<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_24_157205</id>
	<title>US Unable To Win a Cyber War</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1267029000000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"The <a href="http://www.net-security.org/secworld.php?id=8911">inability to deflect even a simulated cyber attack</a> or mitigate its effects shown in an exercise that took place some six days ago at Washington's Mandarin Oriental Hotel doesn't bode well for the US. Mike McConnell, the former Director of National Intelligence, said to the US Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee yesterday that if the US got involved in a cyber war at this moment, <a href="http://www.net-security.org/secworld.php?id=8911">they would surely lose</a>. 'We're the most vulnerable. We're the most connected. We have the most to lose,' he stated. Three years ago, McConnell referred to cybersecurity as the 'soft underbelly of this country' and it's clear that he thinks things haven't changed much since then."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " The inability to deflect even a simulated cyber attack or mitigate its effects shown in an exercise that took place some six days ago at Washington 's Mandarin Oriental Hotel does n't bode well for the US .
Mike McConnell , the former Director of National Intelligence , said to the US Senate Commerce , Science , and Transportation Committee yesterday that if the US got involved in a cyber war at this moment , they would surely lose .
'We 're the most vulnerable .
We 're the most connected .
We have the most to lose, ' he stated .
Three years ago , McConnell referred to cybersecurity as the 'soft underbelly of this country ' and it 's clear that he thinks things have n't changed much since then .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "The inability to deflect even a simulated cyber attack or mitigate its effects shown in an exercise that took place some six days ago at Washington's Mandarin Oriental Hotel doesn't bode well for the US.
Mike McConnell, the former Director of National Intelligence, said to the US Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee yesterday that if the US got involved in a cyber war at this moment, they would surely lose.
'We're the most vulnerable.
We're the most connected.
We have the most to lose,' he stated.
Three years ago, McConnell referred to cybersecurity as the 'soft underbelly of this country' and it's clear that he thinks things haven't changed much since then.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31262128</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit</title>
	<author>vlm</author>
	<datestamp>1265137920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If there was an actual cyber war, we would respond with real war.</p></div><p>The problem is, they have to figure out how to make it look, to the folks on fox news, that it was the Iranians/Iraqis/Afgans.</p><p>The other problem, is say the PLO or the IRA pulls off an attack.  Then we promptly bomb bomb bomb Venezuela because we enjoys that immensely.  Someone is going to get really pissed off, probably the Venezuelan special forces.  Followed by physical attack on us by the Venezuelans.  So the end result is a bunch of dead women and children in Venezuela, another knocked over skyscraper here, and the folks whom actually did it get away with it.  To do it again, I suppose.</p><p>Our military industrial complex will make money off it, so its all good.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If there was an actual cyber war , we would respond with real war.The problem is , they have to figure out how to make it look , to the folks on fox news , that it was the Iranians/Iraqis/Afgans.The other problem , is say the PLO or the IRA pulls off an attack .
Then we promptly bomb bomb bomb Venezuela because we enjoys that immensely .
Someone is going to get really pissed off , probably the Venezuelan special forces .
Followed by physical attack on us by the Venezuelans .
So the end result is a bunch of dead women and children in Venezuela , another knocked over skyscraper here , and the folks whom actually did it get away with it .
To do it again , I suppose.Our military industrial complex will make money off it , so its all good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If there was an actual cyber war, we would respond with real war.The problem is, they have to figure out how to make it look, to the folks on fox news, that it was the Iranians/Iraqis/Afgans.The other problem, is say the PLO or the IRA pulls off an attack.
Then we promptly bomb bomb bomb Venezuela because we enjoys that immensely.
Someone is going to get really pissed off, probably the Venezuelan special forces.
Followed by physical attack on us by the Venezuelans.
So the end result is a bunch of dead women and children in Venezuela, another knocked over skyscraper here, and the folks whom actually did it get away with it.
To do it again, I suppose.Our military industrial complex will make money off it, so its all good.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260746</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261924</id>
	<title>winning?</title>
	<author>Kanel</author>
	<datestamp>1265137080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not all wars have a winner. Did we learn nothing from watching "Wargames" ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not all wars have a winner .
Did we learn nothing from watching " Wargames " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not all wars have a winner.
Did we learn nothing from watching "Wargames" ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261970</id>
	<title>You have been programmed</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265137260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The social engineers and manipulators are programming YOU - wake up..... This is nothing more than a ploy to gather support for the cyber security act that passed the house a few weeks ago; despite that its hugely unpopular....</p><p>If they win - we'll all need licenses to use the Internet - China doesn't even have that type of surveillance/control.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The social engineers and manipulators are programming YOU - wake up..... This is nothing more than a ploy to gather support for the cyber security act that passed the house a few weeks ago ; despite that its hugely unpopular....If they win - we 'll all need licenses to use the Internet - China does n't even have that type of surveillance/control .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The social engineers and manipulators are programming YOU - wake up..... This is nothing more than a ploy to gather support for the cyber security act that passed the house a few weeks ago; despite that its hugely unpopular....If they win - we'll all need licenses to use the Internet - China doesn't even have that type of surveillance/control.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31262940</id>
	<title>Can't happen</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265141580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Take away pr0n &amp; WoW?</p><p>That won't last long...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Take away pr0n &amp; WoW ? That wo n't last long.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Take away pr0n &amp; WoW?That won't last long...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261428</id>
	<title>US Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Co</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265135280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How in the hell do Commerce, Science and Transportation concerns all belong on the same US Senate committee?!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How in the hell do Commerce , Science and Transportation concerns all belong on the same US Senate committee ? !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How in the hell do Commerce, Science and Transportation concerns all belong on the same US Senate committee?!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260874</id>
	<title>SysAdmins in Cyberwarfare put on black hats.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265133000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>All of us that have been gainfully employed for being able to actually work in IT would become modern day partisans in any such event.  It would be a rare opportunity to do our worst to other people's systems with the full knowledge of what has unintentionally brought us pain for years.  That said, unlike common partisans we do think for ourselves.  Many of us would need to be convinced that we were indeed on the side of what we consider good before we took an offensive approach.<br> <br>
AFAIK very few IT workers have decided that they needed to be part of any cyber warfare that could have coincided with the Iraq or Afganistan wars.</htmltext>
<tokenext>All of us that have been gainfully employed for being able to actually work in IT would become modern day partisans in any such event .
It would be a rare opportunity to do our worst to other people 's systems with the full knowledge of what has unintentionally brought us pain for years .
That said , unlike common partisans we do think for ourselves .
Many of us would need to be convinced that we were indeed on the side of what we consider good before we took an offensive approach .
AFAIK very few IT workers have decided that they needed to be part of any cyber warfare that could have coincided with the Iraq or Afganistan wars .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All of us that have been gainfully employed for being able to actually work in IT would become modern day partisans in any such event.
It would be a rare opportunity to do our worst to other people's systems with the full knowledge of what has unintentionally brought us pain for years.
That said, unlike common partisans we do think for ourselves.
Many of us would need to be convinced that we were indeed on the side of what we consider good before we took an offensive approach.
AFAIK very few IT workers have decided that they needed to be part of any cyber warfare that could have coincided with the Iraq or Afganistan wars.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260814</id>
	<title>GNN? CNN? REALLY?</title>
	<author>zcold</author>
	<datestamp>1265132760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think their problem was using GNN as their source for up to date information. Anyone relying on GNN for their news will not make it through...well.. anything... *cough*</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think their problem was using GNN as their source for up to date information .
Anyone relying on GNN for their news will not make it through...well.. anything... * cough *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think their problem was using GNN as their source for up to date information.
Anyone relying on GNN for their news will not make it through...well.. anything... *cough*</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261914</id>
	<title>Re:Bunch of BS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265137080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>[citation required]</p><p>I'm sure Obama is terribly embarrassed, since he personally setup all those networks.  No?  Oh...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>[ citation required ] I 'm sure Obama is terribly embarrassed , since he personally setup all those networks .
No ? Oh.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[citation required]I'm sure Obama is terribly embarrassed, since he personally setup all those networks.
No?  Oh...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260772</id>
	<title>Told ya!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265132640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There once was a time when we had the best, cutting edge people in the security biz. Yes, this was a long time ago, when we had most of the technology too.</p><p>Then they passed various laws, which had good intentions. But the negative side effects killed any curiousity that new students had in exploring this field. Businesses helped insure this death of talent, by threatening certain schools by not hiring students who took classes that the Businesses found threatening.</p><p>One could see the results a mile off. We have a whole generation who is ignorant and unprepared to fight such a war. Many of the more incompetent of them are even under the delusion that they are really hot stuff. But incompetent people are blind to their own incompetence, while the bad guys have free reign to test their skills every day.</p><p>If you want a chance at some hope to defend this nation, you need to free the students to explore and learn. Until that happens, yoo'll always be owned by the bad guys. There's not a chance in the world of this happening yet though. The entire rotten system has to come crashing down first. The good news is that with the $700 Trillion ponzi scheme of derivatives, this is about to happen via the Global Financial Crisis.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There once was a time when we had the best , cutting edge people in the security biz .
Yes , this was a long time ago , when we had most of the technology too.Then they passed various laws , which had good intentions .
But the negative side effects killed any curiousity that new students had in exploring this field .
Businesses helped insure this death of talent , by threatening certain schools by not hiring students who took classes that the Businesses found threatening.One could see the results a mile off .
We have a whole generation who is ignorant and unprepared to fight such a war .
Many of the more incompetent of them are even under the delusion that they are really hot stuff .
But incompetent people are blind to their own incompetence , while the bad guys have free reign to test their skills every day.If you want a chance at some hope to defend this nation , you need to free the students to explore and learn .
Until that happens , yoo 'll always be owned by the bad guys .
There 's not a chance in the world of this happening yet though .
The entire rotten system has to come crashing down first .
The good news is that with the $ 700 Trillion ponzi scheme of derivatives , this is about to happen via the Global Financial Crisis .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There once was a time when we had the best, cutting edge people in the security biz.
Yes, this was a long time ago, when we had most of the technology too.Then they passed various laws, which had good intentions.
But the negative side effects killed any curiousity that new students had in exploring this field.
Businesses helped insure this death of talent, by threatening certain schools by not hiring students who took classes that the Businesses found threatening.One could see the results a mile off.
We have a whole generation who is ignorant and unprepared to fight such a war.
Many of the more incompetent of them are even under the delusion that they are really hot stuff.
But incompetent people are blind to their own incompetence, while the bad guys have free reign to test their skills every day.If you want a chance at some hope to defend this nation, you need to free the students to explore and learn.
Until that happens, yoo'll always be owned by the bad guys.
There's not a chance in the world of this happening yet though.
The entire rotten system has to come crashing down first.
The good news is that with the $700 Trillion ponzi scheme of derivatives, this is about to happen via the Global Financial Crisis.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260850</id>
	<title>Quick!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265132940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Attack them now! Before it's too late!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Attack them now !
Before it 's too late !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Attack them now!
Before it's too late!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261634</id>
	<title>Change the system...</title>
	<author>thestudio\_bob</author>
	<datestamp>1265136060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unfortunately for the U.S., the problem started decades ago. The downfall began when the corporations convinced politicians to make stronger and stronger laws to punish those who hack their system or product. This led to the idea that instead of fixing any security issues, it was easier and cheaper to try to punish those who hacked. Fast forward to today, and now theres the more laws, EUA's, DMCA's, etc.</p><p>If you discover exploits and try to go public with it. The first thing the targeted company might try to do to squash the "exploit" is either litigate or file criminal charges.</p><p>I'm not saying that there shouldn't be laws against hacking into systems, but the current environment doesn't bode well for making these system any more secure. It would be nice if there was some kind of "whistle blower" protection for those who discover exploits and maybe a company or government agency that you could disclose these exploits to in order to receive this protection.</p><p>Maybe there could be laws inacted that require a company to fix the exploit within a certain amount of time once it has been reported or something. If not they could either be fined or held accountable if any sensitive data is breached. Not sure, but something needs to be changed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately for the U.S. , the problem started decades ago .
The downfall began when the corporations convinced politicians to make stronger and stronger laws to punish those who hack their system or product .
This led to the idea that instead of fixing any security issues , it was easier and cheaper to try to punish those who hacked .
Fast forward to today , and now theres the more laws , EUA 's , DMCA 's , etc.If you discover exploits and try to go public with it .
The first thing the targeted company might try to do to squash the " exploit " is either litigate or file criminal charges.I 'm not saying that there should n't be laws against hacking into systems , but the current environment does n't bode well for making these system any more secure .
It would be nice if there was some kind of " whistle blower " protection for those who discover exploits and maybe a company or government agency that you could disclose these exploits to in order to receive this protection.Maybe there could be laws inacted that require a company to fix the exploit within a certain amount of time once it has been reported or something .
If not they could either be fined or held accountable if any sensitive data is breached .
Not sure , but something needs to be changed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately for the U.S., the problem started decades ago.
The downfall began when the corporations convinced politicians to make stronger and stronger laws to punish those who hack their system or product.
This led to the idea that instead of fixing any security issues, it was easier and cheaper to try to punish those who hacked.
Fast forward to today, and now theres the more laws, EUA's, DMCA's, etc.If you discover exploits and try to go public with it.
The first thing the targeted company might try to do to squash the "exploit" is either litigate or file criminal charges.I'm not saying that there shouldn't be laws against hacking into systems, but the current environment doesn't bode well for making these system any more secure.
It would be nice if there was some kind of "whistle blower" protection for those who discover exploits and maybe a company or government agency that you could disclose these exploits to in order to receive this protection.Maybe there could be laws inacted that require a company to fix the exploit within a certain amount of time once it has been reported or something.
If not they could either be fined or held accountable if any sensitive data is breached.
Not sure, but something needs to be changed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261022</id>
	<title>Power to the people</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265133600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm guessing that there are many people in power that want an excuse to seperate the www and make seperate WAN'S. Seems like nobody is investing in secure networking for the masses for a reason... THEY WANT CONTROL BACK</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm guessing that there are many people in power that want an excuse to seperate the www and make seperate WAN 'S .
Seems like nobody is investing in secure networking for the masses for a reason... THEY WANT CONTROL BACK</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm guessing that there are many people in power that want an excuse to seperate the www and make seperate WAN'S.
Seems like nobody is investing in secure networking for the masses for a reason... THEY WANT CONTROL BACK</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261456</id>
	<title>Win at war?</title>
	<author>harris s newman</author>
	<datestamp>1265135400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Tell me when someone, anyone, actually is a winner? War is a loose loose situation.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Tell me when someone , anyone , actually is a winner ?
War is a loose loose situation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tell me when someone, anyone, actually is a winner?
War is a loose loose situation.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261166</id>
	<title>Easy solution</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265134260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Avoid an digital communications war ("cyber"?  There are no cybernetics involved).  Don't connect government machines to public networks, and don't rely on public networks for communication.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Avoid an digital communications war ( " cyber " ?
There are no cybernetics involved ) .
Do n't connect government machines to public networks , and do n't rely on public networks for communication .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Avoid an digital communications war ("cyber"?
There are no cybernetics involved).
Don't connect government machines to public networks, and don't rely on public networks for communication.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31262182</id>
	<title>cyberwar = bullshit</title>
	<author>unity100</author>
	<datestamp>1265138160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>if there is a cyberattack, it will originate from a particular country, or, in the ultimate end, the real culprit will be detected even if they were based in another country.</p><p>what do you think will happen then, in the world of internet ? how will entire world react ?  do you think everyone will just let it slide, despite internet being a MAJOR economic field and all the countries being interconnected through it, along with all their economic interests ?</p><p>we are not living in 19th century anymore. this is no simple shit. any country perpetrating such an 'attack' would face SERIOUS consequences and sanctions from entire world. leave aside international organizations like wto. also leave aside the fact that they will practically getting all their ips banned from cyberspace by individual countries, and therefore totally fucking up their own internet market.</p><p>dont buy this cyberwar bullshit. they are just using it as an excuse to justify internet control schemes they want to bring upon you americans. remember how terrorism was used to bring liberties-infringing 'security' measures in all aspects of life. its the same shit, repeating itself.</p><p>do NOT buy it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>if there is a cyberattack , it will originate from a particular country , or , in the ultimate end , the real culprit will be detected even if they were based in another country.what do you think will happen then , in the world of internet ?
how will entire world react ?
do you think everyone will just let it slide , despite internet being a MAJOR economic field and all the countries being interconnected through it , along with all their economic interests ? we are not living in 19th century anymore .
this is no simple shit .
any country perpetrating such an 'attack ' would face SERIOUS consequences and sanctions from entire world .
leave aside international organizations like wto .
also leave aside the fact that they will practically getting all their ips banned from cyberspace by individual countries , and therefore totally fucking up their own internet market.dont buy this cyberwar bullshit .
they are just using it as an excuse to justify internet control schemes they want to bring upon you americans .
remember how terrorism was used to bring liberties-infringing 'security ' measures in all aspects of life .
its the same shit , repeating itself.do NOT buy it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if there is a cyberattack, it will originate from a particular country, or, in the ultimate end, the real culprit will be detected even if they were based in another country.what do you think will happen then, in the world of internet ?
how will entire world react ?
do you think everyone will just let it slide, despite internet being a MAJOR economic field and all the countries being interconnected through it, along with all their economic interests ?we are not living in 19th century anymore.
this is no simple shit.
any country perpetrating such an 'attack' would face SERIOUS consequences and sanctions from entire world.
leave aside international organizations like wto.
also leave aside the fact that they will practically getting all their ips banned from cyberspace by individual countries, and therefore totally fucking up their own internet market.dont buy this cyberwar bullshit.
they are just using it as an excuse to justify internet control schemes they want to bring upon you americans.
remember how terrorism was used to bring liberties-infringing 'security' measures in all aspects of life.
its the same shit, repeating itself.do NOT buy it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260738</id>
	<title>Where going about this entire issue all wrong</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265132580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A cyber war is an attack of things trying to leech information from systems illictly, right? Well, we need to change the way we use to combat it. We need to have web routers for personal use that forbid traffic inbound except as reply to outbound packets, by having the routers have a connection log, blocking any connections that do not truely exist. We need a new http server, one that only sends the appropriate files, and don't allow the programs it runs to edit any files except those it has been authorized to edit, we need mail servers to have a hyper-tough encryption, say 2048-bit encryption of some sort. We have the capibility of all this, we just need to utilize. Cyber Insecurity is caused only by carelessness.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A cyber war is an attack of things trying to leech information from systems illictly , right ?
Well , we need to change the way we use to combat it .
We need to have web routers for personal use that forbid traffic inbound except as reply to outbound packets , by having the routers have a connection log , blocking any connections that do not truely exist .
We need a new http server , one that only sends the appropriate files , and do n't allow the programs it runs to edit any files except those it has been authorized to edit , we need mail servers to have a hyper-tough encryption , say 2048-bit encryption of some sort .
We have the capibility of all this , we just need to utilize .
Cyber Insecurity is caused only by carelessness .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A cyber war is an attack of things trying to leech information from systems illictly, right?
Well, we need to change the way we use to combat it.
We need to have web routers for personal use that forbid traffic inbound except as reply to outbound packets, by having the routers have a connection log, blocking any connections that do not truely exist.
We need a new http server, one that only sends the appropriate files, and don't allow the programs it runs to edit any files except those it has been authorized to edit, we need mail servers to have a hyper-tough encryption, say 2048-bit encryption of some sort.
We have the capibility of all this, we just need to utilize.
Cyber Insecurity is caused only by carelessness.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261746</id>
	<title>The ultimate cyberwar weapon</title>
	<author>gmuslera</author>
	<datestamp>1265136420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>... is social engineering. No firewall can isolate you from human stupidity, and more accessible information about everything (that either is public, or can be obtained thru directed trojans/botnets) gives good base for such kind of approach.</htmltext>
<tokenext>... is social engineering .
No firewall can isolate you from human stupidity , and more accessible information about everything ( that either is public , or can be obtained thru directed trojans/botnets ) gives good base for such kind of approach .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... is social engineering.
No firewall can isolate you from human stupidity, and more accessible information about everything (that either is public, or can be obtained thru directed trojans/botnets) gives good base for such kind of approach.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31263190</id>
	<title>Re:cyberwar = bullshit</title>
	<author>captainClassLoader</author>
	<datestamp>1265142480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>dont buy this cyberwar bullshit. they are just using it as an excuse to justify internet control schemes they want to bring upon you americans. remember how terrorism was used to bring liberties-infringing 'security' measures in all aspects of life. its the same shit, repeating itself.</p><p>do NOT buy it.</p></div><p>From <a href="http://www.net-security.org/secworld.php?id=8878" title="net-security.org">an article about the "mock cyber attack":</a> [net-security.org]
<br> <br>
"...A bevy of former top US officials were given various roles to play:
</p><ul>
<li>John Negroponte, the former Director of National Intelligence, as the Secretary of State</li><li>Michael Chertoff, the ex DHS Secretary, as the National Security Adviser</li><li>Fran Townsend, former White House Homeland Security Advisor, as the Secretary of DHS</li><li>John McLaughlin, ex CIA deputy director, as the Director of National Intelligence</li><li>Jamie Gorelick, former deputy attorney general, as attorney general</li><li>Charles Wald, retired Air Force general, as the Secretary of Defense</li><li>Stephen Friedman, former director of the National Economic Council, as the Treasury Secretary.</li></ul><p>
The entire scenario was thought up by Michael Hayden, the former CIA Director, and the faux attack began with malware masquerading as a free March Madness application for smartphones...."
<br> <br>
Not only the same shit, but the same shit doled out by the same people.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>dont buy this cyberwar bullshit .
they are just using it as an excuse to justify internet control schemes they want to bring upon you americans .
remember how terrorism was used to bring liberties-infringing 'security ' measures in all aspects of life .
its the same shit , repeating itself.do NOT buy it.From an article about the " mock cyber attack " : [ net-security.org ] " ...A bevy of former top US officials were given various roles to play : John Negroponte , the former Director of National Intelligence , as the Secretary of StateMichael Chertoff , the ex DHS Secretary , as the National Security AdviserFran Townsend , former White House Homeland Security Advisor , as the Secretary of DHSJohn McLaughlin , ex CIA deputy director , as the Director of National IntelligenceJamie Gorelick , former deputy attorney general , as attorney generalCharles Wald , retired Air Force general , as the Secretary of DefenseStephen Friedman , former director of the National Economic Council , as the Treasury Secretary .
The entire scenario was thought up by Michael Hayden , the former CIA Director , and the faux attack began with malware masquerading as a free March Madness application for smartphones.... " Not only the same shit , but the same shit doled out by the same people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>dont buy this cyberwar bullshit.
they are just using it as an excuse to justify internet control schemes they want to bring upon you americans.
remember how terrorism was used to bring liberties-infringing 'security' measures in all aspects of life.
its the same shit, repeating itself.do NOT buy it.From an article about the "mock cyber attack": [net-security.org]
 
"...A bevy of former top US officials were given various roles to play:

John Negroponte, the former Director of National Intelligence, as the Secretary of StateMichael Chertoff, the ex DHS Secretary, as the National Security AdviserFran Townsend, former White House Homeland Security Advisor, as the Secretary of DHSJohn McLaughlin, ex CIA deputy director, as the Director of National IntelligenceJamie Gorelick, former deputy attorney general, as attorney generalCharles Wald, retired Air Force general, as the Secretary of DefenseStephen Friedman, former director of the National Economic Council, as the Treasury Secretary.
The entire scenario was thought up by Michael Hayden, the former CIA Director, and the faux attack began with malware masquerading as a free March Madness application for smartphones...."
 
Not only the same shit, but the same shit doled out by the same people.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31262182</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31263008</id>
	<title>Why did he leave his post</title>
	<author>BlueBoxSW.com</author>
	<datestamp>1265141760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If Mike McConnel is so concerned about cyber security, why did he leave his post 7 days into the Obama administration for a cush job in the private sector?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If Mike McConnel is so concerned about cyber security , why did he leave his post 7 days into the Obama administration for a cush job in the private sector ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Mike McConnel is so concerned about cyber security, why did he leave his post 7 days into the Obama administration for a cush job in the private sector?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261922</id>
	<title>Re:A comment in The Atlantic on cluelessness</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265137080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, the real responders will be CERT and NANOG.  I'd be willing to bet that some fair percentage of the people with their hands on the keyboards in NANOG would be able to fire up their HAM sets if the backbones got so totally overwhelmed that nothing could get through.  I KNOW they don't care if their fucking cell phones don't work.  They have desks with three screens and a keyboard and a hardwired phone on them.  What happens to their daughters' iPhones in no way interferes with their jobs.
</p><p>
But I have a hard time imagining any purely digital situation that would take down the backbones.  Script kiddies have been running DDOS botnets for a decade now.  The backbones have seen it all, done it all, and when you get right down to it, the trans-Atlantic and trans-Pacific links aren't big enough to saturate the continental backbone.  We have a LOT more fiber in the ground than we do underwater.
</p><p>
The only situation that could take down the backbone is an extended, multi-state power outage, and guess what: we've been there and done that.  The northeast power outage was our worst case scenario made manifest.  Those of us in the Midwest knew about it, but barely even noticed it in our day to day lives.  Our grid stayed up, our phones still worked, and business went on as usual for most of us.  Those who needed to talk to eastern seaboard customers/employers/whatever had a quiet few days, that's all.
</p><p>
Sure, it looked like the participants were clueless.  And I know the old saw about never attributing to malice what can be explained by incompetence.  But I've seen the names of the participants, and I know for an absolute fact that malignance is one of their primary motivations.  They seek power, at all costs, and they will do anything to get it, including lie, cheat, steal, and manipulate anything and everything they can affect.  I think they <i>do</i> have the staffers who can tell them about NANOG and CERT and NERC and they don't like the fact that those organizations exist without <i>their</i> explicit control over everything they do.
</p><p>
They want the authority, in law, to order NANOG around, on any pretext.  They want the authority, in law, to disband CERT if they feel like it.  They want to exert the full force of the US Government to make all these 'maverick' network operators stand and salute when they say so, or lose their jobs.  They've heard how the Internet views censorship as damage and routes around it and <i>they want control of the people who control the routers</i>.  They want the power and they want the money, and they're going to do their damndest to stampede their herd of useful idiots into giving it all to them.  They are sociopaths and psychotics and we can only hope they die of old age before the country falls headlong into a French Revolution of purges, pogroms, and random bloodletting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , the real responders will be CERT and NANOG .
I 'd be willing to bet that some fair percentage of the people with their hands on the keyboards in NANOG would be able to fire up their HAM sets if the backbones got so totally overwhelmed that nothing could get through .
I KNOW they do n't care if their fucking cell phones do n't work .
They have desks with three screens and a keyboard and a hardwired phone on them .
What happens to their daughters ' iPhones in no way interferes with their jobs .
But I have a hard time imagining any purely digital situation that would take down the backbones .
Script kiddies have been running DDOS botnets for a decade now .
The backbones have seen it all , done it all , and when you get right down to it , the trans-Atlantic and trans-Pacific links are n't big enough to saturate the continental backbone .
We have a LOT more fiber in the ground than we do underwater .
The only situation that could take down the backbone is an extended , multi-state power outage , and guess what : we 've been there and done that .
The northeast power outage was our worst case scenario made manifest .
Those of us in the Midwest knew about it , but barely even noticed it in our day to day lives .
Our grid stayed up , our phones still worked , and business went on as usual for most of us .
Those who needed to talk to eastern seaboard customers/employers/whatever had a quiet few days , that 's all .
Sure , it looked like the participants were clueless .
And I know the old saw about never attributing to malice what can be explained by incompetence .
But I 've seen the names of the participants , and I know for an absolute fact that malignance is one of their primary motivations .
They seek power , at all costs , and they will do anything to get it , including lie , cheat , steal , and manipulate anything and everything they can affect .
I think they do have the staffers who can tell them about NANOG and CERT and NERC and they do n't like the fact that those organizations exist without their explicit control over everything they do .
They want the authority , in law , to order NANOG around , on any pretext .
They want the authority , in law , to disband CERT if they feel like it .
They want to exert the full force of the US Government to make all these 'maverick ' network operators stand and salute when they say so , or lose their jobs .
They 've heard how the Internet views censorship as damage and routes around it and they want control of the people who control the routers .
They want the power and they want the money , and they 're going to do their damndest to stampede their herd of useful idiots into giving it all to them .
They are sociopaths and psychotics and we can only hope they die of old age before the country falls headlong into a French Revolution of purges , pogroms , and random bloodletting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, the real responders will be CERT and NANOG.
I'd be willing to bet that some fair percentage of the people with their hands on the keyboards in NANOG would be able to fire up their HAM sets if the backbones got so totally overwhelmed that nothing could get through.
I KNOW they don't care if their fucking cell phones don't work.
They have desks with three screens and a keyboard and a hardwired phone on them.
What happens to their daughters' iPhones in no way interferes with their jobs.
But I have a hard time imagining any purely digital situation that would take down the backbones.
Script kiddies have been running DDOS botnets for a decade now.
The backbones have seen it all, done it all, and when you get right down to it, the trans-Atlantic and trans-Pacific links aren't big enough to saturate the continental backbone.
We have a LOT more fiber in the ground than we do underwater.
The only situation that could take down the backbone is an extended, multi-state power outage, and guess what: we've been there and done that.
The northeast power outage was our worst case scenario made manifest.
Those of us in the Midwest knew about it, but barely even noticed it in our day to day lives.
Our grid stayed up, our phones still worked, and business went on as usual for most of us.
Those who needed to talk to eastern seaboard customers/employers/whatever had a quiet few days, that's all.
Sure, it looked like the participants were clueless.
And I know the old saw about never attributing to malice what can be explained by incompetence.
But I've seen the names of the participants, and I know for an absolute fact that malignance is one of their primary motivations.
They seek power, at all costs, and they will do anything to get it, including lie, cheat, steal, and manipulate anything and everything they can affect.
I think they do have the staffers who can tell them about NANOG and CERT and NERC and they don't like the fact that those organizations exist without their explicit control over everything they do.
They want the authority, in law, to order NANOG around, on any pretext.
They want the authority, in law, to disband CERT if they feel like it.
They want to exert the full force of the US Government to make all these 'maverick' network operators stand and salute when they say so, or lose their jobs.
They've heard how the Internet views censorship as damage and routes around it and they want control of the people who control the routers.
They want the power and they want the money, and they're going to do their damndest to stampede their herd of useful idiots into giving it all to them.
They are sociopaths and psychotics and we can only hope they die of old age before the country falls headlong into a French Revolution of purges, pogroms, and random bloodletting.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260958</id>
	<title>Of course we can't win a Cyber war</title>
	<author>jd.schmidt</author>
	<datestamp>1265133360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For the same reason we can't win a space war, we have the most to lose.  The more systems you have dependent on an asset, the more vulnerable you become in that asset.</p><p>Note however, that doesn't mean you are in a weaker position, an asset is still an asset.</p><p>Convenience isn't just convenient, it is time saved you can use to do other things.  We just need to start waking up to what is a security risk and what isn't.  What we need to protect and what we don't and finally drills on what to do if the primary system fails.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For the same reason we ca n't win a space war , we have the most to lose .
The more systems you have dependent on an asset , the more vulnerable you become in that asset.Note however , that does n't mean you are in a weaker position , an asset is still an asset.Convenience is n't just convenient , it is time saved you can use to do other things .
We just need to start waking up to what is a security risk and what is n't .
What we need to protect and what we do n't and finally drills on what to do if the primary system fails .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For the same reason we can't win a space war, we have the most to lose.
The more systems you have dependent on an asset, the more vulnerable you become in that asset.Note however, that doesn't mean you are in a weaker position, an asset is still an asset.Convenience isn't just convenient, it is time saved you can use to do other things.
We just need to start waking up to what is a security risk and what isn't.
What we need to protect and what we don't and finally drills on what to do if the primary system fails.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261018</id>
	<title>A comment in The Atlantic on cluelessness</title>
	<author>Animats</author>
	<datestamp>1265133600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
I wrote this to The Atlantic, which is a "think piece" magazine read by some decision makers in Washington.
</p><p>
After seeing that show, I was struck by the cluelessness of the panelists. I don't expect them to understand how networks really work, but they didn't even understand the organizations involved. Key organizations in a crisis like that would be the North American Network Operators Group and the North American Electric Reliability Council, along with the US Computer Emergency Response Team. The participants didn't know that, and they didn't have staffers to tell them.
</p><p>
The panelists were obsessing over whether they had enough authority to do something, while totally lacking any idea of what to do.
</p><p>
There are a few reasonable steps they could have taken at their level.
</p><ul>
<li>
First, after a physical attack on electric power facilities, get troops guarding key substations. The NERC would know where those are, and there should be a plan in place to do that.</li>
<li>
Second, faced with an massive attack via "smart phones", ask network operators to temporarily disable 4G and 3G services while keeping voice up. That would cut traffic 90\% and stop further infections. Cellular voice service would probably come back up.</li>
<li>
Third, ask ISPs to temporarily block all HTML/MIME email, while allowing text email. That would stop most attacks against PCs and virus transmission. Yes, the FCC lacks the authority to order this. But if CERT and NANOG simply asked network operators to do that in an emergency, 99\% would do it.</li>
<li>
Fourth, activate the Emergency Broadcasting System, which uses AM radio, for a Presidential address. That will get through even if almost everything else is down.</li>
<li>
Fifth, get FEMA cranked up to provide emergency services in areas with power outages. That's where people are going to die. Everything else is an economic problem.</li>
</ul><p>
Having taken the initial steps, the next priority is bringing the electrical grid back up. If substations were damaged, it may be necessary to move some very large transformers around, and possibly to import them from other countries. Military assets (i.e. big transport aircraft) should be made available to help with that.
</p><p>
In parallel with this, the intelligence community and DoD can work on who's behind the attack. But that's not going to be dealt with in the first hours. Don't obsess on hitting back.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wrote this to The Atlantic , which is a " think piece " magazine read by some decision makers in Washington .
After seeing that show , I was struck by the cluelessness of the panelists .
I do n't expect them to understand how networks really work , but they did n't even understand the organizations involved .
Key organizations in a crisis like that would be the North American Network Operators Group and the North American Electric Reliability Council , along with the US Computer Emergency Response Team .
The participants did n't know that , and they did n't have staffers to tell them .
The panelists were obsessing over whether they had enough authority to do something , while totally lacking any idea of what to do .
There are a few reasonable steps they could have taken at their level .
First , after a physical attack on electric power facilities , get troops guarding key substations .
The NERC would know where those are , and there should be a plan in place to do that .
Second , faced with an massive attack via " smart phones " , ask network operators to temporarily disable 4G and 3G services while keeping voice up .
That would cut traffic 90 \ % and stop further infections .
Cellular voice service would probably come back up .
Third , ask ISPs to temporarily block all HTML/MIME email , while allowing text email .
That would stop most attacks against PCs and virus transmission .
Yes , the FCC lacks the authority to order this .
But if CERT and NANOG simply asked network operators to do that in an emergency , 99 \ % would do it .
Fourth , activate the Emergency Broadcasting System , which uses AM radio , for a Presidential address .
That will get through even if almost everything else is down .
Fifth , get FEMA cranked up to provide emergency services in areas with power outages .
That 's where people are going to die .
Everything else is an economic problem .
Having taken the initial steps , the next priority is bringing the electrical grid back up .
If substations were damaged , it may be necessary to move some very large transformers around , and possibly to import them from other countries .
Military assets ( i.e .
big transport aircraft ) should be made available to help with that .
In parallel with this , the intelligence community and DoD can work on who 's behind the attack .
But that 's not going to be dealt with in the first hours .
Do n't obsess on hitting back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
I wrote this to The Atlantic, which is a "think piece" magazine read by some decision makers in Washington.
After seeing that show, I was struck by the cluelessness of the panelists.
I don't expect them to understand how networks really work, but they didn't even understand the organizations involved.
Key organizations in a crisis like that would be the North American Network Operators Group and the North American Electric Reliability Council, along with the US Computer Emergency Response Team.
The participants didn't know that, and they didn't have staffers to tell them.
The panelists were obsessing over whether they had enough authority to do something, while totally lacking any idea of what to do.
There are a few reasonable steps they could have taken at their level.
First, after a physical attack on electric power facilities, get troops guarding key substations.
The NERC would know where those are, and there should be a plan in place to do that.
Second, faced with an massive attack via "smart phones", ask network operators to temporarily disable 4G and 3G services while keeping voice up.
That would cut traffic 90\% and stop further infections.
Cellular voice service would probably come back up.
Third, ask ISPs to temporarily block all HTML/MIME email, while allowing text email.
That would stop most attacks against PCs and virus transmission.
Yes, the FCC lacks the authority to order this.
But if CERT and NANOG simply asked network operators to do that in an emergency, 99\% would do it.
Fourth, activate the Emergency Broadcasting System, which uses AM radio, for a Presidential address.
That will get through even if almost everything else is down.
Fifth, get FEMA cranked up to provide emergency services in areas with power outages.
That's where people are going to die.
Everything else is an economic problem.
Having taken the initial steps, the next priority is bringing the electrical grid back up.
If substations were damaged, it may be necessary to move some very large transformers around, and possibly to import them from other countries.
Military assets (i.e.
big transport aircraft) should be made available to help with that.
In parallel with this, the intelligence community and DoD can work on who's behind the attack.
But that's not going to be dealt with in the first hours.
Don't obsess on hitting back.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31262430</id>
	<title>Last 9 years was WASTED</title>
	<author>WindBourne</author>
	<datestamp>1265139120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>W, and even Obama, have ignored the issues with this. China is working hard to have an offensive against the west. But, it can not be a gun for a gun. We have advanced systems that barring their stealing more, they will not have for another 10-20 years. So, they have been hard at work figuring out how to take out our communications and spy sats. With the aide of the neo-cons who passed tax incentives for sending manufacturing to China AND disregarded that China is breaking all of the legal treaties regarding trade, we have really screwed ourselves.<br> <br>
The west's best chance is to bring back manufacturing. In addition, we need to re-focus an effort on securing all of the west's systems.</htmltext>
<tokenext>W , and even Obama , have ignored the issues with this .
China is working hard to have an offensive against the west .
But , it can not be a gun for a gun .
We have advanced systems that barring their stealing more , they will not have for another 10-20 years .
So , they have been hard at work figuring out how to take out our communications and spy sats .
With the aide of the neo-cons who passed tax incentives for sending manufacturing to China AND disregarded that China is breaking all of the legal treaties regarding trade , we have really screwed ourselves .
The west 's best chance is to bring back manufacturing .
In addition , we need to re-focus an effort on securing all of the west 's systems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>W, and even Obama, have ignored the issues with this.
China is working hard to have an offensive against the west.
But, it can not be a gun for a gun.
We have advanced systems that barring their stealing more, they will not have for another 10-20 years.
So, they have been hard at work figuring out how to take out our communications and spy sats.
With the aide of the neo-cons who passed tax incentives for sending manufacturing to China AND disregarded that China is breaking all of the legal treaties regarding trade, we have really screwed ourselves.
The west's best chance is to bring back manufacturing.
In addition, we need to re-focus an effort on securing all of the west's systems.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261678</id>
	<title>It's not just the Cyberwar</title>
	<author>Bling316</author>
	<datestamp>1265136180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The US has been unable to win any war in the last decade if not longer.
This is just another manufactured bad guy to rally the sheeple against.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The US has been unable to win any war in the last decade if not longer .
This is just another manufactured bad guy to rally the sheeple against .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The US has been unable to win any war in the last decade if not longer.
This is just another manufactured bad guy to rally the sheeple against.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261020</id>
	<title>Goes without saying...</title>
	<author>Nethemas the Great</author>
	<datestamp>1265133600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The US has been and will be stuck back in WWII thinking until it's too late.  When you invest in war ships, tanks and fighter planes you have something "show" people.  It's pretty hard to demonstrate what you got for the money when it comes to the security of intangible things.  The installation of a firewall just doesn't make one go "oooh and ahhh" like the vaporized city and mushroom cloud from a 10 mega-ton ICBM.  Even a security fence and a camera or two around a municipal water supply isn't very "impressive" compared to the demonstration of raw power an F-22 can unleash.</p><p>Worse still is when people do play "tickle-tickle" with our soft underbelly the response tends to be blowing up FedEx packages, taking off our shoes, having dogs sniff our crotch, and groping pregnant ladies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The US has been and will be stuck back in WWII thinking until it 's too late .
When you invest in war ships , tanks and fighter planes you have something " show " people .
It 's pretty hard to demonstrate what you got for the money when it comes to the security of intangible things .
The installation of a firewall just does n't make one go " oooh and ahhh " like the vaporized city and mushroom cloud from a 10 mega-ton ICBM .
Even a security fence and a camera or two around a municipal water supply is n't very " impressive " compared to the demonstration of raw power an F-22 can unleash.Worse still is when people do play " tickle-tickle " with our soft underbelly the response tends to be blowing up FedEx packages , taking off our shoes , having dogs sniff our crotch , and groping pregnant ladies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The US has been and will be stuck back in WWII thinking until it's too late.
When you invest in war ships, tanks and fighter planes you have something "show" people.
It's pretty hard to demonstrate what you got for the money when it comes to the security of intangible things.
The installation of a firewall just doesn't make one go "oooh and ahhh" like the vaporized city and mushroom cloud from a 10 mega-ton ICBM.
Even a security fence and a camera or two around a municipal water supply isn't very "impressive" compared to the demonstration of raw power an F-22 can unleash.Worse still is when people do play "tickle-tickle" with our soft underbelly the response tends to be blowing up FedEx packages, taking off our shoes, having dogs sniff our crotch, and groping pregnant ladies.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261430</id>
	<title>We hold national security exercises in hotels now?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265135280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;"exercise that took place some six days ago at Washington's Mandarin Oriental Hotel"</p><p>Bullshit was it an exercise.  It was a staged marketing promotion, nothing else.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; " exercise that took place some six days ago at Washington 's Mandarin Oriental Hotel " Bullshit was it an exercise .
It was a staged marketing promotion , nothing else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;"exercise that took place some six days ago at Washington's Mandarin Oriental Hotel"Bullshit was it an exercise.
It was a staged marketing promotion, nothing else.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31262462</id>
	<title>lol</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265139240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Remove all gateways for secured networks. No USB thumb drives allowed before entering a PC that's connected to that network. Build core images per department and bit lock every app that is redundant to the person's position. That's a good start...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Remove all gateways for secured networks .
No USB thumb drives allowed before entering a PC that 's connected to that network .
Build core images per department and bit lock every app that is redundant to the person 's position .
That 's a good start.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Remove all gateways for secured networks.
No USB thumb drives allowed before entering a PC that's connected to that network.
Build core images per department and bit lock every app that is redundant to the person's position.
That's a good start...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31262110</id>
	<title>Get wise; and quick</title>
	<author>bl8n8r</author>
	<datestamp>1265137860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Anyone that has been grep'ing server logs for the past 10 years or so knows the "cyber war" has already started.  Since the late 90's bunk ingress from APNIC regions has been growing at an alarming rate.  I used to wonder how the hell so many people in (seemingly) Asia had so much time to kill with all the dictionary attacks/scans. A lot of admins I know simply just drop the entire APNIC address range, but if you do biz in Asia, that's not so much of an option. The fact that the U.S. network czars are only just realizing they brought knives to the gunfight is an indication to me that the infrastructure is in for a severe corn-holing when the time comes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone that has been grep'ing server logs for the past 10 years or so knows the " cyber war " has already started .
Since the late 90 's bunk ingress from APNIC regions has been growing at an alarming rate .
I used to wonder how the hell so many people in ( seemingly ) Asia had so much time to kill with all the dictionary attacks/scans .
A lot of admins I know simply just drop the entire APNIC address range , but if you do biz in Asia , that 's not so much of an option .
The fact that the U.S. network czars are only just realizing they brought knives to the gunfight is an indication to me that the infrastructure is in for a severe corn-holing when the time comes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone that has been grep'ing server logs for the past 10 years or so knows the "cyber war" has already started.
Since the late 90's bunk ingress from APNIC regions has been growing at an alarming rate.
I used to wonder how the hell so many people in (seemingly) Asia had so much time to kill with all the dictionary attacks/scans.
A lot of admins I know simply just drop the entire APNIC address range, but if you do biz in Asia, that's not so much of an option.
The fact that the U.S. network czars are only just realizing they brought knives to the gunfight is an indication to me that the infrastructure is in for a severe corn-holing when the time comes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31262648</id>
	<title>Why fight progress?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265140080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Perhaps its better if no country can win a war, cyber-based or otherwise. Think of it! Peace might break out, and we could begin using the assets that have traditionally been diverted from improving life toward aggressive political ends or empire building.</p><p>I understand the perception that a strong military provides security and protection, but this seems true only in as much as it preserves power structures that seek to concentrate wealth and preserve a class system. In the long run Mutually Assured Destruction hasn't improved anything for anyone. The overall systemic effect has been to encourage militarism amongst the so-called civilized societies. The opportunity cost is an unknown. What could be done with the brain power and economic power currently devoted to bigger guns, better bombs and mechanized warfare?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps its better if no country can win a war , cyber-based or otherwise .
Think of it !
Peace might break out , and we could begin using the assets that have traditionally been diverted from improving life toward aggressive political ends or empire building.I understand the perception that a strong military provides security and protection , but this seems true only in as much as it preserves power structures that seek to concentrate wealth and preserve a class system .
In the long run Mutually Assured Destruction has n't improved anything for anyone .
The overall systemic effect has been to encourage militarism amongst the so-called civilized societies .
The opportunity cost is an unknown .
What could be done with the brain power and economic power currently devoted to bigger guns , better bombs and mechanized warfare ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps its better if no country can win a war, cyber-based or otherwise.
Think of it!
Peace might break out, and we could begin using the assets that have traditionally been diverted from improving life toward aggressive political ends or empire building.I understand the perception that a strong military provides security and protection, but this seems true only in as much as it preserves power structures that seek to concentrate wealth and preserve a class system.
In the long run Mutually Assured Destruction hasn't improved anything for anyone.
The overall systemic effect has been to encourage militarism amongst the so-called civilized societies.
The opportunity cost is an unknown.
What could be done with the brain power and economic power currently devoted to bigger guns, better bombs and mechanized warfare?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31262574</id>
	<title>Re:Bunch of BS</title>
	<author>dburkland</author>
	<datestamp>1265139720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>That "excercise" was conducted by a bunch of former Bush officials and other neocons. It wasn't a test of our cyber security, it was a propaganda tool designed to embarass the Obama administration and urge a further erosion of our civil liberties.</p></div><p>I'm pretty sure the Obama administration is embarrassing themselves just fine on their own... Also how is the healthcare bill NOT a way for the guberment to further erode our civil liberties?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That " excercise " was conducted by a bunch of former Bush officials and other neocons .
It was n't a test of our cyber security , it was a propaganda tool designed to embarass the Obama administration and urge a further erosion of our civil liberties.I 'm pretty sure the Obama administration is embarrassing themselves just fine on their own... Also how is the healthcare bill NOT a way for the guberment to further erode our civil liberties ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That "excercise" was conducted by a bunch of former Bush officials and other neocons.
It wasn't a test of our cyber security, it was a propaganda tool designed to embarass the Obama administration and urge a further erosion of our civil liberties.I'm pretty sure the Obama administration is embarrassing themselves just fine on their own... Also how is the healthcare bill NOT a way for the guberment to further erode our civil liberties?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31264026</id>
	<title>Attack can just come from within...</title>
	<author>Phizzle</author>
	<datestamp>1265103000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Even if US somehow blocked EVERY country that is even remotely threatening, the attacks can come from within the US from the hundreds of thousands of compromised bots controlled through proxies or simply carrying out coordinated sleeper code planted in advance.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Even if US somehow blocked EVERY country that is even remotely threatening , the attacks can come from within the US from the hundreds of thousands of compromised bots controlled through proxies or simply carrying out coordinated sleeper code planted in advance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even if US somehow blocked EVERY country that is even remotely threatening, the attacks can come from within the US from the hundreds of thousands of compromised bots controlled through proxies or simply carrying out coordinated sleeper code planted in advance.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260910</id>
	<title>NEED MOAR MCSEs!</title>
	<author>newdsfornerds</author>
	<datestamp>1265133120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There simply aren't enough Microsoft admins to manage the threat. We need a job corps project for MCSEs! This will keep us safe from Chinese haxorz.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There simply are n't enough Microsoft admins to manage the threat .
We need a job corps project for MCSEs !
This will keep us safe from Chinese haxorz .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There simply aren't enough Microsoft admins to manage the threat.
We need a job corps project for MCSEs!
This will keep us safe from Chinese haxorz.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31266094</id>
	<title>Re:A comment in The Atlantic on cluelessness</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265111880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Fifth, get FEMA cranked up to provide emergency services in areas with power outages. That's where people are going to die.</p></div><p>Yep, if there's one thing we can trust FEMA for it's killing your citizens.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Fifth , get FEMA cranked up to provide emergency services in areas with power outages .
That 's where people are going to die.Yep , if there 's one thing we can trust FEMA for it 's killing your citizens .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fifth, get FEMA cranked up to provide emergency services in areas with power outages.
That's where people are going to die.Yep, if there's one thing we can trust FEMA for it's killing your citizens.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31264250</id>
	<title>Re:A comment in The Atlantic on cluelessness</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265104020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I wrote this to The Atlantic, which is a "think piece" magazine read by some decision makers in Washington.</p></div><p>Well I'm glad your theoretical response, which was a thousands times better and more appropriate than what the exercise provided, has a some possibility of getting seen by those in currently power.  Have you thought about sending it to your Senator and Representatives as well?  I'm sure they will be receiving at least a few uninformed and fearful letters from their due to this exercise, yours would at least help balance-out the feed-back they are getting from their constituents.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wrote this to The Atlantic , which is a " think piece " magazine read by some decision makers in Washington.Well I 'm glad your theoretical response , which was a thousands times better and more appropriate than what the exercise provided , has a some possibility of getting seen by those in currently power .
Have you thought about sending it to your Senator and Representatives as well ?
I 'm sure they will be receiving at least a few uninformed and fearful letters from their due to this exercise , yours would at least help balance-out the feed-back they are getting from their constituents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wrote this to The Atlantic, which is a "think piece" magazine read by some decision makers in Washington.Well I'm glad your theoretical response, which was a thousands times better and more appropriate than what the exercise provided, has a some possibility of getting seen by those in currently power.
Have you thought about sending it to your Senator and Representatives as well?
I'm sure they will be receiving at least a few uninformed and fearful letters from their due to this exercise, yours would at least help balance-out the feed-back they are getting from their constituents.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261672</id>
	<title>Late Breaking News</title>
	<author>LostCluster</author>
	<datestamp>1265136180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Slashdot as usual is a little bit behind the times... this "Cyber-Shockwave" wargame was recorded by CNN with Wolf Blitzer hosting, and broadcast repeatedly on CNN last weekend. Would been nice if we could tell some of the trolls here to go watch TV and come back when they were better informed.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Slashdot as usual is a little bit behind the times... this " Cyber-Shockwave " wargame was recorded by CNN with Wolf Blitzer hosting , and broadcast repeatedly on CNN last weekend .
Would been nice if we could tell some of the trolls here to go watch TV and come back when they were better informed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slashdot as usual is a little bit behind the times... this "Cyber-Shockwave" wargame was recorded by CNN with Wolf Blitzer hosting, and broadcast repeatedly on CNN last weekend.
Would been nice if we could tell some of the trolls here to go watch TV and come back when they were better informed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31264502</id>
	<title>We better increase our funding there ASAP!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265105040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Quick, Start the presses! We have another crisis to fund!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Quick , Start the presses !
We have another crisis to fund !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Quick, Start the presses!
We have another crisis to fund!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261686</id>
	<title>Amanda Seyfried/Julianne Moore love scene?  Check!</title>
	<author>Impy the Impiuos Imp</author>
	<datestamp>1265136240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To the OP, umm, no.</p><p>Calls AT&amp;T, whoever owns MAE East, etc. "This is the President of the United States.  Can you shut down this, this, and this?  Txbie."</p><p>From the viewpoint of a few dudes sitting at a cyber security dashboard app, yeah, it looks bad.  From the point of view of someone who can mobilize a thousand people at the core of the Internet backbone, not so much.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To the OP , umm , no.Calls AT&amp;T , whoever owns MAE East , etc .
" This is the President of the United States .
Can you shut down this , this , and this ?
Txbie. " From the viewpoint of a few dudes sitting at a cyber security dashboard app , yeah , it looks bad .
From the point of view of someone who can mobilize a thousand people at the core of the Internet backbone , not so much .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To the OP, umm, no.Calls AT&amp;T, whoever owns MAE East, etc.
"This is the President of the United States.
Can you shut down this, this, and this?
Txbie."From the viewpoint of a few dudes sitting at a cyber security dashboard app, yeah, it looks bad.
From the point of view of someone who can mobilize a thousand people at the core of the Internet backbone, not so much.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31264150</id>
	<title>Re:Goes without saying...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265103600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I understand the whole thing about planning for the previous war, but... the US has been in four big wars since WW2. (Korea, Vietnam, Iraq1, Iraq2). Very large chunks of the military budget have long since gone into things that aren't "shown"; the nuclear subs no one ever sees, and small-scale stuff like jeeps and personal arms and stuff that everyone sees but no one is wowd by the sight of. No more battleships going around showing the flag, but lots of satellites quietly invisibly floating overhead.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I understand the whole thing about planning for the previous war , but... the US has been in four big wars since WW2 .
( Korea , Vietnam , Iraq1 , Iraq2 ) .
Very large chunks of the military budget have long since gone into things that are n't " shown " ; the nuclear subs no one ever sees , and small-scale stuff like jeeps and personal arms and stuff that everyone sees but no one is wowd by the sight of .
No more battleships going around showing the flag , but lots of satellites quietly invisibly floating overhead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I understand the whole thing about planning for the previous war, but... the US has been in four big wars since WW2.
(Korea, Vietnam, Iraq1, Iraq2).
Very large chunks of the military budget have long since gone into things that aren't "shown"; the nuclear subs no one ever sees, and small-scale stuff like jeeps and personal arms and stuff that everyone sees but no one is wowd by the sight of.
No more battleships going around showing the flag, but lots of satellites quietly invisibly floating overhead.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261986</id>
	<title>What, budget time again?</title>
	<author>BeanThere</author>
	<datestamp>1265137320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Excuse my cynicism about such reports, but at least once a year every year we hear some major government department bemoan how vulnerable the 'cyber-infrastructure' is to 'cyber attack'. Be scared! The message is clear! We simply must give some deadweight organisation a whole lot of money from the tax-funded budget, pronto, so that a whole building full of people somewhere can sit around pretending to come up with solutions for another year! Then they'll do nothing until budget time again next year, when we'll hear another yet alarming report about how vulnerable everything is and how the whole Internets is on the verge of being attacked and destroyed by (insert boogie-man-of-the-day blah blah) etc. Or worse, instead of doing nothing, they still don't solve the actual problems, but just pass bills that give government more power.</p><p>I'm not saying there aren't vulnerabilities in the infrastructure - certainly there are - but there's 'solving those problems', and then there's 'solving those problems'.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Excuse my cynicism about such reports , but at least once a year every year we hear some major government department bemoan how vulnerable the 'cyber-infrastructure ' is to 'cyber attack' .
Be scared !
The message is clear !
We simply must give some deadweight organisation a whole lot of money from the tax-funded budget , pronto , so that a whole building full of people somewhere can sit around pretending to come up with solutions for another year !
Then they 'll do nothing until budget time again next year , when we 'll hear another yet alarming report about how vulnerable everything is and how the whole Internets is on the verge of being attacked and destroyed by ( insert boogie-man-of-the-day blah blah ) etc .
Or worse , instead of doing nothing , they still do n't solve the actual problems , but just pass bills that give government more power.I 'm not saying there are n't vulnerabilities in the infrastructure - certainly there are - but there 's 'solving those problems ' , and then there 's 'solving those problems' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Excuse my cynicism about such reports, but at least once a year every year we hear some major government department bemoan how vulnerable the 'cyber-infrastructure' is to 'cyber attack'.
Be scared!
The message is clear!
We simply must give some deadweight organisation a whole lot of money from the tax-funded budget, pronto, so that a whole building full of people somewhere can sit around pretending to come up with solutions for another year!
Then they'll do nothing until budget time again next year, when we'll hear another yet alarming report about how vulnerable everything is and how the whole Internets is on the verge of being attacked and destroyed by (insert boogie-man-of-the-day blah blah) etc.
Or worse, instead of doing nothing, they still don't solve the actual problems, but just pass bills that give government more power.I'm not saying there aren't vulnerabilities in the infrastructure - certainly there are - but there's 'solving those problems', and then there's 'solving those problems'.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261630</id>
	<title>This is all a play.</title>
	<author>moxley</author>
	<datestamp>1265136000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This entire situation is designed to help coerce people and legislators into supporting further restrictions on internet freedom and more - it's entirely apparent.</p><p>The other thing that should be apparent is that our intelligence services and military aren't stupid. They've been recruiting people with skills for years.</p><p>We're not unprepared; where we stand against Russia and CHina I don't know, but to say we're not ready just doesn't ring true to me.</p><p>I agree with Lessig and others about a "cyber 9/11" being on the horizon, and government already having the policies they want but will never get without an attack..... <a href="http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docid=-4631871144083884704&amp;hl=en" title="google.com">http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docid=-4631871144083884704&amp;hl=en</a> [google.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This entire situation is designed to help coerce people and legislators into supporting further restrictions on internet freedom and more - it 's entirely apparent.The other thing that should be apparent is that our intelligence services and military are n't stupid .
They 've been recruiting people with skills for years.We 're not unprepared ; where we stand against Russia and CHina I do n't know , but to say we 're not ready just does n't ring true to me.I agree with Lessig and others about a " cyber 9/11 " being on the horizon , and government already having the policies they want but will never get without an attack..... http : //video.google.com/googleplayer.swf ? docid = -4631871144083884704&amp;hl = en [ google.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This entire situation is designed to help coerce people and legislators into supporting further restrictions on internet freedom and more - it's entirely apparent.The other thing that should be apparent is that our intelligence services and military aren't stupid.
They've been recruiting people with skills for years.We're not unprepared; where we stand against Russia and CHina I don't know, but to say we're not ready just doesn't ring true to me.I agree with Lessig and others about a "cyber 9/11" being on the horizon, and government already having the policies they want but will never get without an attack..... http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docid=-4631871144083884704&amp;hl=en [google.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261962</id>
	<title>Only one unique link in summary</title>
	<author>madpansy</author>
	<datestamp>1265137260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The other link is probably meant to be <a href="http://www.net-security.org/secworld.php?id=8878" title="net-security.org" rel="nofollow">this article</a> [net-security.org]. <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfv5JASJxbA" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">Video</a> [youtube.com] </p><p><div class="quote"><p>A bevy of former top US officials were given various roles to play... The entire scenario was thought up by Michael Hayden, the former CIA Director, and the faux attack began with malware masquerading as a free March Madness application for smartphones. Once activated, it spread fast and first incapacitated cellphone networks, then landlines, the Internet, and finally - aided by mock bombs exploding in a couple of gas pipelines and power stations and a hurricane hitting the Gulf Coast - brought the entire East Coast electrical power grid to its knees. Air traffic was thrown into disorder and commerce came to a standstill.</p></div><p>This exercise was just a huge piece of FUD by CNN and a bunch of retired government officials all touting the need for more government in our lives.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The other link is probably meant to be this article [ net-security.org ] .
Video [ youtube.com ] A bevy of former top US officials were given various roles to play... The entire scenario was thought up by Michael Hayden , the former CIA Director , and the faux attack began with malware masquerading as a free March Madness application for smartphones .
Once activated , it spread fast and first incapacitated cellphone networks , then landlines , the Internet , and finally - aided by mock bombs exploding in a couple of gas pipelines and power stations and a hurricane hitting the Gulf Coast - brought the entire East Coast electrical power grid to its knees .
Air traffic was thrown into disorder and commerce came to a standstill.This exercise was just a huge piece of FUD by CNN and a bunch of retired government officials all touting the need for more government in our lives .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The other link is probably meant to be this article [net-security.org].
Video [youtube.com] A bevy of former top US officials were given various roles to play... The entire scenario was thought up by Michael Hayden, the former CIA Director, and the faux attack began with malware masquerading as a free March Madness application for smartphones.
Once activated, it spread fast and first incapacitated cellphone networks, then landlines, the Internet, and finally - aided by mock bombs exploding in a couple of gas pipelines and power stations and a hurricane hitting the Gulf Coast - brought the entire East Coast electrical power grid to its knees.
Air traffic was thrown into disorder and commerce came to a standstill.This exercise was just a huge piece of FUD by CNN and a bunch of retired government officials all touting the need for more government in our lives.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260558</id>
	<title>Stupidity of leadership...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265131860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you watched the broadcast of this exercise on CNN, you heard many people arguing for things that the government just can't do such as ordering telcos to disable all smartphones, suspending rights, and even nationalizing the power companies.</p><p>They spent so much time being told by the simulated AG what they couldn't do, they didn't have time left to discuss what they could do.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you watched the broadcast of this exercise on CNN , you heard many people arguing for things that the government just ca n't do such as ordering telcos to disable all smartphones , suspending rights , and even nationalizing the power companies.They spent so much time being told by the simulated AG what they could n't do , they did n't have time left to discuss what they could do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you watched the broadcast of this exercise on CNN, you heard many people arguing for things that the government just can't do such as ordering telcos to disable all smartphones, suspending rights, and even nationalizing the power companies.They spent so much time being told by the simulated AG what they couldn't do, they didn't have time left to discuss what they could do.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31263340</id>
	<title>If the US lost a "cyber war", the world would lose</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265143020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If the US lost a "cyber war" enough to seriously damage our economic infrastructure, the world would lose.</p><p>Who imports all that stuff from China?  A stalled US economy will lead to a lot of upset Chinese unemployed.  Who still has the largest amount of global financial services?   Care to try to cash in those stocks/bonds or "safe" US Treasury Securities when the US information infrastructure is down?</p><p>If the US real-estate bubble was enough to cause a global recession, what would happen if the entire information infrastructure of the US were taken out?</p><p>Any nation-state that thinks taking out the US will help them is stupid.  Terrorism (the kind that can accept a global depression) is another story.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the US lost a " cyber war " enough to seriously damage our economic infrastructure , the world would lose.Who imports all that stuff from China ?
A stalled US economy will lead to a lot of upset Chinese unemployed .
Who still has the largest amount of global financial services ?
Care to try to cash in those stocks/bonds or " safe " US Treasury Securities when the US information infrastructure is down ? If the US real-estate bubble was enough to cause a global recession , what would happen if the entire information infrastructure of the US were taken out ? Any nation-state that thinks taking out the US will help them is stupid .
Terrorism ( the kind that can accept a global depression ) is another story .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the US lost a "cyber war" enough to seriously damage our economic infrastructure, the world would lose.Who imports all that stuff from China?
A stalled US economy will lead to a lot of upset Chinese unemployed.
Who still has the largest amount of global financial services?
Care to try to cash in those stocks/bonds or "safe" US Treasury Securities when the US information infrastructure is down?If the US real-estate bubble was enough to cause a global recession, what would happen if the entire information infrastructure of the US were taken out?Any nation-state that thinks taking out the US will help them is stupid.
Terrorism (the kind that can accept a global depression) is another story.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31262460</id>
	<title>Secretary of War Gates Has The Solution</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265139240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>buy more <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/feb/23/pacification-europe-security-threat-us-nato" title="guardian.co.uk" rel="nofollow">U.S.A. weapons</a> [guardian.co.uk].</p><p>Brilliant !</p><p>Yours In Ashgabat,<br>Kilgore T.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>buy more U.S.A. weapons [ guardian.co.uk ] .Brilliant ! Yours In Ashgabat,Kilgore T .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>buy more U.S.A. weapons [guardian.co.uk].Brilliant !Yours In Ashgabat,Kilgore T.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261788</id>
	<title>Silly</title>
	<author>MrTripps</author>
	<datestamp>1265136600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>OMG!! Some super virus has been unleashed on the Internet and can't be contained by firewalls, routers, or anti-virus measures! How do we stop it? They might as well game out a scenario where all door locks suddenly stop working.</htmltext>
<tokenext>OMG ! !
Some super virus has been unleashed on the Internet and ca n't be contained by firewalls , routers , or anti-virus measures !
How do we stop it ?
They might as well game out a scenario where all door locks suddenly stop working .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OMG!!
Some super virus has been unleashed on the Internet and can't be contained by firewalls, routers, or anti-virus measures!
How do we stop it?
They might as well game out a scenario where all door locks suddenly stop working.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31268264</id>
	<title>Re:A comment in The Atlantic on cluelessness</title>
	<author>azrider</author>
	<datestamp>1265129040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>sixth (notice that this was from a reply):<blockquote><div><p>I'd be willing to bet that some fair percentage of the people with their hands on the keyboards in NANOG would be able to fire up their <strong>HAM (radio) sets</strong> if the backbones got so totally overwhelmed that nothing could get through. (edited for clarity)</p></div></blockquote><p>
In the event of a major disaster, Ham Radio (under the auspices of the ARRL) has MORs with FEMA, Red Cross, DOD and most state and local governments.  There <strong>will not</strong> be a total communications breakdown unless FEMA is run by the president of an arabian horse association.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>sixth ( notice that this was from a reply ) : I 'd be willing to bet that some fair percentage of the people with their hands on the keyboards in NANOG would be able to fire up their HAM ( radio ) sets if the backbones got so totally overwhelmed that nothing could get through .
( edited for clarity ) In the event of a major disaster , Ham Radio ( under the auspices of the ARRL ) has MORs with FEMA , Red Cross , DOD and most state and local governments .
There will not be a total communications breakdown unless FEMA is run by the president of an arabian horse association .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>sixth (notice that this was from a reply):I'd be willing to bet that some fair percentage of the people with their hands on the keyboards in NANOG would be able to fire up their HAM (radio) sets if the backbones got so totally overwhelmed that nothing could get through.
(edited for clarity)
In the event of a major disaster, Ham Radio (under the auspices of the ARRL) has MORs with FEMA, Red Cross, DOD and most state and local governments.
There will not be a total communications breakdown unless FEMA is run by the president of an arabian horse association.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261544</id>
	<title>The only winning move...</title>
	<author>deliciousmonster</author>
	<datestamp>1265135700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>... is not to play.</htmltext>
<tokenext>... is not to play .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... is not to play.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260832</id>
	<title>The movie was good</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265132880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bruce Willis and Justin Long in a good movie:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Live\_Free\_or\_Die\_Hard</p><p>Whoever wrote the script must have done some research to make it look somewhat real.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bruce Willis and Justin Long in a good movie : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Live \ _Free \ _or \ _Die \ _HardWhoever wrote the script must have done some research to make it look somewhat real .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bruce Willis and Justin Long in a good movie:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Live\_Free\_or\_Die\_HardWhoever wrote the script must have done some research to make it look somewhat real.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31262636</id>
	<title>Why Would Geeks Want to Fight a Cyber War Anyway?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265140020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Isn't all that flag waving, jingoist nonesense for the jocks and the more physically aggressive types in society? Why would those marginalised to their bedrooms and basements for much of their formative years feel any obligation or urge to fight for so ethereal a concept as a nation? What is a nation but a line drawn in the sand to divide one tax paying group of people from another tax paying group of people? Aren't there more interesting things to do like watching Battlestar Gallactica or playing Bioshock 2?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't all that flag waving , jingoist nonesense for the jocks and the more physically aggressive types in society ?
Why would those marginalised to their bedrooms and basements for much of their formative years feel any obligation or urge to fight for so ethereal a concept as a nation ?
What is a nation but a line drawn in the sand to divide one tax paying group of people from another tax paying group of people ?
Are n't there more interesting things to do like watching Battlestar Gallactica or playing Bioshock 2 ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't all that flag waving, jingoist nonesense for the jocks and the more physically aggressive types in society?
Why would those marginalised to their bedrooms and basements for much of their formative years feel any obligation or urge to fight for so ethereal a concept as a nation?
What is a nation but a line drawn in the sand to divide one tax paying group of people from another tax paying group of people?
Aren't there more interesting things to do like watching Battlestar Gallactica or playing Bioshock 2?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31262052</id>
	<title>All warfare is based on deception</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265137620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All warfare is based on deception.</p><p>Hence, when able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must seem inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.</p><p>Hold out baits to entice the enemy.  Feign disorder,and crush him.</p><p><i> Sun Tzu, The Art of War</i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All warfare is based on deception.Hence , when able to attack , we must seem unable ; when using our forces , we must seem inactive ; when we are near , we must make the enemy believe we are far away ; when far away , we must make him believe we are near.Hold out baits to entice the enemy .
Feign disorder,and crush him .
Sun Tzu , The Art of War</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All warfare is based on deception.Hence, when able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must seem inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.Hold out baits to entice the enemy.
Feign disorder,and crush him.
Sun Tzu, The Art of War</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261670</id>
	<title>This was a bullshit story</title>
	<author>JumpDrive</author>
	<datestamp>1265136180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>While watching parts of this it became obvious that this was a scripted show and had no basis in reality.  They had certain talking points that they wanted to get out and test on the American public, this was the show in which they set it up to do it.  It was unbelievably stupid and showed incompetence of a highest order.<br>
Obama should address this scenario and flat out bitch slap them for using this FUD to float trial balloons to further erode our constitution.</htmltext>
<tokenext>While watching parts of this it became obvious that this was a scripted show and had no basis in reality .
They had certain talking points that they wanted to get out and test on the American public , this was the show in which they set it up to do it .
It was unbelievably stupid and showed incompetence of a highest order .
Obama should address this scenario and flat out bitch slap them for using this FUD to float trial balloons to further erode our constitution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While watching parts of this it became obvious that this was a scripted show and had no basis in reality.
They had certain talking points that they wanted to get out and test on the American public, this was the show in which they set it up to do it.
It was unbelievably stupid and showed incompetence of a highest order.
Obama should address this scenario and flat out bitch slap them for using this FUD to float trial balloons to further erode our constitution.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31271102</id>
	<title>Re:A comment in The Atlantic on cluelessness</title>
	<author>fm6</author>
	<datestamp>1267107360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Uh, did The Atlantic actually use your letter? I'm guessing not, since you reproduced it in full. In which case mentioning that you submitted it to them is a rather lame attempt to inflate its importance.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Uh , did The Atlantic actually use your letter ?
I 'm guessing not , since you reproduced it in full .
In which case mentioning that you submitted it to them is a rather lame attempt to inflate its importance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uh, did The Atlantic actually use your letter?
I'm guessing not, since you reproduced it in full.
In which case mentioning that you submitted it to them is a rather lame attempt to inflate its importance.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261086</id>
	<title>Which country \_would\_ win?</title>
	<author>spookymonster</author>
	<datestamp>1265133900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Frankly, I feel the US is more prepared than most countries. Unfortunately, that still doesn't quite cut it.</p><p>I think the threat of indefensible counter-attack is going to make any government think twice about a full-on cyber-attack, taking the same role nuclear retaliation did during the Cold War.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Frankly , I feel the US is more prepared than most countries .
Unfortunately , that still does n't quite cut it.I think the threat of indefensible counter-attack is going to make any government think twice about a full-on cyber-attack , taking the same role nuclear retaliation did during the Cold War .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Frankly, I feel the US is more prepared than most countries.
Unfortunately, that still doesn't quite cut it.I think the threat of indefensible counter-attack is going to make any government think twice about a full-on cyber-attack, taking the same role nuclear retaliation did during the Cold War.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31265018</id>
	<title>The one and only true cyber attack</title>
	<author>Sven Tuerpe</author>
	<datestamp>1265107200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5oCHxB8d20s" title="youtube.com">Typing <i>Google</i> into Google.</a> [youtube.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Typing Google into Google .
[ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Typing Google into Google.
[youtube.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31262968</id>
	<title>An honest loss?</title>
	<author>Jeremy Erwin</author>
	<datestamp>1265141640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The military has conducted <a href="http://www.armytimes.com/legacy/new/0-292925-1060102.php" title="armytimes.com">dishonest wargames</a> [armytimes.com] before, gaming the rules to prevent the Red team from achieving a politically distasteful victory. Perhaps the parties involved can learn from their loss instead of pretending it didn't happen. Of course, if the Red Team was supposed to win, in order to bolster budget requests and score political points, we're back to meaningless pantomimes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The military has conducted dishonest wargames [ armytimes.com ] before , gaming the rules to prevent the Red team from achieving a politically distasteful victory .
Perhaps the parties involved can learn from their loss instead of pretending it did n't happen .
Of course , if the Red Team was supposed to win , in order to bolster budget requests and score political points , we 're back to meaningless pantomimes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The military has conducted dishonest wargames [armytimes.com] before, gaming the rules to prevent the Red team from achieving a politically distasteful victory.
Perhaps the parties involved can learn from their loss instead of pretending it didn't happen.
Of course, if the Red Team was supposed to win, in order to bolster budget requests and score political points, we're back to meaningless pantomimes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31264708</id>
	<title>Re:Everyone loses</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1265105880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>the Internet as we know it would cease to be. You can't even guess what that would look like.<br></i><br>As someone who has lived most of his life without the internet as we know it even existing, yes, I think I can guess what it would be like. Now, guessing what life without automobiles would be like would be beyond my sphere of experience; THAT I couldn't guess what would be like.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the Internet as we know it would cease to be .
You ca n't even guess what that would look like.As someone who has lived most of his life without the internet as we know it even existing , yes , I think I can guess what it would be like .
Now , guessing what life without automobiles would be like would be beyond my sphere of experience ; THAT I could n't guess what would be like .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the Internet as we know it would cease to be.
You can't even guess what that would look like.As someone who has lived most of his life without the internet as we know it even existing, yes, I think I can guess what it would be like.
Now, guessing what life without automobiles would be like would be beyond my sphere of experience; THAT I couldn't guess what would be like.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31262504</id>
	<title>Stop bitching and get it fixed!</title>
	<author>xxuserxx</author>
	<datestamp>1265139420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Instead of bitching and bringing more media attention to our weakness why does he not form a plan and get us where we need to be?  You know...that "work" thing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Instead of bitching and bringing more media attention to our weakness why does he not form a plan and get us where we need to be ?
You know...that " work " thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Instead of bitching and bringing more media attention to our weakness why does he not form a plan and get us where we need to be?
You know...that "work" thing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261508</id>
	<title>Re:Bunch of BS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265135580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yep, this was set up by Fox N... wait a second, it was on CNN!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yep , this was set up by Fox N... wait a second , it was on CNN !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yep, this was set up by Fox N... wait a second, it was on CNN!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31274424</id>
	<title>By Neruos</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267123320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The US has been fighting the war on crime, drugs, etc for 40+ years, still haven't made an impact and those things are REAL.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The US has been fighting the war on crime , drugs , etc for 40 + years , still have n't made an impact and those things are REAL .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The US has been fighting the war on crime, drugs, etc for 40+ years, still haven't made an impact and those things are REAL.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260746</id>
	<title>Bullshit</title>
	<author>sexconker</author>
	<datestamp>1265132580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If there was an actual cyber war, we would respond with real war.</p><p>We're far and away the best at that.</p><p>Random attacks showing the ineptitude of  aren't a cyber war.  When someone starts launching missles and redirecting our navy clear a path for an attack, then it'll be a cyber war.</p><p>When some schlubs steal buckets of personal data, mess with the power grid, or disrupt internet traffic it's just another day in the U S of A.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If there was an actual cyber war , we would respond with real war.We 're far and away the best at that.Random attacks showing the ineptitude of are n't a cyber war .
When someone starts launching missles and redirecting our navy clear a path for an attack , then it 'll be a cyber war.When some schlubs steal buckets of personal data , mess with the power grid , or disrupt internet traffic it 's just another day in the U S of A .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If there was an actual cyber war, we would respond with real war.We're far and away the best at that.Random attacks showing the ineptitude of  aren't a cyber war.
When someone starts launching missles and redirecting our navy clear a path for an attack, then it'll be a cyber war.When some schlubs steal buckets of personal data, mess with the power grid, or disrupt internet traffic it's just another day in the U S of A.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261754</id>
	<title>Re:SysAdmins in Cyberwarfare put on black hats.</title>
	<author>Fnord666</author>
	<datestamp>1265136480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>All of us that have been gainfully employed for being able to actually work in IT would become modern day partisans in any such event. It would be a rare opportunity to do our worst to other people's systems with the full knowledge of what has unintentionally brought us pain for years. That said, unlike common partisans we do think for ourselves. Many of us would need to be convinced that we were indeed on the side of what we consider good before we took an offensive approach.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Have you heard of <a href="http://www.infragard.net/" title="infragard.net">Infragard</a> [infragard.net]?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>All of us that have been gainfully employed for being able to actually work in IT would become modern day partisans in any such event .
It would be a rare opportunity to do our worst to other people 's systems with the full knowledge of what has unintentionally brought us pain for years .
That said , unlike common partisans we do think for ourselves .
Many of us would need to be convinced that we were indeed on the side of what we consider good before we took an offensive approach .
Have you heard of Infragard [ infragard.net ] ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All of us that have been gainfully employed for being able to actually work in IT would become modern day partisans in any such event.
It would be a rare opportunity to do our worst to other people's systems with the full knowledge of what has unintentionally brought us pain for years.
That said, unlike common partisans we do think for ourselves.
Many of us would need to be convinced that we were indeed on the side of what we consider good before we took an offensive approach.
Have you heard of Infragard [infragard.net]?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260874</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31267312</id>
	<title>Re:Which country \_would\_ win?</title>
	<author>lennier</author>
	<datestamp>1265120100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The one which could survive without Farmville the longest.</p><p>North Korea, perhaps.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The one which could survive without Farmville the longest.North Korea , perhaps .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The one which could survive without Farmville the longest.North Korea, perhaps.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260952</id>
	<title>They have a point...</title>
	<author>d1r3lnd</author>
	<datestamp>1265133360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Too much of our "national cyber security" policy does seem to be FUDged together by people who don't know what they're talking about.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Too much of our " national cyber security " policy does seem to be FUDged together by people who do n't know what they 're talking about .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Too much of our "national cyber security" policy does seem to be FUDged together by people who don't know what they're talking about.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261012</id>
	<title>Always remember this in a cyber war</title>
	<author>Tetsujin</author>
	<datestamp>1265133540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you're captured by the enemy, there are just three pieces of information you are compelled to divulge: Age, Sex, and Location.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're captured by the enemy , there are just three pieces of information you are compelled to divulge : Age , Sex , and Location .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're captured by the enemy, there are just three pieces of information you are compelled to divulge: Age, Sex, and Location.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261730</id>
	<title>Re:SysAdmins in Cyberwarfare put on black hats.</title>
	<author>bsDaemon</author>
	<datestamp>1265136360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The good side is on the inside of my firewall.  Everyone else is potentially the enemy.  Frankly, a situation which legitimized punitive retaliation against the attackers I have to fend off would be OK by me, no matter where they were located.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The good side is on the inside of my firewall .
Everyone else is potentially the enemy .
Frankly , a situation which legitimized punitive retaliation against the attackers I have to fend off would be OK by me , no matter where they were located .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The good side is on the inside of my firewall.
Everyone else is potentially the enemy.
Frankly, a situation which legitimized punitive retaliation against the attackers I have to fend off would be OK by me, no matter where they were located.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260874</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261894</id>
	<title>Re:Bunch of BS</title>
	<author>baKanale</author>
	<datestamp>1265137020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not even sure what the whole "wargame" consisted of to begin with.  Correct me if I'm wrong, but from the sound of things, the entire event was just a bunch of guys sitting around at a table, with their staff telling them what's "happening".  Everything they do (i.e. talking about it) is unable to change what they're being told.</p><p>Seems to me like it doesn't need to have any basis in reality.  It could have had any conclusion they want it to.  For all it matters the scenario could have been an invasion by space gorillas and proved that the United States is [prepared/unprepared] to fend of laser banana cannons!  When you add the fact that these guys wouldn't even necessarily be part of the government response to the events depicted, how does anyone get "We are unprepared for a cyberattack" out of it?</p><p>Also, "Cyber ShockWave" sounds like the title of a bad novel you'd find at a drug store in the late 1990's.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not even sure what the whole " wargame " consisted of to begin with .
Correct me if I 'm wrong , but from the sound of things , the entire event was just a bunch of guys sitting around at a table , with their staff telling them what 's " happening " .
Everything they do ( i.e .
talking about it ) is unable to change what they 're being told.Seems to me like it does n't need to have any basis in reality .
It could have had any conclusion they want it to .
For all it matters the scenario could have been an invasion by space gorillas and proved that the United States is [ prepared/unprepared ] to fend of laser banana cannons !
When you add the fact that these guys would n't even necessarily be part of the government response to the events depicted , how does anyone get " We are unprepared for a cyberattack " out of it ? Also , " Cyber ShockWave " sounds like the title of a bad novel you 'd find at a drug store in the late 1990 's .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not even sure what the whole "wargame" consisted of to begin with.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but from the sound of things, the entire event was just a bunch of guys sitting around at a table, with their staff telling them what's "happening".
Everything they do (i.e.
talking about it) is unable to change what they're being told.Seems to me like it doesn't need to have any basis in reality.
It could have had any conclusion they want it to.
For all it matters the scenario could have been an invasion by space gorillas and proved that the United States is [prepared/unprepared] to fend of laser banana cannons!
When you add the fact that these guys wouldn't even necessarily be part of the government response to the events depicted, how does anyone get "We are unprepared for a cyberattack" out of it?Also, "Cyber ShockWave" sounds like the title of a bad novel you'd find at a drug store in the late 1990's.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261474</id>
	<title>Bruce saw this coming.</title>
	<author>Ora*DBA</author>
	<datestamp>1265135520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Live free or die hard!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Live free or die hard !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Live free or die hard!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261556</id>
	<title>Re:GNN? CNN? REALLY?</title>
	<author>LostCluster</author>
	<datestamp>1265135700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The GNN branding in this situation was a concession to CNN who didn't want to use any real logos in the fictional updates, for fear it might be confused with real news.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The GNN branding in this situation was a concession to CNN who did n't want to use any real logos in the fictional updates , for fear it might be confused with real news .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The GNN branding in this situation was a concession to CNN who didn't want to use any real logos in the fictional updates, for fear it might be confused with real news.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260814</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31263978</id>
	<title>Kill spambots</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1265102760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If the DoD really wants a practical exercise, it should go after the botnets and kill them. They are exactly the sort of thing that would be used to launch a cyber attack from the inside out. Kill the botnets and they kill a huge attack vector.</p><p>Next up would be a re-design of the corporate attitude. The just push it out the door and we'll patch any security flaws later (like, you know, after we give up on shareholder value and the quarterly numbers as our sole metrics of success and quit offshoring to the cheapest labor who happens to be in the country we most fear a cyber attack from, that is).</p><p>Good luck with that BTW.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the DoD really wants a practical exercise , it should go after the botnets and kill them .
They are exactly the sort of thing that would be used to launch a cyber attack from the inside out .
Kill the botnets and they kill a huge attack vector.Next up would be a re-design of the corporate attitude .
The just push it out the door and we 'll patch any security flaws later ( like , you know , after we give up on shareholder value and the quarterly numbers as our sole metrics of success and quit offshoring to the cheapest labor who happens to be in the country we most fear a cyber attack from , that is ) .Good luck with that BTW .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the DoD really wants a practical exercise, it should go after the botnets and kill them.
They are exactly the sort of thing that would be used to launch a cyber attack from the inside out.
Kill the botnets and they kill a huge attack vector.Next up would be a re-design of the corporate attitude.
The just push it out the door and we'll patch any security flaws later (like, you know, after we give up on shareholder value and the quarterly numbers as our sole metrics of success and quit offshoring to the cheapest labor who happens to be in the country we most fear a cyber attack from, that is).Good luck with that BTW.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261860</id>
	<title>SkyNet</title>
	<author>The Abused Developer</author>
	<datestamp>1265136900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>hihihi - this is not stupidity; it is call subversive influence; if this would have been the reality nobody would have had trumpeted it over the seas and lands so that anybody interested hears it.
Its real purpose is to seed the ground for implementing the mega-system who's going to control all the internet - the baby SkyNet has been conceived.</htmltext>
<tokenext>hihihi - this is not stupidity ; it is call subversive influence ; if this would have been the reality nobody would have had trumpeted it over the seas and lands so that anybody interested hears it .
Its real purpose is to seed the ground for implementing the mega-system who 's going to control all the internet - the baby SkyNet has been conceived .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>hihihi - this is not stupidity; it is call subversive influence; if this would have been the reality nobody would have had trumpeted it over the seas and lands so that anybody interested hears it.
Its real purpose is to seed the ground for implementing the mega-system who's going to control all the internet - the baby SkyNet has been conceived.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31262362</id>
	<title>Nuke from Orbit??</title>
	<author>bjk002</author>
	<datestamp>1265138760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think, in this case, a quick read on the general area from where the attack spawned, coupled with a few large EMP explosions would do the trick...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think , in this case , a quick read on the general area from where the attack spawned , coupled with a few large EMP explosions would do the trick.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think, in this case, a quick read on the general area from where the attack spawned, coupled with a few large EMP explosions would do the trick...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31264442</id>
	<title>Re:If the US lost a "cyber war", the world would l</title>
	<author>Foolicious</author>
	<datestamp>1265104920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>A stalled US economy <strong>has</strong> lead to a lot of upset Chinese unemployed.</p></div><p>One correction.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A stalled US economy has lead to a lot of upset Chinese unemployed.One correction .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A stalled US economy has lead to a lot of upset Chinese unemployed.One correction.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31263340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260826</id>
	<title>Yeah could win, but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265132820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, we would lose as this country continues to be wrapped up in Gov. red tape.  On the flip side if we experienced a serious cyber outage all it would take is to rally the troops from Blackhat/Defcon etc..., put aside that they don't hold clearance and smoke pot and let them do what they do BEST.  Don't think for once the US is incapable of winning this "battle" what impedes us is we spend more time fighting bureaucracy then we do fighting the war.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , we would lose as this country continues to be wrapped up in Gov .
red tape .
On the flip side if we experienced a serious cyber outage all it would take is to rally the troops from Blackhat/Defcon etc... , put aside that they do n't hold clearance and smoke pot and let them do what they do BEST .
Do n't think for once the US is incapable of winning this " battle " what impedes us is we spend more time fighting bureaucracy then we do fighting the war .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, we would lose as this country continues to be wrapped up in Gov.
red tape.
On the flip side if we experienced a serious cyber outage all it would take is to rally the troops from Blackhat/Defcon etc..., put aside that they don't hold clearance and smoke pot and let them do what they do BEST.
Don't think for once the US is incapable of winning this "battle" what impedes us is we spend more time fighting bureaucracy then we do fighting the war.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260916</id>
	<title>Everyone loses</title>
	<author>FlyingBishop</author>
	<datestamp>1265133120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In a real cyber war, the international network chokepoints would be cut (probably brought down by the DDOS load) and the Internet as we know it would cease to be. You can't even guess what that would look like.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In a real cyber war , the international network chokepoints would be cut ( probably brought down by the DDOS load ) and the Internet as we know it would cease to be .
You ca n't even guess what that would look like .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In a real cyber war, the international network chokepoints would be cut (probably brought down by the DDOS load) and the Internet as we know it would cease to be.
You can't even guess what that would look like.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260998</id>
	<title>Cut the cord</title>
	<author>Nittle</author>
	<datestamp>1265133480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>If an attack was serious enough, we could just start disengaging connections to outside the US, then start dealing with the aspects that were attacking from inside the borders.

This is probably mostly government propaganda to make the US look weaker than it really is.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If an attack was serious enough , we could just start disengaging connections to outside the US , then start dealing with the aspects that were attacking from inside the borders .
This is probably mostly government propaganda to make the US look weaker than it really is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If an attack was serious enough, we could just start disengaging connections to outside the US, then start dealing with the aspects that were attacking from inside the borders.
This is probably mostly government propaganda to make the US look weaker than it really is.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31263146</id>
	<title>Re:A comment in The Atlantic on cluelessness</title>
	<author>Lousifer</author>
	<datestamp>1265142300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>They are sociopaths and psychotics and we can only hope they die of old age before the country falls headlong into a French Revolution of purges, pogroms, and random bloodletting.</i> </p><p>
What makes you think their children will be any different?  There has been a trend for the ruling class in the US to function equivalently to royalty (Bush I &amp; II, Clintons, Kennedys).  I don't see why the next generation of sociopaths will be any better than the current batch.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They are sociopaths and psychotics and we can only hope they die of old age before the country falls headlong into a French Revolution of purges , pogroms , and random bloodletting .
What makes you think their children will be any different ?
There has been a trend for the ruling class in the US to function equivalently to royalty ( Bush I &amp; II , Clintons , Kennedys ) .
I do n't see why the next generation of sociopaths will be any better than the current batch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> They are sociopaths and psychotics and we can only hope they die of old age before the country falls headlong into a French Revolution of purges, pogroms, and random bloodletting.
What makes you think their children will be any different?
There has been a trend for the ruling class in the US to function equivalently to royalty (Bush I &amp; II, Clintons, Kennedys).
I don't see why the next generation of sociopaths will be any better than the current batch.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261922</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31268828</id>
	<title>Translation: I want money</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265135280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Longer translation: The Marines/Navy/Army/CIA/NSA/whatever have all those shiny new toys!  I also want toys.  Gimme my toys!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Longer translation : The Marines/Navy/Army/CIA/NSA/whatever have all those shiny new toys !
I also want toys .
Gim me my toys !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Longer translation: The Marines/Navy/Army/CIA/NSA/whatever have all those shiny new toys!
I also want toys.
Gimme my toys!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260774</id>
	<title>Bunch of BS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265132640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>That "excercise" was conducted by a bunch of former Bush officials and other neocons. It wasn't a test of our cyber security, it was a propaganda tool designed to embarass the Obama administration and urge a further erosion of our civil liberties.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That " excercise " was conducted by a bunch of former Bush officials and other neocons .
It was n't a test of our cyber security , it was a propaganda tool designed to embarass the Obama administration and urge a further erosion of our civil liberties .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That "excercise" was conducted by a bunch of former Bush officials and other neocons.
It wasn't a test of our cyber security, it was a propaganda tool designed to embarass the Obama administration and urge a further erosion of our civil liberties.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261146</id>
	<title>Re:Bunch of BS</title>
	<author>CodeBuster</author>
	<datestamp>1265134140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think you are looking at this all wrong. As others on this thread have pointed out, the real defense against any "cyber attack" (can we all stop using the cyber prefix already? The Internet has very little to do with cyborgs) will come from the private sector. This exercise, like many others conducted by biased parties within the government, is designed to drum up maximum fear and guarantee years of increased budgets and spending for those involved in the exercise. This is about money, plain and simple, and the private sector will be only too happy to supply the government with whatever gear, useful or otherwise, it is willing to pay for. When have you ever heard of a government exercise not resulting in the conclusion that lots more money must be spent and quickly to ensure that we "win" the game?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you are looking at this all wrong .
As others on this thread have pointed out , the real defense against any " cyber attack " ( can we all stop using the cyber prefix already ?
The Internet has very little to do with cyborgs ) will come from the private sector .
This exercise , like many others conducted by biased parties within the government , is designed to drum up maximum fear and guarantee years of increased budgets and spending for those involved in the exercise .
This is about money , plain and simple , and the private sector will be only too happy to supply the government with whatever gear , useful or otherwise , it is willing to pay for .
When have you ever heard of a government exercise not resulting in the conclusion that lots more money must be spent and quickly to ensure that we " win " the game ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you are looking at this all wrong.
As others on this thread have pointed out, the real defense against any "cyber attack" (can we all stop using the cyber prefix already?
The Internet has very little to do with cyborgs) will come from the private sector.
This exercise, like many others conducted by biased parties within the government, is designed to drum up maximum fear and guarantee years of increased budgets and spending for those involved in the exercise.
This is about money, plain and simple, and the private sector will be only too happy to supply the government with whatever gear, useful or otherwise, it is willing to pay for.
When have you ever heard of a government exercise not resulting in the conclusion that lots more money must be spent and quickly to ensure that we "win" the game?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261554</id>
	<title>Re:Which country \_would\_ win?</title>
	<author>shentino</author>
	<datestamp>1265135700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except that nowadays the "nukes", also known as multithousand node botnets, are in the hands of "terrorists", also known as spammers and botnet operators.</p><p>And terrorists are not exactly known for being rational.</p><p>Anyone who pisses them off is going to face mega retaliation...</p><p>A lession that Blue Security unfortunately had to learn the hard way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except that nowadays the " nukes " , also known as multithousand node botnets , are in the hands of " terrorists " , also known as spammers and botnet operators.And terrorists are not exactly known for being rational.Anyone who pisses them off is going to face mega retaliation...A lession that Blue Security unfortunately had to learn the hard way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except that nowadays the "nukes", also known as multithousand node botnets, are in the hands of "terrorists", also known as spammers and botnet operators.And terrorists are not exactly known for being rational.Anyone who pisses them off is going to face mega retaliation...A lession that Blue Security unfortunately had to learn the hard way.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31262184</id>
	<title>Re:A comment in The Atlantic on cluelessness</title>
	<author>LostCluster</author>
	<datestamp>1265138160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Fourth, activate the Emergency Broadcasting System, which uses AM radio, for a Presidential address. That will get through even if almost everything else is down.</p><p>EBS is dead... long live EAS. That plan includes all cable, XM/Sirius, and broadcast radio and TV systems. But, the problem is without power, you can't broadcast anything. These guys didn't understand the seriousness of the problem, and therefore lost their ability to activate EAS before they had a message to send.</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Fourth , activate the Emergency Broadcasting System , which uses AM radio , for a Presidential address .
That will get through even if almost everything else is down.EBS is dead... long live EAS .
That plan includes all cable , XM/Sirius , and broadcast radio and TV systems .
But , the problem is without power , you ca n't broadcast anything .
These guys did n't understand the seriousness of the problem , and therefore lost their ability to activate EAS before they had a message to send .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fourth, activate the Emergency Broadcasting System, which uses AM radio, for a Presidential address.
That will get through even if almost everything else is down.EBS is dead... long live EAS.
That plan includes all cable, XM/Sirius, and broadcast radio and TV systems.
But, the problem is without power, you can't broadcast anything.
These guys didn't understand the seriousness of the problem, and therefore lost their ability to activate EAS before they had a message to send.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260940</id>
	<title>Just like now</title>
	<author>kondor6c</author>
	<datestamp>1265133240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>As soon as we upgrade our ability to win a cyber war, people will be out on the streets protesting the de-arming of computers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As soon as we upgrade our ability to win a cyber war , people will be out on the streets protesting the de-arming of computers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As soon as we upgrade our ability to win a cyber war, people will be out on the streets protesting the de-arming of computers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31264698</id>
	<title>Re:Goes without saying...</title>
	<author>Sven Tuerpe</author>
	<datestamp>1265105820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The installation of a firewall just doesn't make one go "oooh and ahhh" like the vaporized city and mushroom cloud from a 10 mega-ton ICBM.</p></div><p>
Unlike a "cyber attack" the ICBM does real damage to the enemy. Which is the whole point of war: overpowering the enemy. The point of war is not to force the enemy to reroute network traffic or to restore a computer system from backup copies. If the troubles are serious, forget all that cyber stuff and go for the ICBM. It is the only thing that makes sense.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The installation of a firewall just does n't make one go " oooh and ahhh " like the vaporized city and mushroom cloud from a 10 mega-ton ICBM .
Unlike a " cyber attack " the ICBM does real damage to the enemy .
Which is the whole point of war : overpowering the enemy .
The point of war is not to force the enemy to reroute network traffic or to restore a computer system from backup copies .
If the troubles are serious , forget all that cyber stuff and go for the ICBM .
It is the only thing that makes sense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The installation of a firewall just doesn't make one go "oooh and ahhh" like the vaporized city and mushroom cloud from a 10 mega-ton ICBM.
Unlike a "cyber attack" the ICBM does real damage to the enemy.
Which is the whole point of war: overpowering the enemy.
The point of war is not to force the enemy to reroute network traffic or to restore a computer system from backup copies.
If the troubles are serious, forget all that cyber stuff and go for the ICBM.
It is the only thing that makes sense.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31265314</id>
	<title>IP to RTTY</title>
	<author>caluml</author>
	<datestamp>1265108340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Someone should write a network-to-<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RTTY" title="wikipedia.org">RTTY</a> [wikipedia.org] audio/network driver. Then, if the internet fails, we can still network (albeit slowly) over the phone network, walkie-talkies, Ham Radio (44/8 anyone?).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Someone should write a network-to-RTTY [ wikipedia.org ] audio/network driver .
Then , if the internet fails , we can still network ( albeit slowly ) over the phone network , walkie-talkies , Ham Radio ( 44/8 anyone ?
) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Someone should write a network-to-RTTY [wikipedia.org] audio/network driver.
Then, if the internet fails, we can still network (albeit slowly) over the phone network, walkie-talkies, Ham Radio (44/8 anyone?
).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_157205_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31264250
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261018
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_157205_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260774
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_157205_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31271102
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261018
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_157205_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31263146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261922
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261018
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_157205_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31268264
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261018
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_157205_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31266094
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261018
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_157205_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261914
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260774
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_157205_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261894
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260774
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_157205_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260814
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_157205_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31263190
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31262182
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_157205_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31264150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261020
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_157205_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260774
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_157205_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261754
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260874
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_157205_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31264442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31263340
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_157205_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31267312
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_157205_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_157205_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31262574
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260774
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_157205_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31262128
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260746
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_157205_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31262184
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261018
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_157205_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31264698
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261020
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_157205_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31264708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260916
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_157205_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261730
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260874
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_157205.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260738
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_157205.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260774
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261146
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261914
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31262574
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261508
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261894
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_157205.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31262636
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_157205.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260558
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_157205.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261012
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_157205.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31263340
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31264442
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_157205.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260916
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31264708
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_157205.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261670
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_157205.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261086
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261554
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31267312
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_157205.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31262182
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31263190
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_157205.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31268828
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_157205.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260874
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261754
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261730
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_157205.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31262968
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_157205.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261018
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31264250
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31262184
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31268264
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31266094
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31271102
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261922
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31263146
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_157205.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260814
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261556
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_157205.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260998
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_157205.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261746
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_157205.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261020
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31264698
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31264150
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_157205.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260746
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31262128
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_157205.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31260772
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_157205.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31262430
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_157205.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_157205.31261456
</commentlist>
</conversation>
