .
And now Larry &amp; Sergey are selling their shares [ slashdot.org ] and other more business oriented people will get more saying on the company .
Even if Google was n't being so intrusive before ( and it kind of was ) , being a publicly traded company you never know what happens with your data in future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google toolbar, analytics, ad sense, double click, chrome... My love for Google is diminishing faster than the DOW in 2008.Google has always been about datamining and advertising and you're always been losing your privacy to them.
It's just now that people are starting to get it.
And now  Larry &amp; Sergey are selling their shares [slashdot.org] and other more business oriented people will get more saying on the company.
Even if Google wasn't being so intrusive before (and it kind of was), being a publicly traded company you never know what happens with your data in future.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916636</id>
	<title>Misleading title</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264604760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Google Toolbar Tracks Your Browsing, Even When Off</i></p><p>At first I thought that this meant that Google was tracking my movements even when my computer was off. I wondered how they'd do this and then I remembered about Google Street View.</p><p>Sly bastards.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google Toolbar Tracks Your Browsing , Even When OffAt first I thought that this meant that Google was tracking my movements even when my computer was off .
I wondered how they 'd do this and then I remembered about Google Street View.Sly bastards .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google Toolbar Tracks Your Browsing, Even When OffAt first I thought that this meant that Google was tracking my movements even when my computer was off.
I wondered how they'd do this and then I remembered about Google Street View.Sly bastards.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916626</id>
	<title>Yeah, that's the ticket.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264604700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why, just the other day, I was discussing this with my wife, Morgan Fairchild . . .</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why , just the other day , I was discussing this with my wife , Morgan Fairchild .
. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why, just the other day, I was discussing this with my wife, Morgan Fairchild .
. .</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917376</id>
	<title>Re:Say it ain't so</title>
	<author>Draek</author>
	<datestamp>1264608060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Browser toolbars are a lot like Office suites: they're stupid little pieces of software that no sane person in their right mind would ever want near their computer, but the masses want 'em for some bloody reason so if you want their money you must make one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Browser toolbars are a lot like Office suites : they 're stupid little pieces of software that no sane person in their right mind would ever want near their computer , but the masses want 'em for some bloody reason so if you want their money you must make one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Browser toolbars are a lot like Office suites: they're stupid little pieces of software that no sane person in their right mind would ever want near their computer, but the masses want 'em for some bloody reason so if you want their money you must make one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30918580</id>
	<title>Re:Say it ain't so</title>
	<author>PRMan</author>
	<datestamp>1264612500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use the Google Toolbar (yes, on purpose).  I like the word search buttons and the AutoFill button to fill out forms for me.</p><p>The others are a complete waste and install surreptitiously, but the Google Toolbar does have some nice features.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use the Google Toolbar ( yes , on purpose ) .
I like the word search buttons and the AutoFill button to fill out forms for me.The others are a complete waste and install surreptitiously , but the Google Toolbar does have some nice features .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use the Google Toolbar (yes, on purpose).
I like the word search buttons and the AutoFill button to fill out forms for me.The others are a complete waste and install surreptitiously, but the Google Toolbar does have some nice features.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916602</id>
	<title>Considering that it only worked in certain version</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264604640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It probably was a bug.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It probably was a bug .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It probably was a bug.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30922788</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, but...</title>
	<author>Ja'Achan</author>
	<datestamp>1264625220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Of course we're at war with Google. We've always been at war with Google.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course we 're at war with Google .
We 've always been at war with Google .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course we're at war with Google.
We've always been at war with Google.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916684</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30923618</id>
	<title>Re:Oops</title>
	<author>HermMunster</author>
	<datestamp>1264584060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been telling people forever that toolbars have only one purpose, which is to track.  If you really think about it there are no real features of the toolbar other than tracking.  Those buttons they add can easily be accomplished with the bookmarks toolbar shortcuts/bookmarks.</p><p>Somewhat rhetorical:  What's the "other" purpose of having those toolbars?   You get one for Microsoft, another for Yahoo,  for Google,  for Ask, etc., (makes me nauseous just to think about it).</p><p>Those toolbars are being installed into your browser by a number of products that have the option to install it by default such as the Java installer.  As someone that cleans up a lot of computers every year in my shop to interrupt this process process is time consuming--to remove or disable them.  Though it is time consuming I remove or disable them on almost every customer's computer that I work on.  I then inform my customers of the purpose and consequences of the toolbars.</p><p>How much of this behavior is embedded in browsers provided by closed source vendors such as Microsoft?  Do they track you and report back searches you do in Google to help them to gain a leg up on their searches?  I've always wondered that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been telling people forever that toolbars have only one purpose , which is to track .
If you really think about it there are no real features of the toolbar other than tracking .
Those buttons they add can easily be accomplished with the bookmarks toolbar shortcuts/bookmarks.Somewhat rhetorical : What 's the " other " purpose of having those toolbars ?
You get one for Microsoft , another for Yahoo , for Google , for Ask , etc. , ( makes me nauseous just to think about it ) .Those toolbars are being installed into your browser by a number of products that have the option to install it by default such as the Java installer .
As someone that cleans up a lot of computers every year in my shop to interrupt this process process is time consuming--to remove or disable them .
Though it is time consuming I remove or disable them on almost every customer 's computer that I work on .
I then inform my customers of the purpose and consequences of the toolbars.How much of this behavior is embedded in browsers provided by closed source vendors such as Microsoft ?
Do they track you and report back searches you do in Google to help them to gain a leg up on their searches ?
I 've always wondered that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been telling people forever that toolbars have only one purpose, which is to track.
If you really think about it there are no real features of the toolbar other than tracking.
Those buttons they add can easily be accomplished with the bookmarks toolbar shortcuts/bookmarks.Somewhat rhetorical:  What's the "other" purpose of having those toolbars?
You get one for Microsoft, another for Yahoo,  for Google,  for Ask, etc., (makes me nauseous just to think about it).Those toolbars are being installed into your browser by a number of products that have the option to install it by default such as the Java installer.
As someone that cleans up a lot of computers every year in my shop to interrupt this process process is time consuming--to remove or disable them.
Though it is time consuming I remove or disable them on almost every customer's computer that I work on.
I then inform my customers of the purpose and consequences of the toolbars.How much of this behavior is embedded in browsers provided by closed source vendors such as Microsoft?
Do they track you and report back searches you do in Google to help them to gain a leg up on their searches?
I've always wondered that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916600</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916878</id>
	<title>Singalong</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264605900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Every day more and more <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04QoA44c23A" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">I like Chinese</a> [youtube.com].</p><p>The world today seems absolutely crackers<br>With nuclear bombs to blow us all sky high<br>There's fools and idiots sittin' on the trigger<br>It's depressing and it's senseless, and that's why</p><p>I like Chinese, I like Chinese<br>They only come up to your knees<br>Yet they're always friendly, and they're ready to please</p><p>I like Chinese, I like Chinese<br>There's nine hundred million of them in the world today<br>You'd better learn to like them, that's what I say</p><p>I like Chinese, I like Chinese<br>They come from a long way overseas<br>But they're cute and they're cuddly, and they're ready to please</p><p>I like Chinese food, the waiters never are rude<br>Think of the many things they've done to impress<br>There's Maoism, Taoism, I Ching, <b>the Google hack</b> and chess</p><p>So I like Chinese, I like Chinese<br>I like their tiny little trees<br>Their Zen, their ping-pong, their yin and yang-ese</p><p>I like Chinese thought, the wisdom that Confucius taught<br>If Darwin is anything to shout about<br>The Chinese will survive us all without any doubt</p><p>So, I like Chinese, I like Chinese<br>They only come up to your knees<br>Yet they're wise and they're witty and they're ready to please<br>All together</p><p>Wo ai zhongguo ren, wo ai zhongguo ren<br>Wo ai zhongguo ren<br>Ni hao ma; ni hao ma; ni hao ma; zaijien</p><p>I like Chinese, I like Chinese<br>Their food is guaranteed to please<br>A fourteen, a seven, a nine and lychees</p><p>I like Chinese, I like Chinese<br>I like their tiny little trees<br>Their Zen, their ping-pong, their yin and yang-ese</p><p>I like Chinese, I like Chinese<br>They only come up to your knees</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Every day more and more I like Chinese [ youtube.com ] .The world today seems absolutely crackersWith nuclear bombs to blow us all sky highThere 's fools and idiots sittin ' on the triggerIt 's depressing and it 's senseless , and that 's whyI like Chinese , I like ChineseThey only come up to your kneesYet they 're always friendly , and they 're ready to pleaseI like Chinese , I like ChineseThere 's nine hundred million of them in the world todayYou 'd better learn to like them , that 's what I sayI like Chinese , I like ChineseThey come from a long way overseasBut they 're cute and they 're cuddly , and they 're ready to pleaseI like Chinese food , the waiters never are rudeThink of the many things they 've done to impressThere 's Maoism , Taoism , I Ching , the Google hack and chessSo I like Chinese , I like ChineseI like their tiny little treesTheir Zen , their ping-pong , their yin and yang-eseI like Chinese thought , the wisdom that Confucius taughtIf Darwin is anything to shout aboutThe Chinese will survive us all without any doubtSo , I like Chinese , I like ChineseThey only come up to your kneesYet they 're wise and they 're witty and they 're ready to pleaseAll togetherWo ai zhongguo ren , wo ai zhongguo renWo ai zhongguo renNi hao ma ; ni hao ma ; ni hao ma ; zaijienI like Chinese , I like ChineseTheir food is guaranteed to pleaseA fourteen , a seven , a nine and lycheesI like Chinese , I like ChineseI like their tiny little treesTheir Zen , their ping-pong , their yin and yang-eseI like Chinese , I like ChineseThey only come up to your knees</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Every day more and more I like Chinese [youtube.com].The world today seems absolutely crackersWith nuclear bombs to blow us all sky highThere's fools and idiots sittin' on the triggerIt's depressing and it's senseless, and that's whyI like Chinese, I like ChineseThey only come up to your kneesYet they're always friendly, and they're ready to pleaseI like Chinese, I like ChineseThere's nine hundred million of them in the world todayYou'd better learn to like them, that's what I sayI like Chinese, I like ChineseThey come from a long way overseasBut they're cute and they're cuddly, and they're ready to pleaseI like Chinese food, the waiters never are rudeThink of the many things they've done to impressThere's Maoism, Taoism, I Ching, the Google hack and chessSo I like Chinese, I like ChineseI like their tiny little treesTheir Zen, their ping-pong, their yin and yang-eseI like Chinese thought, the wisdom that Confucius taughtIf Darwin is anything to shout aboutThe Chinese will survive us all without any doubtSo, I like Chinese, I like ChineseThey only come up to your kneesYet they're wise and they're witty and they're ready to pleaseAll togetherWo ai zhongguo ren, wo ai zhongguo renWo ai zhongguo renNi hao ma; ni hao ma; ni hao ma; zaijienI like Chinese, I like ChineseTheir food is guaranteed to pleaseA fourteen, a seven, a nine and lycheesI like Chinese, I like ChineseI like their tiny little treesTheir Zen, their ping-pong, their yin and yang-eseI like Chinese, I like ChineseThey only come up to your knees</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30918678</id>
	<title>Re:found a search engine with privacy: ixquick.com</title>
	<author>symes</author>
	<datestamp>1264612860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd never heard of ixquick before but initial impressions are very positive. So thankyou. I've set it as my default search engine for additional scrutiny. Also interested to note that they are <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Luovo73Bjqc" title="youtube.com">launching</a> [youtube.com] a proxy service. A breath of fresh air.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd never heard of ixquick before but initial impressions are very positive .
So thankyou .
I 've set it as my default search engine for additional scrutiny .
Also interested to note that they are launching [ youtube.com ] a proxy service .
A breath of fresh air .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd never heard of ixquick before but initial impressions are very positive.
So thankyou.
I've set it as my default search engine for additional scrutiny.
Also interested to note that they are launching [youtube.com] a proxy service.
A breath of fresh air.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916656</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30928998</id>
	<title>Re:Say it ain't so</title>
	<author>yuhong</author>
	<datestamp>1264606800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yea, I once used these toolbars often, but I now have them hidden at least.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yea , I once used these toolbars often , but I now have them hidden at least .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yea, I once used these toolbars often, but I now have them hidden at least.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917374</id>
	<title>Re:Say it ain't so</title>
	<author>D Ninja</author>
	<datestamp>1264608060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Google toolbar, analytics, ad sense, double click, chrome... My love for Google is diminishing faster than the DOW in 2008.</p></div><p>Hrm...what's wrong with Chrome, exactly?  It's a sweet browser and has really helped to push other browsers forward as well.</p><p>As for Analytics, Ad Sense, and Doubleclick - I'm not sure of your exact problems with them, but ads are how Google makes money so they can keep giving away all this "free" stuff.  Sure, those ads may annoy you, but you can block them easily enough if they do.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google toolbar , analytics , ad sense , double click , chrome... My love for Google is diminishing faster than the DOW in 2008.Hrm...what 's wrong with Chrome , exactly ?
It 's a sweet browser and has really helped to push other browsers forward as well.As for Analytics , Ad Sense , and Doubleclick - I 'm not sure of your exact problems with them , but ads are how Google makes money so they can keep giving away all this " free " stuff .
Sure , those ads may annoy you , but you can block them easily enough if they do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google toolbar, analytics, ad sense, double click, chrome... My love for Google is diminishing faster than the DOW in 2008.Hrm...what's wrong with Chrome, exactly?
It's a sweet browser and has really helped to push other browsers forward as well.As for Analytics, Ad Sense, and Doubleclick - I'm not sure of your exact problems with them, but ads are how Google makes money so they can keep giving away all this "free" stuff.
Sure, those ads may annoy you, but you can block them easily enough if they do.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917350</id>
	<title>Re:Oops</title>
	<author>kalirion</author>
	<datestamp>1264608000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Did anyone check if the official Goolebar Firefox extension has the same "bug"?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did anyone check if the official Goolebar Firefox extension has the same " bug " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did anyone check if the official Goolebar Firefox extension has the same "bug"?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916600</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916600</id>
	<title>Oops</title>
	<author>strikeleader</author>
	<datestamp>1264604640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>this was just a bug, not a feature....<br>
Yea...right</htmltext>
<tokenext>this was just a bug , not a feature... . Yea...right</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this was just a bug, not a feature....
Yea...right</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916736</id>
	<title>Geez</title>
	<author>rarez</author>
	<datestamp>1264605180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google are turning into m$ with they're unscruplicous methods.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google are turning into m $ with they 're unscruplicous methods .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google are turning into m$ with they're unscruplicous methods.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916712</id>
	<title>Re:Say it ain't so</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264605120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I actually do know some (techie background) people who use google toolbar.<br>I don't see a use for it, neither do you, but that doesn't mean that nobody out there does.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I actually do know some ( techie background ) people who use google toolbar.I do n't see a use for it , neither do you , but that does n't mean that nobody out there does .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I actually do know some (techie background) people who use google toolbar.I don't see a use for it, neither do you, but that doesn't mean that nobody out there does.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917972</id>
	<title>Accident?</title>
	<author>MikeURL</author>
	<datestamp>1264610340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Perhaps.  But having complete tracking data for a wide swath of internet users is extremely valuable.  I'd be more impressed if they were promising to purge that data from their servers.  As it is it looks like they figured they'd do this until they got caught and then say "oopsie".</htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps .
But having complete tracking data for a wide swath of internet users is extremely valuable .
I 'd be more impressed if they were promising to purge that data from their servers .
As it is it looks like they figured they 'd do this until they got caught and then say " oopsie " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps.
But having complete tracking data for a wide swath of internet users is extremely valuable.
I'd be more impressed if they were promising to purge that data from their servers.
As it is it looks like they figured they'd do this until they got caught and then say "oopsie".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30930468</id>
	<title>Re:Say it ain't so</title>
	<author>ajs</author>
	<datestamp>1264710420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The last guy whose computer I worked on must have had 5 or 6 toolbars in his browser, countless viruses, and he had been phished so many times that his browser had all but stopped working under the load (it loaded up about ten different phishing sites and at least a dozen porn pop-ups at every boot).</p></div><p>Straw man arguments are fun. Let me try...</p><p>The last person I saw eating ice cream had a freezer full of bright pink, chemical infused flavors. It was smeared all over his clothes, he weighed 400 pounds and couldn't leave his apartment. You don't want to be like that guy do you? Well, then don't eat ice cream.</p><p>The anti-toolbar craze among the techie community started when Yahoo! put out theirs. It was a disaster. Its features were so intrusive that anyone with a clue immediately un-installed it if they'd been unfortunate enough to be an early adopter (I don't recall having done so, but I've installed so much software over the years, I might have back then). After that "toolbar" became synonymous with the loathing we all felt for Yahoo!'s little toy. It didn't help that any number of "toolbars" were part of the standard arsenal of malware.</p><p>So, I can see how Google's toolbar can get an unfair start out of the gate, but let me just ask.... have you used it? Have you explored the features it provides and found them wanting or are you just engaging yourself in some toolbar luditism?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The last guy whose computer I worked on must have had 5 or 6 toolbars in his browser , countless viruses , and he had been phished so many times that his browser had all but stopped working under the load ( it loaded up about ten different phishing sites and at least a dozen porn pop-ups at every boot ) .Straw man arguments are fun .
Let me try...The last person I saw eating ice cream had a freezer full of bright pink , chemical infused flavors .
It was smeared all over his clothes , he weighed 400 pounds and could n't leave his apartment .
You do n't want to be like that guy do you ?
Well , then do n't eat ice cream.The anti-toolbar craze among the techie community started when Yahoo !
put out theirs .
It was a disaster .
Its features were so intrusive that anyone with a clue immediately un-installed it if they 'd been unfortunate enough to be an early adopter ( I do n't recall having done so , but I 've installed so much software over the years , I might have back then ) .
After that " toolbar " became synonymous with the loathing we all felt for Yahoo !
's little toy .
It did n't help that any number of " toolbars " were part of the standard arsenal of malware.So , I can see how Google 's toolbar can get an unfair start out of the gate , but let me just ask.... have you used it ?
Have you explored the features it provides and found them wanting or are you just engaging yourself in some toolbar luditism ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The last guy whose computer I worked on must have had 5 or 6 toolbars in his browser, countless viruses, and he had been phished so many times that his browser had all but stopped working under the load (it loaded up about ten different phishing sites and at least a dozen porn pop-ups at every boot).Straw man arguments are fun.
Let me try...The last person I saw eating ice cream had a freezer full of bright pink, chemical infused flavors.
It was smeared all over his clothes, he weighed 400 pounds and couldn't leave his apartment.
You don't want to be like that guy do you?
Well, then don't eat ice cream.The anti-toolbar craze among the techie community started when Yahoo!
put out theirs.
It was a disaster.
Its features were so intrusive that anyone with a clue immediately un-installed it if they'd been unfortunate enough to be an early adopter (I don't recall having done so, but I've installed so much software over the years, I might have back then).
After that "toolbar" became synonymous with the loathing we all felt for Yahoo!
's little toy.
It didn't help that any number of "toolbars" were part of the standard arsenal of malware.So, I can see how Google's toolbar can get an unfair start out of the gate, but let me just ask.... have you used it?
Have you explored the features it provides and found them wanting or are you just engaging yourself in some toolbar luditism?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916956</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917290</id>
	<title>Re: Oops</title>
	<author>Demonoid-Penguin</author>
	<datestamp>1264607700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Disables the constant Chinese connections too!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-p</htmltext>
<tokenext>Disables the constant Chinese connections too !
; -p</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Disables the constant Chinese connections too!
;-p</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917118</id>
	<title>Quote Fail</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264606920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>[quote][/quote]</p></div></blockquote><p>Quote Fail. AAH-HAHAhahahahahahahahahahaaaaaa, what a rewb!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>[ quote ] [ /quote ] Quote Fail .
AAH-HAHAhahahahahahahahahahaaaaaa , what a rewb !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[quote][/quote]Quote Fail.
AAH-HAHAhahahahahahahahahahaaaaaa, what a rewb!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916678</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916974</id>
	<title>Re:Say it ain't so</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264606380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Didn't RTFA eh?.</p><p>It looks like a bug: If you disable the bar it will track you until the browser restarts. Then it'll be disabled forever. Sounds like a very strange feature (a dangerous trick just to squeeze the last hour of tracking from the victim?), but quite a boring bug to me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did n't RTFA eh ? .It looks like a bug : If you disable the bar it will track you until the browser restarts .
Then it 'll be disabled forever .
Sounds like a very strange feature ( a dangerous trick just to squeeze the last hour of tracking from the victim ?
) , but quite a boring bug to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Didn't RTFA eh?.It looks like a bug: If you disable the bar it will track you until the browser restarts.
Then it'll be disabled forever.
Sounds like a very strange feature (a dangerous trick just to squeeze the last hour of tracking from the victim?
), but quite a boring bug to me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916788</id>
	<title>No toolbar here</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264605480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't use any installable tool-bars.  Like they say, nothing is truly free.  I'm sure the sending of data when off was intentional.  They just got busted.</p><p>I don't like mega-corporations that have way to much control.  This is why I wish someone new would step up in the search world.  The two best search engines are Google and Bing, both owned by mega-corps.  Maybe an open source search engine powered by an open source charity. (donates to open source projects)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't use any installable tool-bars .
Like they say , nothing is truly free .
I 'm sure the sending of data when off was intentional .
They just got busted.I do n't like mega-corporations that have way to much control .
This is why I wish someone new would step up in the search world .
The two best search engines are Google and Bing , both owned by mega-corps .
Maybe an open source search engine powered by an open source charity .
( donates to open source projects )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't use any installable tool-bars.
Like they say, nothing is truly free.
I'm sure the sending of data when off was intentional.
They just got busted.I don't like mega-corporations that have way to much control.
This is why I wish someone new would step up in the search world.
The two best search engines are Google and Bing, both owned by mega-corps.
Maybe an open source search engine powered by an open source charity.
(donates to open source projects)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916656</id>
	<title>found a search engine with privacy: ixquick.com</title>
	<author>H4x0r Jim Duggan</author>
	<datestamp>1264604880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've switched to using</p><ul> <li> <a href="http://ixquick.com/" title="ixquick.com">http://ixquick.com</a> [ixquick.com] </li></ul><p>It's a meta search engine that focusses on privacy by not logging your IP address and your searches.  On the technical side, it's nearly as good as the big name search engine I used previously.</p><p>Here's a plugin for GNU IceCat / IceWeasel / Firefox: <a href="https://addons.mozilla.org/fr/firefox/addon/12389" title="mozilla.org">Ixquick</a> [mozilla.org], or the <a href="https://addons.mozilla.org/sv-SE/firefox/addon/12781" title="mozilla.org">https version</a> [mozilla.org] (which I haven't tried, but I guess is the same to users).</p><p>One hiccup: their ads system uses Google ads.  Maybe they've implemented this in an anonymous way.  I hope they have, but either way, at least with ixquick there a hope of privacy, unlike Google.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've switched to using http : //ixquick.com [ ixquick.com ] It 's a meta search engine that focusses on privacy by not logging your IP address and your searches .
On the technical side , it 's nearly as good as the big name search engine I used previously.Here 's a plugin for GNU IceCat / IceWeasel / Firefox : Ixquick [ mozilla.org ] , or the https version [ mozilla.org ] ( which I have n't tried , but I guess is the same to users ) .One hiccup : their ads system uses Google ads .
Maybe they 've implemented this in an anonymous way .
I hope they have , but either way , at least with ixquick there a hope of privacy , unlike Google .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've switched to using  http://ixquick.com [ixquick.com] It's a meta search engine that focusses on privacy by not logging your IP address and your searches.
On the technical side, it's nearly as good as the big name search engine I used previously.Here's a plugin for GNU IceCat / IceWeasel / Firefox: Ixquick [mozilla.org], or the https version [mozilla.org] (which I haven't tried, but I guess is the same to users).One hiccup: their ads system uses Google ads.
Maybe they've implemented this in an anonymous way.
I hope they have, but either way, at least with ixquick there a hope of privacy, unlike Google.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30919402</id>
	<title>Another good reason for on-going log removal</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264615620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is another great reason for pushing Google and other search providers to complete search log removal after a certain period of time.  If bugs can violate privacy policies then software providers should minimize the potential effect of bad code.  Unless you do not log any data, permanent removal of the logs is the only choice.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is another great reason for pushing Google and other search providers to complete search log removal after a certain period of time .
If bugs can violate privacy policies then software providers should minimize the potential effect of bad code .
Unless you do not log any data , permanent removal of the logs is the only choice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is another great reason for pushing Google and other search providers to complete search log removal after a certain period of time.
If bugs can violate privacy policies then software providers should minimize the potential effect of bad code.
Unless you do not log any data, permanent removal of the logs is the only choice.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622</id>
	<title>Say it ain't so</title>
	<author>eihab</author>
	<datestamp>1264604700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As far as I'm concerned toolbar == spy-ware. Google jumped the shark and joined the ranks of Yahoo, MSN and Happy-smiley-spy-ware-toolbar the day they created one and started shoving it down people's throat.</p><p>No techie I know installs any toolbar in IE or Firefox. The only poor souls that seems to be stuck with them are non-techies, who usually have at least 3-4 toolbars and they "don't know how it happened".</p><p>It's also amazing to watch them browse the web, they almost never use the address bar, it's either the Google or Yahoo toolbar's search box, and they seem to mix and match them in any given session. Basically whatever box is closest to the mouse pointer.</p><p>I would be surprised if this was actually a "bug" and not a feature, sounds like a great bug to have for a data mining company. I also wonder if the assertion that it only affects "<em>versions 6.3.911.1819 through 6.4.1311.42</em>" is true. How can anyone confirm that since "<em>the company intends to automatically update users' toolbars sometime today</em>". Who has an older version to check?</p><p>Google toolbar, analytics, ad sense, double click, chrome... My love for Google is diminishing faster than the DOW in 2008.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As far as I 'm concerned toolbar = = spy-ware .
Google jumped the shark and joined the ranks of Yahoo , MSN and Happy-smiley-spy-ware-toolbar the day they created one and started shoving it down people 's throat.No techie I know installs any toolbar in IE or Firefox .
The only poor souls that seems to be stuck with them are non-techies , who usually have at least 3-4 toolbars and they " do n't know how it happened " .It 's also amazing to watch them browse the web , they almost never use the address bar , it 's either the Google or Yahoo toolbar 's search box , and they seem to mix and match them in any given session .
Basically whatever box is closest to the mouse pointer.I would be surprised if this was actually a " bug " and not a feature , sounds like a great bug to have for a data mining company .
I also wonder if the assertion that it only affects " versions 6.3.911.1819 through 6.4.1311.42 " is true .
How can anyone confirm that since " the company intends to automatically update users ' toolbars sometime today " .
Who has an older version to check ? Google toolbar , analytics , ad sense , double click , chrome... My love for Google is diminishing faster than the DOW in 2008 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As far as I'm concerned toolbar == spy-ware.
Google jumped the shark and joined the ranks of Yahoo, MSN and Happy-smiley-spy-ware-toolbar the day they created one and started shoving it down people's throat.No techie I know installs any toolbar in IE or Firefox.
The only poor souls that seems to be stuck with them are non-techies, who usually have at least 3-4 toolbars and they "don't know how it happened".It's also amazing to watch them browse the web, they almost never use the address bar, it's either the Google or Yahoo toolbar's search box, and they seem to mix and match them in any given session.
Basically whatever box is closest to the mouse pointer.I would be surprised if this was actually a "bug" and not a feature, sounds like a great bug to have for a data mining company.
I also wonder if the assertion that it only affects "versions 6.3.911.1819 through 6.4.1311.42" is true.
How can anyone confirm that since "the company intends to automatically update users' toolbars sometime today".
Who has an older version to check?Google toolbar, analytics, ad sense, double click, chrome... My love for Google is diminishing faster than the DOW in 2008.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917082</id>
	<title>Re:Say it ain't so</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264606800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What is wrong with Chrome?  Whats wrong with analytics?  I get the toolbar, ad sense, and double click, but Chrome and Analytics are nice.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What is wrong with Chrome ?
Whats wrong with analytics ?
I get the toolbar , ad sense , and double click , but Chrome and Analytics are nice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is wrong with Chrome?
Whats wrong with analytics?
I get the toolbar, ad sense, and double click, but Chrome and Analytics are nice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30918212</id>
	<title>I'm just going to leave this here</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264611120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="https://www.torproject.org/torbrowser/" title="torproject.org" rel="nofollow">Tor Browser Bundle</a> [torproject.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Tor Browser Bundle [ torproject.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tor Browser Bundle [torproject.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917004</id>
	<title>The Alexa Toolbar</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264606500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This new shouldn't be a surprise for anyone who has ever used a browser toolbar before.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This new should n't be a surprise for anyone who has ever used a browser toolbar before .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This new shouldn't be a surprise for anyone who has ever used a browser toolbar before.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916724</id>
	<title>Re:Say it ain't so</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264605180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The "non-techies" you speak of make up about 99.9999\% of the population, and they're the main target of the advertisements that Google serves up.</p><p>Anyway, you're right, Google is on its way down. They've grown too large, and once that happens an innovative company is done for. It happened to Yahoo!, it happened to Xerox, it happened to IBM, it happened to Sun Microsystems.</p><p>Soon they start putting out progressively shittier and shittier products. Chrome OS is a good example of this. It was a braindead idea from the start, and the Chromium OS releases we've been able to use so far are absolutely pathetic.</p><p>I've showed Chromium OS to some "average" people I know, and none of them want anything to do with it. They can already access Facebook, GMail, and their other web apps from their goddamn netbooks, Blackberries and iPhones. Oh, and then they can install their own software, if they want. Even they see that Chrome OS will be stupid.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The " non-techies " you speak of make up about 99.9999 \ % of the population , and they 're the main target of the advertisements that Google serves up.Anyway , you 're right , Google is on its way down .
They 've grown too large , and once that happens an innovative company is done for .
It happened to Yahoo ! , it happened to Xerox , it happened to IBM , it happened to Sun Microsystems.Soon they start putting out progressively shittier and shittier products .
Chrome OS is a good example of this .
It was a braindead idea from the start , and the Chromium OS releases we 've been able to use so far are absolutely pathetic.I 've showed Chromium OS to some " average " people I know , and none of them want anything to do with it .
They can already access Facebook , GMail , and their other web apps from their goddamn netbooks , Blackberries and iPhones .
Oh , and then they can install their own software , if they want .
Even they see that Chrome OS will be stupid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The "non-techies" you speak of make up about 99.9999\% of the population, and they're the main target of the advertisements that Google serves up.Anyway, you're right, Google is on its way down.
They've grown too large, and once that happens an innovative company is done for.
It happened to Yahoo!, it happened to Xerox, it happened to IBM, it happened to Sun Microsystems.Soon they start putting out progressively shittier and shittier products.
Chrome OS is a good example of this.
It was a braindead idea from the start, and the Chromium OS releases we've been able to use so far are absolutely pathetic.I've showed Chromium OS to some "average" people I know, and none of them want anything to do with it.
They can already access Facebook, GMail, and their other web apps from their goddamn netbooks, Blackberries and iPhones.
Oh, and then they can install their own software, if they want.
Even they see that Chrome OS will be stupid.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916850</id>
	<title>Why does this surprise anyone?</title>
	<author>i\_want\_you\_to\_throw\_</author>
	<datestamp>1264605780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No one is surprised when Microsoft does this but it'a amazing that people are when Google does. As a publicly traded company Google's only obligation is to make a profit for shareholders. That means doing things like instituting business practices that are favorable to their business. Can you imagine a better situation? 80\% of the search market and people love you. Once GOOG became publicly traded "Do no evil" is more of a guideline than a rule. Maybe they should change their motto to "We do less evil than everyone else&copy;"</htmltext>
<tokenext>No one is surprised when Microsoft does this but it'a amazing that people are when Google does .
As a publicly traded company Google 's only obligation is to make a profit for shareholders .
That means doing things like instituting business practices that are favorable to their business .
Can you imagine a better situation ?
80 \ % of the search market and people love you .
Once GOOG became publicly traded " Do no evil " is more of a guideline than a rule .
Maybe they should change their motto to " We do less evil than everyone else   "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No one is surprised when Microsoft does this but it'a amazing that people are when Google does.
As a publicly traded company Google's only obligation is to make a profit for shareholders.
That means doing things like instituting business practices that are favorable to their business.
Can you imagine a better situation?
80\% of the search market and people love you.
Once GOOG became publicly traded "Do no evil" is more of a guideline than a rule.
Maybe they should change their motto to "We do less evil than everyone else©"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917796</id>
	<title>Okay?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264609620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Am I the only one that LIKES that they keep track of my searches?</p><p>I don't like getting a bunch of irrelevant results when I search.  If tracking how I browse gets rid of those irrelevant results, then fine.<br>Google's ads are the least intrusive of any company I've ever seen, and if they want to take over the advertising business, I think that's a very good thing.</p><p>Also, I think a lot of you are flattering yourselves into thinking they are tracking you in some Nineteen Eighty-Four Big Brother way.  They don't actually care about you, just how people browse the web so they can improve their business.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Am I the only one that LIKES that they keep track of my searches ? I do n't like getting a bunch of irrelevant results when I search .
If tracking how I browse gets rid of those irrelevant results , then fine.Google 's ads are the least intrusive of any company I 've ever seen , and if they want to take over the advertising business , I think that 's a very good thing.Also , I think a lot of you are flattering yourselves into thinking they are tracking you in some Nineteen Eighty-Four Big Brother way .
They do n't actually care about you , just how people browse the web so they can improve their business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Am I the only one that LIKES that they keep track of my searches?I don't like getting a bunch of irrelevant results when I search.
If tracking how I browse gets rid of those irrelevant results, then fine.Google's ads are the least intrusive of any company I've ever seen, and if they want to take over the advertising business, I think that's a very good thing.Also, I think a lot of you are flattering yourselves into thinking they are tracking you in some Nineteen Eighty-Four Big Brother way.
They don't actually care about you, just how people browse the web so they can improve their business.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916678</id>
	<title>Re:Say it ain't so</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264604940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>[quote]jumped the shark[/quote]
Shut it... I'm beyond tired of people misusing this phrase.</div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>[ quote ] jumped the shark [ /quote ] Shut it... I 'm beyond tired of people misusing this phrase .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[quote]jumped the shark[/quote]
Shut it... I'm beyond tired of people misusing this phrase.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30921060</id>
	<title>Re:found a search engine with privacy: ixquick.com</title>
	<author>eihab</author>
	<datestamp>1264621440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>One hiccup: their ads system uses Google ads. Maybe they've implemented this in an anonymous way. I hope they have, but either way, at least with ixquick there a hope of privacy, unlike Google.</p></div><p>It looks like they did. The ads are not loaded with Javascript or anything from Google. They are basically links served from ixquick's server as:<br>http://www.google.com/aclk?sa=l&amp;ai=<strong>[Publisher/Advertiser Identifier]</strong>&amp;adurl=<strong>[URL of the ad]</strong>.</p><p>Since ixquick uses <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP\_POST" title="wikipedia.org">POST</a> [wikipedia.org] instead of <a href="http://www.diffen.com/difference/Get\_vs\_Post" title="diffen.com">GET</a> [diffen.com], Google can't see your keywords in the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP\_referrer" title="wikipedia.org">referrer header</a> [wikipedia.org], all they'll see is that you came from (http://us2.ixquick.com/do/metasearch.pl).</p><p>My only issue with these meta-search engines is that they rely on all of the other search engines to produce their results. I'm not sure if what they're doing is allowed by the engines' terms of services (e.g. I don't see Google on ixquick's list, but yet there's Scroogle), and I don't know if they're viable long term.</p><p>I'm pretty sure if they get big enough then Bing, Yahoo and others will have an issue with their traffic going ixquick's way.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>One hiccup : their ads system uses Google ads .
Maybe they 've implemented this in an anonymous way .
I hope they have , but either way , at least with ixquick there a hope of privacy , unlike Google.It looks like they did .
The ads are not loaded with Javascript or anything from Google .
They are basically links served from ixquick 's server as : http : //www.google.com/aclk ? sa = l&amp;ai = [ Publisher/Advertiser Identifier ] &amp;adurl = [ URL of the ad ] .Since ixquick uses POST [ wikipedia.org ] instead of GET [ diffen.com ] , Google ca n't see your keywords in the referrer header [ wikipedia.org ] , all they 'll see is that you came from ( http : //us2.ixquick.com/do/metasearch.pl ) .My only issue with these meta-search engines is that they rely on all of the other search engines to produce their results .
I 'm not sure if what they 're doing is allowed by the engines ' terms of services ( e.g .
I do n't see Google on ixquick 's list , but yet there 's Scroogle ) , and I do n't know if they 're viable long term.I 'm pretty sure if they get big enough then Bing , Yahoo and others will have an issue with their traffic going ixquick 's way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One hiccup: their ads system uses Google ads.
Maybe they've implemented this in an anonymous way.
I hope they have, but either way, at least with ixquick there a hope of privacy, unlike Google.It looks like they did.
The ads are not loaded with Javascript or anything from Google.
They are basically links served from ixquick's server as:http://www.google.com/aclk?sa=l&amp;ai=[Publisher/Advertiser Identifier]&amp;adurl=[URL of the ad].Since ixquick uses POST [wikipedia.org] instead of GET [diffen.com], Google can't see your keywords in the referrer header [wikipedia.org], all they'll see is that you came from (http://us2.ixquick.com/do/metasearch.pl).My only issue with these meta-search engines is that they rely on all of the other search engines to produce their results.
I'm not sure if what they're doing is allowed by the engines' terms of services (e.g.
I don't see Google on ixquick's list, but yet there's Scroogle), and I don't know if they're viable long term.I'm pretty sure if they get big enough then Bing, Yahoo and others will have an issue with their traffic going ixquick's way.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916656</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1331243_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917118
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916678
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1331243_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916600
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1331243_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30918678
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916656
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1331243_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30919014
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916656
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1331243_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30921060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916656
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1331243_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917582
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916656
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1331243_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30918580
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1331243_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30918760
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916684
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1331243_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916724
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1331243_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1331243_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1331243_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916600
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1331243_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30928998
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1331243_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916756
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916600
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1331243_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30918250
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916600
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1331243_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916730
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1331243_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916974
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1331243_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30918884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1331243_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1331243_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30918196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1331243_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30923618
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916600
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1331243_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30930468
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916956
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1331243_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30928492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916636
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1331243_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30920390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916678
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1331243_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917376
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1331243_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30930414
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1331243_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916684
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1331243_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30929944
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916636
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1331243_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916696
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1331243_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30922788
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916684
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1331243_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1331243_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917098
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916600
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1331243.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916850
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1331243.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917796
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1331243.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916684
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30922788
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916846
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30918760
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1331243.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916736
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1331243.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916602
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1331243.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916656
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30921060
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30919014
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30918678
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917582
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1331243.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917026
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1331243.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916676
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1331243.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916622
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917254
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30918196
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916974
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30918884
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916724
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30928998
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917082
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30918580
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916956
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30930468
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30930414
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916712
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916696
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917376
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916678
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917118
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30920390
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916730
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917374
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917598
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1331243.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916600
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30918250
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917122
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30923618
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916756
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917350
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917098
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1331243.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916636
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30928492
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30929944
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1331243.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30917004
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1331243.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1331243.30916788
</commentlist>
</conversation>
