<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_05_1426216</id>
	<title>There Is No Cyberwar</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1267802400000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://crowfeather.com/" rel="nofollow">crowfeather</a> notes an <a href="http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/03/schmidt-cyberwar/">interview with cybersecurity czar Howard Schmidt</a> that Wired's Threat Level conducted this week. <i>"Howard Schmidt, the new cybersecurity czar for the Obama administration, has a short answer for the <a href="//it.slashdot.org/story/10/02/24/157205/US-Unable-To-Win-a-Cyber-War?art\_pos=1">drumbeat of rhetoric</a> claiming the United States is caught up in a cyberwar that it is losing. 'There is no cyberwar,' Schmidt told Wired.com in a sit-down interview Wednesday at the RSA Security Conference in San Francisco. 'I think that is a terrible metaphor and I think that is a terrible concept,' Schmidt said. 'There are no winners in that environment.' Instead, Schmidt said the government needs to focus its cybersecurity efforts to fight online crime and espionage. His stance contradicts Michael McConnell, the former director of national intelligence who made headlines last week when he testified to Congress that the country was already in the midst of a cyberwar &mdash; and was losing it. ... There's been much ink spilled in recent years over the turf battles in D.C. over whether the NSA (representing the military) or DHS (on the civilian side) takes the lead role in cybersecurity. But... "I haven't seen that tension," Schmidt said. As for which will take the cybersecurity lead, Schmidt simply says it's a shared effort."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>crowfeather notes an interview with cybersecurity czar Howard Schmidt that Wired 's Threat Level conducted this week .
" Howard Schmidt , the new cybersecurity czar for the Obama administration , has a short answer for the drumbeat of rhetoric claiming the United States is caught up in a cyberwar that it is losing .
'There is no cyberwar, ' Schmidt told Wired.com in a sit-down interview Wednesday at the RSA Security Conference in San Francisco .
'I think that is a terrible metaphor and I think that is a terrible concept, ' Schmidt said .
'There are no winners in that environment .
' Instead , Schmidt said the government needs to focus its cybersecurity efforts to fight online crime and espionage .
His stance contradicts Michael McConnell , the former director of national intelligence who made headlines last week when he testified to Congress that the country was already in the midst of a cyberwar    and was losing it .
... There 's been much ink spilled in recent years over the turf battles in D.C. over whether the NSA ( representing the military ) or DHS ( on the civilian side ) takes the lead role in cybersecurity .
But... " I have n't seen that tension , " Schmidt said .
As for which will take the cybersecurity lead , Schmidt simply says it 's a shared effort .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>crowfeather notes an interview with cybersecurity czar Howard Schmidt that Wired's Threat Level conducted this week.
"Howard Schmidt, the new cybersecurity czar for the Obama administration, has a short answer for the drumbeat of rhetoric claiming the United States is caught up in a cyberwar that it is losing.
'There is no cyberwar,' Schmidt told Wired.com in a sit-down interview Wednesday at the RSA Security Conference in San Francisco.
'I think that is a terrible metaphor and I think that is a terrible concept,' Schmidt said.
'There are no winners in that environment.
' Instead, Schmidt said the government needs to focus its cybersecurity efforts to fight online crime and espionage.
His stance contradicts Michael McConnell, the former director of national intelligence who made headlines last week when he testified to Congress that the country was already in the midst of a cyberwar — and was losing it.
... There's been much ink spilled in recent years over the turf battles in D.C. over whether the NSA (representing the military) or DHS (on the civilian side) takes the lead role in cybersecurity.
But... "I haven't seen that tension," Schmidt said.
As for which will take the cybersecurity lead, Schmidt simply says it's a shared effort.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31374506</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, right</title>
	<author>jbezorg</author>
	<datestamp>1267821240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"never get involved in a botnet war in Asia"?</p><p>Wait, that's a classic blunder, not a rule.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" never get involved in a botnet war in Asia " ? Wait , that 's a classic blunder , not a rule .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"never get involved in a botnet war in Asia"?Wait, that's a classic blunder, not a rule.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371748</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371638</id>
	<title>...and at the same conference, FBI director says:</title>
	<author>daveschroeder</author>
	<datestamp>1267807740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/04/AR2010030405066.html" title="washingtonpost.com">FBI director warns of 'rapidly expanding' cyberterrorism threat</a> [washingtonpost.com]</p><p>This "there is no cyberwar" business plays right into Singel's agenda that anything related to cyber war is really a <a href="http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/03/cyber-war-hype/" title="wired.com">conspiracy to kill the open internet</a> [wired.com].</p><p>All the "cyberwar" stuff may be overplayed, and no, we're not in a "war", <i>per se</i>, at the moment, but we are most certainly unprepared, as are many open, information-dependent societies...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FBI director warns of 'rapidly expanding ' cyberterrorism threat [ washingtonpost.com ] This " there is no cyberwar " business plays right into Singel 's agenda that anything related to cyber war is really a conspiracy to kill the open internet [ wired.com ] .All the " cyberwar " stuff may be overplayed , and no , we 're not in a " war " , per se , at the moment , but we are most certainly unprepared , as are many open , information-dependent societies.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FBI director warns of 'rapidly expanding' cyberterrorism threat [washingtonpost.com]This "there is no cyberwar" business plays right into Singel's agenda that anything related to cyber war is really a conspiracy to kill the open internet [wired.com].All the "cyberwar" stuff may be overplayed, and no, we're not in a "war", per se, at the moment, but we are most certainly unprepared, as are many open, information-dependent societies...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371794</id>
	<title>Re:All this cyberwar bullshit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267808400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think it's naive to believe or suspect it's not happening. I also believe it's naive to think governments don't sponsor it.  Espionage, particularly from China, has been rampant in the corporate sector for longer than most of us have been alive.  Government is an even bigger target with bigger payoffs. Using the Internet to do so makes it very accessible and completely deniable.  I'm not a conspiracy freak but it's foolish to think it's not going on, even if it wasn't right in your face via the news.</p><p>A.C.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think it 's naive to believe or suspect it 's not happening .
I also believe it 's naive to think governments do n't sponsor it .
Espionage , particularly from China , has been rampant in the corporate sector for longer than most of us have been alive .
Government is an even bigger target with bigger payoffs .
Using the Internet to do so makes it very accessible and completely deniable .
I 'm not a conspiracy freak but it 's foolish to think it 's not going on , even if it was n't right in your face via the news.A.C .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think it's naive to believe or suspect it's not happening.
I also believe it's naive to think governments don't sponsor it.
Espionage, particularly from China, has been rampant in the corporate sector for longer than most of us have been alive.
Government is an even bigger target with bigger payoffs.
Using the Internet to do so makes it very accessible and completely deniable.
I'm not a conspiracy freak but it's foolish to think it's not going on, even if it wasn't right in your face via the news.A.C.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371716</id>
	<title>Re:This guy sounds out of touch</title>
	<author>Chris Burke</author>
	<datestamp>1267808100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't see how emailing your post to the white house could fail to do the job.  I mean "sounds out of touch"?  How can anyone read that and not know he's not suited for the job?</p><p>Seriously, focusing on online crime and espionage without re-engineering the internet to eliminate anonymity, instead of focusing on a Cyber-War buzzword with all the "but we're at war!" excuses for doing whatever they want?  That's no way to exercise executive power!  You're so right; how incompetent can you get?!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't see how emailing your post to the white house could fail to do the job .
I mean " sounds out of touch " ?
How can anyone read that and not know he 's not suited for the job ? Seriously , focusing on online crime and espionage without re-engineering the internet to eliminate anonymity , instead of focusing on a Cyber-War buzzword with all the " but we 're at war !
" excuses for doing whatever they want ?
That 's no way to exercise executive power !
You 're so right ; how incompetent can you get ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't see how emailing your post to the white house could fail to do the job.
I mean "sounds out of touch"?
How can anyone read that and not know he's not suited for the job?Seriously, focusing on online crime and espionage without re-engineering the internet to eliminate anonymity, instead of focusing on a Cyber-War buzzword with all the "but we're at war!
" excuses for doing whatever they want?
That's no way to exercise executive power!
You're so right; how incompetent can you get?
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372986</id>
	<title>Re:There is no cyberwar...</title>
	<author>BJ\_Covert\_Action</author>
	<datestamp>1267814340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sounds like it's time to dust off the ol'  <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monroe\_Doctrine" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Monroe Doctrine</a> [wikipedia.org] then. Do you think it would be taken more seriously in pdf or html format online? =)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like it 's time to dust off the ol ' Monroe Doctrine [ wikipedia.org ] then .
Do you think it would be taken more seriously in pdf or html format online ?
= )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like it's time to dust off the ol'  Monroe Doctrine [wikipedia.org] then.
Do you think it would be taken more seriously in pdf or html format online?
=)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371306</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371744</id>
	<title>He's right</title>
	<author>gmuslera</author>
	<datestamp>1267808220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In a war both sides are fighting... but so far, only the bot(net)s are attacking, and what the "attacked" front does efficiently is giving them more drones. Is not war, is harvest.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In a war both sides are fighting... but so far , only the bot ( net ) s are attacking , and what the " attacked " front does efficiently is giving them more drones .
Is not war , is harvest .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In a war both sides are fighting... but so far, only the bot(net)s are attacking, and what the "attacked" front does efficiently is giving them more drones.
Is not war, is harvest.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31373466</id>
	<title>Re:War on X</title>
	<author>Ltap</author>
	<datestamp>1267816500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>All we need now is a War on Sex. That's a cause we could ALL get behind, if these "War on X" trends continue!</htmltext>
<tokenext>All we need now is a War on Sex .
That 's a cause we could ALL get behind , if these " War on X " trends continue !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All we need now is a War on Sex.
That's a cause we could ALL get behind, if these "War on X" trends continue!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371722</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372084</id>
	<title>"No Cyber(security) War" - Yeah, right. Impeach!</title>
	<author>impeach</author>
	<datestamp>1267809780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It sounds right out of <i>When Mars Attacks</i>, misdirection. We need Articles of Impeachment, before these people (run by the International bankers) can fully crash the global economy. Converting the Internet to their police state grid is just part of their plans. But while we can still communicate over the Internet, there is still time to impeach and throw a wrench in their plans.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It sounds right out of When Mars Attacks , misdirection .
We need Articles of Impeachment , before these people ( run by the International bankers ) can fully crash the global economy .
Converting the Internet to their police state grid is just part of their plans .
But while we can still communicate over the Internet , there is still time to impeach and throw a wrench in their plans .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It sounds right out of When Mars Attacks, misdirection.
We need Articles of Impeachment, before these people (run by the International bankers) can fully crash the global economy.
Converting the Internet to their police state grid is just part of their plans.
But while we can still communicate over the Internet, there is still time to impeach and throw a wrench in their plans.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372252</id>
	<title>Re:***Hand Waive***</title>
	<author>Arthur Grumbine</author>
	<datestamp>1267810560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hand waive? Well, if you're not using yours I guess I could find "uses" for an extra two.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hand waive ?
Well , if you 're not using yours I guess I could find " uses " for an extra two .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hand waive?
Well, if you're not using yours I guess I could find "uses" for an extra two.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371492</id>
	<title>A note for non-Americans.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267807080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is just a brief note to non-Americans, to help you avoid some potential confusion.</p><p>The following is from the article:<br><i>There's been much ink spilled in recent years over the turf battles in D.C. over whether the NSA (representing the military) or DHS (on the civilian side) takes the lead role in cybersecurity.</i></p><p>Keep in mind that in this context, "civilian" means "transnational corporations".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is just a brief note to non-Americans , to help you avoid some potential confusion.The following is from the article : There 's been much ink spilled in recent years over the turf battles in D.C. over whether the NSA ( representing the military ) or DHS ( on the civilian side ) takes the lead role in cybersecurity.Keep in mind that in this context , " civilian " means " transnational corporations " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is just a brief note to non-Americans, to help you avoid some potential confusion.The following is from the article:There's been much ink spilled in recent years over the turf battles in D.C. over whether the NSA (representing the military) or DHS (on the civilian side) takes the lead role in cybersecurity.Keep in mind that in this context, "civilian" means "transnational corporations".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31380046</id>
	<title>'There is no cyberwar'</title>
	<author>Wodin</author>
	<datestamp>1267881960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Peace in our time?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Peace in our time ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Peace in our time?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371338</id>
	<title>And he's right.</title>
	<author>ScrewMaster</author>
	<datestamp>1267806360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's not a war if only one side is putting up a fight.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not a war if only one side is putting up a fight .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not a war if only one side is putting up a fight.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371436</id>
	<title>Roll the bad analogies</title>
	<author>sakdoctor</author>
	<datestamp>1267806840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is no war, but if you use IE, acrobat and flash, you are standing up in a front-line trench. It is only a matter of time before a bullet hits you in the head.</p><p>Ok, ratings out of 10 for this analogy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no war , but if you use IE , acrobat and flash , you are standing up in a front-line trench .
It is only a matter of time before a bullet hits you in the head.Ok , ratings out of 10 for this analogy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no war, but if you use IE, acrobat and flash, you are standing up in a front-line trench.
It is only a matter of time before a bullet hits you in the head.Ok, ratings out of 10 for this analogy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371338</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371792</id>
	<title>Re:All this cyberwar bullshit</title>
	<author>jhoegl</author>
	<datestamp>1267808400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The "For whatever reason" makes me think of the cold war and the rhetoric cast back and forth during that whole thing.  It is something so established in our society that even saying "socialist" gets you all kinds of irrational emotional rage about something people know nothing about.<br>

So the reason?  Because people in government positions want unlimited funds for fighting ghosts.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The " For whatever reason " makes me think of the cold war and the rhetoric cast back and forth during that whole thing .
It is something so established in our society that even saying " socialist " gets you all kinds of irrational emotional rage about something people know nothing about .
So the reason ?
Because people in government positions want unlimited funds for fighting ghosts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The "For whatever reason" makes me think of the cold war and the rhetoric cast back and forth during that whole thing.
It is something so established in our society that even saying "socialist" gets you all kinds of irrational emotional rage about something people know nothing about.
So the reason?
Because people in government positions want unlimited funds for fighting ghosts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371814</id>
	<title>no cyberwar...more like a vicious beating</title>
	<author>SgtChaireBourne</author>
	<datestamp>1267808460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>C'mon.  The jackass is hired to be Microsoft's number on apologist.  If he admitted to the cyberwar that has been going for two years at least, then he'd open the door to an investigation of the situation the US finds itself in and how it got there.  He and the other Microsoft party members would find themselves in very hot water, fast.  </p><p>
Besides, with all the Microsoft products permeating even <a href="http://gcn.com/articles/2008/12/02/malware-targets-us-military-computers.aspx" title="gcn.com" rel="nofollow">military bases</a> [gcn.com], it's not a war it's nasty beating.  The US is permeated with Windows, which are systems designed to be taken over back door or hole.  There's no reason why any Microsofter, from your average asshole MCSE on up to the party chairman Bill Gates should be walking free.  It's one thing for them to be racketeering and destroying the US' ability to compete in research or industry.  It's an entirely additional problem once it affects national defense and standing.  From Bill's party, we've already had a sampler of navy ships dead in the water, power blackouts, disaster recovery clusterfucks, air traffic outages, and many hundreds of billions of malware damage.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>C'mon .
The jackass is hired to be Microsoft 's number on apologist .
If he admitted to the cyberwar that has been going for two years at least , then he 'd open the door to an investigation of the situation the US finds itself in and how it got there .
He and the other Microsoft party members would find themselves in very hot water , fast .
Besides , with all the Microsoft products permeating even military bases [ gcn.com ] , it 's not a war it 's nasty beating .
The US is permeated with Windows , which are systems designed to be taken over back door or hole .
There 's no reason why any Microsofter , from your average asshole MCSE on up to the party chairman Bill Gates should be walking free .
It 's one thing for them to be racketeering and destroying the US ' ability to compete in research or industry .
It 's an entirely additional problem once it affects national defense and standing .
From Bill 's party , we 've already had a sampler of navy ships dead in the water , power blackouts , disaster recovery clusterfucks , air traffic outages , and many hundreds of billions of malware damage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>C'mon.
The jackass is hired to be Microsoft's number on apologist.
If he admitted to the cyberwar that has been going for two years at least, then he'd open the door to an investigation of the situation the US finds itself in and how it got there.
He and the other Microsoft party members would find themselves in very hot water, fast.
Besides, with all the Microsoft products permeating even military bases [gcn.com], it's not a war it's nasty beating.
The US is permeated with Windows, which are systems designed to be taken over back door or hole.
There's no reason why any Microsofter, from your average asshole MCSE on up to the party chairman Bill Gates should be walking free.
It's one thing for them to be racketeering and destroying the US' ability to compete in research or industry.
It's an entirely additional problem once it affects national defense and standing.
From Bill's party, we've already had a sampler of navy ships dead in the water, power blackouts, disaster recovery clusterfucks, air traffic outages, and many hundreds of billions of malware damage.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371306</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372718</id>
	<title>Re:There is no cyberwar...</title>
	<author>jwest</author>
	<datestamp>1267813080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cyberwar is cyberpeace</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cyberwar is cyberpeace</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cyberwar is cyberpeace</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371306</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372144</id>
	<title>IBM layoffs and coporate espionage</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267809960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>IBM has recently started directly laying off American developers and replacing them with Chinese developers working in the "CDL labs". They're doing this for code designed to run on System z mainframes, such as Rational HATS (half the team just moved to China in the past couple of weeks). The main reason why companies use System z at all is because it's supposed to be ultra-secure, and therefore it is used for the most sensitive of processes (like banks, etc...). How unrealistic would it be for a Chinese developer (either willingly, or coerced by the Chinese government) to plant security holes in IBM mainframe products? They did it with Google...isn't it logical that they'd also be trying to target IBM?

It scares the heck out of me thinking how many Fortune 500 companies that use System z for their ultra-secure mainframes might be getting exposed to Chinese corporate espionage.</htmltext>
<tokenext>IBM has recently started directly laying off American developers and replacing them with Chinese developers working in the " CDL labs " .
They 're doing this for code designed to run on System z mainframes , such as Rational HATS ( half the team just moved to China in the past couple of weeks ) .
The main reason why companies use System z at all is because it 's supposed to be ultra-secure , and therefore it is used for the most sensitive of processes ( like banks , etc... ) .
How unrealistic would it be for a Chinese developer ( either willingly , or coerced by the Chinese government ) to plant security holes in IBM mainframe products ?
They did it with Google...is n't it logical that they 'd also be trying to target IBM ?
It scares the heck out of me thinking how many Fortune 500 companies that use System z for their ultra-secure mainframes might be getting exposed to Chinese corporate espionage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IBM has recently started directly laying off American developers and replacing them with Chinese developers working in the "CDL labs".
They're doing this for code designed to run on System z mainframes, such as Rational HATS (half the team just moved to China in the past couple of weeks).
The main reason why companies use System z at all is because it's supposed to be ultra-secure, and therefore it is used for the most sensitive of processes (like banks, etc...).
How unrealistic would it be for a Chinese developer (either willingly, or coerced by the Chinese government) to plant security holes in IBM mainframe products?
They did it with Google...isn't it logical that they'd also be trying to target IBM?
It scares the heck out of me thinking how many Fortune 500 companies that use System z for their ultra-secure mainframes might be getting exposed to Chinese corporate espionage.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371836</id>
	<title>Re:All this cyberwar bullshit</title>
	<author>ArsonSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1267808580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is a cyber war, but it's within our own government, and it's over who gets the budget dollars to fight it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is a cyber war , but it 's within our own government , and it 's over who gets the budget dollars to fight it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is a cyber war, but it's within our own government, and it's over who gets the budget dollars to fight it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371626</id>
	<title>CyberWar becomes Fiber War</title>
	<author>GPLDAN</author>
	<datestamp>1267807680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>The US owns the sea. the Chinese know this. Their sub technology is borrowed from the Soviets, and the Akula class is a barge underwater and it's all they got, and their Navy sucks.<br> <br>
The US has shown it possess the technology to splice underwater fiber cables and tap them. Google it, they've already done it in the North Sea. <br> <br>
And that is the trump card. China launches a major offensive against the world, they better have routes down through Korea, because every trans-pacific cable leading to the mainland will get cut in minutes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The US owns the sea .
the Chinese know this .
Their sub technology is borrowed from the Soviets , and the Akula class is a barge underwater and it 's all they got , and their Navy sucks .
The US has shown it possess the technology to splice underwater fiber cables and tap them .
Google it , they 've already done it in the North Sea .
And that is the trump card .
China launches a major offensive against the world , they better have routes down through Korea , because every trans-pacific cable leading to the mainland will get cut in minutes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The US owns the sea.
the Chinese know this.
Their sub technology is borrowed from the Soviets, and the Akula class is a barge underwater and it's all they got, and their Navy sucks.
The US has shown it possess the technology to splice underwater fiber cables and tap them.
Google it, they've already done it in the North Sea.
And that is the trump card.
China launches a major offensive against the world, they better have routes down through Korea, because every trans-pacific cable leading to the mainland will get cut in minutes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31373310</id>
	<title>Idiocy knows no boundary...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267815900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hmmm... State sponsored attacks, carried out from known state funded locations, with state controlled hardware, by personnel under the direction and pay of representatives of a state - what the heck other definition does one need?</p><p>Of course, this is the administration that doesn't see attacks on the US from a group funded by other governments as a war either, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised.</p><p>The military generally calls a spade a spade, so they will see it for what it is, a war. Just one in which no one has directly been killed - although we'll conveniently close our eyes to that pipeline that blew up because someone monkeyed with the sensor feedback mechanism...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmmm... State sponsored attacks , carried out from known state funded locations , with state controlled hardware , by personnel under the direction and pay of representatives of a state - what the heck other definition does one need ? Of course , this is the administration that does n't see attacks on the US from a group funded by other governments as a war either , so I guess I should n't be surprised.The military generally calls a spade a spade , so they will see it for what it is , a war .
Just one in which no one has directly been killed - although we 'll conveniently close our eyes to that pipeline that blew up because someone monkeyed with the sensor feedback mechanism.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmmm... State sponsored attacks, carried out from known state funded locations, with state controlled hardware, by personnel under the direction and pay of representatives of a state - what the heck other definition does one need?Of course, this is the administration that doesn't see attacks on the US from a group funded by other governments as a war either, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised.The military generally calls a spade a spade, so they will see it for what it is, a war.
Just one in which no one has directly been killed - although we'll conveniently close our eyes to that pipeline that blew up because someone monkeyed with the sensor feedback mechanism...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31405864</id>
	<title>FBI Report</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268045160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>An official report released  Friday said the number of attacks on Congress and other government agencies had risen significantly in the past year to an estimated 1.6 billion every month.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>An official report released Friday said the number of attacks on Congress and other government agencies had risen significantly in the past year to an estimated 1.6 billion every month .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An official report released  Friday said the number of attacks on Congress and other government agencies had risen significantly in the past year to an estimated 1.6 billion every month.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371908</id>
	<title>Re:...and at the same conference, FBI director say</title>
	<author>DJoffe</author>
	<datestamp>1267808940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you ask me, most of the rhetoric one hears from government officials is more about money than anything else; warning of a 'rapidly expanding cyberterrorism threat' is mainly scaremongering that translates to 'give us a bigger budget than ever'.

Not saying there aren't vulnerabilities; certainly there are, just look at all the Windows botnets and viruses (and nowadays PDF seems to be a primary attack vector). If there was a "cyberwar" already being waged, it would probably already have been lost. But giving more money to some state department to employ a building full of people somewhere to 'tackle the problem' is hardly going to fix things like IE and Adobe's PDF reader.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you ask me , most of the rhetoric one hears from government officials is more about money than anything else ; warning of a 'rapidly expanding cyberterrorism threat ' is mainly scaremongering that translates to 'give us a bigger budget than ever' .
Not saying there are n't vulnerabilities ; certainly there are , just look at all the Windows botnets and viruses ( and nowadays PDF seems to be a primary attack vector ) .
If there was a " cyberwar " already being waged , it would probably already have been lost .
But giving more money to some state department to employ a building full of people somewhere to 'tackle the problem ' is hardly going to fix things like IE and Adobe 's PDF reader .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you ask me, most of the rhetoric one hears from government officials is more about money than anything else; warning of a 'rapidly expanding cyberterrorism threat' is mainly scaremongering that translates to 'give us a bigger budget than ever'.
Not saying there aren't vulnerabilities; certainly there are, just look at all the Windows botnets and viruses (and nowadays PDF seems to be a primary attack vector).
If there was a "cyberwar" already being waged, it would probably already have been lost.
But giving more money to some state department to employ a building full of people somewhere to 'tackle the problem' is hardly going to fix things like IE and Adobe's PDF reader.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371638</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372606</id>
	<title>Now if only...</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1267812480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...he would re-release that same statement, with:<br>s/cyber.?war/terrorism/i</p><p>Then we would start to get somewhere... and maybe fix more important problems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...he would re-release that same statement , with : s/cyber .
? war/terrorism/iThen we would start to get somewhere... and maybe fix more important problems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...he would re-release that same statement, with:s/cyber.
?war/terrorism/iThen we would start to get somewhere... and maybe fix more important problems.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371398</id>
	<title>We're on the cyber-frontier on the cyber-gan-trail</title>
	<author>BobMcD</author>
	<datestamp>1267806600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can say there's no war because there's no structure.  That's quaint.  You're lying about it, if for no other reason that our own military's cyber 'forces'.</p><p>The risks are real and the burden is being carried by civilians.  Just like it was out on the last frontier.  Eventually larger and larger organizations will come into conflict and some will aptly begin to label that as 'war'.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can say there 's no war because there 's no structure .
That 's quaint .
You 're lying about it , if for no other reason that our own military 's cyber 'forces'.The risks are real and the burden is being carried by civilians .
Just like it was out on the last frontier .
Eventually larger and larger organizations will come into conflict and some will aptly begin to label that as 'war' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can say there's no war because there's no structure.
That's quaint.
You're lying about it, if for no other reason that our own military's cyber 'forces'.The risks are real and the burden is being carried by civilians.
Just like it was out on the last frontier.
Eventually larger and larger organizations will come into conflict and some will aptly begin to label that as 'war'.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372494</id>
	<title>News for Paranoid Cynics</title>
	<author>AP31R0N</author>
	<datestamp>1267811880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem with kneejerk cynicism and paranoia is that if (when) there is a real threat we might not be prepared to respond to it.  We might choose to not respond.  Maybe the boy shouldn't be crying wolf so often, but the village should at least think about what to do when the wolf comes calling.</p><p>Let's take as a given that there is no cyberwar.  Does that mean that China, Russia and anyone else with an interest in hurting the US isn't working on a plan to attack us? They might be able to keep a secret. The plans we make to thwart a cyber attack might be useful in dealing with some unforseable problem.</p><p>Are we pretending that the internet is unimportant to our economy and culture just because we don't trust anyone over 30?</p><p>If a panel of Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, George Bush, a box of hair and Jeffrey Dahmer advised us to look both ways before crossing the street it would be good advice.  We shouldn't dismiss what the gov't says out of kneejerk mistrust.  Even if the gov't is out to get YOU (unlikely), they might be right about something anyway.  Sure, we should question their motives and approach but on the merits of the claim... not by "is he wearing a suit".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem with kneejerk cynicism and paranoia is that if ( when ) there is a real threat we might not be prepared to respond to it .
We might choose to not respond .
Maybe the boy should n't be crying wolf so often , but the village should at least think about what to do when the wolf comes calling.Let 's take as a given that there is no cyberwar .
Does that mean that China , Russia and anyone else with an interest in hurting the US is n't working on a plan to attack us ?
They might be able to keep a secret .
The plans we make to thwart a cyber attack might be useful in dealing with some unforseable problem.Are we pretending that the internet is unimportant to our economy and culture just because we do n't trust anyone over 30 ? If a panel of Hitler , Stalin , Pol Pot , George Bush , a box of hair and Jeffrey Dahmer advised us to look both ways before crossing the street it would be good advice .
We should n't dismiss what the gov't says out of kneejerk mistrust .
Even if the gov't is out to get YOU ( unlikely ) , they might be right about something anyway .
Sure , we should question their motives and approach but on the merits of the claim... not by " is he wearing a suit " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem with kneejerk cynicism and paranoia is that if (when) there is a real threat we might not be prepared to respond to it.
We might choose to not respond.
Maybe the boy shouldn't be crying wolf so often, but the village should at least think about what to do when the wolf comes calling.Let's take as a given that there is no cyberwar.
Does that mean that China, Russia and anyone else with an interest in hurting the US isn't working on a plan to attack us?
They might be able to keep a secret.
The plans we make to thwart a cyber attack might be useful in dealing with some unforseable problem.Are we pretending that the internet is unimportant to our economy and culture just because we don't trust anyone over 30?If a panel of Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, George Bush, a box of hair and Jeffrey Dahmer advised us to look both ways before crossing the street it would be good advice.
We shouldn't dismiss what the gov't says out of kneejerk mistrust.
Even if the gov't is out to get YOU (unlikely), they might be right about something anyway.
Sure, we should question their motives and approach but on the merits of the claim... not by "is he wearing a suit".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371678</id>
	<title>War against small...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267807860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think all that China is doing is not employing bored script kiddies. From all accounts these hackers have no day jobs.

Our biggest online security threats come from people trying to trick folks into clicking links about viagra and SEE BRITTANY SPEARS NUDE!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think all that China is doing is not employing bored script kiddies .
From all accounts these hackers have no day jobs .
Our biggest online security threats come from people trying to trick folks into clicking links about viagra and SEE BRITTANY SPEARS NUDE !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think all that China is doing is not employing bored script kiddies.
From all accounts these hackers have no day jobs.
Our biggest online security threats come from people trying to trick folks into clicking links about viagra and SEE BRITTANY SPEARS NUDE!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371270</id>
	<title>All this cyberwar bullshit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267806000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have actually always wondered about this. I remember how we had to write a school subject about "chinese superhackers" newspaper article in the early 2000's. The Google thing was also showed off to be a work of amateurs, not some Chinese superhackers working for their government. For me it just starts to look like trying to put fear into people for whatever personal reason. "Chinese hackers working for their country to break into US systems" sure sounds cool and creates fear in people, but is there any actual truth behind it? As it is now it's almost like cold war carried over to new technological area. It also looks to be a common thing here on slashdot too - without actually even questioning if theres any truth behind it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have actually always wondered about this .
I remember how we had to write a school subject about " chinese superhackers " newspaper article in the early 2000 's .
The Google thing was also showed off to be a work of amateurs , not some Chinese superhackers working for their government .
For me it just starts to look like trying to put fear into people for whatever personal reason .
" Chinese hackers working for their country to break into US systems " sure sounds cool and creates fear in people , but is there any actual truth behind it ?
As it is now it 's almost like cold war carried over to new technological area .
It also looks to be a common thing here on slashdot too - without actually even questioning if theres any truth behind it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have actually always wondered about this.
I remember how we had to write a school subject about "chinese superhackers" newspaper article in the early 2000's.
The Google thing was also showed off to be a work of amateurs, not some Chinese superhackers working for their government.
For me it just starts to look like trying to put fear into people for whatever personal reason.
"Chinese hackers working for their country to break into US systems" sure sounds cool and creates fear in people, but is there any actual truth behind it?
As it is now it's almost like cold war carried over to new technological area.
It also looks to be a common thing here on slashdot too - without actually even questioning if theres any truth behind it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31375320</id>
	<title>Re:This guy sounds out of touch</title>
	<author>flappinbooger</author>
	<datestamp>1267782180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sounds like you think you could do a better job?<br> <br>Maybe you could.  Maybe I could too.  But would you want to do that job?  It's like you'd be the president of the internet.  <br> <br>When some bureaucrat in washington gets a fake antivirus on their "secured" system, you'd get the blame.  <br> <br>"That onyxruby guy just isn't doing a good job.  I've got a virus.  I thought he was the cybersecurity czar. What does he do all day? Why isn't he protecting my hard drive? How could this happen? I'm going to write a scathing letter. He's been in office for three months now.  How hard can it be?  My nephew knows computers, he gets on that iTunes all the time and downloads those songs. He says all I need to do is go to Walmart and buy superduberspywareblaster for 10.99 and download that to my hard drive and take care of that virus.  Now, there's this elected offical CZAR of all things, and I get me a virus on my hard drive.  I can't play my Euchre now, I've got 39 trojans and 15 keyloggers and it says a hacker is stealing my passwords and credit cards.  What is he going to do about it?"<br> <br>Do you want that job?  Besides, I don't think he actually does much on a computer at all, I think he's in conference rooms most of the day.  Anyone have his credentials and background?  Who's on his team?  Does he have a team?  What's the real purpose of that office, just generating policy? Is he just a posturing politician that knows how to spell TCP/IP?  If you know something about "hacking" perhaps you'd be overqualified for the job!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like you think you could do a better job ?
Maybe you could .
Maybe I could too .
But would you want to do that job ?
It 's like you 'd be the president of the internet .
When some bureaucrat in washington gets a fake antivirus on their " secured " system , you 'd get the blame .
" That onyxruby guy just is n't doing a good job .
I 've got a virus .
I thought he was the cybersecurity czar .
What does he do all day ?
Why is n't he protecting my hard drive ?
How could this happen ?
I 'm going to write a scathing letter .
He 's been in office for three months now .
How hard can it be ?
My nephew knows computers , he gets on that iTunes all the time and downloads those songs .
He says all I need to do is go to Walmart and buy superduberspywareblaster for 10.99 and download that to my hard drive and take care of that virus .
Now , there 's this elected offical CZAR of all things , and I get me a virus on my hard drive .
I ca n't play my Euchre now , I 've got 39 trojans and 15 keyloggers and it says a hacker is stealing my passwords and credit cards .
What is he going to do about it ?
" Do you want that job ?
Besides , I do n't think he actually does much on a computer at all , I think he 's in conference rooms most of the day .
Anyone have his credentials and background ?
Who 's on his team ?
Does he have a team ?
What 's the real purpose of that office , just generating policy ?
Is he just a posturing politician that knows how to spell TCP/IP ?
If you know something about " hacking " perhaps you 'd be overqualified for the job !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like you think you could do a better job?
Maybe you could.
Maybe I could too.
But would you want to do that job?
It's like you'd be the president of the internet.
When some bureaucrat in washington gets a fake antivirus on their "secured" system, you'd get the blame.
"That onyxruby guy just isn't doing a good job.
I've got a virus.
I thought he was the cybersecurity czar.
What does he do all day?
Why isn't he protecting my hard drive?
How could this happen?
I'm going to write a scathing letter.
He's been in office for three months now.
How hard can it be?
My nephew knows computers, he gets on that iTunes all the time and downloads those songs.
He says all I need to do is go to Walmart and buy superduberspywareblaster for 10.99 and download that to my hard drive and take care of that virus.
Now, there's this elected offical CZAR of all things, and I get me a virus on my hard drive.
I can't play my Euchre now, I've got 39 trojans and 15 keyloggers and it says a hacker is stealing my passwords and credit cards.
What is he going to do about it?
" Do you want that job?
Besides, I don't think he actually does much on a computer at all, I think he's in conference rooms most of the day.
Anyone have his credentials and background?
Who's on his team?
Does he have a team?
What's the real purpose of that office, just generating policy?
Is he just a posturing politician that knows how to spell TCP/IP?
If you know something about "hacking" perhaps you'd be overqualified for the job!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371350</id>
	<title>This guy sounds out of touch</title>
	<author>onyxruby</author>
	<datestamp>1267806420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This guy sounds out of touch, like he is more concerned with the politics of appeasing China than the job of securing our country. Can we somehow get this guy removed from office for incompetence?</htmltext>
<tokenext>This guy sounds out of touch , like he is more concerned with the politics of appeasing China than the job of securing our country .
Can we somehow get this guy removed from office for incompetence ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This guy sounds out of touch, like he is more concerned with the politics of appeasing China than the job of securing our country.
Can we somehow get this guy removed from office for incompetence?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371732</id>
	<title>wat</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267808220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If only they could apply the same rationale to the "drug war".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If only they could apply the same rationale to the " drug war " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If only they could apply the same rationale to the "drug war".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371490</id>
	<title>Yeah, but...</title>
	<author>denzacar</author>
	<datestamp>1267807080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The chocolate rations went up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The chocolate rations went up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The chocolate rations went up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371306</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371458</id>
	<title>Re:All this cyberwar bullshit</title>
	<author>oodaloop</author>
	<datestamp>1267806900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>No, not much.  Just a bunch of massive cyber attacks on the U.S. government's websites.<br> <br>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyberwarfare#History\_of\_attacks
<br> <br>Doesn't really matter if it's China behind any of it to call it a cyber war.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , not much .
Just a bunch of massive cyber attacks on the U.S. government 's websites .
http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyberwarfare # History \ _of \ _attacks Does n't really matter if it 's China behind any of it to call it a cyber war .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, not much.
Just a bunch of massive cyber attacks on the U.S. government's websites.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyberwarfare#History\_of\_attacks
 Doesn't really matter if it's China behind any of it to call it a cyber war.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371344</id>
	<title>What a tool</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267806360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He's been in office THREE MONTHS and he's not only got a handle on this, but is proclaiming that nothing is going on.  WTF?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He 's been in office THREE MONTHS and he 's not only got a handle on this , but is proclaiming that nothing is going on .
WTF ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He's been in office THREE MONTHS and he's not only got a handle on this, but is proclaiming that nothing is going on.
WTF?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372212</id>
	<title>Constant break-in attempts not aggressive actions?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267810320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So does he just not getting the data from his IT people on the constant SSH scans and Remote Desktop attacks aimed at every computer on the network?. And we are suppose to think this isn't a concerted effort by foreign entities to take over US government property and steal information? I guess it's just a bunch of vitamin 'D' deprived adolescents doing it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So does he just not getting the data from his IT people on the constant SSH scans and Remote Desktop attacks aimed at every computer on the network ? .
And we are suppose to think this is n't a concerted effort by foreign entities to take over US government property and steal information ?
I guess it 's just a bunch of vitamin 'D ' deprived adolescents doing it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So does he just not getting the data from his IT people on the constant SSH scans and Remote Desktop attacks aimed at every computer on the network?.
And we are suppose to think this isn't a concerted effort by foreign entities to take over US government property and steal information?
I guess it's just a bunch of vitamin 'D' deprived adolescents doing it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371588</id>
	<title>All's quiet....</title>
	<author>tpstigers</author>
	<datestamp>1267807500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Does this mean that the Information Superhighway has NOT become the Information Western Front?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does this mean that the Information Superhighway has NOT become the Information Western Front ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does this mean that the Information Superhighway has NOT become the Information Western Front?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371424</id>
	<title>Re:All this cyberwar bullshit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267806780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If there's no "cyber-war", only online crime, what's in that for government?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If there 's no " cyber-war " , only online crime , what 's in that for government ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If there's no "cyber-war", only online crime, what's in that for government?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31373854</id>
	<title>Re:All this cyberwar bullshit</title>
	<author>RavenChild</author>
	<datestamp>1267818180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Doesn't really matter if it's China behind any of it to call it a cyber war.</p></div><p>
Reminds me of another war.  Something about terror?<br> <br>
Just because we don't fight a country doesn't mean we are not at war with another entity. Or even the war on terror was brought about on a country to justify Washington calling it a "war."</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does n't really matter if it 's China behind any of it to call it a cyber war .
Reminds me of another war .
Something about terror ?
Just because we do n't fight a country does n't mean we are not at war with another entity .
Or even the war on terror was brought about on a country to justify Washington calling it a " war .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doesn't really matter if it's China behind any of it to call it a cyber war.
Reminds me of another war.
Something about terror?
Just because we don't fight a country doesn't mean we are not at war with another entity.
Or even the war on terror was brought about on a country to justify Washington calling it a "war.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371458</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372464</id>
	<title>Re:This guy sounds out of touch</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267811760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This guy sounds out of touch...</p></div><p>Maybe he's that way on purpose.  Wouldn't be the first time a government spokesman was intentionally kept out of the loop.  The  rule is don't tell marketing anything  you don't want the public to know.  I'm sure the same rule exists in government.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This guy sounds out of touch...Maybe he 's that way on purpose .
Would n't be the first time a government spokesman was intentionally kept out of the loop .
The rule is do n't tell marketing anything you do n't want the public to know .
I 'm sure the same rule exists in government .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This guy sounds out of touch...Maybe he's that way on purpose.
Wouldn't be the first time a government spokesman was intentionally kept out of the loop.
The  rule is don't tell marketing anything  you don't want the public to know.
I'm sure the same rule exists in government.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371396</id>
	<title>***Hand Waive***</title>
	<author>bobcat7677</author>
	<datestamp>1267806600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>There is no Cyber-War<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...and these are not the droids you are looking for.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no Cyber-War ...and these are not the droids you are looking for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no Cyber-War ...and these are not the droids you are looking for.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371676</id>
	<title>Re:We're on the cyber-frontier on the cyber-gan-tr</title>
	<author>HungryHobo</author>
	<datestamp>1267807860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In this case given that nobody is actually getting shot civilians in the form of sys admins and programmers are far better equipped to fight this one.<br>They're more numerous, they're just as skilled and they're on their home ground.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In this case given that nobody is actually getting shot civilians in the form of sys admins and programmers are far better equipped to fight this one.They 're more numerous , they 're just as skilled and they 're on their home ground .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In this case given that nobody is actually getting shot civilians in the form of sys admins and programmers are far better equipped to fight this one.They're more numerous, they're just as skilled and they're on their home ground.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31375802</id>
	<title>Re:War on X</title>
	<author>bughunter</author>
	<datestamp>1267784700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Egad, then there must have been a secret War on Stupidity here in the US for the past 30 years.</p><p>I say it's time for a War on Peace!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Egad , then there must have been a secret War on Stupidity here in the US for the past 30 years.I say it 's time for a War on Peace !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Egad, then there must have been a secret War on Stupidity here in the US for the past 30 years.I say it's time for a War on Peace!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371722</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371554</id>
	<title>Fear is excellent for controlling people</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267807380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You don't need religion. You don't need dogma. You don't need issues.<br>They're all rooted in basic primal emotions..</p><p>You just need to instill fear in people, and they will give you that much more power, status and sex.<br>Best way to gain power and stop intelligent discussions is to start a war.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't need religion .
You do n't need dogma .
You do n't need issues.They 're all rooted in basic primal emotions..You just need to instill fear in people , and they will give you that much more power , status and sex.Best way to gain power and stop intelligent discussions is to start a war .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't need religion.
You don't need dogma.
You don't need issues.They're all rooted in basic primal emotions..You just need to instill fear in people, and they will give you that much more power, status and sex.Best way to gain power and stop intelligent discussions is to start a war.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372002</id>
	<title>Re:***Hand Waive***</title>
	<author>ArcherB</author>
	<datestamp>1267809420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>There is no Cyber-War<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...and these are not the droids you are looking for.</p></div><p>But those <a href="http://blog.filippovitale.it/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/windowslivewriterthosewerethedroidsiwaslookingfor-a2a9those-were-the-droids-i-was-looking-for-2.jpg" title="filippovitale.it">WERE</a> [filippovitale.it] the droids you were looking for!<br>
&nbsp; <br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>... and there certainly is a cyber war.  However, it just falls under the espionage and sabotage categories.  We have satellites and planes that specialize at electronic eavesdropping.  We have *unknown* numbers of cyber spies constantly monitoring what emails and page traffic goes to and from what.  Remember, ESCHELON is the one we in the public know about.  How much is out there that we don't know about?  How much of that is from other counties and pointed at us?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no Cyber-War ...and these are not the droids you are looking for.But those WERE [ filippovitale.it ] the droids you were looking for !
  ... and there certainly is a cyber war .
However , it just falls under the espionage and sabotage categories .
We have satellites and planes that specialize at electronic eavesdropping .
We have * unknown * numbers of cyber spies constantly monitoring what emails and page traffic goes to and from what .
Remember , ESCHELON is the one we in the public know about .
How much is out there that we do n't know about ?
How much of that is from other counties and pointed at us ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no Cyber-War ...and these are not the droids you are looking for.But those WERE [filippovitale.it] the droids you were looking for!
   ... and there certainly is a cyber war.
However, it just falls under the espionage and sabotage categories.
We have satellites and planes that specialize at electronic eavesdropping.
We have *unknown* numbers of cyber spies constantly monitoring what emails and page traffic goes to and from what.
Remember, ESCHELON is the one we in the public know about.
How much is out there that we don't know about?
How much of that is from other counties and pointed at us?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372070</id>
	<title>Re:What a tool</title>
	<author>DIplomatic</author>
	<datestamp>1267809720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>He's been in office THREE MONTHS and he's not only got a handle on this, but is proclaiming that nothing is going on.  WTF?</p></div><p>Are you suggesting Obama had never been on the internet before he became President?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>He 's been in office THREE MONTHS and he 's not only got a handle on this , but is proclaiming that nothing is going on .
WTF ? Are you suggesting Obama had never been on the internet before he became President ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He's been in office THREE MONTHS and he's not only got a handle on this, but is proclaiming that nothing is going on.
WTF?Are you suggesting Obama had never been on the internet before he became President?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371420</id>
	<title>Re:And he's right.</title>
	<author>DIplomatic</author>
	<datestamp>1267806720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I definitely agree.

I make sure my house and car are locked and secure but I wouldn't say that I am waging a war against burglary.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I definitely agree .
I make sure my house and car are locked and secure but I would n't say that I am waging a war against burglary .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I definitely agree.
I make sure my house and car are locked and secure but I wouldn't say that I am waging a war against burglary.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371338</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31373040</id>
	<title>Re:All this cyberwar bullshit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267814580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Exactly. There IS no spoon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly .
There IS no spoon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly.
There IS no spoon.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371458</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371526</id>
	<title>There is no backbone cabal</title>
	<author>Ltap</author>
	<datestamp>1267807260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sounds familiar?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds familiar ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds familiar?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31374556</id>
	<title>No Cyberwar ?</title>
	<author>Hymer</author>
	<datestamp>1267821540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just like there was No Such Agency back in the 1950'ties and 1960'ties ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just like there was No Such Agency back in the 1950'ties and 1960'ties ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just like there was No Such Agency back in the 1950'ties and 1960'ties ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371776</id>
	<title>Re:And he's right.</title>
	<author>maxwell demon</author>
	<datestamp>1267808340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let's call it an asymmetric threat situation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's call it an asymmetric threat situation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's call it an asymmetric threat situation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371338</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31373460</id>
	<title>Re:War on X</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267816500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>no Cybersex?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>no Cybersex ?
: (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>no Cybersex?
:(</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371722</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372616</id>
	<title>Re: Where are your sources?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267812540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What amateurs use zero day exploits alongside rootkits? Tailoring their hacks to specific companies?</p><p>You should read the security considerations from iSEC https://www.isecpartners.com/files/iSEC\_Aurora\_Response\_Recommendations.pdf regarding the "Aurora Response Recommendations". The truth is that every organisation has some people that are a liability on the internet.</p><p>Apparently Google found over 30 companies had been totally compromised - and over 100 had been targeted. Of course it's probably not the same gang, as Gary McKinnon said, there are loads of people from all around the world hacking into insecure systems. Some for fun, some to see secret / privilledged information.</p><p>Of course the new guy says, don't worry folks everythings OK, there is no war. That is because hacking is not about distruction, it's about knowledge. In the right hands, knowledge really is power.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What amateurs use zero day exploits alongside rootkits ?
Tailoring their hacks to specific companies ? You should read the security considerations from iSEC https : //www.isecpartners.com/files/iSEC \ _Aurora \ _Response \ _Recommendations.pdf regarding the " Aurora Response Recommendations " .
The truth is that every organisation has some people that are a liability on the internet.Apparently Google found over 30 companies had been totally compromised - and over 100 had been targeted .
Of course it 's probably not the same gang , as Gary McKinnon said , there are loads of people from all around the world hacking into insecure systems .
Some for fun , some to see secret / privilledged information.Of course the new guy says , do n't worry folks everythings OK , there is no war .
That is because hacking is not about distruction , it 's about knowledge .
In the right hands , knowledge really is power .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What amateurs use zero day exploits alongside rootkits?
Tailoring their hacks to specific companies?You should read the security considerations from iSEC https://www.isecpartners.com/files/iSEC\_Aurora\_Response\_Recommendations.pdf regarding the "Aurora Response Recommendations".
The truth is that every organisation has some people that are a liability on the internet.Apparently Google found over 30 companies had been totally compromised - and over 100 had been targeted.
Of course it's probably not the same gang, as Gary McKinnon said, there are loads of people from all around the world hacking into insecure systems.
Some for fun, some to see secret / privilledged information.Of course the new guy says, don't worry folks everythings OK, there is no war.
That is because hacking is not about distruction, it's about knowledge.
In the right hands, knowledge really is power.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371370</id>
	<title>So, wait...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267806480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Are you telling me I planted my Cyber War Victory Garden and bought Cyber War Bonds for nothing?!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you telling me I planted my Cyber War Victory Garden and bought Cyber War Bonds for nothing ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you telling me I planted my Cyber War Victory Garden and bought Cyber War Bonds for nothing?
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371306</id>
	<title>There is no cyberwar...</title>
	<author>H0p313ss</author>
	<datestamp>1267806120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>... we have always been at war with Eurasia.</htmltext>
<tokenext>... we have always been at war with Eurasia .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... we have always been at war with Eurasia.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371748</id>
	<title>Yeah, right</title>
	<author>DoofusOfDeath</author>
	<datestamp>1267808280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The First Rule of Cyberwar is...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The First Rule of Cyberwar is.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The First Rule of Cyberwar is...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31379166</id>
	<title>We're not at cyberwar</title>
	<author>OrwellianLurker</author>
	<datestamp>1267816980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>America's infrastructure is under attack-- but it isn't an organized attack. Admittedly, some hackers have government ties. I'm more concerned about the ones without government ties. While China might hack to steal secrets, which is intolerable, but just another form of espionage common between countries, hackers without loyalties to countries can wage unrelenting attacks on our infrastructure.
 <p>

So what do we do? We improve our fucking infrastructure. China is not going to attack our infrastructure and attempt to kill Americans and cripple our country. Why? For starters, they'd lose the money they invested in us. Additionally, their economy is hugely dependent on us. If America falls, China and most of the developed world falls. Lastly, how would America respond? In all likelihood, with nuclear weapons. Our best bet is to improve our infrastructure and when we trace back hackers to a government, we retaliate just as we do in all other forms of espionage- with political and economic sanctions. </p><p> Good ol' politicians spreading FUD. The stakes are higher, but the problems are still the same at the core.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>America 's infrastructure is under attack-- but it is n't an organized attack .
Admittedly , some hackers have government ties .
I 'm more concerned about the ones without government ties .
While China might hack to steal secrets , which is intolerable , but just another form of espionage common between countries , hackers without loyalties to countries can wage unrelenting attacks on our infrastructure .
So what do we do ?
We improve our fucking infrastructure .
China is not going to attack our infrastructure and attempt to kill Americans and cripple our country .
Why ? For starters , they 'd lose the money they invested in us .
Additionally , their economy is hugely dependent on us .
If America falls , China and most of the developed world falls .
Lastly , how would America respond ?
In all likelihood , with nuclear weapons .
Our best bet is to improve our infrastructure and when we trace back hackers to a government , we retaliate just as we do in all other forms of espionage- with political and economic sanctions .
Good ol ' politicians spreading FUD .
The stakes are higher , but the problems are still the same at the core .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>America's infrastructure is under attack-- but it isn't an organized attack.
Admittedly, some hackers have government ties.
I'm more concerned about the ones without government ties.
While China might hack to steal secrets, which is intolerable, but just another form of espionage common between countries, hackers without loyalties to countries can wage unrelenting attacks on our infrastructure.
So what do we do?
We improve our fucking infrastructure.
China is not going to attack our infrastructure and attempt to kill Americans and cripple our country.
Why? For starters, they'd lose the money they invested in us.
Additionally, their economy is hugely dependent on us.
If America falls, China and most of the developed world falls.
Lastly, how would America respond?
In all likelihood, with nuclear weapons.
Our best bet is to improve our infrastructure and when we trace back hackers to a government, we retaliate just as we do in all other forms of espionage- with political and economic sanctions.
Good ol' politicians spreading FUD.
The stakes are higher, but the problems are still the same at the core.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372956</id>
	<title>Re:War on X</title>
	<author>gtall</author>
	<datestamp>1267814220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ah, you Sir get the Internet Award for Gratuitous and Absurd Use of Induction.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ah , you Sir get the Internet Award for Gratuitous and Absurd Use of Induction .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ah, you Sir get the Internet Award for Gratuitous and Absurd Use of Induction.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371722</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372932</id>
	<title>Re:War against small...</title>
	<author>gtall</author>
	<datestamp>1267814040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While Brittany Spears nude is certainly dirty warfare, I think what concerns the U.S. military most is that the Chinese bureaucrats running the asylum will think they'll be seen as having bigger penises if they invade Taiwan. The U.S. has a treaty to defend Taiwan. If we ever got into a hot war, there won't be any question of whether cyberwar will be part of it if nothing else than for Chinese hackers to keep the U.S. too preoccupied to properly respond. They needn't even be working for the Chinese government, just the usual bunch of nationalist nutjobs that went apeshit over China downing one of the U.S. fighters awhile back...and that's after they won one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While Brittany Spears nude is certainly dirty warfare , I think what concerns the U.S. military most is that the Chinese bureaucrats running the asylum will think they 'll be seen as having bigger penises if they invade Taiwan .
The U.S. has a treaty to defend Taiwan .
If we ever got into a hot war , there wo n't be any question of whether cyberwar will be part of it if nothing else than for Chinese hackers to keep the U.S. too preoccupied to properly respond .
They need n't even be working for the Chinese government , just the usual bunch of nationalist nutjobs that went apeshit over China downing one of the U.S. fighters awhile back...and that 's after they won one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While Brittany Spears nude is certainly dirty warfare, I think what concerns the U.S. military most is that the Chinese bureaucrats running the asylum will think they'll be seen as having bigger penises if they invade Taiwan.
The U.S. has a treaty to defend Taiwan.
If we ever got into a hot war, there won't be any question of whether cyberwar will be part of it if nothing else than for Chinese hackers to keep the U.S. too preoccupied to properly respond.
They needn't even be working for the Chinese government, just the usual bunch of nationalist nutjobs that went apeshit over China downing one of the U.S. fighters awhile back...and that's after they won one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371678</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372670</id>
	<title>Re:So, wait...</title>
	<author>Chris Burke</author>
	<datestamp>1267812840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sadly yes, and not only that.  Your HOA is about to come after you for having a bunch of PCBs sticking out of your yard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sadly yes , and not only that .
Your HOA is about to come after you for having a bunch of PCBs sticking out of your yard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sadly yes, and not only that.
Your HOA is about to come after you for having a bunch of PCBs sticking out of your yard.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371370</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31379726</id>
	<title>Re:War on X</title>
	<author>Jedi Alec</author>
	<datestamp>1267873080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I put on my kevlar rob and reinforced wizard hat.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I put on my kevlar rob and reinforced wizard hat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I put on my kevlar rob and reinforced wizard hat.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371722</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371486</id>
	<title>Meh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267807080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>There is no spoon.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no spoon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no spoon.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371944</id>
	<title>There is no spoon!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267809120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>These aren't the droids you're looking for!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>These are n't the droids you 're looking for !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These aren't the droids you're looking for!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31439976</id>
	<title>Only a war if both sides can fight</title>
	<author>SgtChaireBourne</author>
	<datestamp>1268330760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>C'mon. The jackass is hired to be Microsoft's number on apologist. His office can now be abused to cover the situation up.  If he admitted to the cyberwar that has been going for two years at least, then he'd open the door to an investigation of the situation the US finds itself in and how it got there. He and the other Microsoft party members would find themselves in very hot water, fast.
</p><p>
Besides, with all the Microsoft products <a href="http://gcn.com/articles/2008/12/02/malware-targets-us-military-computers.aspx" title="gcn.com">permeating even military bases</a> [gcn.com], it's not a war it's nasty beating.
</p><p>It's only a war if it's possible to fight back.  The US is permeated with Windows, which is a system designed to be taken over back door or outright bad design security hole.  There's no reason why any Microsofter, from your average asshole MCSE on up to the party chairman Bill Gates should be walking free. It's one thing for them to be racketeering and destroying the US' ability to compete in research or industry. It's an entirely additional problem once it affects national defense and standing. From Bill's party, we've already had a sampler of navy ships dead in the water, power blackouts, disaster recovery clusterfucks, air traffic outages, and many hundreds of billions of malware damage.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>C'mon .
The jackass is hired to be Microsoft 's number on apologist .
His office can now be abused to cover the situation up .
If he admitted to the cyberwar that has been going for two years at least , then he 'd open the door to an investigation of the situation the US finds itself in and how it got there .
He and the other Microsoft party members would find themselves in very hot water , fast .
Besides , with all the Microsoft products permeating even military bases [ gcn.com ] , it 's not a war it 's nasty beating .
It 's only a war if it 's possible to fight back .
The US is permeated with Windows , which is a system designed to be taken over back door or outright bad design security hole .
There 's no reason why any Microsofter , from your average asshole MCSE on up to the party chairman Bill Gates should be walking free .
It 's one thing for them to be racketeering and destroying the US ' ability to compete in research or industry .
It 's an entirely additional problem once it affects national defense and standing .
From Bill 's party , we 've already had a sampler of navy ships dead in the water , power blackouts , disaster recovery clusterfucks , air traffic outages , and many hundreds of billions of malware damage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>C'mon.
The jackass is hired to be Microsoft's number on apologist.
His office can now be abused to cover the situation up.
If he admitted to the cyberwar that has been going for two years at least, then he'd open the door to an investigation of the situation the US finds itself in and how it got there.
He and the other Microsoft party members would find themselves in very hot water, fast.
Besides, with all the Microsoft products permeating even military bases [gcn.com], it's not a war it's nasty beating.
It's only a war if it's possible to fight back.
The US is permeated with Windows, which is a system designed to be taken over back door or outright bad design security hole.
There's no reason why any Microsofter, from your average asshole MCSE on up to the party chairman Bill Gates should be walking free.
It's one thing for them to be racketeering and destroying the US' ability to compete in research or industry.
It's an entirely additional problem once it affects national defense and standing.
From Bill's party, we've already had a sampler of navy ships dead in the water, power blackouts, disaster recovery clusterfucks, air traffic outages, and many hundreds of billions of malware damage.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371306</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31374390</id>
	<title>Re:All this cyberwar bullshit</title>
	<author>Squidlips</author>
	<datestamp>1267820520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nice try at Chinese propaganda, but if it was only a bunch of bored teenagers then why did they try to steal information about Tibetan dissidents?  Bored teenagers would be more interested in other targets.</p><p>Sorry, it was the Chinese government.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nice try at Chinese propaganda , but if it was only a bunch of bored teenagers then why did they try to steal information about Tibetan dissidents ?
Bored teenagers would be more interested in other targets.Sorry , it was the Chinese government .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nice try at Chinese propaganda, but if it was only a bunch of bored teenagers then why did they try to steal information about Tibetan dissidents?
Bored teenagers would be more interested in other targets.Sorry, it was the Chinese government.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371692</id>
	<title>This is Good News</title>
	<author>interval1066</author>
	<datestamp>1267807980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This means we can fire Howard Schmidt since his position is not needed and we can put his salary towards the Fed. deficit.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This means we can fire Howard Schmidt since his position is not needed and we can put his salary towards the Fed .
deficit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This means we can fire Howard Schmidt since his position is not needed and we can put his salary towards the Fed.
deficit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372818</id>
	<title>Re:All this cyberwar bullshit</title>
	<author>gtall</author>
	<datestamp>1267813500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Regardless of whether there is a war or not, the Chinese hackers concentrated on Chinese civil rights enthusiasts. I find it doubtful a group of Chinese teenagers would care about that lot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Regardless of whether there is a war or not , the Chinese hackers concentrated on Chinese civil rights enthusiasts .
I find it doubtful a group of Chinese teenagers would care about that lot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Regardless of whether there is a war or not, the Chinese hackers concentrated on Chinese civil rights enthusiasts.
I find it doubtful a group of Chinese teenagers would care about that lot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371722</id>
	<title>War on X</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267808160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We had a War on Poverty, and poverty increased.<br>We had a War on Drugs, and drugs increased.<br>We had a War on Terror, and terror increased.</p><p>So, yeah, let's have a War on Cyber, and maybe cyber will increase too.  Cybernetics?  Cyborgs?  Cyberspace?  Cybering?  I guess you take the good with the bad.</p><p>
&nbsp; -- 77IM</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We had a War on Poverty , and poverty increased.We had a War on Drugs , and drugs increased.We had a War on Terror , and terror increased.So , yeah , let 's have a War on Cyber , and maybe cyber will increase too .
Cybernetics ? Cyborgs ?
Cyberspace ? Cybering ?
I guess you take the good with the bad .
  -- 77IM</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We had a War on Poverty, and poverty increased.We had a War on Drugs, and drugs increased.We had a War on Terror, and terror increased.So, yeah, let's have a War on Cyber, and maybe cyber will increase too.
Cybernetics?  Cyborgs?
Cyberspace?  Cybering?
I guess you take the good with the bad.
  -- 77IM</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372054</id>
	<title>Re:...and at the same conference, FBI director say</title>
	<author>HungryHobo</author>
	<datestamp>1267809660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The internet is essentially a massive number of walled communities.<br>There is nothing that any potential adversary could do which isn't already being done by the botnet herders and we seem to be doing fine despite them.</p><p>In any case I see little or no way in which the government could do a better job than the current crop of sys admins.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The internet is essentially a massive number of walled communities.There is nothing that any potential adversary could do which is n't already being done by the botnet herders and we seem to be doing fine despite them.In any case I see little or no way in which the government could do a better job than the current crop of sys admins .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The internet is essentially a massive number of walled communities.There is nothing that any potential adversary could do which isn't already being done by the botnet herders and we seem to be doing fine despite them.In any case I see little or no way in which the government could do a better job than the current crop of sys admins.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371638</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31373276</id>
	<title>Re:There is no cyberwar...</title>
	<author>newdsfornerds</author>
	<datestamp>1267815600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Your comment is doubleplus good! <br>
Except that it would be East Asia.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Your comment is doubleplus good !
Except that it would be East Asia .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your comment is doubleplus good!
Except that it would be East Asia.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371306</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372336</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267810920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is just a prelude to cost cutting.  No cyberwar, no funding required.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is just a prelude to cost cutting .
No cyberwar , no funding required .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is just a prelude to cost cutting.
No cyberwar, no funding required.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31373760</id>
	<title>Re:There is no cyberwar...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267817700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I thought it was Eastasia...*konfused*</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought it was Eastasia... * konfused *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought it was Eastasia...*konfused*</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371306</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31374506
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371748
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31373460
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371722
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31373466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371722
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371792
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372932
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371678
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31375320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31373760
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372054
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371638
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372986
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31373276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31439976
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371344
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372464
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372718
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371338
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31379726
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371722
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371420
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371338
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371814
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372670
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31374390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371676
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31375802
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371722
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31373040
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371458
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372616
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31373854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371458
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372956
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371722
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371908
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371638
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371716
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_1426216_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371776
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371338
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_1426216.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371486
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_1426216.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371722
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31379726
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31373466
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372956
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31373460
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31375802
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_1426216.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371396
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372252
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372002
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_1426216.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372144
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_1426216.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371678
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372932
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_1426216.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371306
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31439976
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372986
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371814
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371490
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31373276
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31373760
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372718
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_1426216.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371626
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_1426216.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371748
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31374506
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_1426216.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372212
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_1426216.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371638
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372054
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371908
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_1426216.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371344
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372070
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_1426216.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371270
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371794
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371458
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31373040
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31373854
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372818
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371836
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371792
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371424
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31374390
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371554
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372616
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_1426216.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371398
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371676
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_1426216.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371350
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371716
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31375320
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372464
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_1426216.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371370
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31372670
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_1426216.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371338
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371776
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371436
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_1426216.31371420
</commentlist>
</conversation>
