<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_08_159231</id>
	<title>Zero-Day Vulnerabilities On the Market</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1265644080000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"Zero-day vulnerabilities have become prized possessions to attackers and defenders alike. As the recent China-Google attack demonstrated, they are the basis on which most of the successful attacks are crafted these days. There is <a href="http://www.net-security.org/secworld.php?id=8842">an underground market growing around these vulnerabilities</a>, but there are also 'white markets' &mdash; set up by VeriSign, TippingPoint, Google &mdash; where they buy zero-day flaws and alert the companies so that they can patch their products before the vulnerabilities can be taken advantage of."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " Zero-day vulnerabilities have become prized possessions to attackers and defenders alike .
As the recent China-Google attack demonstrated , they are the basis on which most of the successful attacks are crafted these days .
There is an underground market growing around these vulnerabilities , but there are also 'white markets '    set up by VeriSign , TippingPoint , Google    where they buy zero-day flaws and alert the companies so that they can patch their products before the vulnerabilities can be taken advantage of .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "Zero-day vulnerabilities have become prized possessions to attackers and defenders alike.
As the recent China-Google attack demonstrated, they are the basis on which most of the successful attacks are crafted these days.
There is an underground market growing around these vulnerabilities, but there are also 'white markets' — set up by VeriSign, TippingPoint, Google — where they buy zero-day flaws and alert the companies so that they can patch their products before the vulnerabilities can be taken advantage of.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061218</id>
	<title>Re:I'm surprised white markets aren't more common</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265649000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You do realize that the Taliban is the reason that there was no opium in Afghanistan up until we showed up, right? They used to destroy the fields the first time they caught you growing opium, and shoot your ass if they had to come back. Karzai's brother is the big opium dealer in the country, and he isn't on the Taliban's side he is on the corrupt politicians side.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do realize that the Taliban is the reason that there was no opium in Afghanistan up until we showed up , right ?
They used to destroy the fields the first time they caught you growing opium , and shoot your ass if they had to come back .
Karzai 's brother is the big opium dealer in the country , and he is n't on the Taliban 's side he is on the corrupt politicians side .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You do realize that the Taliban is the reason that there was no opium in Afghanistan up until we showed up, right?
They used to destroy the fields the first time they caught you growing opium, and shoot your ass if they had to come back.
Karzai's brother is the big opium dealer in the country, and he isn't on the Taliban's side he is on the corrupt politicians side.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31064214</id>
	<title>What passes for Insightful...</title>
	<author>Gary W. Longsine</author>
	<datestamp>1265620380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> <a href="http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/6210.pdf" title="state.gov">Taliban and the Drug Trade</a> [state.gov] <br>
Some members of the U.S. drug enforcement community suggest that a new strategy may have been adopted by the Taliban in the wake of their July 27, 2000 announced ban on cultivation. This strategy would reflect a desire by the Taliban to use their &ldquo;monopoly&rdquo; position to maximize profits, i.e. restrict supply by restricting cultivation; drive prices up dramatically; and sell from an extensive supply of stockpiled opium. According to the United Nations Drug Control Program (UNDCP) personnel, in the past, up to 60\% of opium stock has been stored for sale in future years."</p></div>
</blockquote><p>

Uhm, no.  What nut jobs like Mullah Omar say, and what they actually do, might overlap, but may not be entirely equivalent.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Taliban and the Drug Trade [ state.gov ] Some members of the U.S. drug enforcement community suggest that a new strategy may have been adopted by the Taliban in the wake of their July 27 , 2000 announced ban on cultivation .
This strategy would reflect a desire by the Taliban to use their    monopoly    position to maximize profits , i.e .
restrict supply by restricting cultivation ; drive prices up dramatically ; and sell from an extensive supply of stockpiled opium .
According to the United Nations Drug Control Program ( UNDCP ) personnel , in the past , up to 60 \ % of opium stock has been stored for sale in future years .
" Uhm , no .
What nut jobs like Mullah Omar say , and what they actually do , might overlap , but may not be entirely equivalent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Taliban and the Drug Trade [state.gov] 
Some members of the U.S. drug enforcement community suggest that a new strategy may have been adopted by the Taliban in the wake of their July 27, 2000 announced ban on cultivation.
This strategy would reflect a desire by the Taliban to use their “monopoly” position to maximize profits, i.e.
restrict supply by restricting cultivation; drive prices up dramatically; and sell from an extensive supply of stockpiled opium.
According to the United Nations Drug Control Program (UNDCP) personnel, in the past, up to 60\% of opium stock has been stored for sale in future years.
"


Uhm, no.
What nut jobs like Mullah Omar say, and what they actually do, might overlap, but may not be entirely equivalent.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061910</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31062408</id>
	<title>Not a trend.</title>
	<author>yoda</author>
	<datestamp>1265654940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The vulnerability contributor program @ Verisign and TippingPoint were setup by the same person.  I know this because that person used to work for me.  Google is buying simply as a reaction to the China stuff.  This isn't a trend...though on the surface, it appears that way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The vulnerability contributor program @ Verisign and TippingPoint were setup by the same person .
I know this because that person used to work for me .
Google is buying simply as a reaction to the China stuff .
This is n't a trend...though on the surface , it appears that way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The vulnerability contributor program @ Verisign and TippingPoint were setup by the same person.
I know this because that person used to work for me.
Google is buying simply as a reaction to the China stuff.
This isn't a trend...though on the surface, it appears that way.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061306</id>
	<title>Re:I'm surprised white markets aren't more common</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265649420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I had that idea for a long, long time.</p><p>Even go one step further: Buy not from the cartels but directly from the farmers.</p><p>The drug cartels in Mexico (and their wars with 20.000 dead per year!) would be ended tomorrow.</p><p>But I guess we cannot do that. Giving our money to poor countries it not what we want to do with it. We rather spend it on... the War on Terror or other useless shit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had that idea for a long , long time.Even go one step further : Buy not from the cartels but directly from the farmers.The drug cartels in Mexico ( and their wars with 20.000 dead per year !
) would be ended tomorrow.But I guess we can not do that .
Giving our money to poor countries it not what we want to do with it .
We rather spend it on... the War on Terror or other useless shit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had that idea for a long, long time.Even go one step further: Buy not from the cartels but directly from the farmers.The drug cartels in Mexico (and their wars with 20.000 dead per year!
) would be ended tomorrow.But I guess we cannot do that.
Giving our money to poor countries it not what we want to do with it.
We rather spend it on... the War on Terror or other useless shit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31062666</id>
	<title>Re:"Zero-day" is just noise</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265656200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The way I see it is that zero-day once had a meaning, but it was a cool term and everyone wanted to use it and now everything is zero-day and it means nothing, literally.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The way I see it is that zero-day once had a meaning , but it was a cool term and everyone wanted to use it and now everything is zero-day and it means nothing , literally .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The way I see it is that zero-day once had a meaning, but it was a cool term and everyone wanted to use it and now everything is zero-day and it means nothing, literally.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061160</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31062290</id>
	<title>Re:I'm surprised white markets aren't more common</title>
	<author>SnarfQuest</author>
	<datestamp>1265654220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since these "farmers" will know that the drugs they produce will never be used, what's to stop them from selling fake drugs which have fixed to make the tests turn out right to the US government, and selling the real ones to the Taliban? All you need is some cheap chemical that makes the test kit change color, and I'm sure that there are things other than opium that can fake out the tests. Maybe just some food coloring mixed in.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since these " farmers " will know that the drugs they produce will never be used , what 's to stop them from selling fake drugs which have fixed to make the tests turn out right to the US government , and selling the real ones to the Taliban ?
All you need is some cheap chemical that makes the test kit change color , and I 'm sure that there are things other than opium that can fake out the tests .
Maybe just some food coloring mixed in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since these "farmers" will know that the drugs they produce will never be used, what's to stop them from selling fake drugs which have fixed to make the tests turn out right to the US government, and selling the real ones to the Taliban?
All you need is some cheap chemical that makes the test kit change color, and I'm sure that there are things other than opium that can fake out the tests.
Maybe just some food coloring mixed in.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31064166</id>
	<title>co34</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265620260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">be 'very pporly play parties the munches the most come Here but now is ingesting</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>be 'very pporly play parties the munches the most come Here but now is ingesting [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>be 'very pporly play parties the munches the most come Here but now is ingesting [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31062136</id>
	<title>Re:I'm surprised white markets aren't more common</title>
	<author>wintercolby</author>
	<datestamp>1265653380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I remember the Karzai's government trying to do just what you're suggesting here, and the Bush Administration refuting it.  Most of our current legal opium supply comes from Turkey, which houses several US Military bases.  Ultimately, purchasing opium for use in purposely restricted legal markets would flood those markets, driving down prices and alienating our allies.

That said, I would be willing to bet that purchasing opium from farmers and storing it would be cheaper than prosecuting the war against the Taliban as well as the expensive war on drugs.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember the Karzai 's government trying to do just what you 're suggesting here , and the Bush Administration refuting it .
Most of our current legal opium supply comes from Turkey , which houses several US Military bases .
Ultimately , purchasing opium for use in purposely restricted legal markets would flood those markets , driving down prices and alienating our allies .
That said , I would be willing to bet that purchasing opium from farmers and storing it would be cheaper than prosecuting the war against the Taliban as well as the expensive war on drugs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember the Karzai's government trying to do just what you're suggesting here, and the Bush Administration refuting it.
Most of our current legal opium supply comes from Turkey, which houses several US Military bases.
Ultimately, purchasing opium for use in purposely restricted legal markets would flood those markets, driving down prices and alienating our allies.
That said, I would be willing to bet that purchasing opium from farmers and storing it would be cheaper than prosecuting the war against the Taliban as well as the expensive war on drugs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31063952</id>
	<title>Re:I'm surprised white markets aren't more common</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265662380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except that the black market for recreational drugs only exists because of government. If recreational drugs were legal, the bad guys would be straight out of business, and the price of recreational drugs would drop like a rock. Exactly the same as alcohol prohibition in the 1920s.</p><p>What you're suggesting is merely a band-aid, and rests on the assumption that prohibition is normal, moral, and just -- when in reality it is abnormal, immoral, and unjust.</p><p>The real solution is to abolish prohibition.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except that the black market for recreational drugs only exists because of government .
If recreational drugs were legal , the bad guys would be straight out of business , and the price of recreational drugs would drop like a rock .
Exactly the same as alcohol prohibition in the 1920s.What you 're suggesting is merely a band-aid , and rests on the assumption that prohibition is normal , moral , and just -- when in reality it is abnormal , immoral , and unjust.The real solution is to abolish prohibition .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except that the black market for recreational drugs only exists because of government.
If recreational drugs were legal, the bad guys would be straight out of business, and the price of recreational drugs would drop like a rock.
Exactly the same as alcohol prohibition in the 1920s.What you're suggesting is merely a band-aid, and rests on the assumption that prohibition is normal, moral, and just -- when in reality it is abnormal, immoral, and unjust.The real solution is to abolish prohibition.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31062202</id>
	<title>Inside exploitation of these systems?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265653680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is it possible that a developer or contractor close to a product preparing to launch could engineer a vulnerability in to the software and then conspire with a free-lance hacker working these sorts of projects to snatch up the payout? This is especially worrisome for government software, especially if they are paying out 5-6 figures for an identified vulnerability.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is it possible that a developer or contractor close to a product preparing to launch could engineer a vulnerability in to the software and then conspire with a free-lance hacker working these sorts of projects to snatch up the payout ?
This is especially worrisome for government software , especially if they are paying out 5-6 figures for an identified vulnerability .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is it possible that a developer or contractor close to a product preparing to launch could engineer a vulnerability in to the software and then conspire with a free-lance hacker working these sorts of projects to snatch up the payout?
This is especially worrisome for government software, especially if they are paying out 5-6 figures for an identified vulnerability.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31062248</id>
	<title>Re:This is why we need...</title>
	<author>\_Sprocket\_</author>
	<datestamp>1265654040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Dude.  As soon as Bill stops screwing around with card games, we're going to be set!"</p><p>"Why?"</p><p>"I just got a whole bunch of neg 7300 day exploits for Win95, dude.  We're gonna be set."</p><p>"Cool.  Hey.... have you even been born yet?"</p><p>"Awww crap..." (poof)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Dude .
As soon as Bill stops screwing around with card games , we 're going to be set ! " " Why ?
" " I just got a whole bunch of neg 7300 day exploits for Win95 , dude .
We 're gon na be set. " " Cool .
Hey.... have you even been born yet ?
" " Awww crap... " ( poof )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Dude.
As soon as Bill stops screwing around with card games, we're going to be set!""Why?
""I just got a whole bunch of neg 7300 day exploits for Win95, dude.
We're gonna be set.""Cool.
Hey.... have you even been born yet?
""Awww crap..." (poof)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31060988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061304</id>
	<title>poor grammar</title>
	<author>FredThompson</author>
	<datestamp>1265649420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"...can be taken advantage of."</p><p>should be something like,</p><p>"can be exploited."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" ...can be taken advantage of .
" should be something like , " can be exploited .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"...can be taken advantage of.
"should be something like,"can be exploited.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31063222</id>
	<title>Smart idea</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265658720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"White marketing" this makes perfect sense to me.  After all, if you spend your time productively searching for flaws in products, this benefits the company thus exposed.<br>This "involuntary outsourcing" deserves compensation, and at the same time keeps these flaws away from those who would exploit them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" White marketing " this makes perfect sense to me .
After all , if you spend your time productively searching for flaws in products , this benefits the company thus exposed.This " involuntary outsourcing " deserves compensation , and at the same time keeps these flaws away from those who would exploit them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"White marketing" this makes perfect sense to me.
After all, if you spend your time productively searching for flaws in products, this benefits the company thus exposed.This "involuntary outsourcing" deserves compensation, and at the same time keeps these flaws away from those who would exploit them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061530</id>
	<title>Re:I'm surprised white markets aren't more common</title>
	<author>Yvanhoe</author>
	<datestamp>1265650440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The taliban are actually opposed to drugs production. While they were in power, the area of opium cultures fell down incredibely quick. It came back thanks to the war. The drugs lords are a faction different from the talibans.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The taliban are actually opposed to drugs production .
While they were in power , the area of opium cultures fell down incredibely quick .
It came back thanks to the war .
The drugs lords are a faction different from the talibans .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The taliban are actually opposed to drugs production.
While they were in power, the area of opium cultures fell down incredibely quick.
It came back thanks to the war.
The drugs lords are a faction different from the talibans.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061186</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061386</id>
	<title>How does the purchaser of an exploit...</title>
	<author>John Hasler</author>
	<datestamp>1265649780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...know that it has not also been sold to someone else?  And who brokers these deals?  I can't imagine the parties trusting each other.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...know that it has not also been sold to someone else ?
And who brokers these deals ?
I ca n't imagine the parties trusting each other .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...know that it has not also been sold to someone else?
And who brokers these deals?
I can't imagine the parties trusting each other.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061164</id>
	<title>white market in zero-day vulnerabilities</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265648760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Does anyone have a breakdown as to the number of zero-day vulnerabilities per platform and Operating System ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does anyone have a breakdown as to the number of zero-day vulnerabilities per platform and Operating System ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does anyone have a breakdown as to the number of zero-day vulnerabilities per platform and Operating System ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061248</id>
	<title>Buy them</title>
	<author>microbox</author>
	<datestamp>1265649120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Surely companies could just buy the zero-day exploits, study them, and patch their software. Turn the black market to your own end. Then the problem is solved without time travel.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Surely companies could just buy the zero-day exploits , study them , and patch their software .
Turn the black market to your own end .
Then the problem is solved without time travel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Surely companies could just buy the zero-day exploits, study them, and patch their software.
Turn the black market to your own end.
Then the problem is solved without time travel.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31060988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061910</id>
	<title>Re:I'm surprised white markets aren't more common</title>
	<author>ratboy666</author>
	<datestamp>1265652180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Taliban sells heroin?</p><p>Um... no. In July 2000, Mullah Omar ordered a ban on poppy cultivation. As far as I know, this hasn't been lifted. Other members of the Northern Alliance are responsible.</p><p>I presume you are a US citizen; please know your enemy. The Taliban may be at war with the US, but they are even harder on drugs. It is about as conceivable as Pat Robertson selling heroin to fund Christian Outreach.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Taliban sells heroin ? Um... no. In July 2000 , Mullah Omar ordered a ban on poppy cultivation .
As far as I know , this has n't been lifted .
Other members of the Northern Alliance are responsible.I presume you are a US citizen ; please know your enemy .
The Taliban may be at war with the US , but they are even harder on drugs .
It is about as conceivable as Pat Robertson selling heroin to fund Christian Outreach .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Taliban sells heroin?Um... no. In July 2000, Mullah Omar ordered a ban on poppy cultivation.
As far as I know, this hasn't been lifted.
Other members of the Northern Alliance are responsible.I presume you are a US citizen; please know your enemy.
The Taliban may be at war with the US, but they are even harder on drugs.
It is about as conceivable as Pat Robertson selling heroin to fund Christian Outreach.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31066730</id>
	<title>Some groups won't give up exploits</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265630700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unfortunately it all comes down to greed. Why would someone who finds an exploit report it to Microsoft for free or give it to Google for $500, when they can sell it and make $50,000 or more on the "black" market. Also, their are many groups out there that are looking for exploits that have no desire to report them to anyone. Chinese and Russian government hacker groups prize these back doors...</p><p>cyberarms.wordpress.com</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately it all comes down to greed .
Why would someone who finds an exploit report it to Microsoft for free or give it to Google for $ 500 , when they can sell it and make $ 50,000 or more on the " black " market .
Also , their are many groups out there that are looking for exploits that have no desire to report them to anyone .
Chinese and Russian government hacker groups prize these back doors...cyberarms.wordpress.com</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately it all comes down to greed.
Why would someone who finds an exploit report it to Microsoft for free or give it to Google for $500, when they can sell it and make $50,000 or more on the "black" market.
Also, their are many groups out there that are looking for exploits that have no desire to report them to anyone.
Chinese and Russian government hacker groups prize these back doors...cyberarms.wordpress.com</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31062646</id>
	<title>Re:I'm surprised white markets aren't more common</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265656140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>...especially when the market is fairly inelastic.</p><p>The best "white market" tale I've ever heard is the militias that ran the "Golden Triangle" in the Southeast Asian highlands offering to sell the US the entire opium crop.</p><p>I think it would be a grand strategy in Afghanistan -- build goodwill with farmers through buying their crop at prices better than the Taliban is offering, denying the Taliban a source of income through trafficking and probably having a significant supply reduction in the global heroin market.  They could even use the opium for the production of painkillers for the legitimate market, which I understand is actually constrained sometimes by strict production limitations.</p><p>You would think that white marketing the supply of illicit drugs would make a lot of sense -- by buying up supplies at the volume end of the market and denying it to the market, you would drive street prices through the roof and have far more impact on the consumers, pricing many out of the market.  Cocaine supply diversity may make this difficult, but if pursued quietly it might actually be effective there too.</p><p>Critics would decry giving money to criminals, but the "buy" could actually take place at the farming level where that's an option, thus totally undercutting the criminals.  It'd be great to see a cost analysis to see if it would actually be cheaper to just buy up the drugs at the point of production versus the drug war, which doesn't work.</p></div><p>As the black market prices go up.. the white market has to follow. So where would this price war end?</p><p>Paying for doing illegal stuff can never work in the long run.</p><p>What next? Pay all the hit men? thieves?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...especially when the market is fairly inelastic.The best " white market " tale I 've ever heard is the militias that ran the " Golden Triangle " in the Southeast Asian highlands offering to sell the US the entire opium crop.I think it would be a grand strategy in Afghanistan -- build goodwill with farmers through buying their crop at prices better than the Taliban is offering , denying the Taliban a source of income through trafficking and probably having a significant supply reduction in the global heroin market .
They could even use the opium for the production of painkillers for the legitimate market , which I understand is actually constrained sometimes by strict production limitations.You would think that white marketing the supply of illicit drugs would make a lot of sense -- by buying up supplies at the volume end of the market and denying it to the market , you would drive street prices through the roof and have far more impact on the consumers , pricing many out of the market .
Cocaine supply diversity may make this difficult , but if pursued quietly it might actually be effective there too.Critics would decry giving money to criminals , but the " buy " could actually take place at the farming level where that 's an option , thus totally undercutting the criminals .
It 'd be great to see a cost analysis to see if it would actually be cheaper to just buy up the drugs at the point of production versus the drug war , which does n't work.As the black market prices go up.. the white market has to follow .
So where would this price war end ? Paying for doing illegal stuff can never work in the long run.What next ?
Pay all the hit men ?
thieves ? ... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...especially when the market is fairly inelastic.The best "white market" tale I've ever heard is the militias that ran the "Golden Triangle" in the Southeast Asian highlands offering to sell the US the entire opium crop.I think it would be a grand strategy in Afghanistan -- build goodwill with farmers through buying their crop at prices better than the Taliban is offering, denying the Taliban a source of income through trafficking and probably having a significant supply reduction in the global heroin market.
They could even use the opium for the production of painkillers for the legitimate market, which I understand is actually constrained sometimes by strict production limitations.You would think that white marketing the supply of illicit drugs would make a lot of sense -- by buying up supplies at the volume end of the market and denying it to the market, you would drive street prices through the roof and have far more impact on the consumers, pricing many out of the market.
Cocaine supply diversity may make this difficult, but if pursued quietly it might actually be effective there too.Critics would decry giving money to criminals, but the "buy" could actually take place at the farming level where that's an option, thus totally undercutting the criminals.
It'd be great to see a cost analysis to see if it would actually be cheaper to just buy up the drugs at the point of production versus the drug war, which doesn't work.As the black market prices go up.. the white market has to follow.
So where would this price war end?Paying for doing illegal stuff can never work in the long run.What next?
Pay all the hit men?
thieves? ....
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061186</id>
	<title>Re:I'm surprised white markets aren't more common</title>
	<author>L4t3r4lu5</author>
	<datestamp>1265648820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Buying products other than opium, i.e. incentives to plant other crops would be better.<br> <br>On another point, don't you think the Taliban might be a little irritated by this and, ooooh I don't know, cut off some farmers heads? I hear they've been known to do that to make a point.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Buying products other than opium , i.e .
incentives to plant other crops would be better .
On another point , do n't you think the Taliban might be a little irritated by this and , ooooh I do n't know , cut off some farmers heads ?
I hear they 've been known to do that to make a point .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Buying products other than opium, i.e.
incentives to plant other crops would be better.
On another point, don't you think the Taliban might be a little irritated by this and, ooooh I don't know, cut off some farmers heads?
I hear they've been known to do that to make a point.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061788</id>
	<title>Re:Sure is...</title>
	<author>insufflate10mg</author>
	<datestamp>1265651520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I just realized the parent was trying to make a joke about how 0days have been on the black market since the 90's.  When I read it the first time I thought it was a nostalgic reference, not a reference to the fact that the news contained in this story is far from news. Maybe olds, but not news.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I just realized the parent was trying to make a joke about how 0days have been on the black market since the 90 's .
When I read it the first time I thought it was a nostalgic reference , not a reference to the fact that the news contained in this story is far from news .
Maybe olds , but not news .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just realized the parent was trying to make a joke about how 0days have been on the black market since the 90's.
When I read it the first time I thought it was a nostalgic reference, not a reference to the fact that the news contained in this story is far from news.
Maybe olds, but not news.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31060970</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31062030</id>
	<title>How do you evaluate an open market item?</title>
	<author>filesiteguy</author>
	<datestamp>1265652840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Though I'm not surprised that this exists, I wonder how one prices a zero-day exploit.  Do you get a return on investment? Number of PC's infected? Number of bank accounts stolen?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Though I 'm not surprised that this exists , I wonder how one prices a zero-day exploit .
Do you get a return on investment ?
Number of PC 's infected ?
Number of bank accounts stolen ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Though I'm not surprised that this exists, I wonder how one prices a zero-day exploit.
Do you get a return on investment?
Number of PC's infected?
Number of bank accounts stolen?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061326</id>
	<title>Re:I'm surprised white markets aren't more common</title>
	<author>swb</author>
	<datestamp>1265649540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We can incentivize the growing of other crops, too, but we should also be prepared to buy up the opium crop.</p><p>The alternative is destroying the opium crop; this impoverishes the farmer further, destroys his livelihood and causes him to not just grow opium, but join the Taliban.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We can incentivize the growing of other crops , too , but we should also be prepared to buy up the opium crop.The alternative is destroying the opium crop ; this impoverishes the farmer further , destroys his livelihood and causes him to not just grow opium , but join the Taliban .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We can incentivize the growing of other crops, too, but we should also be prepared to buy up the opium crop.The alternative is destroying the opium crop; this impoverishes the farmer further, destroys his livelihood and causes him to not just grow opium, but join the Taliban.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061186</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061648</id>
	<title>Re:I'm surprised white markets aren't more common</title>
	<author>Jenming</author>
	<datestamp>1265650980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I bet the Opium would still reach the consumer at comparable prices.</p><p>The Opiate trade does not exist because of Afghanistan farmers or the Taliban, it exists because consumers really want Opiates.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I bet the Opium would still reach the consumer at comparable prices.The Opiate trade does not exist because of Afghanistan farmers or the Taliban , it exists because consumers really want Opiates .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I bet the Opium would still reach the consumer at comparable prices.The Opiate trade does not exist because of Afghanistan farmers or the Taliban, it exists because consumers really want Opiates.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31068748</id>
	<title>Most of the successful attacks?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1265650080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>As the recent China-Google attack demonstrated, they are the basis on which most of the successful attacks are crafted these days.</p></div><p>I highly doubt that. I think that, compared to social engineering, zero-day attacks are pretty much an insignificant slice of the cake.</p><p>I mean, it&rsquo;s much easier to hack a PEBKAC. And as the biggest ranks usually also are the biggest PEBKACs, it&rsquo;s a clear winner. ^^</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As the recent China-Google attack demonstrated , they are the basis on which most of the successful attacks are crafted these days.I highly doubt that .
I think that , compared to social engineering , zero-day attacks are pretty much an insignificant slice of the cake.I mean , it    s much easier to hack a PEBKAC .
And as the biggest ranks usually also are the biggest PEBKACs , it    s a clear winner .
^ ^</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As the recent China-Google attack demonstrated, they are the basis on which most of the successful attacks are crafted these days.I highly doubt that.
I think that, compared to social engineering, zero-day attacks are pretty much an insignificant slice of the cake.I mean, it’s much easier to hack a PEBKAC.
And as the biggest ranks usually also are the biggest PEBKACs, it’s a clear winner.
^^
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31062174</id>
	<title>When will companies be held liable for bugs?</title>
	<author>jollyreaper</author>
	<datestamp>1265653500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Toyota's gonna catch holy hell for the whole "car randomly becomes kamikaze" bug with the accelerator. There are regulations and laws about this sort of thing. If I run a slaughterhouse and knowingly ship bad meat, I could go to jail. This isn't home hobbyist shit anymore, computers are serious business and Microsoft is wearing the big boy pants. Lives are at stake over this sort of thing. Dissidents can be targeted and killed. And even if it's not political but just plain' ol' computer crime, the losses can really add up.</p><p>I'm not a fan of bogging the industry down with so much regulation that nobody can get anything done but it's clear that businesses are, generally, not self-policing and concern for public welfare is not on the agenda. They will not consider it until compelled to by force of law. And to all the business apologists complaining about the stifling hand of government laying heavily upon the necks of business, just remember that there wouldn't be a call for regulation if there wasn't a need for regulation. If slaughterhouse owners applied the same standard to meat intended for public consumption that they would apply for meat intended for their own tables, Upton Sinclair wouldn't have had a novel and we wouldn't have had an FDA.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Toyota 's gon na catch holy hell for the whole " car randomly becomes kamikaze " bug with the accelerator .
There are regulations and laws about this sort of thing .
If I run a slaughterhouse and knowingly ship bad meat , I could go to jail .
This is n't home hobbyist shit anymore , computers are serious business and Microsoft is wearing the big boy pants .
Lives are at stake over this sort of thing .
Dissidents can be targeted and killed .
And even if it 's not political but just plain ' ol ' computer crime , the losses can really add up.I 'm not a fan of bogging the industry down with so much regulation that nobody can get anything done but it 's clear that businesses are , generally , not self-policing and concern for public welfare is not on the agenda .
They will not consider it until compelled to by force of law .
And to all the business apologists complaining about the stifling hand of government laying heavily upon the necks of business , just remember that there would n't be a call for regulation if there was n't a need for regulation .
If slaughterhouse owners applied the same standard to meat intended for public consumption that they would apply for meat intended for their own tables , Upton Sinclair would n't have had a novel and we would n't have had an FDA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Toyota's gonna catch holy hell for the whole "car randomly becomes kamikaze" bug with the accelerator.
There are regulations and laws about this sort of thing.
If I run a slaughterhouse and knowingly ship bad meat, I could go to jail.
This isn't home hobbyist shit anymore, computers are serious business and Microsoft is wearing the big boy pants.
Lives are at stake over this sort of thing.
Dissidents can be targeted and killed.
And even if it's not political but just plain' ol' computer crime, the losses can really add up.I'm not a fan of bogging the industry down with so much regulation that nobody can get anything done but it's clear that businesses are, generally, not self-policing and concern for public welfare is not on the agenda.
They will not consider it until compelled to by force of law.
And to all the business apologists complaining about the stifling hand of government laying heavily upon the necks of business, just remember that there wouldn't be a call for regulation if there wasn't a need for regulation.
If slaughterhouse owners applied the same standard to meat intended for public consumption that they would apply for meat intended for their own tables, Upton Sinclair wouldn't have had a novel and we wouldn't have had an FDA.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31065768</id>
	<title>Re:"Zero-day" is just noise</title>
	<author>jofny</author>
	<datestamp>1265626440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>0day implies that there is a --non public-- vulnerability and/or exploit out in the wild that has not yet been disclosed outside of relatively small private circles (nothing to do with the time between vuln and exploit).  Its meaning has been lately bastardized to include "things for which we dont have a patch yet" - and it's that bastardization which creates scenarios that don't make "sense".</htmltext>
<tokenext>0day implies that there is a --non public-- vulnerability and/or exploit out in the wild that has not yet been disclosed outside of relatively small private circles ( nothing to do with the time between vuln and exploit ) .
Its meaning has been lately bastardized to include " things for which we dont have a patch yet " - and it 's that bastardization which creates scenarios that do n't make " sense " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>0day implies that there is a --non public-- vulnerability and/or exploit out in the wild that has not yet been disclosed outside of relatively small private circles (nothing to do with the time between vuln and exploit).
Its meaning has been lately bastardized to include "things for which we dont have a patch yet" - and it's that bastardization which creates scenarios that don't make "sense".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061160</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061184</id>
	<title>Re:I'm surprised white markets aren't more common</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265648760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I think it would be a grand strategy in Afghanistan -- build goodwill with farmers through buying their crop at prices better than the Taliban is offering, denying the Taliban a source of income through trafficking and probably having a significant supply reduction in the global heroin market.</p> </div><p>This would probably cause a knock-on effect of increasing production in the area, due to the fact that you will be increasing the profits for the poppy growers, and perhaps also encouraging people to start poppy farming; selling to US troops is probably a hell of a lot less scary than selling to the Taliban.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think it would be a grand strategy in Afghanistan -- build goodwill with farmers through buying their crop at prices better than the Taliban is offering , denying the Taliban a source of income through trafficking and probably having a significant supply reduction in the global heroin market .
This would probably cause a knock-on effect of increasing production in the area , due to the fact that you will be increasing the profits for the poppy growers , and perhaps also encouraging people to start poppy farming ; selling to US troops is probably a hell of a lot less scary than selling to the Taliban .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think it would be a grand strategy in Afghanistan -- build goodwill with farmers through buying their crop at prices better than the Taliban is offering, denying the Taliban a source of income through trafficking and probably having a significant supply reduction in the global heroin market.
This would probably cause a knock-on effect of increasing production in the area, due to the fact that you will be increasing the profits for the poppy growers, and perhaps also encouraging people to start poppy farming; selling to US troops is probably a hell of a lot less scary than selling to the Taliban.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061564</id>
	<title>Re:I'm surprised white markets aren't more common</title>
	<author>SeePage87</author>
	<datestamp>1265650620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Another problem with the strategy is that more drugs will be produces.  If you buy up all the drugs at high prices, you'll have artificially injected a huge amount of demand into the market, as well as effectively condoned drug production.  The existing producers will produce much more, since they can move it, and other's will flock to the drug trade, knowing that the U.S. government will buy it.  If we don't, they'll just sell it to the Taliban again and, since we never put it on the streets, they'll still receive good prices and have no problems moving it.  Always remember to apply the game theoretical implications of any can of economic policy (which I've found very few in Congress do.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Another problem with the strategy is that more drugs will be produces .
If you buy up all the drugs at high prices , you 'll have artificially injected a huge amount of demand into the market , as well as effectively condoned drug production .
The existing producers will produce much more , since they can move it , and other 's will flock to the drug trade , knowing that the U.S. government will buy it .
If we do n't , they 'll just sell it to the Taliban again and , since we never put it on the streets , they 'll still receive good prices and have no problems moving it .
Always remember to apply the game theoretical implications of any can of economic policy ( which I 've found very few in Congress do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another problem with the strategy is that more drugs will be produces.
If you buy up all the drugs at high prices, you'll have artificially injected a huge amount of demand into the market, as well as effectively condoned drug production.
The existing producers will produce much more, since they can move it, and other's will flock to the drug trade, knowing that the U.S. government will buy it.
If we don't, they'll just sell it to the Taliban again and, since we never put it on the streets, they'll still receive good prices and have no problems moving it.
Always remember to apply the game theoretical implications of any can of economic policy (which I've found very few in Congress do.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061160</id>
	<title>"Zero-day" is just noise</title>
	<author>Imagix</author>
	<datestamp>1265648700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>OK, this is a pet peeve of mine, but why the heck do these get called "Zero-day vulnerabilities".  Yes, I understand that the definition is that the zero-day refers to the time between the vulnerability is made public and the time that an exploit is made available.  However, I don't get why this needs an additional moniker on top of being a vulnerability in the first place.  Don't most of the vulnerabilities have an exploit the same day that the vulerability is published (wouldn't you want to have a proof of concept that the vulnerability exists, I'd assume one was created.)?  I haven't heard of many "7-day vulnerabilities".  So why isn't the "zero-day" thing implied?  If a vulnerability is exposed and there is no exploit available, the vendors already make statements such as "there are no known exploits for this".  Where I would think that the "zero-day" moniker would actually add some information is if the vulnerability is exposed on the zeroith day of release of the product in question.  \_That\_ would be something to give a special name to.  That would mean that the developer has botched it so badly that it didn't even take 24 hours before someone found a hole.   As it is now (IMHO) the "zero-day" moniker is simply being alarmist and only trying to add sparkle to the term, and carries no significant information.</htmltext>
<tokenext>OK , this is a pet peeve of mine , but why the heck do these get called " Zero-day vulnerabilities " .
Yes , I understand that the definition is that the zero-day refers to the time between the vulnerability is made public and the time that an exploit is made available .
However , I do n't get why this needs an additional moniker on top of being a vulnerability in the first place .
Do n't most of the vulnerabilities have an exploit the same day that the vulerability is published ( would n't you want to have a proof of concept that the vulnerability exists , I 'd assume one was created. ) ?
I have n't heard of many " 7-day vulnerabilities " .
So why is n't the " zero-day " thing implied ?
If a vulnerability is exposed and there is no exploit available , the vendors already make statements such as " there are no known exploits for this " .
Where I would think that the " zero-day " moniker would actually add some information is if the vulnerability is exposed on the zeroith day of release of the product in question .
\ _That \ _ would be something to give a special name to .
That would mean that the developer has botched it so badly that it did n't even take 24 hours before someone found a hole .
As it is now ( IMHO ) the " zero-day " moniker is simply being alarmist and only trying to add sparkle to the term , and carries no significant information .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OK, this is a pet peeve of mine, but why the heck do these get called "Zero-day vulnerabilities".
Yes, I understand that the definition is that the zero-day refers to the time between the vulnerability is made public and the time that an exploit is made available.
However, I don't get why this needs an additional moniker on top of being a vulnerability in the first place.
Don't most of the vulnerabilities have an exploit the same day that the vulerability is published (wouldn't you want to have a proof of concept that the vulnerability exists, I'd assume one was created.)?
I haven't heard of many "7-day vulnerabilities".
So why isn't the "zero-day" thing implied?
If a vulnerability is exposed and there is no exploit available, the vendors already make statements such as "there are no known exploits for this".
Where I would think that the "zero-day" moniker would actually add some information is if the vulnerability is exposed on the zeroith day of release of the product in question.
\_That\_ would be something to give a special name to.
That would mean that the developer has botched it so badly that it didn't even take 24 hours before someone found a hole.
As it is now (IMHO) the "zero-day" moniker is simply being alarmist and only trying to add sparkle to the term, and carries no significant information.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061980</id>
	<title>Re:I'm surprised white markets aren't more common</title>
	<author>dave562</author>
	<datestamp>1265652540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Two things your logic misses.  First you've completely ignored the fact that the profits from drugs are used to finance the war.  It isn't just the Taliban who are trading dope for military hardware.  The drug trade is a perfect way for the government and companies to launder money.  Here is a link to a PBS article that details a small, ACKNOWLEDGED portion of the process.</p><p><a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/drugs/special/us.html" title="pbs.org">http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/drugs/special/us.html</a> [pbs.org]</p><p>The PBS article talks about legit goods like appliances and automobiles.  The arms market is a whole other beast.  The CIA and other agencies use drugs to fund operations that they can't go to Congress for.</p><p>Here's an article about how the CIA was involved in running drugs through Arkansas.</p><p><a href="http://www.serendipity.li/cia/hayes2.html" title="serendipity.li">http://www.serendipity.li/cia/hayes2.html</a> [serendipity.li]</p><p>The other thing that I think you should consider is that the farmers need an alternate crop.  As others have stated, there isn't much that will grown in Afghanistan.  They could grow hemp though.  In my mind, and I've said it before, it would be great to switch them from opium to hemp.  Opium has one use.  It is a pain killer.  Hemp has multiple uses.  The way I conceived of it working, the UN or US or whoever would buy the opium for a few years while the transition takes place.  Once the farmers start growing hemp, they could sell to local markets in the provincial capitols.  The capitols could start to build infrastructure to use the hemp.  Hemp can be turned into cloth for clothing.  The oil can be used for cooking and heating.  The farmers could be allowed to grow marijuana too.  It's about time that people pull their heads of their asses regarding marijuana prohibition.  It isn't the best substance in world for your body, but it isn't any worse than cigarettes or alcohol.  The added benefit of hemp is that it encourages companion industries like textiles.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Two things your logic misses .
First you 've completely ignored the fact that the profits from drugs are used to finance the war .
It is n't just the Taliban who are trading dope for military hardware .
The drug trade is a perfect way for the government and companies to launder money .
Here is a link to a PBS article that details a small , ACKNOWLEDGED portion of the process.http : //www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/drugs/special/us.html [ pbs.org ] The PBS article talks about legit goods like appliances and automobiles .
The arms market is a whole other beast .
The CIA and other agencies use drugs to fund operations that they ca n't go to Congress for.Here 's an article about how the CIA was involved in running drugs through Arkansas.http : //www.serendipity.li/cia/hayes2.html [ serendipity.li ] The other thing that I think you should consider is that the farmers need an alternate crop .
As others have stated , there is n't much that will grown in Afghanistan .
They could grow hemp though .
In my mind , and I 've said it before , it would be great to switch them from opium to hemp .
Opium has one use .
It is a pain killer .
Hemp has multiple uses .
The way I conceived of it working , the UN or US or whoever would buy the opium for a few years while the transition takes place .
Once the farmers start growing hemp , they could sell to local markets in the provincial capitols .
The capitols could start to build infrastructure to use the hemp .
Hemp can be turned into cloth for clothing .
The oil can be used for cooking and heating .
The farmers could be allowed to grow marijuana too .
It 's about time that people pull their heads of their asses regarding marijuana prohibition .
It is n't the best substance in world for your body , but it is n't any worse than cigarettes or alcohol .
The added benefit of hemp is that it encourages companion industries like textiles .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Two things your logic misses.
First you've completely ignored the fact that the profits from drugs are used to finance the war.
It isn't just the Taliban who are trading dope for military hardware.
The drug trade is a perfect way for the government and companies to launder money.
Here is a link to a PBS article that details a small, ACKNOWLEDGED portion of the process.http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/drugs/special/us.html [pbs.org]The PBS article talks about legit goods like appliances and automobiles.
The arms market is a whole other beast.
The CIA and other agencies use drugs to fund operations that they can't go to Congress for.Here's an article about how the CIA was involved in running drugs through Arkansas.http://www.serendipity.li/cia/hayes2.html [serendipity.li]The other thing that I think you should consider is that the farmers need an alternate crop.
As others have stated, there isn't much that will grown in Afghanistan.
They could grow hemp though.
In my mind, and I've said it before, it would be great to switch them from opium to hemp.
Opium has one use.
It is a pain killer.
Hemp has multiple uses.
The way I conceived of it working, the UN or US or whoever would buy the opium for a few years while the transition takes place.
Once the farmers start growing hemp, they could sell to local markets in the provincial capitols.
The capitols could start to build infrastructure to use the hemp.
Hemp can be turned into cloth for clothing.
The oil can be used for cooking and heating.
The farmers could be allowed to grow marijuana too.
It's about time that people pull their heads of their asses regarding marijuana prohibition.
It isn't the best substance in world for your body, but it isn't any worse than cigarettes or alcohol.
The added benefit of hemp is that it encourages companion industries like textiles.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31060988</id>
	<title>This is why we need...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265647920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>someone to invent time travel. Then someone could go into the future, get all the patches and fixes to various popular software, come back in time, and give it to us. Problem solved.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>someone to invent time travel .
Then someone could go into the future , get all the patches and fixes to various popular software , come back in time , and give it to us .
Problem solved .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>someone to invent time travel.
Then someone could go into the future, get all the patches and fixes to various popular software, come back in time, and give it to us.
Problem solved.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31064664</id>
	<title>Re:I'm surprised white markets aren't more common</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265622420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or instead of your retarded apporach we could just pay them a large subsidy to plant wheat or something useful.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or instead of your retarded apporach we could just pay them a large subsidy to plant wheat or something useful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or instead of your retarded apporach we could just pay them a large subsidy to plant wheat or something useful.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31063960</id>
	<title>Hard decision</title>
	<author>edxwelch</author>
	<datestamp>1265662440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Charlie Miller<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... who sold a bug he discovered in the Linux OS to a government contractor for $50,000 dollars, said that choosing whether to sell such an item or give it away for free to Microsoft is a hard decision to make"</p><p>Hmm, doesn't sound that hard to me.</p><p>Just wondering, what exactly did the government contractor do with the vunerability afterwards?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Charlie Miller ... who sold a bug he discovered in the Linux OS to a government contractor for $ 50,000 dollars , said that choosing whether to sell such an item or give it away for free to Microsoft is a hard decision to make " Hmm , does n't sound that hard to me.Just wondering , what exactly did the government contractor do with the vunerability afterwards ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Charlie Miller ... who sold a bug he discovered in the Linux OS to a government contractor for $50,000 dollars, said that choosing whether to sell such an item or give it away for free to Microsoft is a hard decision to make"Hmm, doesn't sound that hard to me.Just wondering, what exactly did the government contractor do with the vunerability afterwards?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31064658</id>
	<title>Re:I'm surprised white markets aren't more common</title>
	<author>Z34107</author>
	<datestamp>1265622300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's a great idea in the term, but I think it might have problems long-term.  Vastly increasing the demand for heroin (exactly what buying all production at the best price possible is!) would encourage more people to enter heroin production.  Maybe convert farmland from food production to "cash crops."</p><p>However, unlike the "war" on drugs, I'm convinced your idea has a least a snowball's chance of working.  The DEA's budget should be transferred immediately to you, our new Drug Czar.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a great idea in the term , but I think it might have problems long-term .
Vastly increasing the demand for heroin ( exactly what buying all production at the best price possible is !
) would encourage more people to enter heroin production .
Maybe convert farmland from food production to " cash crops .
" However , unlike the " war " on drugs , I 'm convinced your idea has a least a snowball 's chance of working .
The DEA 's budget should be transferred immediately to you , our new Drug Czar .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a great idea in the term, but I think it might have problems long-term.
Vastly increasing the demand for heroin (exactly what buying all production at the best price possible is!
) would encourage more people to enter heroin production.
Maybe convert farmland from food production to "cash crops.
"However, unlike the "war" on drugs, I'm convinced your idea has a least a snowball's chance of working.
The DEA's budget should be transferred immediately to you, our new Drug Czar.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061684</id>
	<title>Re:I'm surprised white markets aren't more common</title>
	<author>Hasai</author>
	<datestamp>1265651100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Critics would decry giving money to criminals, but the "buy" could actually take place at the farming level where that's an option, thus totally undercutting the criminals.</p></div><p>And where, in regions that routinely grow <i>opium, </i>would this be an 'option?' The criminals will show up at the farmer's doorstep, take the money, then butcher both the farmer and his family to make an example.</p><p>I saw the same sort of thing happen in S.A., where this one campesino decided he wasn't going to grow coca anymore: the local enforcers promptly showed-up, dragged him and his family out and forced them to kneel in front of their house, then went right down the row, from youngest to oldest. Pop, pop, pop, pop, pop.</p><p>The term 'naive' doesn't even begin to describe your idea.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Critics would decry giving money to criminals , but the " buy " could actually take place at the farming level where that 's an option , thus totally undercutting the criminals.And where , in regions that routinely grow opium , would this be an 'option ?
' The criminals will show up at the farmer 's doorstep , take the money , then butcher both the farmer and his family to make an example.I saw the same sort of thing happen in S.A. , where this one campesino decided he was n't going to grow coca anymore : the local enforcers promptly showed-up , dragged him and his family out and forced them to kneel in front of their house , then went right down the row , from youngest to oldest .
Pop , pop , pop , pop , pop.The term 'naive ' does n't even begin to describe your idea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Critics would decry giving money to criminals, but the "buy" could actually take place at the farming level where that's an option, thus totally undercutting the criminals.And where, in regions that routinely grow opium, would this be an 'option?
' The criminals will show up at the farmer's doorstep, take the money, then butcher both the farmer and his family to make an example.I saw the same sort of thing happen in S.A., where this one campesino decided he wasn't going to grow coca anymore: the local enforcers promptly showed-up, dragged him and his family out and forced them to kneel in front of their house, then went right down the row, from youngest to oldest.
Pop, pop, pop, pop, pop.The term 'naive' doesn't even begin to describe your idea.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061344</id>
	<title>Re:This is why we need...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265649660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>someone to invent time travel. Then someone could go into the future, get all the patches and fixes to various popular software, come back in time, and <b>sell</b> it to us. Problem solved.</p></div><p>Meh, I see what you did there.  Fixed that for you, mmmkay?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>someone to invent time travel .
Then someone could go into the future , get all the patches and fixes to various popular software , come back in time , and sell it to us .
Problem solved.Meh , I see what you did there .
Fixed that for you , mmmkay ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>someone to invent time travel.
Then someone could go into the future, get all the patches and fixes to various popular software, come back in time, and sell it to us.
Problem solved.Meh, I see what you did there.
Fixed that for you, mmmkay?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31060988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31060970</id>
	<title>Sure is...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265647800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...1998 in here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...1998 in here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...1998 in here.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061060</id>
	<title>Help me get free!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265648220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"I hereby sentence you to a term of no less than 6 years and not exceeding 12 years" bellowed the Judge at my court case. You could tell in the sterness of his voice and his general demeanor that he took delight in sending scum like me up the river. A fucking DUI that ended up killing some black kid in Detroit was all it took to sealed my fate for the next decade. I had thoughts of appeal but I figured it wouldn't be worth the little savings I had left and my sentence would probably stand. To this day I still believe had the kid been white, my life would have been much easier, inside and outside of prison.</p><p>Now, don't believe what you see on Televison about prison, it is a far worse place than any 32" screen could every conjure up. Imagine watching an MSNBC special on jail or an episode of OZ and take that experience and double it. That's about the wretched hell I have come to know for the past 3 1/2 years. Sometimes I don't know who is worse and my already fazed and battered mind, the prison guards or the inmates. It really takes a certain type of psychopath to want to work around this place, 8 hours a day or longer and that's exactly the type of labor pool this place picks from.</p><p>I can't say my first week was the worst week of my life, but I can certainly say it was the scariest, most horrifying change change in lifestyle I can remember. The dynamic between my old life as a software developer with a modest 1 bedroom downtime, to sharing a tiny cell with a sexual deviant is enough to make anyone go insane. But anyway let me talk about my first day of 12 long years here.</p><p>As I was escorted on to the prison bound bus with the day's newly convicted felons, it was already starting. I was chained next to this black man named Napps. I am sure this wasn't his real name but you can't tell these days with the way these people are named. Now Napps was a pretty built man, and I could tell by the excess amount of tattos and his attitude, that this wasn't the first time he was getting bussed off to a stint in the State Penetentary. Napps upon being forced to sit next to me had given me a look that you would imagine a wolf would give towards their defenseless prey. That was what I officially was now, defensless prey for Napps and God knows who else now. Napps, with a smug and deviously look in his eye asked me "What's a white boy like yourself doing going to the shit?". "Pardon?", I said uneasily almost choking on my words. "This white boy dinks we at da country club.", he said to the rest of the bus, while the bus started roaring in laughter. Now all eyes and ears on the bus were tuned in to me. "I says, wat a tender cracka like you doing here wit the rest of us?", he said in a more pointed fashion. "I'm here...for drunk driving. I killed someone in Brightmore", I shamefully admitted. "So you the motherfucka who killed dat black kid!", now furious with me. The rest of the bus, still focused on me began roaring again loudly as if my crime is more terrible than raping and killing a white woman in the suburbs (I eventually find this out later on). "You lucky da guards are here bitch, you hear me? When we get down to the shit, your ass belongs to the blacks, you got it cracker?". My heart jumped, not even in prison yet, and I am already targeted for what I am sure is to be a stabbing. Shit.</p><p>The bus finally turned into the outer gate, which seemed to stretch on for ever, Napps was still from time to time threatening me. I didn't think I would even make it into prison alive. "So you kill one of ours, huh?", he uttered with extreme hatred. "Well, I took one of yours too bitch ass. 4 of my boys went to your white part of town and and took a bitch. We ran a train on dat fo 8 hours, den we pours acid on that cunt", he must have enjoyed the thought as he laughed sadisticly while telling me his crime. As we got manhandled off of the bus one by one, Napps turned around and said "watch yo ass, lit'ry!", before being forced face first by the guard.</p><p>By now I was too much in shock from being scared to even be scared. I</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" I hereby sentence you to a term of no less than 6 years and not exceeding 12 years " bellowed the Judge at my court case .
You could tell in the sterness of his voice and his general demeanor that he took delight in sending scum like me up the river .
A fucking DUI that ended up killing some black kid in Detroit was all it took to sealed my fate for the next decade .
I had thoughts of appeal but I figured it would n't be worth the little savings I had left and my sentence would probably stand .
To this day I still believe had the kid been white , my life would have been much easier , inside and outside of prison.Now , do n't believe what you see on Televison about prison , it is a far worse place than any 32 " screen could every conjure up .
Imagine watching an MSNBC special on jail or an episode of OZ and take that experience and double it .
That 's about the wretched hell I have come to know for the past 3 1/2 years .
Sometimes I do n't know who is worse and my already fazed and battered mind , the prison guards or the inmates .
It really takes a certain type of psychopath to want to work around this place , 8 hours a day or longer and that 's exactly the type of labor pool this place picks from.I ca n't say my first week was the worst week of my life , but I can certainly say it was the scariest , most horrifying change change in lifestyle I can remember .
The dynamic between my old life as a software developer with a modest 1 bedroom downtime , to sharing a tiny cell with a sexual deviant is enough to make anyone go insane .
But anyway let me talk about my first day of 12 long years here.As I was escorted on to the prison bound bus with the day 's newly convicted felons , it was already starting .
I was chained next to this black man named Napps .
I am sure this was n't his real name but you ca n't tell these days with the way these people are named .
Now Napps was a pretty built man , and I could tell by the excess amount of tattos and his attitude , that this was n't the first time he was getting bussed off to a stint in the State Penetentary .
Napps upon being forced to sit next to me had given me a look that you would imagine a wolf would give towards their defenseless prey .
That was what I officially was now , defensless prey for Napps and God knows who else now .
Napps , with a smug and deviously look in his eye asked me " What 's a white boy like yourself doing going to the shit ? " .
" Pardon ? " , I said uneasily almost choking on my words .
" This white boy dinks we at da country club .
" , he said to the rest of the bus , while the bus started roaring in laughter .
Now all eyes and ears on the bus were tuned in to me .
" I says , wat a tender cracka like you doing here wit the rest of us ?
" , he said in a more pointed fashion .
" I 'm here...for drunk driving .
I killed someone in Brightmore " , I shamefully admitted .
" So you the motherfucka who killed dat black kid !
" , now furious with me .
The rest of the bus , still focused on me began roaring again loudly as if my crime is more terrible than raping and killing a white woman in the suburbs ( I eventually find this out later on ) .
" You lucky da guards are here bitch , you hear me ?
When we get down to the shit , your ass belongs to the blacks , you got it cracker ? " .
My heart jumped , not even in prison yet , and I am already targeted for what I am sure is to be a stabbing .
Shit.The bus finally turned into the outer gate , which seemed to stretch on for ever , Napps was still from time to time threatening me .
I did n't think I would even make it into prison alive .
" So you kill one of ours , huh ?
" , he uttered with extreme hatred .
" Well , I took one of yours too bitch ass .
4 of my boys went to your white part of town and and took a bitch .
We ran a train on dat fo 8 hours , den we pours acid on that cunt " , he must have enjoyed the thought as he laughed sadisticly while telling me his crime .
As we got manhandled off of the bus one by one , Napps turned around and said " watch yo ass , lit'ry !
" , before being forced face first by the guard.By now I was too much in shock from being scared to even be scared .
I</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I hereby sentence you to a term of no less than 6 years and not exceeding 12 years" bellowed the Judge at my court case.
You could tell in the sterness of his voice and his general demeanor that he took delight in sending scum like me up the river.
A fucking DUI that ended up killing some black kid in Detroit was all it took to sealed my fate for the next decade.
I had thoughts of appeal but I figured it wouldn't be worth the little savings I had left and my sentence would probably stand.
To this day I still believe had the kid been white, my life would have been much easier, inside and outside of prison.Now, don't believe what you see on Televison about prison, it is a far worse place than any 32" screen could every conjure up.
Imagine watching an MSNBC special on jail or an episode of OZ and take that experience and double it.
That's about the wretched hell I have come to know for the past 3 1/2 years.
Sometimes I don't know who is worse and my already fazed and battered mind, the prison guards or the inmates.
It really takes a certain type of psychopath to want to work around this place, 8 hours a day or longer and that's exactly the type of labor pool this place picks from.I can't say my first week was the worst week of my life, but I can certainly say it was the scariest, most horrifying change change in lifestyle I can remember.
The dynamic between my old life as a software developer with a modest 1 bedroom downtime, to sharing a tiny cell with a sexual deviant is enough to make anyone go insane.
But anyway let me talk about my first day of 12 long years here.As I was escorted on to the prison bound bus with the day's newly convicted felons, it was already starting.
I was chained next to this black man named Napps.
I am sure this wasn't his real name but you can't tell these days with the way these people are named.
Now Napps was a pretty built man, and I could tell by the excess amount of tattos and his attitude, that this wasn't the first time he was getting bussed off to a stint in the State Penetentary.
Napps upon being forced to sit next to me had given me a look that you would imagine a wolf would give towards their defenseless prey.
That was what I officially was now, defensless prey for Napps and God knows who else now.
Napps, with a smug and deviously look in his eye asked me "What's a white boy like yourself doing going to the shit?".
"Pardon?", I said uneasily almost choking on my words.
"This white boy dinks we at da country club.
", he said to the rest of the bus, while the bus started roaring in laughter.
Now all eyes and ears on the bus were tuned in to me.
"I says, wat a tender cracka like you doing here wit the rest of us?
", he said in a more pointed fashion.
"I'm here...for drunk driving.
I killed someone in Brightmore", I shamefully admitted.
"So you the motherfucka who killed dat black kid!
", now furious with me.
The rest of the bus, still focused on me began roaring again loudly as if my crime is more terrible than raping and killing a white woman in the suburbs (I eventually find this out later on).
"You lucky da guards are here bitch, you hear me?
When we get down to the shit, your ass belongs to the blacks, you got it cracker?".
My heart jumped, not even in prison yet, and I am already targeted for what I am sure is to be a stabbing.
Shit.The bus finally turned into the outer gate, which seemed to stretch on for ever, Napps was still from time to time threatening me.
I didn't think I would even make it into prison alive.
"So you kill one of ours, huh?
", he uttered with extreme hatred.
"Well, I took one of yours too bitch ass.
4 of my boys went to your white part of town and and took a bitch.
We ran a train on dat fo 8 hours, den we pours acid on that cunt", he must have enjoyed the thought as he laughed sadisticly while telling me his crime.
As we got manhandled off of the bus one by one, Napps turned around and said "watch yo ass, lit'ry!
", before being forced face first by the guard.By now I was too much in shock from being scared to even be scared.
I</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074</id>
	<title>I'm surprised white markets aren't more common</title>
	<author>swb</author>
	<datestamp>1265648340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...especially when the market is fairly inelastic.</p><p>The best "white market" tale I've ever heard is the militias that ran the "Golden Triangle" in the Southeast Asian highlands offering to sell the US the entire opium crop.</p><p>I think it would be a grand strategy in Afghanistan -- build goodwill with farmers through buying their crop at prices better than the Taliban is offering, denying the Taliban a source of income through trafficking and probably having a significant supply reduction in the global heroin market.  They could even use the opium for the production of painkillers for the legitimate market, which I understand is actually constrained sometimes by strict production limitations.</p><p>You would think that white marketing the supply of illicit drugs would make a lot of sense -- by buying up supplies at the volume end of the market and denying it to the market, you would drive street prices through the roof and have far more impact on the consumers, pricing many out of the market.  Cocaine supply diversity may make this difficult, but if pursued quietly it might actually be effective there too.</p><p>Critics would decry giving money to criminals, but the "buy" could actually take place at the farming level where that's an option, thus totally undercutting the criminals.  It'd be great to see a cost analysis to see if it would actually be cheaper to just buy up the drugs at the point of production versus the drug war, which doesn't work.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...especially when the market is fairly inelastic.The best " white market " tale I 've ever heard is the militias that ran the " Golden Triangle " in the Southeast Asian highlands offering to sell the US the entire opium crop.I think it would be a grand strategy in Afghanistan -- build goodwill with farmers through buying their crop at prices better than the Taliban is offering , denying the Taliban a source of income through trafficking and probably having a significant supply reduction in the global heroin market .
They could even use the opium for the production of painkillers for the legitimate market , which I understand is actually constrained sometimes by strict production limitations.You would think that white marketing the supply of illicit drugs would make a lot of sense -- by buying up supplies at the volume end of the market and denying it to the market , you would drive street prices through the roof and have far more impact on the consumers , pricing many out of the market .
Cocaine supply diversity may make this difficult , but if pursued quietly it might actually be effective there too.Critics would decry giving money to criminals , but the " buy " could actually take place at the farming level where that 's an option , thus totally undercutting the criminals .
It 'd be great to see a cost analysis to see if it would actually be cheaper to just buy up the drugs at the point of production versus the drug war , which does n't work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...especially when the market is fairly inelastic.The best "white market" tale I've ever heard is the militias that ran the "Golden Triangle" in the Southeast Asian highlands offering to sell the US the entire opium crop.I think it would be a grand strategy in Afghanistan -- build goodwill with farmers through buying their crop at prices better than the Taliban is offering, denying the Taliban a source of income through trafficking and probably having a significant supply reduction in the global heroin market.
They could even use the opium for the production of painkillers for the legitimate market, which I understand is actually constrained sometimes by strict production limitations.You would think that white marketing the supply of illicit drugs would make a lot of sense -- by buying up supplies at the volume end of the market and denying it to the market, you would drive street prices through the roof and have far more impact on the consumers, pricing many out of the market.
Cocaine supply diversity may make this difficult, but if pursued quietly it might actually be effective there too.Critics would decry giving money to criminals, but the "buy" could actually take place at the farming level where that's an option, thus totally undercutting the criminals.
It'd be great to see a cost analysis to see if it would actually be cheaper to just buy up the drugs at the point of production versus the drug war, which doesn't work.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061178</id>
	<title>... you are sadly mistaken</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265648760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>You seem to be under the impression that the war (on drugs) has anything to do with logical reasoning... <br>
It's a great idea though, and I bet it will in fact work *and* be cheaper.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You seem to be under the impression that the war ( on drugs ) has anything to do with logical reasoning.. . It 's a great idea though , and I bet it will in fact work * and * be cheaper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You seem to be under the impression that the war (on drugs) has anything to do with logical reasoning... 
It's a great idea though, and I bet it will in fact work *and* be cheaper.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31064832</id>
	<title>Re:I'm surprised white markets aren't more common</title>
	<author>aurumdib</author>
	<datestamp>1265623080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You assume that the offer will be constant but is not. Each farmer would have the possibility to plant opium or coca with a sure mark, do you think that all the farmers will be happy to plant anything else... in the long term, the farmer will loss because of the mono plantation, but that will be not the only problem, in short term the government will be broke for buyout the special plantations.
<br> <br>
If you propose the enforcement of the control in the limits of the production (to assure the constant offer) you will generate what already are in Peru or Columbia or Bolivia (black mark), Here again with the same problem of the start.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You assume that the offer will be constant but is not .
Each farmer would have the possibility to plant opium or coca with a sure mark , do you think that all the farmers will be happy to plant anything else... in the long term , the farmer will loss because of the mono plantation , but that will be not the only problem , in short term the government will be broke for buyout the special plantations .
If you propose the enforcement of the control in the limits of the production ( to assure the constant offer ) you will generate what already are in Peru or Columbia or Bolivia ( black mark ) , Here again with the same problem of the start .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You assume that the offer will be constant but is not.
Each farmer would have the possibility to plant opium or coca with a sure mark, do you think that all the farmers will be happy to plant anything else... in the long term, the farmer will loss because of the mono plantation, but that will be not the only problem, in short term the government will be broke for buyout the special plantations.
If you propose the enforcement of the control in the limits of the production (to assure the constant offer) you will generate what already are in Peru or Columbia or Bolivia (black mark), Here again with the same problem of the start.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31066040</id>
	<title>Re:I'm surprised white markets aren't more common</title>
	<author>ArsonSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1265627580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd complain more that driving the street price up would also drive up the drug related street crime here close to home.  Providing incentive for more local growers and strain the local enforcements.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd complain more that driving the street price up would also drive up the drug related street crime here close to home .
Providing incentive for more local growers and strain the local enforcements .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd complain more that driving the street price up would also drive up the drug related street crime here close to home.
Providing incentive for more local growers and strain the local enforcements.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31066400</id>
	<title>Re:I'm surprised white markets aren't more common</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265629140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hear the yanks have been known to do equally nasty things too.<br>At this point, the Taliban is less of a threat to me than the USA.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hear the yanks have been known to do equally nasty things too.At this point , the Taliban is less of a threat to me than the USA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hear the yanks have been known to do equally nasty things too.At this point, the Taliban is less of a threat to me than the USA.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061186</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31063070</id>
	<title>Re:I'm surprised white markets aren't more common</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265657940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... "Let's pay them for their crops so they'll stop growing them!"   The idea of a 'white market' is a scary thing.   It is a 'cheat' to begin with (as much as domestic farm subsidies) and encourages cheating the system, and making 'the problem' worse.</p><p>In the case of the 'War on Drugs' the answer is obvious: legalize them across the board.   This may be a less comfortable argument for 'hard' drugs, but the effect is all the more important.   The only reason there's enough profit to be made in illicit drugs to interest major criminal cartels and the like is because they are illegal.   We (the US) fund both sides of the 'War', at great expense and for no good reason.   You can't buy up all the poppies in the world, or all the coca, or all the liquor, or anything else.   If we would just legalize drugs, there would be no profit in trafficking.   Imagine the effect on all the parts of the world where 'drug money' funds violence, oppression, and instability.</p><p>The problem is, this is where your analogy becomes less apt.   I mean, we can't really 'legalize' hacks and security breaches, can we?   Drugs are not illegal for any inherent reason, but computer security is a practical need.   So, maybe 'white markets' are a good solution, but they still present significant risks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow ... " Let 's pay them for their crops so they 'll stop growing them !
" The idea of a 'white market ' is a scary thing .
It is a 'cheat ' to begin with ( as much as domestic farm subsidies ) and encourages cheating the system , and making 'the problem ' worse.In the case of the 'War on Drugs ' the answer is obvious : legalize them across the board .
This may be a less comfortable argument for 'hard ' drugs , but the effect is all the more important .
The only reason there 's enough profit to be made in illicit drugs to interest major criminal cartels and the like is because they are illegal .
We ( the US ) fund both sides of the 'War ' , at great expense and for no good reason .
You ca n't buy up all the poppies in the world , or all the coca , or all the liquor , or anything else .
If we would just legalize drugs , there would be no profit in trafficking .
Imagine the effect on all the parts of the world where 'drug money ' funds violence , oppression , and instability.The problem is , this is where your analogy becomes less apt .
I mean , we ca n't really 'legalize ' hacks and security breaches , can we ?
Drugs are not illegal for any inherent reason , but computer security is a practical need .
So , maybe 'white markets ' are a good solution , but they still present significant risks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow ... "Let's pay them for their crops so they'll stop growing them!
"   The idea of a 'white market' is a scary thing.
It is a 'cheat' to begin with (as much as domestic farm subsidies) and encourages cheating the system, and making 'the problem' worse.In the case of the 'War on Drugs' the answer is obvious: legalize them across the board.
This may be a less comfortable argument for 'hard' drugs, but the effect is all the more important.
The only reason there's enough profit to be made in illicit drugs to interest major criminal cartels and the like is because they are illegal.
We (the US) fund both sides of the 'War', at great expense and for no good reason.
You can't buy up all the poppies in the world, or all the coca, or all the liquor, or anything else.
If we would just legalize drugs, there would be no profit in trafficking.
Imagine the effect on all the parts of the world where 'drug money' funds violence, oppression, and instability.The problem is, this is where your analogy becomes less apt.
I mean, we can't really 'legalize' hacks and security breaches, can we?
Drugs are not illegal for any inherent reason, but computer security is a practical need.
So, maybe 'white markets' are a good solution, but they still present significant risks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31062410</id>
	<title>Re:I'm surprised white markets aren't more common</title>
	<author>SnarfQuest</author>
	<datestamp>1265654940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Buying products other than opium, i.e. incentives to plant other crops would be better.</p></div><p>Like industrial strength hemp?</p><p>They grow drugs because it is more profitable than food crops. They probably get 10 times the earnings per acre for opium than they would get for any food crop. If the US bought up all the opium one year, the farmers would just convert more of their fields over to opium. After one year, there would me more than enough opium for the US and the Taliban, and anyone else who wants it.</p><p>If you went to California, and put up an ad specifying that the government would pay $1000/pound for marajuana, with no legal problems, would you expect the quantity grown in that state to decrease?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Buying products other than opium , i.e .
incentives to plant other crops would be better.Like industrial strength hemp ? They grow drugs because it is more profitable than food crops .
They probably get 10 times the earnings per acre for opium than they would get for any food crop .
If the US bought up all the opium one year , the farmers would just convert more of their fields over to opium .
After one year , there would me more than enough opium for the US and the Taliban , and anyone else who wants it.If you went to California , and put up an ad specifying that the government would pay $ 1000/pound for marajuana , with no legal problems , would you expect the quantity grown in that state to decrease ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Buying products other than opium, i.e.
incentives to plant other crops would be better.Like industrial strength hemp?They grow drugs because it is more profitable than food crops.
They probably get 10 times the earnings per acre for opium than they would get for any food crop.
If the US bought up all the opium one year, the farmers would just convert more of their fields over to opium.
After one year, there would me more than enough opium for the US and the Taliban, and anyone else who wants it.If you went to California, and put up an ad specifying that the government would pay $1000/pound for marajuana, with no legal problems, would you expect the quantity grown in that state to decrease?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061186</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061892</id>
	<title>Link?</title>
	<author>spydabyte</author>
	<datestamp>1265652060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I like the link to the black markets but not to the white markets. Hackers would probably benefit from these new "white-markets" you speak of.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I like the link to the black markets but not to the white markets .
Hackers would probably benefit from these new " white-markets " you speak of .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like the link to the black markets but not to the white markets.
Hackers would probably benefit from these new "white-markets" you speak of.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061022</id>
	<title>Good to know</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265648100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I always appreciate the clarification that a growing market is growing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I always appreciate the clarification that a growing market is growing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I always appreciate the clarification that a growing market is growing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_159231_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061248
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31060988
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_159231_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061178
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_159231_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31062410
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061186
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_159231_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31063952
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_159231_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061530
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061186
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_159231_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31062248
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31060988
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_159231_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061788
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31060970
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_159231_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31062136
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_159231_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061344
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31060988
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_159231_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31063070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_159231_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31064832
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_159231_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061218
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_159231_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31064214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_159231_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061184
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_159231_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31064658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_159231_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31066400
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061186
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_159231_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31064664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_159231_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31065768
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061160
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_159231_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061684
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_159231_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061980
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_159231_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061306
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_159231_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061564
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_159231_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061186
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_159231_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31062646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_159231_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061648
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_159231_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31066040
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_159231_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31062666
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061160
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_159231_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31062290
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_08_159231.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061386
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_08_159231.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31060988
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061344
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31062248
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061248
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_08_159231.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061160
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31065768
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31062666
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_08_159231.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31062174
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_08_159231.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061164
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_08_159231.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061074
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061564
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31064658
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061980
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31064664
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061178
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31063952
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061218
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061910
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31064214
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061306
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061184
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061648
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31066040
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31062646
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31063070
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061684
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061186
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061530
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31062410
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061326
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31066400
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31064832
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31062290
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31062136
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_08_159231.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061060
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_08_159231.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31060970
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_159231.31061788
</commentlist>
</conversation>
