<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_15_026239</id>
	<title>Was This the First Denial of Service Attack?</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1266248160000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"Way back in 1974, Dave Dennis, then aged 13, decided to try out the -ext- TUTOR command on the PLATO system at the University of Illinois, and see if he could cause all the terminals of other users to go offline.   <a href="http://www.platohistory.org/blog/2010/02/perhaps-the-first-denial-of-service-attack.html">It worked.  And he never got caught.</a>   Of course, the powers that be eventually caught on and fixed the -ext- command so terminals by default didn't automatically receive -ext-'s sent from other locations."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " Way back in 1974 , Dave Dennis , then aged 13 , decided to try out the -ext- TUTOR command on the PLATO system at the University of Illinois , and see if he could cause all the terminals of other users to go offline .
It worked .
And he never got caught .
Of course , the powers that be eventually caught on and fixed the -ext- command so terminals by default did n't automatically receive -ext- 's sent from other locations .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "Way back in 1974, Dave Dennis, then aged 13, decided to try out the -ext- TUTOR command on the PLATO system at the University of Illinois, and see if he could cause all the terminals of other users to go offline.
It worked.
And he never got caught.
Of course, the powers that be eventually caught on and fixed the -ext- command so terminals by default didn't automatically receive -ext-'s sent from other locations.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141580</id>
	<title>Re:Denial of Service was happening a long time pri</title>
	<author>failedlogic</author>
	<datestamp>1266265800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Remdinds me of this in a way: <a href="http://slashdot.org/articles/02/12/06/1554227.shtml?tid=133" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://slashdot.org/articles/02/12/06/1554227.shtml?tid=133</a> [slashdot.org]. Spam the spammer.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Remdinds me of this in a way : http : //slashdot.org/articles/02/12/06/1554227.shtml ? tid = 133 [ slashdot.org ] .
Spam the spammer .
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Remdinds me of this in a way: http://slashdot.org/articles/02/12/06/1554227.shtml?tid=133 [slashdot.org].
Spam the spammer.
;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31144794</id>
	<title>Re:So they could receive commands!?</title>
	<author>hedronist</author>
	<datestamp>1266252960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Security? When I first sat down at a PLATO IV terminal in Jan 1973, you typed "s" to login as a student, and "a" to login in as an author -- no passwords. If you could guess a file name (called "lesson spaces") you could edit it. Al McNeil and I found any number of allocated-but-unused lesson spaces and just started poking and prodding the system. Al and I basically "guessed" the TUTOR language from looking at other people's code because there were no manuals available at that time (at least not in far off Chicago). But it was exactly because it was so easy to get into the system that we became hackers.</p><p>Weirdly enough, 9 months later we (I was a Business undergrad, and Al was an Art undergrad) were teaching TUTOR to UICC profs who wanted to use it for their classes<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... and one of our students was Al's father, the head of the Physics department.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Security ?
When I first sat down at a PLATO IV terminal in Jan 1973 , you typed " s " to login as a student , and " a " to login in as an author -- no passwords .
If you could guess a file name ( called " lesson spaces " ) you could edit it .
Al McNeil and I found any number of allocated-but-unused lesson spaces and just started poking and prodding the system .
Al and I basically " guessed " the TUTOR language from looking at other people 's code because there were no manuals available at that time ( at least not in far off Chicago ) .
But it was exactly because it was so easy to get into the system that we became hackers.Weirdly enough , 9 months later we ( I was a Business undergrad , and Al was an Art undergrad ) were teaching TUTOR to UICC profs who wanted to use it for their classes ... and one of our students was Al 's father , the head of the Physics department .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Security?
When I first sat down at a PLATO IV terminal in Jan 1973, you typed "s" to login as a student, and "a" to login in as an author -- no passwords.
If you could guess a file name (called "lesson spaces") you could edit it.
Al McNeil and I found any number of allocated-but-unused lesson spaces and just started poking and prodding the system.
Al and I basically "guessed" the TUTOR language from looking at other people's code because there were no manuals available at that time (at least not in far off Chicago).
But it was exactly because it was so easy to get into the system that we became hackers.Weirdly enough, 9 months later we (I was a Business undergrad, and Al was an Art undergrad) were teaching TUTOR to UICC profs who wanted to use it for their classes ... and one of our students was Al's father, the head of the Physics department.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140368</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31142518</id>
	<title>Re:Was it a DoS exactly?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266234960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Heck an idiot tripping over the power cord to the server is technically a DoS if people <b>loose</b> access.</p></div><p>I always find it hard to listen to anyone that is preachy and yet has no clue about correctly using the word lose instead of loose.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Heck an idiot tripping over the power cord to the server is technically a DoS if people loose access.I always find it hard to listen to anyone that is preachy and yet has no clue about correctly using the word lose instead of loose .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Heck an idiot tripping over the power cord to the server is technically a DoS if people loose access.I always find it hard to listen to anyone that is preachy and yet has no clue about correctly using the word lose instead of loose.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140506</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31142554</id>
	<title>Re:Shorter answer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266235620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No.</p><p>The first DOS would have been performed by a backhoe operator</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No.The first DOS would have been performed by a backhoe operator</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.The first DOS would have been performed by a backhoe operator</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140910</id>
	<title>Barn Door Still Open</title>
	<author>wa2flq</author>
	<datestamp>1266171300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Those were the days....   email, group notes, bloggs, instant messaging, p0rn,  multiuser space and dungeon games, 512x512 graphics,  decent keyboards</p><p>The security on the -ext- command was user settable for Authors.</p><p>Always fun to find someone who had toggled it to world "write"  and to start up the microfich slide projector in their Plato Terminals unexpectedly.  Even more fun if the slide projector still had a good supply of compressed air to rattle the terminal and flash the projector at the same time.</p><p>See cyber1.org</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Those were the days.... email , group notes , bloggs , instant messaging , p0rn , multiuser space and dungeon games , 512x512 graphics , decent keyboardsThe security on the -ext- command was user settable for Authors.Always fun to find someone who had toggled it to world " write " and to start up the microfich slide projector in their Plato Terminals unexpectedly .
Even more fun if the slide projector still had a good supply of compressed air to rattle the terminal and flash the projector at the same time.See cyber1.org</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Those were the days....   email, group notes, bloggs, instant messaging, p0rn,  multiuser space and dungeon games, 512x512 graphics,  decent keyboardsThe security on the -ext- command was user settable for Authors.Always fun to find someone who had toggled it to world "write"  and to start up the microfich slide projector in their Plato Terminals unexpectedly.
Even more fun if the slide projector still had a good supply of compressed air to rattle the terminal and flash the projector at the same time.See cyber1.org</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31142980</id>
	<title>Uh, no, here's a few before that</title>
	<author>Ancient\_Hacker</author>
	<datestamp>1266241200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In 1972, I was a college student with more time on my hands than sense.   Here's a few things I did to a $4 million CDC 6600 time-sharing system:</p><p>(1)  Hells bells:  This machine had ten PP's (Peripheral Processors) that offloaded I/O tasks.  The PP's had for-the-time screaming I/O speeds-- all of 2MBPS.  User disk space consisted of two washing-machine sized disk drives, 88MB total.  A little metal arithmetic suggested that you could fill the disks in no time.  so a 2-line FORTRAN program:   1   WRITE(1) 76437643764376437643B;  GOTO 1<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...  it filled up the disks in under a minute, bringing the system to a standstill.  (7643B was the display code for ^G, bell)    ( The system programmers quickly implemented disk space quotas after that ).</p><p>(2)  There was a fixed-size open file table in the kernel memory area, usually configured for 400 files.  There were no open file quotas.  So a 2-line SNOBOL program could very quickly open up an number of empty temp files, bringing the system to a halt.  ( FORTRAN programs could only work with files declared in the program header line ).  ( The system programmers again very quickly implemented a limit on number of files per user ).</p><p>(3)  On early core RAM modules, the modules were interleaved 8-wise, so each module only got accessed every 8-th word fetch..  But if you knew this, and wrote a program that jumped forward 8 words several dozen times, then jumped back to the start, one module would get accessed at the maximum possible rate and within a minute the module would melt down.   I did not try this ( the 4K modules must have cost $100 or so ), but I heard of someone that did.</p><p>(4)  The card punch was designed for punching text data, which had at most two out of every 12 rows punched per column.   If one punched a few hundred cards of -0 (all ones on a one's complement machine), and did a DISPOSE(OUTPUT=PUNCHB), the card punch would overheat and melt down all the punch electromagnets.  My boss at the time admitted to doing this.</p><p>(5)  The line printers were amazing machines, extremely speedy, BUT if you write out a few hundred lines of "-------------------", the first column was carriage control, and the default cc tape would map "-" to mean "no line feed".  A few dozen lines of that and the paper would cut through, bringing that printer to a halt.<br>]<br>(6)  Same thing as (5), but with a "1" in column 1 would eject pages at the maximum rate, which was much faster than the paper stacker could collect the pages.   There were page limits in place, but the poor operators would still be confronted by a printer covered with 100 pages of ejected paper.</p><p>(7)  At first you could make system calls with bit 20 set, which meant asyncronously.  You could issue these requests much faster than the OS or PP's could finish them, so you could easily tie up all the free PP's and that would instantly bring the system to a very slow crawl.  Very soon thereafter, a limit of 2 PP's per user task was implemented.</p><p>There were more, but the statute of limitations may not be up for them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In 1972 , I was a college student with more time on my hands than sense .
Here 's a few things I did to a $ 4 million CDC 6600 time-sharing system : ( 1 ) Hells bells : This machine had ten PP 's ( Peripheral Processors ) that offloaded I/O tasks .
The PP 's had for-the-time screaming I/O speeds-- all of 2MBPS .
User disk space consisted of two washing-machine sized disk drives , 88MB total .
A little metal arithmetic suggested that you could fill the disks in no time .
so a 2-line FORTRAN program : 1 WRITE ( 1 ) 76437643764376437643B ; GOTO 1 ... it filled up the disks in under a minute , bringing the system to a standstill .
( 7643B was the display code for ^ G , bell ) ( The system programmers quickly implemented disk space quotas after that ) .
( 2 ) There was a fixed-size open file table in the kernel memory area , usually configured for 400 files .
There were no open file quotas .
So a 2-line SNOBOL program could very quickly open up an number of empty temp files , bringing the system to a halt .
( FORTRAN programs could only work with files declared in the program header line ) .
( The system programmers again very quickly implemented a limit on number of files per user ) .
( 3 ) On early core RAM modules , the modules were interleaved 8-wise , so each module only got accessed every 8-th word fetch.. But if you knew this , and wrote a program that jumped forward 8 words several dozen times , then jumped back to the start , one module would get accessed at the maximum possible rate and within a minute the module would melt down .
I did not try this ( the 4K modules must have cost $ 100 or so ) , but I heard of someone that did .
( 4 ) The card punch was designed for punching text data , which had at most two out of every 12 rows punched per column .
If one punched a few hundred cards of -0 ( all ones on a one 's complement machine ) , and did a DISPOSE ( OUTPUT = PUNCHB ) , the card punch would overheat and melt down all the punch electromagnets .
My boss at the time admitted to doing this .
( 5 ) The line printers were amazing machines , extremely speedy , BUT if you write out a few hundred lines of " ------------------- " , the first column was carriage control , and the default cc tape would map " - " to mean " no line feed " .
A few dozen lines of that and the paper would cut through , bringing that printer to a halt .
] ( 6 ) Same thing as ( 5 ) , but with a " 1 " in column 1 would eject pages at the maximum rate , which was much faster than the paper stacker could collect the pages .
There were page limits in place , but the poor operators would still be confronted by a printer covered with 100 pages of ejected paper .
( 7 ) At first you could make system calls with bit 20 set , which meant asyncronously .
You could issue these requests much faster than the OS or PP 's could finish them , so you could easily tie up all the free PP 's and that would instantly bring the system to a very slow crawl .
Very soon thereafter , a limit of 2 PP 's per user task was implemented.There were more , but the statute of limitations may not be up for them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In 1972, I was a college student with more time on my hands than sense.
Here's a few things I did to a $4 million CDC 6600 time-sharing system:(1)  Hells bells:  This machine had ten PP's (Peripheral Processors) that offloaded I/O tasks.
The PP's had for-the-time screaming I/O speeds-- all of 2MBPS.
User disk space consisted of two washing-machine sized disk drives, 88MB total.
A little metal arithmetic suggested that you could fill the disks in no time.
so a 2-line FORTRAN program:   1   WRITE(1) 76437643764376437643B;  GOTO 1 ...  it filled up the disks in under a minute, bringing the system to a standstill.
(7643B was the display code for ^G, bell)    ( The system programmers quickly implemented disk space quotas after that ).
(2)  There was a fixed-size open file table in the kernel memory area, usually configured for 400 files.
There were no open file quotas.
So a 2-line SNOBOL program could very quickly open up an number of empty temp files, bringing the system to a halt.
( FORTRAN programs could only work with files declared in the program header line ).
( The system programmers again very quickly implemented a limit on number of files per user ).
(3)  On early core RAM modules, the modules were interleaved 8-wise, so each module only got accessed every 8-th word fetch..  But if you knew this, and wrote a program that jumped forward 8 words several dozen times, then jumped back to the start, one module would get accessed at the maximum possible rate and within a minute the module would melt down.
I did not try this ( the 4K modules must have cost $100 or so ), but I heard of someone that did.
(4)  The card punch was designed for punching text data, which had at most two out of every 12 rows punched per column.
If one punched a few hundred cards of -0 (all ones on a one's complement machine), and did a DISPOSE(OUTPUT=PUNCHB), the card punch would overheat and melt down all the punch electromagnets.
My boss at the time admitted to doing this.
(5)  The line printers were amazing machines, extremely speedy, BUT if you write out a few hundred lines of "-------------------", the first column was carriage control, and the default cc tape would map "-" to mean "no line feed".
A few dozen lines of that and the paper would cut through, bringing that printer to a halt.
](6)  Same thing as (5), but with a "1" in column 1 would eject pages at the maximum rate, which was much faster than the paper stacker could collect the pages.
There were page limits in place, but the poor operators would still be confronted by a printer covered with 100 pages of ejected paper.
(7)  At first you could make system calls with bit 20 set, which meant asyncronously.
You could issue these requests much faster than the OS or PP's could finish them, so you could easily tie up all the free PP's and that would instantly bring the system to a very slow crawl.
Very soon thereafter, a limit of 2 PP's per user task was implemented.There were more, but the statute of limitations may not be up for them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31152882</id>
	<title>Well I crashed systems in 1978</title>
	<author>NSN A392-99-964-5927</author>
	<datestamp>1266350940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I also kept systems up as a young boy. Wilcox computers North Wales. I was database programming back then. A good goth chix0r sat me on her lap as a kid and made me hand solder chips on the mother boards,

She was mega-fit and I was "In love with her" She shown me everything how hard drives worked, How to database programme and installing hardware I just wish Dad had married her. That woman taught me everything I know about IT.

Sorry if I am ranting. But she was amazing.

Wilcox is now disbandoned, however, all the people from that company in the past now work for IBM/APPLE/INTEL/ATHLON/M$ and are Linux and BSD coders.

It is a shame those days are gone today but I still love my Green Screen days!

Love NSN</htmltext>
<tokenext>I also kept systems up as a young boy .
Wilcox computers North Wales .
I was database programming back then .
A good goth chix0r sat me on her lap as a kid and made me hand solder chips on the mother boards , She was mega-fit and I was " In love with her " She shown me everything how hard drives worked , How to database programme and installing hardware I just wish Dad had married her .
That woman taught me everything I know about IT .
Sorry if I am ranting .
But she was amazing .
Wilcox is now disbandoned , however , all the people from that company in the past now work for IBM/APPLE/INTEL/ATHLON/M $ and are Linux and BSD coders .
It is a shame those days are gone today but I still love my Green Screen days !
Love NSN</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I also kept systems up as a young boy.
Wilcox computers North Wales.
I was database programming back then.
A good goth chix0r sat me on her lap as a kid and made me hand solder chips on the mother boards,

She was mega-fit and I was "In love with her" She shown me everything how hard drives worked, How to database programme and installing hardware I just wish Dad had married her.
That woman taught me everything I know about IT.
Sorry if I am ranting.
But she was amazing.
Wilcox is now disbandoned, however, all the people from that company in the past now work for IBM/APPLE/INTEL/ATHLON/M$ and are Linux and BSD coders.
It is a shame those days are gone today but I still love my Green Screen days!
Love NSN</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31142948</id>
	<title>Re:So they could receive commands!?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266240600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So I'm guessing you weren't around in 1974.  It might also surprise you to learn that once upon a time there were no virus scanners or firewalls.  I bet I just blew your mind with that one...</p></div><p>You mean like how most Linux and Mac users run their systems today (at least in regards to virus scanners)?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So I 'm guessing you were n't around in 1974 .
It might also surprise you to learn that once upon a time there were no virus scanners or firewalls .
I bet I just blew your mind with that one...You mean like how most Linux and Mac users run their systems today ( at least in regards to virus scanners ) ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So I'm guessing you weren't around in 1974.
It might also surprise you to learn that once upon a time there were no virus scanners or firewalls.
I bet I just blew your mind with that one...You mean like how most Linux and Mac users run their systems today (at least in regards to virus scanners)?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141490</id>
	<title>Re:So they could receive commands!?</title>
	<author>mysidia</author>
	<datestamp>1266264480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
I would also guess...
There were also few/no viruses.
</p><p>
And hacking was kind of pointless, since
there was no security to hack.
</p><p>
But a skill barrier,  since knowledge of such equipment was not generally publicized (no internet)... and probably not nearly as much damager a 'hacker' or intruder could easily do  without being identified.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would also guess.. . There were also few/no viruses .
And hacking was kind of pointless , since there was no security to hack .
But a skill barrier , since knowledge of such equipment was not generally publicized ( no internet ) ... and probably not nearly as much damager a 'hacker ' or intruder could easily do without being identified .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
I would also guess...
There were also few/no viruses.
And hacking was kind of pointless, since
there was no security to hack.
But a skill barrier,  since knowledge of such equipment was not generally publicized (no internet)... and probably not nearly as much damager a 'hacker' or intruder could easily do  without being identified.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31144428</id>
	<title>Never Prosecuted?  There was no crime.</title>
	<author>originalhack</author>
	<datestamp>1266251520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The author and I were contemporaries and he forgot one very important reason he was never prosecuted.   In 1974, there was no crime even if this had been done by an adult maliciously and for money.  The pendulum, of course, has swung far in the other direction and users now face serious criminal charges for TOS violations.<br><br>By the way, many of us who have good heads for computer security learned during years before it became a felony to practice.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The author and I were contemporaries and he forgot one very important reason he was never prosecuted .
In 1974 , there was no crime even if this had been done by an adult maliciously and for money .
The pendulum , of course , has swung far in the other direction and users now face serious criminal charges for TOS violations.By the way , many of us who have good heads for computer security learned during years before it became a felony to practice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The author and I were contemporaries and he forgot one very important reason he was never prosecuted.
In 1974, there was no crime even if this had been done by an adult maliciously and for money.
The pendulum, of course, has swung far in the other direction and users now face serious criminal charges for TOS violations.By the way, many of us who have good heads for computer security learned during years before it became a felony to practice.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140326</id>
	<title>Frist Post!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266165600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And last post...</p><p>-ext-<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And last post...-ext- : D</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And last post...-ext- :D</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141174</id>
	<title>Didn't get caught?</title>
	<author>Psychotic\_Wrath</author>
	<datestamp>1266174480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If he never got caught how do we know who it is?
<div><p>
Ok maybe i should RTFA, but c'mon this is slashdot..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If he never got caught how do we know who it is ?
Ok maybe i should RTFA , but c'mon this is slashdot. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If he never got caught how do we know who it is?
Ok maybe i should RTFA, but c'mon this is slashdot..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140516</id>
	<title>Re:Was it a DoS exactly?</title>
	<author>xous</author>
	<datestamp>1266167100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hi,</p><p>DoS stands for 'Denial of Service' so anything that can cause a system to fail to respond to legitimate requests.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hi,DoS stands for 'Denial of Service ' so anything that can cause a system to fail to respond to legitimate requests .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hi,DoS stands for 'Denial of Service' so anything that can cause a system to fail to respond to legitimate requests.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140442</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31144658</id>
	<title>Re:Short answer</title>
	<author>WeBMartians</author>
	<datestamp>1266252420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>UC Santa Barbara - 1967 -
There was a design bug in the online system. There was a dedicated REPEAT key: key "REPEAT A 42" and the system would dutifully generate 42 A keystrokes, denying service until done. Problem was, the default numerical mode for the system was real rather than integer. Thus, "REPEAT A 9.999E12" was possible EVEN DURING LOGIN! It was a fine way to bring down the system<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... and many did<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... sometimes concurrently<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... not just a denial of service but distributed across the entire campus<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... and anonymous, too!</htmltext>
<tokenext>UC Santa Barbara - 1967 - There was a design bug in the online system .
There was a dedicated REPEAT key : key " REPEAT A 42 " and the system would dutifully generate 42 A keystrokes , denying service until done .
Problem was , the default numerical mode for the system was real rather than integer .
Thus , " REPEAT A 9.999E12 " was possible EVEN DURING LOGIN !
It was a fine way to bring down the system ... and many did ... sometimes concurrently ... not just a denial of service but distributed across the entire campus ... and anonymous , too !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>UC Santa Barbara - 1967 -
There was a design bug in the online system.
There was a dedicated REPEAT key: key "REPEAT A 42" and the system would dutifully generate 42 A keystrokes, denying service until done.
Problem was, the default numerical mode for the system was real rather than integer.
Thus, "REPEAT A 9.999E12" was possible EVEN DURING LOGIN!
It was a fine way to bring down the system ... and many did ... sometimes concurrently ... not just a denial of service but distributed across the entire campus ... and anonymous, too!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140318</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31142174</id>
	<title>Re:Was it a DoS exactly?</title>
	<author>YourExperiment</author>
	<datestamp>1266230220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>By that definition, walking up to their terminal and hitting it repeatedly with a baseball bat would also be a denial of service attack. So would physically restraining them in their chair such that they were unable to reach the keyboard.</p><p>This seems to me to be an overly broad definition. The term "denial of service attack" has taken on a more specific meaning than "any means of denying access to a computer system".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>By that definition , walking up to their terminal and hitting it repeatedly with a baseball bat would also be a denial of service attack .
So would physically restraining them in their chair such that they were unable to reach the keyboard.This seems to me to be an overly broad definition .
The term " denial of service attack " has taken on a more specific meaning than " any means of denying access to a computer system " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By that definition, walking up to their terminal and hitting it repeatedly with a baseball bat would also be a denial of service attack.
So would physically restraining them in their chair such that they were unable to reach the keyboard.This seems to me to be an overly broad definition.
The term "denial of service attack" has taken on a more specific meaning than "any means of denying access to a computer system".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140506</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140316</id>
	<title>First denial post</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266165540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Frosty!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Frosty !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Frosty!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140558</id>
	<title>Re:Was it a DoS exactly?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266167460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The way I understand it, the machines were 'locked' waiting to talk to an external device (which wasn't available). Subsequent requests couldn't be serviced, so I'd say technically yes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The way I understand it , the machines were 'locked ' waiting to talk to an external device ( which was n't available ) .
Subsequent requests could n't be serviced , so I 'd say technically yes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The way I understand it, the machines were 'locked' waiting to talk to an external device (which wasn't available).
Subsequent requests couldn't be serviced, so I'd say technically yes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140442</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141048</id>
	<title>Yes. It Was. Obviously.</title>
	<author>drfreak</author>
	<datestamp>1266173040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Enough Said.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Enough Said .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Enough Said.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31142820</id>
	<title>Beat by two years</title>
	<author>Skapare</author>
	<datestamp>1266238680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My first DoS discovery was in October 1976. On IBM mainframes running VM/CMS, I found I could take down the entire system from an ASCII serial port connection, without even being logged in. At any prompt, including the "LOGON:" prompt (hence why being logged in was not needed), just press the RETURN key followed immediately by the BREAK key.</p><p>A couple years later when I obtained the source code to the system (bought it on a reel of tape, from IBM, for $150) I found the bug in the code that caused it. The "CP" kernel went into a loop trying to send a command to the I/O controller to reverse the direction of the half-duplex serial port, which would always fail because it had not received the interrupt informing it of the BREAK status, which it would never get because all I/O interrupts were masked off at that point.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My first DoS discovery was in October 1976 .
On IBM mainframes running VM/CMS , I found I could take down the entire system from an ASCII serial port connection , without even being logged in .
At any prompt , including the " LOGON : " prompt ( hence why being logged in was not needed ) , just press the RETURN key followed immediately by the BREAK key.A couple years later when I obtained the source code to the system ( bought it on a reel of tape , from IBM , for $ 150 ) I found the bug in the code that caused it .
The " CP " kernel went into a loop trying to send a command to the I/O controller to reverse the direction of the half-duplex serial port , which would always fail because it had not received the interrupt informing it of the BREAK status , which it would never get because all I/O interrupts were masked off at that point .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My first DoS discovery was in October 1976.
On IBM mainframes running VM/CMS, I found I could take down the entire system from an ASCII serial port connection, without even being logged in.
At any prompt, including the "LOGON:" prompt (hence why being logged in was not needed), just press the RETURN key followed immediately by the BREAK key.A couple years later when I obtained the source code to the system (bought it on a reel of tape, from IBM, for $150) I found the bug in the code that caused it.
The "CP" kernel went into a loop trying to send a command to the I/O controller to reverse the direction of the half-duplex serial port, which would always fail because it had not received the interrupt informing it of the BREAK status, which it would never get because all I/O interrupts were masked off at that point.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31142348</id>
	<title>Re:One of many ways...</title>
	<author>Smask</author>
	<datestamp>1266232320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In the late 80:s, there were a bug in sunos that generated a kenel panic when you did a rcp (remote copy) to the audio device. The file copied ok until rcp tried to close<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/audio. Some bloke spoke to his Sun rep. about this. But the rep being an ass, he downed every workstation at the local Sun office (I think it was in Sweden) using a sample from the movie "2001", where HAL says "My mind is going". After that he didn't dare come forward with the bug being afraid of losing his job.

I think they fixed it by setting the rights to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/audio.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In the late 80 : s , there were a bug in sunos that generated a kenel panic when you did a rcp ( remote copy ) to the audio device .
The file copied ok until rcp tried to close /dev/audio .
Some bloke spoke to his Sun rep. about this .
But the rep being an ass , he downed every workstation at the local Sun office ( I think it was in Sweden ) using a sample from the movie " 2001 " , where HAL says " My mind is going " .
After that he did n't dare come forward with the bug being afraid of losing his job .
I think they fixed it by setting the rights to /dev/audio .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the late 80:s, there were a bug in sunos that generated a kenel panic when you did a rcp (remote copy) to the audio device.
The file copied ok until rcp tried to close /dev/audio.
Some bloke spoke to his Sun rep. about this.
But the rep being an ass, he downed every workstation at the local Sun office (I think it was in Sweden) using a sample from the movie "2001", where HAL says "My mind is going".
After that he didn't dare come forward with the bug being afraid of losing his job.
I think they fixed it by setting the rights to /dev/audio.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140852</id>
	<title>Sad to be 50 and accomplished nothing.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266170400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, of course.  13 years old kids in 1974 got access to UI computer systems without paying for timeshare.<br>Our hero, managed to take a whole room of "terminals" offline with one existing command.</p><p>And now [queue evil music] 36 years later, having done nothing of note ever, he now seeks his hard-earned fame.</p><p>First ever DoS... or 49 year old sociopath longing for publicity... or just a liar.  You decide.  I already have.</p><p>E</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , of course .
13 years old kids in 1974 got access to UI computer systems without paying for timeshare.Our hero , managed to take a whole room of " terminals " offline with one existing command.And now [ queue evil music ] 36 years later , having done nothing of note ever , he now seeks his hard-earned fame.First ever DoS... or 49 year old sociopath longing for publicity... or just a liar .
You decide .
I already have.E</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, of course.
13 years old kids in 1974 got access to UI computer systems without paying for timeshare.Our hero, managed to take a whole room of "terminals" offline with one existing command.And now [queue evil music] 36 years later, having done nothing of note ever, he now seeks his hard-earned fame.First ever DoS... or 49 year old sociopath longing for publicity... or just a liar.
You decide.
I already have.E</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31142790</id>
	<title>Re:The old systems probably have a lot of "Firsts"</title>
	<author>tricorn</author>
	<datestamp>1266238380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You use a lot of words, but they don't really make sense when put together.  A "tutor script"?  A timeout error every second that flushes the keyboard buffer to common?</p><p>The common "chat" program was talkomatic ("talk" on Unix systems is very similar, it allowed up to 6 people to communicate at once, with any number of additional people to monitor a channel), and it really wouldn't matter if everyone on the system was in it, it was fairly efficient, so I don't know why they'd want to prevent people from using it.  The only resource it would use would be a terminal.  Did they also disable TERM-talk, Personal Notes, notesfiles, and all games as well?  I'd have thought you'd be more interested in writing a game in order to stick it to them rather than write a hideously inelegant and inefficient version of talkomatic.</p><p>PLATO was fairly conservative in giving out resources - if you went in "background" mode, you could use all the processing available, but got lower priority, and wouldn't interfere with anyone else running in "foreground".</p><p>Why wouldn't they just delete the author signons of anyone who implemented code they didn't want on the system, anyway?  You can't write code anonymously on a PLATO system, and if they were trying to control things so tightly that they objected to people talking to one another, surely they'd tightly control who got author signons.</p><p>So, your story doesn't really make any sense.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You use a lot of words , but they do n't really make sense when put together .
A " tutor script " ?
A timeout error every second that flushes the keyboard buffer to common ? The common " chat " program was talkomatic ( " talk " on Unix systems is very similar , it allowed up to 6 people to communicate at once , with any number of additional people to monitor a channel ) , and it really would n't matter if everyone on the system was in it , it was fairly efficient , so I do n't know why they 'd want to prevent people from using it .
The only resource it would use would be a terminal .
Did they also disable TERM-talk , Personal Notes , notesfiles , and all games as well ?
I 'd have thought you 'd be more interested in writing a game in order to stick it to them rather than write a hideously inelegant and inefficient version of talkomatic.PLATO was fairly conservative in giving out resources - if you went in " background " mode , you could use all the processing available , but got lower priority , and would n't interfere with anyone else running in " foreground " .Why would n't they just delete the author signons of anyone who implemented code they did n't want on the system , anyway ?
You ca n't write code anonymously on a PLATO system , and if they were trying to control things so tightly that they objected to people talking to one another , surely they 'd tightly control who got author signons.So , your story does n't really make any sense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You use a lot of words, but they don't really make sense when put together.
A "tutor script"?
A timeout error every second that flushes the keyboard buffer to common?The common "chat" program was talkomatic ("talk" on Unix systems is very similar, it allowed up to 6 people to communicate at once, with any number of additional people to monitor a channel), and it really wouldn't matter if everyone on the system was in it, it was fairly efficient, so I don't know why they'd want to prevent people from using it.
The only resource it would use would be a terminal.
Did they also disable TERM-talk, Personal Notes, notesfiles, and all games as well?
I'd have thought you'd be more interested in writing a game in order to stick it to them rather than write a hideously inelegant and inefficient version of talkomatic.PLATO was fairly conservative in giving out resources - if you went in "background" mode, you could use all the processing available, but got lower priority, and wouldn't interfere with anyone else running in "foreground".Why wouldn't they just delete the author signons of anyone who implemented code they didn't want on the system, anyway?
You can't write code anonymously on a PLATO system, and if they were trying to control things so tightly that they objected to people talking to one another, surely they'd tightly control who got author signons.So, your story doesn't really make any sense.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140946</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140874</id>
	<title>Re:Seems fitting</title>
	<author>algormortis</author>
	<datestamp>1266170700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Surprised? How long have you been a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. member for? I've been a member for just a year and I already feel emasculated by all the kids who improve upon a technology before they stop wetting their beds.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Surprised ?
How long have you been a / .
member for ?
I 've been a member for just a year and I already feel emasculated by all the kids who improve upon a technology before they stop wetting their beds .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Surprised?
How long have you been a /.
member for?
I've been a member for just a year and I already feel emasculated by all the kids who improve upon a technology before they stop wetting their beds.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140320</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140370</id>
	<title>Earlier DoS</title>
	<author>gringer</author>
	<datestamp>1266165900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd like to be able to claim an earlier Denial of Service, but unfortunately that was a tiny bit before my cells started dividing. 1974 would mean I'd be about -8 at the time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd like to be able to claim an earlier Denial of Service , but unfortunately that was a tiny bit before my cells started dividing .
1974 would mean I 'd be about -8 at the time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd like to be able to claim an earlier Denial of Service, but unfortunately that was a tiny bit before my cells started dividing.
1974 would mean I'd be about -8 at the time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140806</id>
	<title>Fun with terminals</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266169920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Back in my high school's UNIX system I used to like piping binary files to people terminals. It worked pretty well as a DoS and made a loud racket with the all the BEL characters.</p><p>Cntl-S could also be used to halt people's sessions, and "+++" would screw with people on dial up sessions.</p><p>The good ol' days.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Back in my high school 's UNIX system I used to like piping binary files to people terminals .
It worked pretty well as a DoS and made a loud racket with the all the BEL characters.Cntl-S could also be used to halt people 's sessions , and " + + + " would screw with people on dial up sessions.The good ol ' days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Back in my high school's UNIX system I used to like piping binary files to people terminals.
It worked pretty well as a DoS and made a loud racket with the all the BEL characters.Cntl-S could also be used to halt people's sessions, and "+++" would screw with people on dial up sessions.The good ol' days.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31145202</id>
	<title>Dave Woolley's Was Earlier</title>
	<author>Baldrson</author>
	<datestamp>1266254820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Quoting <a href="http://thinkofit.com/drwool/" title="thinkofit.com">David Woolley</a> [thinkofit.com]:<blockquote><div><p>Reminds me of something I did on PLATO III. Back then, the -press- command let you give an argument to cause a keypress at another terminal. Naturally, the 16-year-old mind wonders what will happen if you put all the terminals in the classroom into a chain where a keypress on one ripples through them all and cycles back around to the original. Well, it hangs the system, that's what.
</p><p>
I actually remember being there when the -ext- command exploit hit.  It didn't hit me personally but it created quite an uproar.
</p><p>
However, that was on that PLATO IV system in 1974.  PLATO III was a few years earlier.</p></div></blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Quoting David Woolley [ thinkofit.com ] : Reminds me of something I did on PLATO III .
Back then , the -press- command let you give an argument to cause a keypress at another terminal .
Naturally , the 16-year-old mind wonders what will happen if you put all the terminals in the classroom into a chain where a keypress on one ripples through them all and cycles back around to the original .
Well , it hangs the system , that 's what .
I actually remember being there when the -ext- command exploit hit .
It did n't hit me personally but it created quite an uproar .
However , that was on that PLATO IV system in 1974 .
PLATO III was a few years earlier .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Quoting David Woolley [thinkofit.com]:Reminds me of something I did on PLATO III.
Back then, the -press- command let you give an argument to cause a keypress at another terminal.
Naturally, the 16-year-old mind wonders what will happen if you put all the terminals in the classroom into a chain where a keypress on one ripples through them all and cycles back around to the original.
Well, it hangs the system, that's what.
I actually remember being there when the -ext- command exploit hit.
It didn't hit me personally but it created quite an uproar.
However, that was on that PLATO IV system in 1974.
PLATO III was a few years earlier.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140478</id>
	<title>This reminds me..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266166920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>of when my friends and I installed Descent and Doom in the computer lab at the local community college to play deathmatches.  This was during finals week, and we were on DOS/windows 3.1 machines and I believe that this was pre-TCP/IP on that particular network.  The game would bomb out after about 15 minutes of playing or so, and the computers would lock up, so we'd have to reboot everything and get back into the game.  After about 2 hours of playing and yet another network crash, someone knocked on the door of the room we were in and asked us if we were having network problems, too.  Apparently we were bringing down THE ENTIRE BUILDING every time we started playing.  There were people literally in tears in the hallway because they lost their papers they were working on.</p><p>We just kind of shut down our computers and casually walked out without drawing any undue attention to ourselves.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>of when my friends and I installed Descent and Doom in the computer lab at the local community college to play deathmatches .
This was during finals week , and we were on DOS/windows 3.1 machines and I believe that this was pre-TCP/IP on that particular network .
The game would bomb out after about 15 minutes of playing or so , and the computers would lock up , so we 'd have to reboot everything and get back into the game .
After about 2 hours of playing and yet another network crash , someone knocked on the door of the room we were in and asked us if we were having network problems , too .
Apparently we were bringing down THE ENTIRE BUILDING every time we started playing .
There were people literally in tears in the hallway because they lost their papers they were working on.We just kind of shut down our computers and casually walked out without drawing any undue attention to ourselves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>of when my friends and I installed Descent and Doom in the computer lab at the local community college to play deathmatches.
This was during finals week, and we were on DOS/windows 3.1 machines and I believe that this was pre-TCP/IP on that particular network.
The game would bomb out after about 15 minutes of playing or so, and the computers would lock up, so we'd have to reboot everything and get back into the game.
After about 2 hours of playing and yet another network crash, someone knocked on the door of the room we were in and asked us if we were having network problems, too.
Apparently we were bringing down THE ENTIRE BUILDING every time we started playing.
There were people literally in tears in the hallway because they lost their papers they were working on.We just kind of shut down our computers and casually walked out without drawing any undue attention to ourselves.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31142150</id>
	<title>Re:Short answer</title>
	<author>YourExperiment</author>
	<datestamp>1266229920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Yes</p></div><p>tl;dr</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yestl ; dr</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yestl;dr
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140318</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31145070</id>
	<title>Re:This reminds me..</title>
	<author>rickb928</author>
	<datestamp>1266254280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Little snots.</p><p>I had to put in another ethernet card in the Novell server and route the lab through it to find the problem.  A few hours with Lanalyzer, and I finally figured out what the traffic was.  More buffers to make the lab network live long enough for me to get there, and I caught the little buggers playing away.  The server just got slow when the card borked.  At least the scheduling software didn't crash anymore.  It took longer to recover the database than the kids did to hose the network AGAIN.  grrr...</p><p>I convinced the principal to just give them some detention.  And we embarked on the campaign to lock down the lab machines.  The beginning of a two-year cat-and-mouse game with the brighter students.  Whoever came up with the idea of teaching them Turbo Pascal with the network libraries available was naive.  They wrote a great network password stealer in two weeks.  Hilarity ensured.</p><p>At least I got paid.  But it was a long two years.</p><p>IPX.  Good and bad.  Doom.  Argggh....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Little snots.I had to put in another ethernet card in the Novell server and route the lab through it to find the problem .
A few hours with Lanalyzer , and I finally figured out what the traffic was .
More buffers to make the lab network live long enough for me to get there , and I caught the little buggers playing away .
The server just got slow when the card borked .
At least the scheduling software did n't crash anymore .
It took longer to recover the database than the kids did to hose the network AGAIN .
grrr...I convinced the principal to just give them some detention .
And we embarked on the campaign to lock down the lab machines .
The beginning of a two-year cat-and-mouse game with the brighter students .
Whoever came up with the idea of teaching them Turbo Pascal with the network libraries available was naive .
They wrote a great network password stealer in two weeks .
Hilarity ensured.At least I got paid .
But it was a long two years.IPX .
Good and bad .
Doom. Argggh... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Little snots.I had to put in another ethernet card in the Novell server and route the lab through it to find the problem.
A few hours with Lanalyzer, and I finally figured out what the traffic was.
More buffers to make the lab network live long enough for me to get there, and I caught the little buggers playing away.
The server just got slow when the card borked.
At least the scheduling software didn't crash anymore.
It took longer to recover the database than the kids did to hose the network AGAIN.
grrr...I convinced the principal to just give them some detention.
And we embarked on the campaign to lock down the lab machines.
The beginning of a two-year cat-and-mouse game with the brighter students.
Whoever came up with the idea of teaching them Turbo Pascal with the network libraries available was naive.
They wrote a great network password stealer in two weeks.
Hilarity ensured.At least I got paid.
But it was a long two years.IPX.
Good and bad.
Doom.  Argggh....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140478</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141222</id>
	<title>Re:So they could receive commands!?</title>
	<author>Sycraft-fu</author>
	<datestamp>1266175260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Computer security was poor back in the day. Since computers were expensive, scarce things that were generally not connected to others, it wasn't a big deal. You knew everyone who had access, if someone caused trouble they'd get in trouble. Even once the Internet, or rather ARPANET back then got started, security was extremely lax. If you look at some of the low numbered ports you'll discover they ware things like "chargen" which just sends a random string of characters out. You can see how this would be a bad idea currently, but it could be a useful tool to make sure a system and link were working.</p><p>As with most things, people learn from experience. As computers become more common and networks larger, security got better by necessity. Things got broken in to, so the problems were fixed. Go with that for a couple decades and we now have systems with multiple privilege levels, hardware enforced memory access limits, virus scanners, firewalls, etc, etc.</p><p>A good deal of security in the world is born out of necessity and experience. Bad things happen, so security is designed to stop them from happening.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Computer security was poor back in the day .
Since computers were expensive , scarce things that were generally not connected to others , it was n't a big deal .
You knew everyone who had access , if someone caused trouble they 'd get in trouble .
Even once the Internet , or rather ARPANET back then got started , security was extremely lax .
If you look at some of the low numbered ports you 'll discover they ware things like " chargen " which just sends a random string of characters out .
You can see how this would be a bad idea currently , but it could be a useful tool to make sure a system and link were working.As with most things , people learn from experience .
As computers become more common and networks larger , security got better by necessity .
Things got broken in to , so the problems were fixed .
Go with that for a couple decades and we now have systems with multiple privilege levels , hardware enforced memory access limits , virus scanners , firewalls , etc , etc.A good deal of security in the world is born out of necessity and experience .
Bad things happen , so security is designed to stop them from happening .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Computer security was poor back in the day.
Since computers were expensive, scarce things that were generally not connected to others, it wasn't a big deal.
You knew everyone who had access, if someone caused trouble they'd get in trouble.
Even once the Internet, or rather ARPANET back then got started, security was extremely lax.
If you look at some of the low numbered ports you'll discover they ware things like "chargen" which just sends a random string of characters out.
You can see how this would be a bad idea currently, but it could be a useful tool to make sure a system and link were working.As with most things, people learn from experience.
As computers become more common and networks larger, security got better by necessity.
Things got broken in to, so the problems were fixed.
Go with that for a couple decades and we now have systems with multiple privilege levels, hardware enforced memory access limits, virus scanners, firewalls, etc, etc.A good deal of security in the world is born out of necessity and experience.
Bad things happen, so security is designed to stop them from happening.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140368</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141686</id>
	<title>Re:Was it a DoS exactly?</title>
	<author>weicco</author>
	<datestamp>1266266760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Flooding is just one way/method to execute (D)DoS attack. You can read more here: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial-of-service\_attack#Methods\_of\_attack" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial-of-service\_attack#Methods\_of\_attack</a> [wikipedia.org] </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Flooding is just one way/method to execute ( D ) DoS attack .
You can read more here : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial-of-service \ _attack # Methods \ _of \ _attack [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Flooding is just one way/method to execute (D)DoS attack.
You can read more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial-of-service\_attack#Methods\_of\_attack [wikipedia.org] </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140442</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140608</id>
	<title>Hardly the first DOS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266167880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In the late 60's it was routine for students learning COBOL to play with the "DISPLAY UPON CONSOLE" directive and flood the operator's console with messages. The operator would have to manually acknowledge each and everyone. This then create a denial of service attack in as much as the operator couldn't respond to other requests. Was really annoying for operators and other users.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In the late 60 's it was routine for students learning COBOL to play with the " DISPLAY UPON CONSOLE " directive and flood the operator 's console with messages .
The operator would have to manually acknowledge each and everyone .
This then create a denial of service attack in as much as the operator could n't respond to other requests .
Was really annoying for operators and other users .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the late 60's it was routine for students learning COBOL to play with the "DISPLAY UPON CONSOLE" directive and flood the operator's console with messages.
The operator would have to manually acknowledge each and everyone.
This then create a denial of service attack in as much as the operator couldn't respond to other requests.
Was really annoying for operators and other users.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140756</id>
	<title>A Possibly earlier one...  and a funny story.</title>
	<author>DougReed</author>
	<datestamp>1266169380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The earliest one I know of was by the smartest man I ever knew (and  the strangest).  He was my mentor.  In the IBM 360 days this guy used to write code<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..  COMPLEX code in binary on the roller bars on the front of the console because he was too lazy to logon.  He made IBM's code more efficient by eliminating all modularization.  It was more efficient to just have one big super efficient kernel, so he redesigned their system, and got something like 140\% efficiency out of the hardware (40\% greater than theoretical possibility) by IBM's own benchmarks, and found a security hole in their code in the process<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..  as he put it "bit enough to drive an 18 wheeler through", which he reported to them.  They told him it was his hacking, he broke something<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...  NOT OUR CODE!!!  IBM CODE CAN'T BE BROKEN!!!  So he went to their 'demo center' and fed in a deck of punch cards.</p><p>On the IBM Selectric console in the IBM demo center, it printed.</p><p>"May I please have a cookie?"</p><p>The operator ignored it.</p><p>8 hours later during shift turnover It printed</p><p>"I never got my cookie"</p><p>The two operators looked at it, shrugged, and ignored it.  The dayshift operator went home.</p><p>4 hours later the console printed.</p><p>"You're not a very nice operator either, I never did get my cookie"</p><p>The operator thought the guys upstairs were fooling around and ignored it.</p><p>2 hours later.</p><p>"WHERE IS MY COOKIE!"</p><p>hummm...</p><p>1 hour later.</p><p>"Dammit give me a cookie!"</p><p>30 minutes.</p><p>"I WANT A COOKIE!"</p><p>15 minutes<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...  7.5 minutes<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...  eventually we get to 32 cookies this second<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..  64 cookies this second<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...  128 cookies this second.</p><p>An IBM Selectric typewriter which is the main console for a 360/65 cannot print even the word cookie in a second, much less a whole sentence, and certainly not 128 of them!  There was ONE way to crash a 360/65<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..  Fill up the console buffer.  The system considered console messages to be important, and if the system couldn't print all of them, it halted.</p><p>Reboot<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...  excuse me...  Mainframe terminology here...  "IPL" the system.  First console message:</p><p>"You know, I never DIID get my cookie!"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..  and the process starts over.</p><p>Finally IBM called my mentor...</p><p>um...  did you submit a job to the demo center?</p><p>Yes, but don't worry, it was just a simple 'unprivileged' process, and as you said, your security is flawless, so I am sure there is no danger.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p><p>Sir, I think we are prepared to acknowledge that there MAY BE a security hole in our system somewhere.  It seems that your job never finished and yet it does not seem to exist in the system anywhere.  Our experts tell us we have to re-install the operating system to fix it.  Do you have any alternative suggestions?</p><p>Just one...  Go get the best operator you have and put him on the console and call me back.</p><p>Yes sir...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..  an hour later</p><p>Sir, this is king super operator, they just called me back in to work to assist you in solving our issue.</p><p>OK<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...  now listen carefully.  I am only going to say this once.  Type carefully, and don't screw this up<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..  are you ready?</p><p>Yes sir.</p><p>Good type this<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...  "c" "o" "o" "k" "i" "e"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... now press "Enter"</p><p>Console prints .  "Thank you that was good", and the job ends.</p><p>After that IBM never ever questioned it if my mentor reported a problem with IBM software ever again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The earliest one I know of was by the smartest man I ever knew ( and the strangest ) .
He was my mentor .
In the IBM 360 days this guy used to write code .. COMPLEX code in binary on the roller bars on the front of the console because he was too lazy to logon .
He made IBM 's code more efficient by eliminating all modularization .
It was more efficient to just have one big super efficient kernel , so he redesigned their system , and got something like 140 \ % efficiency out of the hardware ( 40 \ % greater than theoretical possibility ) by IBM 's own benchmarks , and found a security hole in their code in the process .. as he put it " bit enough to drive an 18 wheeler through " , which he reported to them .
They told him it was his hacking , he broke something ... NOT OUR CODE ! ! !
IBM CODE CA N'T BE BROKEN ! ! !
So he went to their 'demo center ' and fed in a deck of punch cards.On the IBM Selectric console in the IBM demo center , it printed .
" May I please have a cookie ?
" The operator ignored it.8 hours later during shift turnover It printed " I never got my cookie " The two operators looked at it , shrugged , and ignored it .
The dayshift operator went home.4 hours later the console printed .
" You 're not a very nice operator either , I never did get my cookie " The operator thought the guys upstairs were fooling around and ignored it.2 hours later .
" WHERE IS MY COOKIE !
" hummm...1 hour later .
" Dammit give me a cookie !
" 30 minutes .
" I WANT A COOKIE !
" 15 minutes ... 7.5 minutes ... eventually we get to 32 cookies this second .. 64 cookies this second ... 128 cookies this second.An IBM Selectric typewriter which is the main console for a 360/65 can not print even the word cookie in a second , much less a whole sentence , and certainly not 128 of them !
There was ONE way to crash a 360/65 .. Fill up the console buffer .
The system considered console messages to be important , and if the system could n't print all of them , it halted.Reboot ... excuse me... Mainframe terminology here... " IPL " the system .
First console message : " You know , I never DIID get my cookie !
" .. and the process starts over.Finally IBM called my mentor...um... did you submit a job to the demo center ? Yes , but do n't worry , it was just a simple 'unprivileged ' process , and as you said , your security is flawless , so I am sure there is no danger .
: - ) Sir , I think we are prepared to acknowledge that there MAY BE a security hole in our system somewhere .
It seems that your job never finished and yet it does not seem to exist in the system anywhere .
Our experts tell us we have to re-install the operating system to fix it .
Do you have any alternative suggestions ? Just one... Go get the best operator you have and put him on the console and call me back.Yes sir... .. an hour laterSir , this is king super operator , they just called me back in to work to assist you in solving our issue.OK ... now listen carefully .
I am only going to say this once .
Type carefully , and do n't screw this up .. are you ready ? Yes sir.Good type this ... " c " " o " " o " " k " " i " " e " ... now press " Enter " Console prints .
" Thank you that was good " , and the job ends.After that IBM never ever questioned it if my mentor reported a problem with IBM software ever again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The earliest one I know of was by the smartest man I ever knew (and  the strangest).
He was my mentor.
In the IBM 360 days this guy used to write code ..  COMPLEX code in binary on the roller bars on the front of the console because he was too lazy to logon.
He made IBM's code more efficient by eliminating all modularization.
It was more efficient to just have one big super efficient kernel, so he redesigned their system, and got something like 140\% efficiency out of the hardware (40\% greater than theoretical possibility) by IBM's own benchmarks, and found a security hole in their code in the process ..  as he put it "bit enough to drive an 18 wheeler through", which he reported to them.
They told him it was his hacking, he broke something ...  NOT OUR CODE!!!
IBM CODE CAN'T BE BROKEN!!!
So he went to their 'demo center' and fed in a deck of punch cards.On the IBM Selectric console in the IBM demo center, it printed.
"May I please have a cookie?
"The operator ignored it.8 hours later during shift turnover It printed"I never got my cookie"The two operators looked at it, shrugged, and ignored it.
The dayshift operator went home.4 hours later the console printed.
"You're not a very nice operator either, I never did get my cookie"The operator thought the guys upstairs were fooling around and ignored it.2 hours later.
"WHERE IS MY COOKIE!
"hummm...1 hour later.
"Dammit give me a cookie!
"30 minutes.
"I WANT A COOKIE!
"15 minutes ...  7.5 minutes ...  eventually we get to 32 cookies this second ..  64 cookies this second ...  128 cookies this second.An IBM Selectric typewriter which is the main console for a 360/65 cannot print even the word cookie in a second, much less a whole sentence, and certainly not 128 of them!
There was ONE way to crash a 360/65 ..  Fill up the console buffer.
The system considered console messages to be important, and if the system couldn't print all of them, it halted.Reboot ...  excuse me...  Mainframe terminology here...  "IPL" the system.
First console message:"You know, I never DIID get my cookie!
" ..  and the process starts over.Finally IBM called my mentor...um...  did you submit a job to the demo center?Yes, but don't worry, it was just a simple 'unprivileged' process, and as you said, your security is flawless, so I am sure there is no danger.
:-)Sir, I think we are prepared to acknowledge that there MAY BE a security hole in our system somewhere.
It seems that your job never finished and yet it does not seem to exist in the system anywhere.
Our experts tell us we have to re-install the operating system to fix it.
Do you have any alternative suggestions?Just one...  Go get the best operator you have and put him on the console and call me back.Yes sir... ..  an hour laterSir, this is king super operator, they just called me back in to work to assist you in solving our issue.OK ...  now listen carefully.
I am only going to say this once.
Type carefully, and don't screw this up ..  are you ready?Yes sir.Good type this ...  "c" "o" "o" "k" "i" "e" ... now press "Enter"Console prints .
"Thank you that was good", and the job ends.After that IBM never ever questioned it if my mentor reported a problem with IBM software ever again.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141292</id>
	<title>Re:One of many ways...</title>
	<author>precariousgray</author>
	<datestamp>1266176340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You forgot a close-parenthesis.  For shame!</htmltext>
<tokenext>You forgot a close-parenthesis .
For shame !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You forgot a close-parenthesis.
For shame!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31142430</id>
	<title>Re:So they could receive commands!?</title>
	<author>pspahn</author>
	<datestamp>1266233760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Mod parent... oh.
<br> <br>
But really this is important when you look at the complete mayhem computer security is now. I understand that there will always be inherent risks, but some foresight and common sense (which I don't think are too much to ask from people as brilliant as TFA refers) goes a long way. <br> <br>
Let this be a lesson for those of the next generation. Anticipate problems and work on fixing them without having to tell a soul.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Mod parent... oh . But really this is important when you look at the complete mayhem computer security is now .
I understand that there will always be inherent risks , but some foresight and common sense ( which I do n't think are too much to ask from people as brilliant as TFA refers ) goes a long way .
Let this be a lesson for those of the next generation .
Anticipate problems and work on fixing them without having to tell a soul .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mod parent... oh.
 
But really this is important when you look at the complete mayhem computer security is now.
I understand that there will always be inherent risks, but some foresight and common sense (which I don't think are too much to ask from people as brilliant as TFA refers) goes a long way.
Let this be a lesson for those of the next generation.
Anticipate problems and work on fixing them without having to tell a soul.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140368</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140792</id>
	<title>Re:So they could receive commands!?</title>
	<author>LordLucless</author>
	<datestamp>1266169800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And the fact that you need to SSH in with your own credentials mean that if you were stupid enough to do something of the sort, they'd haul your ass over the coals.<br>
<br>
If you're dealing with people in positions of trust, logging is often the right balance between security and trust. It doesn't stop them from doing the things they need to, but the knowledge that their fingerprints will give them away will (generally) stop them from doing anything to violate that trust.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And the fact that you need to SSH in with your own credentials mean that if you were stupid enough to do something of the sort , they 'd haul your ass over the coals .
If you 're dealing with people in positions of trust , logging is often the right balance between security and trust .
It does n't stop them from doing the things they need to , but the knowledge that their fingerprints will give them away will ( generally ) stop them from doing anything to violate that trust .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And the fact that you need to SSH in with your own credentials mean that if you were stupid enough to do something of the sort, they'd haul your ass over the coals.
If you're dealing with people in positions of trust, logging is often the right balance between security and trust.
It doesn't stop them from doing the things they need to, but the knowledge that their fingerprints will give them away will (generally) stop them from doing anything to violate that trust.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140602</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31143002</id>
	<title>Re:Shorter answer</title>
	<author>poena.dare</author>
	<datestamp>1266241440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No.</p><p>100,000 BC</p><p>"Krug, in next village, is giving away free Mammoth meat. Better hurry before it's all gone."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No.100,000 BC " Krug , in next village , is giving away free Mammoth meat .
Better hurry before it 's all gone .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.100,000 BC"Krug, in next village, is giving away free Mammoth meat.
Better hurry before it's all gone.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140732</id>
	<title>OR set the desktop theme to black on black</title>
	<author>Gothmolly</author>
	<datestamp>1266169080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Worked on DECstations.   The GUI preferences were global.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Worked on DECstations .
The GUI preferences were global .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Worked on DECstations.
The GUI preferences were global.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141158</id>
	<title>Re:So they could receive commands!?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266174360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You should read the book "Hackers" by Stephen(?) Levy.  It has a large portion of it devoted to explaining how security of any type is/was against the hacker ethic, since it limited access to a machine... might be an interesting read for you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You should read the book " Hackers " by Stephen ( ?
) Levy .
It has a large portion of it devoted to explaining how security of any type is/was against the hacker ethic , since it limited access to a machine... might be an interesting read for you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You should read the book "Hackers" by Stephen(?
) Levy.
It has a large portion of it devoted to explaining how security of any type is/was against the hacker ethic, since it limited access to a machine... might be an interesting read for you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140368</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141718</id>
	<title>Re:Sad to be 50 and accomplished nothing.</title>
	<author>fegg</author>
	<datestamp>1266267120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, I know the guy (no, it isn't me), so I'll rule out liar and sociopath, leaving me to question some assumptions made about his character.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , I know the guy ( no , it is n't me ) , so I 'll rule out liar and sociopath , leaving me to question some assumptions made about his character .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, I know the guy (no, it isn't me), so I'll rule out liar and sociopath, leaving me to question some assumptions made about his character.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140852</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31145592</id>
	<title>Re:Dave Woolley's Was Earlier</title>
	<author>Baldrson</author>
	<datestamp>1266256620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Erratum:  David Woolley's quote should have ended with "that's what."</div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Erratum : David Woolley 's quote should have ended with " that 's what .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Erratum:  David Woolley's quote should have ended with "that's what.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31145202</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141094</id>
	<title>Re:Short answer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266173460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nah, I remember when I was a kid in 2700 BC, I threw a rock at a guy with an Abacus.  It broke.  I never got caught either.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nah , I remember when I was a kid in 2700 BC , I threw a rock at a guy with an Abacus .
It broke .
I never got caught either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nah, I remember when I was a kid in 2700 BC, I threw a rock at a guy with an Abacus.
It broke.
I never got caught either.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140318</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31142672</id>
	<title>Re:Was it a DoS exactly?</title>
	<author>tricorn</author>
	<datestamp>1266237000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, the -ext- command was used to send data to an arbitrary piece of "external" equipment attached to the terminal.  A couple devices were a 4-voice music synthesizer, a Votrax voice synthesizer, and a random-access audio play-back device.</p><p>It was useful with some of the equipment for another user's program to be able to send such external data to your equipment and vice versa.  Most people didn't have anything attached, but the system didn't know that.  With nothing attached, all it did was make your terminal really really slow, as the other program queued up output for you that was basically thrown away, but had to be sent anyway (the external data took up about 3 character's worth in the data stream, with about 180 characters/second being output).</p><p>The system actually had pretty good security, and insulated each user from the other in terms of resource usage, and this wasn't strictly speaking a security breach, but this was a way to interfere with other users in an unintended way.  It didn't take the entire system down, it only interfered with the terminals that were targeted.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , the -ext- command was used to send data to an arbitrary piece of " external " equipment attached to the terminal .
A couple devices were a 4-voice music synthesizer , a Votrax voice synthesizer , and a random-access audio play-back device.It was useful with some of the equipment for another user 's program to be able to send such external data to your equipment and vice versa .
Most people did n't have anything attached , but the system did n't know that .
With nothing attached , all it did was make your terminal really really slow , as the other program queued up output for you that was basically thrown away , but had to be sent anyway ( the external data took up about 3 character 's worth in the data stream , with about 180 characters/second being output ) .The system actually had pretty good security , and insulated each user from the other in terms of resource usage , and this was n't strictly speaking a security breach , but this was a way to interfere with other users in an unintended way .
It did n't take the entire system down , it only interfered with the terminals that were targeted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, the -ext- command was used to send data to an arbitrary piece of "external" equipment attached to the terminal.
A couple devices were a 4-voice music synthesizer, a Votrax voice synthesizer, and a random-access audio play-back device.It was useful with some of the equipment for another user's program to be able to send such external data to your equipment and vice versa.
Most people didn't have anything attached, but the system didn't know that.
With nothing attached, all it did was make your terminal really really slow, as the other program queued up output for you that was basically thrown away, but had to be sent anyway (the external data took up about 3 character's worth in the data stream, with about 180 characters/second being output).The system actually had pretty good security, and insulated each user from the other in terms of resource usage, and this wasn't strictly speaking a security breach, but this was a way to interfere with other users in an unintended way.
It didn't take the entire system down, it only interfered with the terminals that were targeted.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140442</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141132</id>
	<title>Today</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266173820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now the kid is 49 and they don't even give him job interviews anymore.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now the kid is 49 and they do n't even give him job interviews anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now the kid is 49 and they don't even give him job interviews anymore.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140466</id>
	<title>Re:So they could receive commands!?</title>
	<author>pookemon</author>
	<datestamp>1266166800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>So I'm guessing you weren't around in 1974.  It might also surprise you to learn that once upon a time there were no virus scanners or firewalls.  I bet I just blew your mind with that one...</htmltext>
<tokenext>So I 'm guessing you were n't around in 1974 .
It might also surprise you to learn that once upon a time there were no virus scanners or firewalls .
I bet I just blew your mind with that one.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So I'm guessing you weren't around in 1974.
It might also surprise you to learn that once upon a time there were no virus scanners or firewalls.
I bet I just blew your mind with that one...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140368</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140606</id>
	<title>Seems unlikely that would be the first</title>
	<author>Demonoid-Penguin</author>
	<datestamp>1266167880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>2 minutes searching shows - October 29, 1969<p><div class="quote"><p>First packets sent by Charley Kline at UCLA as he tried logging into SRI. The first attempt resulted in the system crashing as the letter G of LOGIN was entered.</p> </div><p>I'd bet that part of the initial DARPA deployment testing involved deliberate attempts to jam the network</p><p>Just saying....</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>2 minutes searching shows - October 29 , 1969First packets sent by Charley Kline at UCLA as he tried logging into SRI .
The first attempt resulted in the system crashing as the letter G of LOGIN was entered .
I 'd bet that part of the initial DARPA deployment testing involved deliberate attempts to jam the networkJust saying... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>2 minutes searching shows - October 29, 1969First packets sent by Charley Kline at UCLA as he tried logging into SRI.
The first attempt resulted in the system crashing as the letter G of LOGIN was entered.
I'd bet that part of the initial DARPA deployment testing involved deliberate attempts to jam the networkJust saying....
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140442</id>
	<title>Was it a DoS exactly?</title>
	<author>Al Dimond</author>
	<datestamp>1266166620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I always think of DoS meaning flooding a system with requests, causing all resources to be used, thus nobody can get service.</p><p>It seems like this guy just found a "Halt and Catch Fire" instruction and an overly trusting security policy. Which may have been a first something, but not really a DoS, right? Or am I missing something?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I always think of DoS meaning flooding a system with requests , causing all resources to be used , thus nobody can get service.It seems like this guy just found a " Halt and Catch Fire " instruction and an overly trusting security policy .
Which may have been a first something , but not really a DoS , right ?
Or am I missing something ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I always think of DoS meaning flooding a system with requests, causing all resources to be used, thus nobody can get service.It seems like this guy just found a "Halt and Catch Fire" instruction and an overly trusting security policy.
Which may have been a first something, but not really a DoS, right?
Or am I missing something?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141112</id>
	<title>First DOS attack would predate computers.</title>
	<author>Kenja</author>
	<datestamp>1266173580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Taking out telegraph lines, signal towers, killing messengers. DoS attacks have existed as long as people have tried to communicate over distances. Even man in the middle attacks, intercepting and replacing semaphore messages etc.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Taking out telegraph lines , signal towers , killing messengers .
DoS attacks have existed as long as people have tried to communicate over distances .
Even man in the middle attacks , intercepting and replacing semaphore messages etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Taking out telegraph lines, signal towers, killing messengers.
DoS attacks have existed as long as people have tried to communicate over distances.
Even man in the middle attacks, intercepting and replacing semaphore messages etc.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31143038</id>
	<title>Re:A Possibly earlier one... and a funny story.</title>
	<author>linuxgurugamer</author>
	<datestamp>1266242100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I could moderate now, this would get a +1 Funny</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I could moderate now , this would get a + 1 Funny</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I could moderate now, this would get a +1 Funny</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140756</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140368</id>
	<title>So they could receive commands!?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266165900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>So, let me get this right. You could more or less get a list of addresses, and they would accept commands without question if you just typed in the commands and the right address? Sounds like the worst security system ever.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , let me get this right .
You could more or less get a list of addresses , and they would accept commands without question if you just typed in the commands and the right address ?
Sounds like the worst security system ever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, let me get this right.
You could more or less get a list of addresses, and they would accept commands without question if you just typed in the commands and the right address?
Sounds like the worst security system ever.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141058</id>
	<title>Searching for prior art ?</title>
	<author>wadey</author>
	<datestamp>1266173160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... in support of a US software patent ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... in support of a US software patent ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... in support of a US software patent ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140470</id>
	<title>Re:Seems fitting</title>
	<author>sys.stdout.write</author>
	<datestamp>1266166800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think we should stop and give thanks to the author of the article for couching the story with "this is likely not the first DoS attack, but here's a neat story anyway."<br> <br>
It's so refreshing to see Internet writers not making outlandish, unverifiable claims about things like this.<br> <br>
So, props.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think we should stop and give thanks to the author of the article for couching the story with " this is likely not the first DoS attack , but here 's a neat story anyway .
" It 's so refreshing to see Internet writers not making outlandish , unverifiable claims about things like this .
So , props .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think we should stop and give thanks to the author of the article for couching the story with "this is likely not the first DoS attack, but here's a neat story anyway.
" 
It's so refreshing to see Internet writers not making outlandish, unverifiable claims about things like this.
So, props.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140320</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140498</id>
	<title>Re:Was it a DoS exactly?</title>
	<author>Wyzard</author>
	<datestamp>1266166980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>DoS is any attack that deliberately prevents people from being able to use the system, without actually damaging the system.  Flooding the system with service requests is just one way of doing that.  Sending commands to hang everyone's terminal is another.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>DoS is any attack that deliberately prevents people from being able to use the system , without actually damaging the system .
Flooding the system with service requests is just one way of doing that .
Sending commands to hang everyone 's terminal is another .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DoS is any attack that deliberately prevents people from being able to use the system, without actually damaging the system.
Flooding the system with service requests is just one way of doing that.
Sending commands to hang everyone's terminal is another.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140442</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140320</id>
	<title>Seems fitting</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266165540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>The first recorded denial of service was performed by a 13 year old, who was basically using a "script kiddie" technique? Well, color me surprised.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The first recorded denial of service was performed by a 13 year old , who was basically using a " script kiddie " technique ?
Well , color me surprised .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The first recorded denial of service was performed by a 13 year old, who was basically using a "script kiddie" technique?
Well, color me surprised.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140474</id>
	<title>One of many ways...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266166860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It used to be possible to crash early Sun servers (or at least the terminal server attached to the server by trying to copy data from a virtual terminal (cat<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/ttyp0) or something similar.</p><p>One university department tried to get around the user quotas on commercial UNIX licenses by creating a single user account for an entire class. Hilarity ensued as students working on real-time projects would accidently kill each others processess.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It used to be possible to crash early Sun servers ( or at least the terminal server attached to the server by trying to copy data from a virtual terminal ( cat /dev/ttyp0 ) or something similar.One university department tried to get around the user quotas on commercial UNIX licenses by creating a single user account for an entire class .
Hilarity ensued as students working on real-time projects would accidently kill each others processess .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It used to be possible to crash early Sun servers (or at least the terminal server attached to the server by trying to copy data from a virtual terminal (cat /dev/ttyp0) or something similar.One university department tried to get around the user quotas on commercial UNIX licenses by creating a single user account for an entire class.
Hilarity ensued as students working on real-time projects would accidently kill each others processess.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141182</id>
	<title>Re:So they could receive commands!?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266174660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>have a look at this RFC http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc602</p><p>Says it all really, nothing changes much...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>have a look at this RFC http : //tools.ietf.org/html/rfc602Says it all really , nothing changes much.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>have a look at this RFC http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc602Says it all really, nothing changes much...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140602</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140786</id>
	<title>200,000 years too late</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266169740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The first denial of service happened 200,000 years ago when the first woman invented the headache.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The first denial of service happened 200,000 years ago when the first woman invented the headache .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The first denial of service happened 200,000 years ago when the first woman invented the headache.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140718</id>
	<title>Probably not the first</title>
	<author>chelberg</author>
	<datestamp>1266168900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In high school in 1974 our district (8 schools) used an HP access timesharing system.  It ran the BASIC language.  I was able to write a very short program that would cause the system to crash.  Having discovered this bug in the system, I was able to bring down the entire district's computers at will.  I had discovered this capability while exploring a new feature of BASIC.  Fortunately for them, I was ethical and informed my teacher who at first didn't believe the exploit until I demonstrated it in front of her.  We then contacted HP, gave them the code, and they came up with a patch within a couple of months. I'm not sure if anyone at HP can confirm this at this point.</p><p>I am sure that there are probably earlier exploits as well.</p><p>And as a side note, I was also a PLATO author in 1975 and greatly enjoyed working on that system.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In high school in 1974 our district ( 8 schools ) used an HP access timesharing system .
It ran the BASIC language .
I was able to write a very short program that would cause the system to crash .
Having discovered this bug in the system , I was able to bring down the entire district 's computers at will .
I had discovered this capability while exploring a new feature of BASIC .
Fortunately for them , I was ethical and informed my teacher who at first did n't believe the exploit until I demonstrated it in front of her .
We then contacted HP , gave them the code , and they came up with a patch within a couple of months .
I 'm not sure if anyone at HP can confirm this at this point.I am sure that there are probably earlier exploits as well.And as a side note , I was also a PLATO author in 1975 and greatly enjoyed working on that system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In high school in 1974 our district (8 schools) used an HP access timesharing system.
It ran the BASIC language.
I was able to write a very short program that would cause the system to crash.
Having discovered this bug in the system, I was able to bring down the entire district's computers at will.
I had discovered this capability while exploring a new feature of BASIC.
Fortunately for them, I was ethical and informed my teacher who at first didn't believe the exploit until I demonstrated it in front of her.
We then contacted HP, gave them the code, and they came up with a patch within a couple of months.
I'm not sure if anyone at HP can confirm this at this point.I am sure that there are probably earlier exploits as well.And as a side note, I was also a PLATO author in 1975 and greatly enjoyed working on that system.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141330</id>
	<title>Re:Shorter answer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266176760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No</p><p>I will back that up with my own story of a weaker DoS. The year was one of 1970-72, I do not know which.  UC Berkeley had two CDC 6400s, A was normal, B was used for an experimental time sharing system and thus had an optional-at-extra-cost instruction, Exchange Jump, which swapped context.  I had been toying with a Fortran program and gotten tired of it, so decided to finish it off in a burst of glory.  It began execution in some obscure subroutine instead of MAIN, never called MAIN, and as it ground away at its nominal task, it gradually modified an innocent instruction into an Exchange Jump. But sadly, once it finally had modified it to the Exchange Jump opcode, there was no context, just a pointer to 0, and it farked the entire machine.</p><p>Now I wasn't truly anti-social.  I had in fact written on the card deck that it was only to be run on machine A, not B.  Unbeknownst to me, that Exchange Jump instruction was also used by diagnostic programs, and the tech was too lazy to disable it after each visit, just left it enabled at all times, so my Fortran program crashed the machine.</p><p>It wasn't much of a DoS, I will admit.  The OS, CALIDOSCOPE (Cal Improved Design On SCOPE (Supervisory Control Of Program Execution)), could only handle 6 batch jobs at once at most, so that's the worst it could do.  But I did get called in to the admin's office, who sighed and gave me that "What are we going to do with you?" look.  He knew I wasn't malicious, but he had to warn me to not do it again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>NoI will back that up with my own story of a weaker DoS .
The year was one of 1970-72 , I do not know which .
UC Berkeley had two CDC 6400s , A was normal , B was used for an experimental time sharing system and thus had an optional-at-extra-cost instruction , Exchange Jump , which swapped context .
I had been toying with a Fortran program and gotten tired of it , so decided to finish it off in a burst of glory .
It began execution in some obscure subroutine instead of MAIN , never called MAIN , and as it ground away at its nominal task , it gradually modified an innocent instruction into an Exchange Jump .
But sadly , once it finally had modified it to the Exchange Jump opcode , there was no context , just a pointer to 0 , and it farked the entire machine.Now I was n't truly anti-social .
I had in fact written on the card deck that it was only to be run on machine A , not B. Unbeknownst to me , that Exchange Jump instruction was also used by diagnostic programs , and the tech was too lazy to disable it after each visit , just left it enabled at all times , so my Fortran program crashed the machine.It was n't much of a DoS , I will admit .
The OS , CALIDOSCOPE ( Cal Improved Design On SCOPE ( Supervisory Control Of Program Execution ) ) , could only handle 6 batch jobs at once at most , so that 's the worst it could do .
But I did get called in to the admin 's office , who sighed and gave me that " What are we going to do with you ?
" look .
He knew I was n't malicious , but he had to warn me to not do it again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NoI will back that up with my own story of a weaker DoS.
The year was one of 1970-72, I do not know which.
UC Berkeley had two CDC 6400s, A was normal, B was used for an experimental time sharing system and thus had an optional-at-extra-cost instruction, Exchange Jump, which swapped context.
I had been toying with a Fortran program and gotten tired of it, so decided to finish it off in a burst of glory.
It began execution in some obscure subroutine instead of MAIN, never called MAIN, and as it ground away at its nominal task, it gradually modified an innocent instruction into an Exchange Jump.
But sadly, once it finally had modified it to the Exchange Jump opcode, there was no context, just a pointer to 0, and it farked the entire machine.Now I wasn't truly anti-social.
I had in fact written on the card deck that it was only to be run on machine A, not B.  Unbeknownst to me, that Exchange Jump instruction was also used by diagnostic programs, and the tech was too lazy to disable it after each visit, just left it enabled at all times, so my Fortran program crashed the machine.It wasn't much of a DoS, I will admit.
The OS, CALIDOSCOPE (Cal Improved Design On SCOPE (Supervisory Control Of Program Execution)), could only handle 6 batch jobs at once at most, so that's the worst it could do.
But I did get called in to the admin's office, who sighed and gave me that "What are we going to do with you?
" look.
He knew I wasn't malicious, but he had to warn me to not do it again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140318</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140604</id>
	<title>Re:This reminds me..</title>
	<author>dr00p</author>
	<datestamp>1266167880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>aaaahhhh<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... IPX networks on shared coax cable.<br>The pleasure of coax:It was enough to disconnect one cable and the full network would come down<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>aaaahhhh ... IPX networks on shared coax cable.The pleasure of coax : It was enough to disconnect one cable and the full network would come down : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>aaaahhhh ... IPX networks on shared coax cable.The pleasure of coax:It was enough to disconnect one cable and the full network would come down :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140478</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140762</id>
	<title>The Original DOS predates this by centuries</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266169380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Denial of Service is just about as old as marriage.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Denial of Service is just about as old as marriage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Denial of Service is just about as old as marriage.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140858</id>
	<title>You could get away with a lot of stuff back then..</title>
	<author>Space cowboy</author>
	<datestamp>1266170460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>See <a href="http://slashdot.org/journal/140767/Viruses-and-aftermaths?art\_pos=6" title="slashdot.org">This journal entry</a> [slashdot.org] I posted a while back...

These days, at least in the US, I'd probably be up on federal wiretap charges or something. Back then, it was serious enough that they'd threaten to throw me out of college, but I never got any sense of there being jail-time involved...
<br> <br>
Simon</htmltext>
<tokenext>See This journal entry [ slashdot.org ] I posted a while back.. . These days , at least in the US , I 'd probably be up on federal wiretap charges or something .
Back then , it was serious enough that they 'd threaten to throw me out of college , but I never got any sense of there being jail-time involved.. . Simon</tokentext>
<sentencetext>See This journal entry [slashdot.org] I posted a while back...

These days, at least in the US, I'd probably be up on federal wiretap charges or something.
Back then, it was serious enough that they'd threaten to throw me out of college, but I never got any sense of there being jail-time involved...
 
Simon</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141276</id>
	<title>Re:So they could receive commands!?</title>
	<author>Waffle Iron</author>
	<datestamp>1266176100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Another thing about PLATO in particular, is that while it was very cool and ahead of its time, there was very little important secret information stored in it.</p><p>Most of the users used it to do mundane homework assignments. It also had some games, and facilities that resembled today's newsgroups, chat and rudimentary informational websites.</p><p>At least in the site I used, keeping the aging Control Data Cyber mainframes that hosted PLATO  creaking along was probably a much bigger worry than any security threats. There was no shortage of hardware-related downtime.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Another thing about PLATO in particular , is that while it was very cool and ahead of its time , there was very little important secret information stored in it.Most of the users used it to do mundane homework assignments .
It also had some games , and facilities that resembled today 's newsgroups , chat and rudimentary informational websites.At least in the site I used , keeping the aging Control Data Cyber mainframes that hosted PLATO creaking along was probably a much bigger worry than any security threats .
There was no shortage of hardware-related downtime .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another thing about PLATO in particular, is that while it was very cool and ahead of its time, there was very little important secret information stored in it.Most of the users used it to do mundane homework assignments.
It also had some games, and facilities that resembled today's newsgroups, chat and rudimentary informational websites.At least in the site I used, keeping the aging Control Data Cyber mainframes that hosted PLATO  creaking along was probably a much bigger worry than any security threats.
There was no shortage of hardware-related downtime.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140918</id>
	<title>Oh, come one. If anyone is ever the first ....</title>
	<author>roland\_mai</author>
	<datestamp>1266171360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I once (well okay twice) used the "net send<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/domain" command to just creep everyone in my college of 1,500. The funny thing is that, I don't think the admins would have figured out it was me because they didn't track MAC addresses at the time. Was I the first?

PS: probably not!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I once ( well okay twice ) used the " net send /domain " command to just creep everyone in my college of 1,500 .
The funny thing is that , I do n't think the admins would have figured out it was me because they did n't track MAC addresses at the time .
Was I the first ?
PS : probably not !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I once (well okay twice) used the "net send /domain" command to just creep everyone in my college of 1,500.
The funny thing is that, I don't think the admins would have figured out it was me because they didn't track MAC addresses at the time.
Was I the first?
PS: probably not!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31146872</id>
	<title>Re:So they could receive commands!?</title>
	<author>ChrisMaple</author>
	<datestamp>1266263400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I used the Multics system in 1971, and permissions were in place and used. Not long after the system was first brought up, a friend of mine who was a developer but not totally aware of what everything did, found some files he had full access to that he didn't recognize. So he erased them and the system crashed. The next day, did the same thing. Turns out that he had erased the OS. The next time the system was brought up, the permissions were corrected to prevent general user write access to the OS.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I used the Multics system in 1971 , and permissions were in place and used .
Not long after the system was first brought up , a friend of mine who was a developer but not totally aware of what everything did , found some files he had full access to that he did n't recognize .
So he erased them and the system crashed .
The next day , did the same thing .
Turns out that he had erased the OS .
The next time the system was brought up , the permissions were corrected to prevent general user write access to the OS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used the Multics system in 1971, and permissions were in place and used.
Not long after the system was first brought up, a friend of mine who was a developer but not totally aware of what everything did, found some files he had full access to that he didn't recognize.
So he erased them and the system crashed.
The next day, did the same thing.
Turns out that he had erased the OS.
The next time the system was brought up, the permissions were corrected to prevent general user write access to the OS.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140602</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140506</id>
	<title>Re:Was it a DoS exactly?</title>
	<author>Fallon</author>
	<datestamp>1266167040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>What does DoS stand for? Denial of Service. Getting everybody kicked off the system certainly sounds like denying them access to that computer service to me. Just because a DoS is usually performed by a network flood of some kind doesn't mean that's the only way to do it. Heck an idiot tripping over the power cord to the server is technically a DoS if people loose access.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What does DoS stand for ?
Denial of Service .
Getting everybody kicked off the system certainly sounds like denying them access to that computer service to me .
Just because a DoS is usually performed by a network flood of some kind does n't mean that 's the only way to do it .
Heck an idiot tripping over the power cord to the server is technically a DoS if people loose access .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What does DoS stand for?
Denial of Service.
Getting everybody kicked off the system certainly sounds like denying them access to that computer service to me.
Just because a DoS is usually performed by a network flood of some kind doesn't mean that's the only way to do it.
Heck an idiot tripping over the power cord to the server is technically a DoS if people loose access.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140442</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141042</id>
	<title>Re:403 Forbidden</title>
	<author>scdeimos</author>
	<datestamp>1266172860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm sure you're attempting to be funny, but for those actually interested in reading TFA...</p><p>http://www.networkmirror.com/VB47vkBkoAUZdJvS/www.platohistory.org/blog/2010/02/perhaps-the-first-denial-of-service-attack.html</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure you 're attempting to be funny , but for those actually interested in reading TFA...http : //www.networkmirror.com/VB47vkBkoAUZdJvS/www.platohistory.org/blog/2010/02/perhaps-the-first-denial-of-service-attack.html</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure you're attempting to be funny, but for those actually interested in reading TFA...http://www.networkmirror.com/VB47vkBkoAUZdJvS/www.platohistory.org/blog/2010/02/perhaps-the-first-denial-of-service-attack.html</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140492</id>
	<title>Re:Was it a DoS exactly?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266166980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Denial of Service". It's the damn name.</p><p>One way is to flood the system, but there are plenty of other ways. The one mentioned for example.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Denial of Service " .
It 's the damn name.One way is to flood the system , but there are plenty of other ways .
The one mentioned for example .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Denial of Service".
It's the damn name.One way is to flood the system, but there are plenty of other ways.
The one mentioned for example.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140442</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31156216</id>
	<title>Re:First DOS attack would predate computers.</title>
	<author>georgethornton</author>
	<datestamp>1266341880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My best D.O.S attack to date? ----- I forgot to unlock the computer labs.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)

It's been a decade since I worked in the 'computer/internet security' field. Marketing, first DES product for non-banking applications in 1991. Having installed something called a cern 'world side web server' and something called a 'firewall' with training by some dude named Marcus Ranum. The company that I worked for at the time, "BOUGHT" the first 'FREE' firewall from T.I.S.

  --------------

Firewall - Eah! (Think Homer Simpson)<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....... Isn't that what the operating system suppose to do?

  --------------

SO, IF a bunch of people dial this thing, like free tickets to a concert at the local radio station, they will get a busy signal? "YEP!" AH! So, then it doesn't work! "No! It works! - it keeps people out". But, If a bunch a people 'chose' to keep me out, they could right? "YEP!" Ah! So, then it doesn't work!  "No! It works! - it keeps people out". AH! Just doesn't guarantee people can get 'in'<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)

  --------------

I am old enough to remember when Peter Norton still said there was no such thing as a computer virus and Robert Morris SENIOR still worked for the NSA. I am just really amazed that there has been little to 'NO' forward movement in IT security. Still fighting the same base problems with the same base methods ALL which seem to entail some level of 'brute force' as their awe-inspring 'secret'.


Signed - Not Anonymous.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My best D.O.S attack to date ?
----- I forgot to unlock the computer labs .
; ) It 's been a decade since I worked in the 'computer/internet security ' field .
Marketing , first DES product for non-banking applications in 1991 .
Having installed something called a cern 'world side web server ' and something called a 'firewall ' with training by some dude named Marcus Ranum .
The company that I worked for at the time , " BOUGHT " the first 'FREE ' firewall from T.I.S .
-------------- Firewall - Eah !
( Think Homer Simpson ) ....... Is n't that what the operating system suppose to do ?
-------------- SO , IF a bunch of people dial this thing , like free tickets to a concert at the local radio station , they will get a busy signal ?
" YEP ! " AH !
So , then it does n't work !
" No ! It works !
- it keeps people out " .
But , If a bunch a people 'chose ' to keep me out , they could right ?
" YEP ! " Ah !
So , then it does n't work !
" No ! It works !
- it keeps people out " .
AH ! Just does n't guarantee people can get 'in ' ; ) -------------- I am old enough to remember when Peter Norton still said there was no such thing as a computer virus and Robert Morris SENIOR still worked for the NSA .
I am just really amazed that there has been little to 'NO ' forward movement in IT security .
Still fighting the same base problems with the same base methods ALL which seem to entail some level of 'brute force ' as their awe-inspring 'secret' .
Signed - Not Anonymous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My best D.O.S attack to date?
----- I forgot to unlock the computer labs.
;)

It's been a decade since I worked in the 'computer/internet security' field.
Marketing, first DES product for non-banking applications in 1991.
Having installed something called a cern 'world side web server' and something called a 'firewall' with training by some dude named Marcus Ranum.
The company that I worked for at the time, "BOUGHT" the first 'FREE' firewall from T.I.S.
--------------

Firewall - Eah!
(Think Homer Simpson) ....... Isn't that what the operating system suppose to do?
--------------

SO, IF a bunch of people dial this thing, like free tickets to a concert at the local radio station, they will get a busy signal?
"YEP!" AH!
So, then it doesn't work!
"No! It works!
- it keeps people out".
But, If a bunch a people 'chose' to keep me out, they could right?
"YEP!" Ah!
So, then it doesn't work!
"No! It works!
- it keeps people out".
AH! Just doesn't guarantee people can get 'in' ;)

  --------------

I am old enough to remember when Peter Norton still said there was no such thing as a computer virus and Robert Morris SENIOR still worked for the NSA.
I am just really amazed that there has been little to 'NO' forward movement in IT security.
Still fighting the same base problems with the same base methods ALL which seem to entail some level of 'brute force' as their awe-inspring 'secret'.
Signed - Not Anonymous.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141112</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140946</id>
	<title>The old systems probably have a lot of "Firsts".</title>
	<author>GrpA</author>
	<datestamp>1266171660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well if that was the first DOS, then I'll claim the first "Slashdotted" on a PLATO system. In 1987 after the local admins cut off all access to chat ( due to abuse of the system by people sitting next to each other using "chat" ) I wrote a tutor script that caused a timeout error every second.</p><p>The result was to flush the keyboard buffer to common memory. Then the other terminals read the common memory and updated their display - Kind of like early IRC. Because this was written at the lowest security level, the admins couldn't block it. They deleted the original, but all the other authors had the code by then. It wasn't very efficient code, but they managed to keep it alive despite the best attempts of the admin to get rid of it.</p><p>After the application consumed 99\% or more of all recorded resource use for three months running (making all other resource access slow) I got my ass kicked off the system and they decommissioned that installation of PLATO (CALS).</p><p>Funny thing is I went back three years later in 1990 and managed to convince them to give me an unrestricted dial-in port for Internet access. My first! Several months later, they came to me and said "You're taking up all of our spare resources... You remind us of this guy who wrote a chat program on the old PLATO system several years back."</p><p>I never did own up to it at the time since no one knew my surname at the time ( That's another story entirely ). Although I did buy them another terminal server to make up for it.</p><p>GrpA</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well if that was the first DOS , then I 'll claim the first " Slashdotted " on a PLATO system .
In 1987 after the local admins cut off all access to chat ( due to abuse of the system by people sitting next to each other using " chat " ) I wrote a tutor script that caused a timeout error every second.The result was to flush the keyboard buffer to common memory .
Then the other terminals read the common memory and updated their display - Kind of like early IRC .
Because this was written at the lowest security level , the admins could n't block it .
They deleted the original , but all the other authors had the code by then .
It was n't very efficient code , but they managed to keep it alive despite the best attempts of the admin to get rid of it.After the application consumed 99 \ % or more of all recorded resource use for three months running ( making all other resource access slow ) I got my ass kicked off the system and they decommissioned that installation of PLATO ( CALS ) .Funny thing is I went back three years later in 1990 and managed to convince them to give me an unrestricted dial-in port for Internet access .
My first !
Several months later , they came to me and said " You 're taking up all of our spare resources... You remind us of this guy who wrote a chat program on the old PLATO system several years back .
" I never did own up to it at the time since no one knew my surname at the time ( That 's another story entirely ) .
Although I did buy them another terminal server to make up for it.GrpA</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well if that was the first DOS, then I'll claim the first "Slashdotted" on a PLATO system.
In 1987 after the local admins cut off all access to chat ( due to abuse of the system by people sitting next to each other using "chat" ) I wrote a tutor script that caused a timeout error every second.The result was to flush the keyboard buffer to common memory.
Then the other terminals read the common memory and updated their display - Kind of like early IRC.
Because this was written at the lowest security level, the admins couldn't block it.
They deleted the original, but all the other authors had the code by then.
It wasn't very efficient code, but they managed to keep it alive despite the best attempts of the admin to get rid of it.After the application consumed 99\% or more of all recorded resource use for three months running (making all other resource access slow) I got my ass kicked off the system and they decommissioned that installation of PLATO (CALS).Funny thing is I went back three years later in 1990 and managed to convince them to give me an unrestricted dial-in port for Internet access.
My first!
Several months later, they came to me and said "You're taking up all of our spare resources... You remind us of this guy who wrote a chat program on the old PLATO system several years back.
"I never did own up to it at the time since no one knew my surname at the time ( That's another story entirely ).
Although I did buy them another terminal server to make up for it.GrpA</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140482</id>
	<title>Re:Seems fitting</title>
	<author>SittingUnderBridge</author>
	<datestamp>1266166920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>no your a towel bitch.</htmltext>
<tokenext>no your a towel bitch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>no your a towel bitch.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140320</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140922</id>
	<title>Pffft</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266171360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Try the time Lagadha glued up a merchant's abacus</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Try the time Lagadha glued up a merchant 's abacus</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Try the time Lagadha glued up a merchant's abacus</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140332</id>
	<title>403 Forbidden</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266165660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You don't have permission to access<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/blog/2010/02/perhaps-the-first-denial-of-service-attack.html on this server.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't have permission to access /blog/2010/02/perhaps-the-first-denial-of-service-attack.html on this server .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't have permission to access /blog/2010/02/perhaps-the-first-denial-of-service-attack.html on this server.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31144356</id>
	<title>Re:Shorter answer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266251220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It was hard, but I just fapped to this story and it worked!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It was hard , but I just fapped to this story and it worked !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It was hard, but I just fapped to this story and it worked!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140972</id>
	<title>Re:Denial of Service was happening a long time pri</title>
	<author>phantomfive</author>
	<datestamp>1266172140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Another similar trick I heard was to order a lot of large, cheap things in boxes and send them to a competitor, thus jamming up their supply line (they had all this stuff stuck on the unloading area and no place to put it).  I'm not sure how often this was done, but someone must have done it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Another similar trick I heard was to order a lot of large , cheap things in boxes and send them to a competitor , thus jamming up their supply line ( they had all this stuff stuck on the unloading area and no place to put it ) .
I 'm not sure how often this was done , but someone must have done it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another similar trick I heard was to order a lot of large, cheap things in boxes and send them to a competitor, thus jamming up their supply line (they had all this stuff stuck on the unloading area and no place to put it).
I'm not sure how often this was done, but someone must have done it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140426</id>
	<title>Re:So they could receive commands!?</title>
	<author>girlintraining</author>
	<datestamp>1266166500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Sounds like the worst security system ever.</p></div><p>*cough* Diebold. *cough*</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like the worst security system ever .
* cough * Diebold .
* cough *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like the worst security system ever.
*cough* Diebold.
*cough*
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140368</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140602</id>
	<title>Re:So they could receive commands!?</title>
	<author>betterunixthanunix</author>
	<datestamp>1266167880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>You know, this was all way before my time, but back then, security was not a common concern on university computers.  People working in a lab trusted each other; thus, those who used Unix (or a similar system) would leave their home directories world readable, and as another example, ITS had the ability to observe another user's keystrokes.  Things changed in the 1980s as more students got computer access and as proprietary software became the norm.<br> <br>

There are still echoes of the trust that existed back then.  For example, where I am now, anyone in the CS department can remotely access any computer system located in the department, and the permissions on home directories are 755 by default.  The only firewall is on the gateway between the department the general campus network, but port 22 is open for any system so you can always ssh through the firewall.  We are given root upon request on our assigned desktops.  There are plenty of ways that I could subvert others in the department, I could even bring the entire department to its knees by running a simple fork bomb on every system we have, but I do not do any of that because I am not here to attack people or make their lives difficult.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You know , this was all way before my time , but back then , security was not a common concern on university computers .
People working in a lab trusted each other ; thus , those who used Unix ( or a similar system ) would leave their home directories world readable , and as another example , ITS had the ability to observe another user 's keystrokes .
Things changed in the 1980s as more students got computer access and as proprietary software became the norm .
There are still echoes of the trust that existed back then .
For example , where I am now , anyone in the CS department can remotely access any computer system located in the department , and the permissions on home directories are 755 by default .
The only firewall is on the gateway between the department the general campus network , but port 22 is open for any system so you can always ssh through the firewall .
We are given root upon request on our assigned desktops .
There are plenty of ways that I could subvert others in the department , I could even bring the entire department to its knees by running a simple fork bomb on every system we have , but I do not do any of that because I am not here to attack people or make their lives difficult .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know, this was all way before my time, but back then, security was not a common concern on university computers.
People working in a lab trusted each other; thus, those who used Unix (or a similar system) would leave their home directories world readable, and as another example, ITS had the ability to observe another user's keystrokes.
Things changed in the 1980s as more students got computer access and as proprietary software became the norm.
There are still echoes of the trust that existed back then.
For example, where I am now, anyone in the CS department can remotely access any computer system located in the department, and the permissions on home directories are 755 by default.
The only firewall is on the gateway between the department the general campus network, but port 22 is open for any system so you can always ssh through the firewall.
We are given root upon request on our assigned desktops.
There are plenty of ways that I could subvert others in the department, I could even bring the entire department to its knees by running a simple fork bomb on every system we have, but I do not do any of that because I am not here to attack people or make their lives difficult.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140368</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140598</id>
	<title>Denial of Service was happening a long time prior</title>
	<author>cvd6262</author>
	<datestamp>1266167760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Back in the 19th Century (in the US anyway), mail *recipients* paid postage to get their mail from the local general store. Political figures and others who might have a negative following would receive scores of blank letters and have to pay for them. The objective was to either crowd out the legitimate communications or bankrupt the recipient. Traditionally, one could place an ad in the local paper explaining that he or she would no longer receive letters at the store, which would free them from their obligation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Back in the 19th Century ( in the US anyway ) , mail * recipients * paid postage to get their mail from the local general store .
Political figures and others who might have a negative following would receive scores of blank letters and have to pay for them .
The objective was to either crowd out the legitimate communications or bankrupt the recipient .
Traditionally , one could place an ad in the local paper explaining that he or she would no longer receive letters at the store , which would free them from their obligation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Back in the 19th Century (in the US anyway), mail *recipients* paid postage to get their mail from the local general store.
Political figures and others who might have a negative following would receive scores of blank letters and have to pay for them.
The objective was to either crowd out the legitimate communications or bankrupt the recipient.
Traditionally, one could place an ad in the local paper explaining that he or she would no longer receive letters at the store, which would free them from their obligation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140442</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140798</id>
	<title>Re:Was it a DoS exactly?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266169860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Floods are merely the crudest form of DoS.  Often it's a logic attack on buggy firmware (ATH0 modem bug), buggy OS internals (Ping of Death), or application-level bugs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Floods are merely the crudest form of DoS .
Often it 's a logic attack on buggy firmware ( ATH0 modem bug ) , buggy OS internals ( Ping of Death ) , or application-level bugs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Floods are merely the crudest form of DoS.
Often it's a logic attack on buggy firmware (ATH0 modem bug), buggy OS internals (Ping of Death), or application-level bugs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140442</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140560</id>
	<title>Re:Was it a DoS exactly?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266167460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>In 1973 I wrote a small program that opened a file with a random file name, wrote "MUNCH" and then closed the file. In an infinite loop. Which ran until the operator saw a job asking for disk space that was no longer there. They killed the job, but by that time it was too late. Since all jobs at that time on that system ran in a common user space (i.e., there were no usernames), getting the disk space back was<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... tedious.<p>By the time they figured out what had happened and went to find the person who had submitted the job I had already retrieved and vanished the job deck.</p><p>Not a network DoS (the mainframe didn't even have a network at that time) but a DoS nevertheless I'd say.</p><p>Yes, the system was pretty wild west then. It got better. So, I hope, did I.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In 1973 I wrote a small program that opened a file with a random file name , wrote " MUNCH " and then closed the file .
In an infinite loop .
Which ran until the operator saw a job asking for disk space that was no longer there .
They killed the job , but by that time it was too late .
Since all jobs at that time on that system ran in a common user space ( i.e. , there were no usernames ) , getting the disk space back was ... tedious.By the time they figured out what had happened and went to find the person who had submitted the job I had already retrieved and vanished the job deck.Not a network DoS ( the mainframe did n't even have a network at that time ) but a DoS nevertheless I 'd say.Yes , the system was pretty wild west then .
It got better .
So , I hope , did I .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In 1973 I wrote a small program that opened a file with a random file name, wrote "MUNCH" and then closed the file.
In an infinite loop.
Which ran until the operator saw a job asking for disk space that was no longer there.
They killed the job, but by that time it was too late.
Since all jobs at that time on that system ran in a common user space (i.e., there were no usernames), getting the disk space back was ... tedious.By the time they figured out what had happened and went to find the person who had submitted the job I had already retrieved and vanished the job deck.Not a network DoS (the mainframe didn't even have a network at that time) but a DoS nevertheless I'd say.Yes, the system was pretty wild west then.
It got better.
So, I hope, did I.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140442</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31156050</id>
	<title>Re:Shorter answer</title>
	<author>vaporland</author>
	<datestamp>1266340920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In 1979 I was a student at Virginia Commonwealth University, using their Hewlett-Packard 3000 Series III minicomputer system. I discovered that:<br> <br>

-if you wrote a program called "A" which used the BASIC CHAIN statement to invoke a program called "B", <br>
-and if you wrote a program called "B" which used the BASIC CHAIN statement to invoke program "A", <br>
-and if you ran program "A" and waited about 30 seconds for the two programs to start ping-ponging back and forth between each other, <br>
-and if you then used the "KILL" command to erase either "A" or "B" . . . <br> <br>
. . . the entire system would crash with a "hardware failure" message on the system console. Needless to say, this was great fun at exam time. BUT - upon the fourth consecutive failure, the fourth time the entire minicomputer had been disassembled and reassembled, the HP customer engineer decided to read the memory dump instead of running hardware diagnostics, and I was severely warned by the system administrator about doing this again...</htmltext>
<tokenext>In 1979 I was a student at Virginia Commonwealth University , using their Hewlett-Packard 3000 Series III minicomputer system .
I discovered that : -if you wrote a program called " A " which used the BASIC CHAIN statement to invoke a program called " B " , -and if you wrote a program called " B " which used the BASIC CHAIN statement to invoke program " A " , -and if you ran program " A " and waited about 30 seconds for the two programs to start ping-ponging back and forth between each other , -and if you then used the " KILL " command to erase either " A " or " B " .
. .
. .
. the entire system would crash with a " hardware failure " message on the system console .
Needless to say , this was great fun at exam time .
BUT - upon the fourth consecutive failure , the fourth time the entire minicomputer had been disassembled and reassembled , the HP customer engineer decided to read the memory dump instead of running hardware diagnostics , and I was severely warned by the system administrator about doing this again.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In 1979 I was a student at Virginia Commonwealth University, using their Hewlett-Packard 3000 Series III minicomputer system.
I discovered that: 

-if you wrote a program called "A" which used the BASIC CHAIN statement to invoke a program called "B", 
-and if you wrote a program called "B" which used the BASIC CHAIN statement to invoke program "A", 
-and if you ran program "A" and waited about 30 seconds for the two programs to start ping-ponging back and forth between each other, 
-and if you then used the "KILL" command to erase either "A" or "B" .
. .
. .
. the entire system would crash with a "hardware failure" message on the system console.
Needless to say, this was great fun at exam time.
BUT - upon the fourth consecutive failure, the fourth time the entire minicomputer had been disassembled and reassembled, the HP customer engineer decided to read the memory dump instead of running hardware diagnostics, and I was severely warned by the system administrator about doing this again...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140416</id>
	<title>Re:Earlier DoS</title>
	<author>Guillermito</author>
	<datestamp>1266166380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ever heard about reinarnation?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ever heard about reinarnation ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ever heard about reinarnation?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140370</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31143320</id>
	<title>Re:A Possibly earlier one... and a funny story.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266244920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Your mentor was Zero Cool?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Your mentor was Zero Cool ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your mentor was Zero Cool?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140756</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141886</id>
	<title>Re:Fun with terminals</title>
	<author>yuhong</author>
	<datestamp>1266226200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"+++" would screw with people on dial up sessions.</p></div><p>Yea, that was another story altogether. Hayes tried to prevent this by requiring a guard time before and after this sequence, but they patented it, and so some other modem manufacturers created TIES which did not use guard time. Hayes was irritated at not getting the royalty, so they even made <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=NwoAAAAAMBAJ&amp;lpg=PA19&amp;ots=FqNgt5\_CP7&amp;dq=cio\%20tick\%20tick\%20boom&amp;pg=PA19#v=onepage&amp;q=&amp;f=false" title="google.com" rel="nofollow">full-page ads on the problems with TIES</a> [google.com] with a test kit, which led to lawsuits by these modem makers, and they even put the sequence into <a href="http://groups.google.com/group/comp.dcom.modems/browse\_frm/thread/56bd9a5e5f2353a8" title="google.com" rel="nofollow">press releases</a> [google.com]. <a href="http://groups.google.com/group/comp.dcom.modems/browse\_frm/thread/cbe43bb966d1b9c1/5ee8c242c0c1ce63" title="google.com" rel="nofollow">Another Usenet thread that was part of the reaction to this posting.</a> [google.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" + + + " would screw with people on dial up sessions.Yea , that was another story altogether .
Hayes tried to prevent this by requiring a guard time before and after this sequence , but they patented it , and so some other modem manufacturers created TIES which did not use guard time .
Hayes was irritated at not getting the royalty , so they even made full-page ads on the problems with TIES [ google.com ] with a test kit , which led to lawsuits by these modem makers , and they even put the sequence into press releases [ google.com ] .
Another Usenet thread that was part of the reaction to this posting .
[ google.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"+++" would screw with people on dial up sessions.Yea, that was another story altogether.
Hayes tried to prevent this by requiring a guard time before and after this sequence, but they patented it, and so some other modem manufacturers created TIES which did not use guard time.
Hayes was irritated at not getting the royalty, so they even made full-page ads on the problems with TIES [google.com] with a test kit, which led to lawsuits by these modem makers, and they even put the sequence into press releases [google.com].
Another Usenet thread that was part of the reaction to this posting.
[google.com]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140806</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140328</id>
	<title>DoS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266165600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Article was DoS so I didn't get First post</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Article was DoS so I did n't get First post</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Article was DoS so I didn't get First post</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140396</id>
	<title>Moderate this ....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266166200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Go Fuck yourself douche bag.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Go Fuck yourself douche bag .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Go Fuck yourself douche bag.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140968</id>
	<title>No way . . .</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266172080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not likely.  The 1st person who stuck a "latice card" into thier 80 column punch card set at a shared IBM manframe would get 1st DOS attack (dubious-infamous) honors, an event which surely occured before 1968 when I 1st heard of theses "all columns punched cards would cause both mechanical card reader and mainframe system errors.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not likely .
The 1st person who stuck a " latice card " into thier 80 column punch card set at a shared IBM manframe would get 1st DOS attack ( dubious-infamous ) honors , an event which surely occured before 1968 when I 1st heard of theses " all columns punched cards would cause both mechanical card reader and mainframe system errors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not likely.
The 1st person who stuck a "latice card" into thier 80 column punch card set at a shared IBM manframe would get 1st DOS attack (dubious-infamous) honors, an event which surely occured before 1968 when I 1st heard of theses "all columns punched cards would cause both mechanical card reader and mainframe system errors.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31148730</id>
	<title>Re:So they could receive commands!?</title>
	<author>ShakaUVM</author>
	<datestamp>1266229140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>So, let me get this right. You could more or less get a list of addresses, and they would accept commands without question if you just typed in the commands and the right address? Sounds like the worst security system ever.</i></p><p>In UNIX systems, circa 1997 and before, they'd allow anyone to write to any TTY. This was how Talk worked, for instance.</p><p>So when I wanted to mess with my friends, I'd cat poetry or<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/random &gt; their TTY and watch them start cursing in the lab.</p><p>It's how I taught my friends about ^L.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , let me get this right .
You could more or less get a list of addresses , and they would accept commands without question if you just typed in the commands and the right address ?
Sounds like the worst security system ever.In UNIX systems , circa 1997 and before , they 'd allow anyone to write to any TTY .
This was how Talk worked , for instance.So when I wanted to mess with my friends , I 'd cat poetry or /dev/random &gt; their TTY and watch them start cursing in the lab.It 's how I taught my friends about ^ L .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, let me get this right.
You could more or less get a list of addresses, and they would accept commands without question if you just typed in the commands and the right address?
Sounds like the worst security system ever.In UNIX systems, circa 1997 and before, they'd allow anyone to write to any TTY.
This was how Talk worked, for instance.So when I wanted to mess with my friends, I'd cat poetry or /dev/random &gt; their TTY and watch them start cursing in the lab.It's how I taught my friends about ^L.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140368</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140318</id>
	<title>Short answer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266165540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140416
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31144658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140318
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140558
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140442
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140368
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141222
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140368
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140320
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140442
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140368
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140442
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141886
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140806
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141158
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140368
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141686
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140442
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140604
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140478
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31142554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141330
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140318
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31156050
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141330
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140318
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140792
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140602
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140368
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140320
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31145592
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31145202
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31145070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140478
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31142174
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140506
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140442
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141182
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140602
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140368
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31143320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140756
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140516
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140442
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31142790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140946
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31143002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141330
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140318
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31156216
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31142518
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140506
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140442
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31142672
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140442
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140332
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141580
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140442
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31142348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141094
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140318
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140798
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140442
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140470
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140320
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31142948
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140368
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141292
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31143038
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140756
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31146872
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140602
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140368
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31144794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140368
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31148730
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140368
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140498
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140442
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141718
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140852
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31142430
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140368
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140972
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140442
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31144356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141330
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140318
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140368
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_026239_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31142150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140318
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_026239.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140318
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31144658
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141330
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31143002
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31156050
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31142554
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31144356
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141094
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31142150
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_026239.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140316
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_026239.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140368
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141222
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140466
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31142948
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141490
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141276
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140602
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141182
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140792
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31146872
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141158
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31148730
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140426
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31142430
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31144794
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_026239.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140478
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31145070
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140604
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_026239.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140718
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_026239.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140606
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_026239.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140320
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140470
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140482
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140874
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_026239.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31145202
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31145592
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_026239.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140474
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31142348
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141292
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_026239.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140328
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_026239.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140442
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140498
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140506
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31142174
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31142518
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140560
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31142672
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141686
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140798
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140516
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140492
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140558
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140598
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140972
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141580
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_026239.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140762
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_026239.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140756
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31143320
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31143038
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_026239.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140396
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_026239.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31142980
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_026239.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141112
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31156216
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_026239.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141174
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_026239.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140852
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141718
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_026239.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140370
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140416
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_026239.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140806
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141886
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_026239.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140326
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_026239.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140946
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31142790
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_026239.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31140332
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_026239.31141042
</commentlist>
</conversation>
