<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_16_1857259</id>
	<title>Federal Agents Quietly Using Social Media</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1268729100000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>SpuriousLogic passes along this excerpt from the ChiTrib: <i>"<a href="http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/sns-ap-us-feds-on-facebook,0,3971738,print.story">The Feds are on Facebook</a>. And MySpace, LinkedIn, and Twitter, too. US law enforcement agents are following the rest of the Internet world into popular social-networking services, going undercover with false online profiles to communicate with suspects and gather private information, according to an internal Justice Department document that offers a tantalizing glimpse of issues related to privacy and crime-fighting. ... The document... makes clear that US agents are already logging on surreptitiously to exchange messages with suspects, identify a target's friends or relatives and browse private information such as postings, personal photographs, and video clips. Among other purposes: Investigators can check suspects' alibis by comparing stories told to police with tweets sent at the same time about their whereabouts. Online photos from a suspicious spending spree... can link suspects or their friends to robberies or burglaries."</i> The FoIA lawsuit was filed by the EFF, which has <a href="http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/03/eff-posts-documents-detailing-law-enforcement">posted two documents</a> obtained from the action, from the DoJ and Internal Revenue (more will be coming later). The rights group praises the IRS for spelling out limitations and prohibitions on deceptive use of social media by its agents &mdash; unlike the DoJ. The US Marshalls and the BATFE could not find any documents related to the FoIA request, so presumably they have no guidelines or prohibitions in this area.</htmltext>
<tokenext>SpuriousLogic passes along this excerpt from the ChiTrib : " The Feds are on Facebook .
And MySpace , LinkedIn , and Twitter , too .
US law enforcement agents are following the rest of the Internet world into popular social-networking services , going undercover with false online profiles to communicate with suspects and gather private information , according to an internal Justice Department document that offers a tantalizing glimpse of issues related to privacy and crime-fighting .
... The document... makes clear that US agents are already logging on surreptitiously to exchange messages with suspects , identify a target 's friends or relatives and browse private information such as postings , personal photographs , and video clips .
Among other purposes : Investigators can check suspects ' alibis by comparing stories told to police with tweets sent at the same time about their whereabouts .
Online photos from a suspicious spending spree... can link suspects or their friends to robberies or burglaries .
" The FoIA lawsuit was filed by the EFF , which has posted two documents obtained from the action , from the DoJ and Internal Revenue ( more will be coming later ) .
The rights group praises the IRS for spelling out limitations and prohibitions on deceptive use of social media by its agents    unlike the DoJ .
The US Marshalls and the BATFE could not find any documents related to the FoIA request , so presumably they have no guidelines or prohibitions in this area .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SpuriousLogic passes along this excerpt from the ChiTrib: "The Feds are on Facebook.
And MySpace, LinkedIn, and Twitter, too.
US law enforcement agents are following the rest of the Internet world into popular social-networking services, going undercover with false online profiles to communicate with suspects and gather private information, according to an internal Justice Department document that offers a tantalizing glimpse of issues related to privacy and crime-fighting.
... The document... makes clear that US agents are already logging on surreptitiously to exchange messages with suspects, identify a target's friends or relatives and browse private information such as postings, personal photographs, and video clips.
Among other purposes: Investigators can check suspects' alibis by comparing stories told to police with tweets sent at the same time about their whereabouts.
Online photos from a suspicious spending spree... can link suspects or their friends to robberies or burglaries.
" The FoIA lawsuit was filed by the EFF, which has posted two documents obtained from the action, from the DoJ and Internal Revenue (more will be coming later).
The rights group praises the IRS for spelling out limitations and prohibitions on deceptive use of social media by its agents — unlike the DoJ.
The US Marshalls and the BATFE could not find any documents related to the FoIA request, so presumably they have no guidelines or prohibitions in this area.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501184</id>
	<title>Is anyone surprised?</title>
	<author>calibre-not-output</author>
	<datestamp>1268732880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you need a leaked document to know that spies are spying, you fail at life. Obviously information-gathering agencies will deploy personnel wherever there are large amounts of potentially useful information to be gathered.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you need a leaked document to know that spies are spying , you fail at life .
Obviously information-gathering agencies will deploy personnel wherever there are large amounts of potentially useful information to be gathered .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you need a leaked document to know that spies are spying, you fail at life.
Obviously information-gathering agencies will deploy personnel wherever there are large amounts of potentially useful information to be gathered.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501416</id>
	<title>typical inflammatory wording</title>
	<author>sribe</author>
	<datestamp>1268734020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How exactly are they gathering "private" information from public web sites? Hint: if you post it to a public web site, it is not private any more!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How exactly are they gathering " private " information from public web sites ?
Hint : if you post it to a public web site , it is not private any more !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How exactly are they gathering "private" information from public web sites?
Hint: if you post it to a public web site, it is not private any more!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501384</id>
	<title>Turn it against them</title>
	<author>MSRedfox</author>
	<datestamp>1268733840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>So if they want to use my tweets to break alibis, does this mean I can make tweets to reinforce them?  '8:00 in bed and going to sleep'  '9:00 woke up to the sound of a gun shot in the distance, I hope Bob the snitch is okay'  '9:15 Going downtown with Officers for a cup of coffee, they are so nice'  '9:30 after officers read my tweets, they apologized for wasting my time and drove me home'</htmltext>
<tokenext>So if they want to use my tweets to break alibis , does this mean I can make tweets to reinforce them ?
'8 : 00 in bed and going to sleep ' '9 : 00 woke up to the sound of a gun shot in the distance , I hope Bob the snitch is okay ' '9 : 15 Going downtown with Officers for a cup of coffee , they are so nice ' '9 : 30 after officers read my tweets , they apologized for wasting my time and drove me home'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So if they want to use my tweets to break alibis, does this mean I can make tweets to reinforce them?
'8:00 in bed and going to sleep'  '9:00 woke up to the sound of a gun shot in the distance, I hope Bob the snitch is okay'  '9:15 Going downtown with Officers for a cup of coffee, they are so nice'  '9:30 after officers read my tweets, they apologized for wasting my time and drove me home'</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501316</id>
	<title>alibis</title>
	<author>bsDaemon</author>
	<datestamp>1268733480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because, you know, people twitter "going downtown to cap off @bigjimmy then getting stromboli" or whatever... and like tweets really establish an alibi anyway.  Maybe with geo-tagging, but even then that's suspect, for there is no reason to believe that the perp didn't give his phone to someone to go tweet something from somewhere else.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because , you know , people twitter " going downtown to cap off @ bigjimmy then getting stromboli " or whatever... and like tweets really establish an alibi anyway .
Maybe with geo-tagging , but even then that 's suspect , for there is no reason to believe that the perp did n't give his phone to someone to go tweet something from somewhere else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because, you know, people twitter "going downtown to cap off @bigjimmy then getting stromboli" or whatever... and like tweets really establish an alibi anyway.
Maybe with geo-tagging, but even then that's suspect, for there is no reason to believe that the perp didn't give his phone to someone to go tweet something from somewhere else.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31505008</id>
	<title>Re:It's not private</title>
	<author>Macgrrl</author>
	<datestamp>1268762100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Over recent years people, especially young people, have gradually become accoustomed to posting more and more information about themselve on teh interwebs. Teenagers in particular have become aclimatised to this lesser expectation of privacy - it's almost as if they need to post about an event to validate that they have experienced it (SS or it didn't happen).</p><p>Whether intentional or not, these poeple are being trained not to expect privacy for themselves or anyone else - aided by the media and modern celebraties for whom there is no such thing as bad publicity.</p><p>Andy Warhol said everyone would get their 15 minutes of fame, these kids have somehow been convinced that privacy = being a nobody, and everybody should be a somebody (famous).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Over recent years people , especially young people , have gradually become accoustomed to posting more and more information about themselve on teh interwebs .
Teenagers in particular have become aclimatised to this lesser expectation of privacy - it 's almost as if they need to post about an event to validate that they have experienced it ( SS or it did n't happen ) .Whether intentional or not , these poeple are being trained not to expect privacy for themselves or anyone else - aided by the media and modern celebraties for whom there is no such thing as bad publicity.Andy Warhol said everyone would get their 15 minutes of fame , these kids have somehow been convinced that privacy = being a nobody , and everybody should be a somebody ( famous ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Over recent years people, especially young people, have gradually become accoustomed to posting more and more information about themselve on teh interwebs.
Teenagers in particular have become aclimatised to this lesser expectation of privacy - it's almost as if they need to post about an event to validate that they have experienced it (SS or it didn't happen).Whether intentional or not, these poeple are being trained not to expect privacy for themselves or anyone else - aided by the media and modern celebraties for whom there is no such thing as bad publicity.Andy Warhol said everyone would get their 15 minutes of fame, these kids have somehow been convinced that privacy = being a nobody, and everybody should be a somebody (famous).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501732</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31505370</id>
	<title>Re:"Publicly available"</title>
	<author>drkim</author>
	<datestamp>1268768220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Your use of the word 'spy' is interesting.
<br> <br>
The classic "cop on the beat" an officer, or constable, wandering through town, aware of everything in plain sight, knowing who belongs, and who does not isn't 'spying' it's call "law enforcement."
<br> <br>
The thought of officers perusing a public forum - hosted on a network built by the Department of Defense - where people have been given no expectation of privacy simply brings that model to the modern age.
<br> <br>
<i>Facebook is popular because its users believe that their information is not  publicly available...</i>
<br>I doubt if any Facebook user thinks that anything on Facebook is private.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Your use of the word 'spy ' is interesting .
The classic " cop on the beat " an officer , or constable , wandering through town , aware of everything in plain sight , knowing who belongs , and who does not is n't 'spying ' it 's call " law enforcement .
" The thought of officers perusing a public forum - hosted on a network built by the Department of Defense - where people have been given no expectation of privacy simply brings that model to the modern age .
Facebook is popular because its users believe that their information is not publicly available.. . I doubt if any Facebook user thinks that anything on Facebook is private .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your use of the word 'spy' is interesting.
The classic "cop on the beat" an officer, or constable, wandering through town, aware of everything in plain sight, knowing who belongs, and who does not isn't 'spying' it's call "law enforcement.
"
 
The thought of officers perusing a public forum - hosted on a network built by the Department of Defense - where people have been given no expectation of privacy simply brings that model to the modern age.
Facebook is popular because its users believe that their information is not  publicly available...
I doubt if any Facebook user thinks that anything on Facebook is private.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501230</id>
	<title>Terms of Service violations?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268733120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are these deceptive profiles in violation of the Terms of Service for the various social networks?</p><p>Wasn't that part of the basis for prosecuting Lori Drew? (I realize they threw that out)<br><a href="http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/07/drew\_court/" title="wired.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/07/drew\_court/</a> [wired.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are these deceptive profiles in violation of the Terms of Service for the various social networks ? Was n't that part of the basis for prosecuting Lori Drew ?
( I realize they threw that out ) http : //www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/07/drew \ _court/ [ wired.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are these deceptive profiles in violation of the Terms of Service for the various social networks?Wasn't that part of the basis for prosecuting Lori Drew?
(I realize they threw that out)http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/07/drew\_court/ [wired.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501882</id>
	<title>I tip my hat to you, sir.</title>
	<author>ClintJCL</author>
	<datestamp>1268736420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That was hilarious.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That was hilarious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That was hilarious.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501610</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31505558</id>
	<title>Re:Is anyone surprised?</title>
	<author>solferino</author>
	<datestamp>1268858580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>If you need a leaked document to know that spies are spying, you fail at life.</p></div></blockquote><p>"you fail at life" -- What's with the juvenile hyperbole? The basis of empiricism is confirmation of hypotheses. It's good to get detailed confirmation of (an almost certain) suspicion. And the detail is what is interesting here.</p><p>p.s. It wasn't a leaked document. It was two documents released under a FOI request.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you need a leaked document to know that spies are spying , you fail at life .
" you fail at life " -- What 's with the juvenile hyperbole ?
The basis of empiricism is confirmation of hypotheses .
It 's good to get detailed confirmation of ( an almost certain ) suspicion .
And the detail is what is interesting here.p.s .
It was n't a leaked document .
It was two documents released under a FOI request .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you need a leaked document to know that spies are spying, you fail at life.
"you fail at life" -- What's with the juvenile hyperbole?
The basis of empiricism is confirmation of hypotheses.
It's good to get detailed confirmation of (an almost certain) suspicion.
And the detail is what is interesting here.p.s.
It wasn't a leaked document.
It was two documents released under a FOI request.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501184</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31505656</id>
	<title>Re:The snuke</title>
	<author>cheezegeezer</author>
	<datestamp>1268816940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As long as these darn  incredulous Americans keep with in their own shores (and i mean Mainland USA) then do what the hell you want to your own people but step outside then expect people like me to want a piece of you big time  i mean just who the hell do they think they are</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As long as these darn incredulous Americans keep with in their own shores ( and i mean Mainland USA ) then do what the hell you want to your own people but step outside then expect people like me to want a piece of you big time i mean just who the hell do they think they are</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As long as these darn  incredulous Americans keep with in their own shores (and i mean Mainland USA) then do what the hell you want to your own people but step outside then expect people like me to want a piece of you big time  i mean just who the hell do they think they are</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501182</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501182</id>
	<title>The snuke</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268732880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All right, people, I'm in charge now and we will find the terrorists. Jarvis, I want you to check for any terrorist chatter on AOL. Marley and Greggs, try searching for nuclear devices on askjeeves.com</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All right , people , I 'm in charge now and we will find the terrorists .
Jarvis , I want you to check for any terrorist chatter on AOL .
Marley and Greggs , try searching for nuclear devices on askjeeves.com</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All right, people, I'm in charge now and we will find the terrorists.
Jarvis, I want you to check for any terrorist chatter on AOL.
Marley and Greggs, try searching for nuclear devices on askjeeves.com</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501346</id>
	<title>Re:I'd hope so.</title>
	<author>Ethanol-fueled</author>
	<datestamp>1268733600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Probably means that there's a shortage of real crooks like terrorists and spies, so the feds have to do <i>something</i> to justify their elephantine budgets and keep their bust-numbers high.<br> <br>

<i> Hey, ICE? Hi, this is Agent Smith from the FBI and I'm calling to report a MySpace profile featuring a black guy with gold chains and a new car that he probably stole from some hapless old lady. Can you go pick 'him up for me? Warrants? Nah, if the judge asks just say that the guy's an illegal alien or he's downloading music or somethin'. On your way? Thanks. </i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Probably means that there 's a shortage of real crooks like terrorists and spies , so the feds have to do something to justify their elephantine budgets and keep their bust-numbers high .
Hey , ICE ?
Hi , this is Agent Smith from the FBI and I 'm calling to report a MySpace profile featuring a black guy with gold chains and a new car that he probably stole from some hapless old lady .
Can you go pick 'him up for me ?
Warrants ? Nah , if the judge asks just say that the guy 's an illegal alien or he 's downloading music or somethin' .
On your way ?
Thanks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Probably means that there's a shortage of real crooks like terrorists and spies, so the feds have to do something to justify their elephantine budgets and keep their bust-numbers high.
Hey, ICE?
Hi, this is Agent Smith from the FBI and I'm calling to report a MySpace profile featuring a black guy with gold chains and a new car that he probably stole from some hapless old lady.
Can you go pick 'him up for me?
Warrants? Nah, if the judge asks just say that the guy's an illegal alien or he's downloading music or somethin'.
On your way?
Thanks. </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501264</id>
	<title>I don't see a problem</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268733300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe a TOS violation as someone pointed out.  This kind of thing should be expected in any public forum.  And if your profile is hidden from the public and you're a suspect, then don't be surprised if a secret agent man is trying to get added to your friends list.  They will use whatever means possible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe a TOS violation as someone pointed out .
This kind of thing should be expected in any public forum .
And if your profile is hidden from the public and you 're a suspect , then do n't be surprised if a secret agent man is trying to get added to your friends list .
They will use whatever means possible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe a TOS violation as someone pointed out.
This kind of thing should be expected in any public forum.
And if your profile is hidden from the public and you're a suspect, then don't be surprised if a secret agent man is trying to get added to your friends list.
They will use whatever means possible.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501670</id>
	<title>And this is news how?</title>
	<author>kriston</author>
	<datestamp>1268735340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And this is news how?<br>How could anyone not know this immediately?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And this is news how ? How could anyone not know this immediately ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And this is news how?How could anyone not know this immediately?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501390</id>
	<title>"Publicly available"</title>
	<author>betterunixthanunix</author>
	<datestamp>1268733840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Facebook is popular because its users believe that their information is <b>not</b> publicly available.  Yes, it is a complete falsehood, but the reality of life is that most people do not realize just how public the information on Facebook really is, and that is why these sorts of activities are so problematic.  We are supposed to live in a country where the government does not arbitrarily spy on its citizens, even for the purposes of law enforcement.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Facebook is popular because its users believe that their information is not publicly available .
Yes , it is a complete falsehood , but the reality of life is that most people do not realize just how public the information on Facebook really is , and that is why these sorts of activities are so problematic .
We are supposed to live in a country where the government does not arbitrarily spy on its citizens , even for the purposes of law enforcement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Facebook is popular because its users believe that their information is not publicly available.
Yes, it is a complete falsehood, but the reality of life is that most people do not realize just how public the information on Facebook really is, and that is why these sorts of activities are so problematic.
We are supposed to live in a country where the government does not arbitrarily spy on its citizens, even for the purposes of law enforcement.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501336</id>
	<title>The adage still applies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268733540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't post information publicly, and it can't be used against you.</p><p>Agents can lie, by law, in the investigation of criminal activities.   The fact that they can lie, yet you cannot, underlies why I think the US is now a police state.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't post information publicly , and it ca n't be used against you.Agents can lie , by law , in the investigation of criminal activities .
The fact that they can lie , yet you can not , underlies why I think the US is now a police state .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't post information publicly, and it can't be used against you.Agents can lie, by law, in the investigation of criminal activities.
The fact that they can lie, yet you cannot, underlies why I think the US is now a police state.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501610</id>
	<title>I'm a federal employee</title>
	<author>hatemonger</author>
	<datestamp>1268734920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>and I monitor<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. What now, bitches?</htmltext>
<tokenext>and I monitor / .
What now , bitches ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and I monitor /.
What now, bitches?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501548</id>
	<title>As a member of SDS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268734680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We are not the baby boomer's SDS run by Marxist dogma by the way.  Just wanted to get that out there before people start yelling commie.  Mostly we act as a guard against the insane grabs of power and money by academic institutions that have been occurring at an alarming rate since the late 1990's.  We are about as socialist on average as the socialist democrats are in Europe, even though we have some outliers.</p><p>We have had an online presence for years and the one thing we set out at the start was to be open so if infiltration happened it would be well documented.  There are no closed email lists, no secret societies and no calls to violence or overthrowing of the government.  However, that does not mean that we have not been <a href="http://www.newsds.org/?q=taxonomy/term/1/0" title="newsds.org">spied upon</a> [newsds.org] and we do take threats to our civil rights to assembly, speech and liberty seriously.  What we worry about mostly is the threat of the government running counter intelligence programs against us like <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO" title="wikipedia.org">COUNTELPRO</a> [wikipedia.org] in the 70's since the FBI and the US DOD have been linked to some instances of agent provocateur activity during the Bush years.  So the question that any investigation of these acts by the government is when they stop being surveillance and start being about collecting data on honest citizens who surround a suspect and via police misconduct and prosecutorial witchhunts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We are not the baby boomer 's SDS run by Marxist dogma by the way .
Just wanted to get that out there before people start yelling commie .
Mostly we act as a guard against the insane grabs of power and money by academic institutions that have been occurring at an alarming rate since the late 1990 's .
We are about as socialist on average as the socialist democrats are in Europe , even though we have some outliers.We have had an online presence for years and the one thing we set out at the start was to be open so if infiltration happened it would be well documented .
There are no closed email lists , no secret societies and no calls to violence or overthrowing of the government .
However , that does not mean that we have not been spied upon [ newsds.org ] and we do take threats to our civil rights to assembly , speech and liberty seriously .
What we worry about mostly is the threat of the government running counter intelligence programs against us like COUNTELPRO [ wikipedia.org ] in the 70 's since the FBI and the US DOD have been linked to some instances of agent provocateur activity during the Bush years .
So the question that any investigation of these acts by the government is when they stop being surveillance and start being about collecting data on honest citizens who surround a suspect and via police misconduct and prosecutorial witchhunts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We are not the baby boomer's SDS run by Marxist dogma by the way.
Just wanted to get that out there before people start yelling commie.
Mostly we act as a guard against the insane grabs of power and money by academic institutions that have been occurring at an alarming rate since the late 1990's.
We are about as socialist on average as the socialist democrats are in Europe, even though we have some outliers.We have had an online presence for years and the one thing we set out at the start was to be open so if infiltration happened it would be well documented.
There are no closed email lists, no secret societies and no calls to violence or overthrowing of the government.
However, that does not mean that we have not been spied upon [newsds.org] and we do take threats to our civil rights to assembly, speech and liberty seriously.
What we worry about mostly is the threat of the government running counter intelligence programs against us like COUNTELPRO [wikipedia.org] in the 70's since the FBI and the US DOD have been linked to some instances of agent provocateur activity during the Bush years.
So the question that any investigation of these acts by the government is when they stop being surveillance and start being about collecting data on honest citizens who surround a suspect and via police misconduct and prosecutorial witchhunts.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31502350</id>
	<title>Re:Also..</title>
	<author>amicusNYCL</author>
	<datestamp>1268738760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It is the nature of round-the-clock access to a person's profile and life, and the spillover into their friend's lives<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... that makes this a more intrusive form of investigation.</p></div><p>Go up to an agent or detective and tell him that you think his investigation into the private life of his murder or drug dealing suspect is too intrusive.  See what he says.  After he stops laughing, of course, you'll need to wait for that.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is the nature of round-the-clock access to a person 's profile and life , and the spillover into their friend 's lives ... that makes this a more intrusive form of investigation.Go up to an agent or detective and tell him that you think his investigation into the private life of his murder or drug dealing suspect is too intrusive .
See what he says .
After he stops laughing , of course , you 'll need to wait for that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is the nature of round-the-clock access to a person's profile and life, and the spillover into their friend's lives ... that makes this a more intrusive form of investigation.Go up to an agent or detective and tell him that you think his investigation into the private life of his murder or drug dealing suspect is too intrusive.
See what he says.
After he stops laughing, of course, you'll need to wait for that.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501448</id>
	<title>Serously...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268734140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Have any murder suspects really tweeted their crime?  This will happen one day.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have any murder suspects really tweeted their crime ?
This will happen one day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have any murder suspects really tweeted their crime?
This will happen one day.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501854</id>
	<title>In other news...</title>
	<author>ls671</author>
	<datestamp>1268736300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In other news, intelligence gathering agencies read newspapers, listen to news, read blogs, read Usenet posting, read Slashdot and other forum and news sites. They sometimes post to the newspapers, usenet and web sites to deceive potential suspects.</p><p>How is them reading/posting on Facebook,  MySpace, LinkedIn, and Twitter any different?</p><p>I heard sometime ago that one of the most effective way to gather intelligence was to read newspapers if you knew how to correlate things. I do not see why this principle couldn't apply to electronic media.</p><p>And guess what ? You are allowed to do it too ! Many journalists have done just the same thing to find out stuff<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In other news , intelligence gathering agencies read newspapers , listen to news , read blogs , read Usenet posting , read Slashdot and other forum and news sites .
They sometimes post to the newspapers , usenet and web sites to deceive potential suspects.How is them reading/posting on Facebook , MySpace , LinkedIn , and Twitter any different ? I heard sometime ago that one of the most effective way to gather intelligence was to read newspapers if you knew how to correlate things .
I do not see why this principle could n't apply to electronic media.And guess what ?
You are allowed to do it too !
Many journalists have done just the same thing to find out stuff ; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In other news, intelligence gathering agencies read newspapers, listen to news, read blogs, read Usenet posting, read Slashdot and other forum and news sites.
They sometimes post to the newspapers, usenet and web sites to deceive potential suspects.How is them reading/posting on Facebook,  MySpace, LinkedIn, and Twitter any different?I heard sometime ago that one of the most effective way to gather intelligence was to read newspapers if you knew how to correlate things.
I do not see why this principle couldn't apply to electronic media.And guess what ?
You are allowed to do it too !
Many journalists have done just the same thing to find out stuff ;-)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501732</id>
	<title>It's not private</title>
	<author>Trailer Trash</author>
	<datestamp>1268735640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> browse private information such as postings, personal photographs, and video clips.</p></div></blockquote><p>No.  What you're referring to is *public information* if they can get to it through the normal user interface.  Now, if they call up facebook and say "I want to see so and so's non-public photos", fine, it's a problem, they need a warrant.</p><p>But I'm tired of this nonsense where someone posts all kinds of crap on their facebook account, make it public (or allow "friends" to see it), and then act like it's not supposed to be viewed by law enforcement.</p><p>If you don't want the cops to see it, don't post it to facebook.  Why is this so hard?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>browse private information such as postings , personal photographs , and video clips.No .
What you 're referring to is * public information * if they can get to it through the normal user interface .
Now , if they call up facebook and say " I want to see so and so 's non-public photos " , fine , it 's a problem , they need a warrant.But I 'm tired of this nonsense where someone posts all kinds of crap on their facebook account , make it public ( or allow " friends " to see it ) , and then act like it 's not supposed to be viewed by law enforcement.If you do n't want the cops to see it , do n't post it to facebook .
Why is this so hard ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> browse private information such as postings, personal photographs, and video clips.No.
What you're referring to is *public information* if they can get to it through the normal user interface.
Now, if they call up facebook and say "I want to see so and so's non-public photos", fine, it's a problem, they need a warrant.But I'm tired of this nonsense where someone posts all kinds of crap on their facebook account, make it public (or allow "friends" to see it), and then act like it's not supposed to be viewed by law enforcement.If you don't want the cops to see it, don't post it to facebook.
Why is this so hard?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31502266</id>
	<title>Web filters</title>
	<author>craash420</author>
	<datestamp>1268738340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd guess this is just a scheme to have their IT department unblock their favorite networking site.  Maybe I can convince my boss to let us do tech support via Facebook...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd guess this is just a scheme to have their IT department unblock their favorite networking site .
Maybe I can convince my boss to let us do tech support via Facebook.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd guess this is just a scheme to have their IT department unblock their favorite networking site.
Maybe I can convince my boss to let us do tech support via Facebook...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31504048</id>
	<title>Ramirez, guard this cart of garlic!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268751900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Rub some on your pits while you're there, you stink Ramirez.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Rub some on your pits while you 're there , you stink Ramirez .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Rub some on your pits while you're there, you stink Ramirez.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501182</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501272</id>
	<title>Re:Is anyone surprised?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268733360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But they told me they weren't...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But they told me they were n't.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But they told me they weren't...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501184</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31502120</id>
	<title>well, there is this... *Content Facebook &#169; 20</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268737560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This agreement was written in English (US).  Please note that Section 16 contains certain changes to the general terms for users outside the United States.</p><p>Date of Last Revision: December 21, 2009<br>Statement of Rights and Responsibilities</p><p>This Statement of Rights and Responsibilities ("Statement") derives from the Facebook Principles, and governs our relationship with users and others who interact with Facebook. By using or accessing Facebook, you agree to this Statement.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...<br>Registration and Account Security</p><p>Facebook users provide their real names and information, and we need your help to keep it that way. Here are some commitments you make to us relating to registering and maintaining the security of your account:</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 1. You will not provide any false personal information on Facebook, or create an account for anyone other than yourself without permission.</p><p>end quote</p><p>but then who would expect our law enforcement officials to obey the law? Oh, wait... we do.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This agreement was written in English ( US ) .
Please note that Section 16 contains certain changes to the general terms for users outside the United States.Date of Last Revision : December 21 , 2009Statement of Rights and ResponsibilitiesThis Statement of Rights and Responsibilities ( " Statement " ) derives from the Facebook Principles , and governs our relationship with users and others who interact with Facebook .
By using or accessing Facebook , you agree to this Statement .
...Registration and Account SecurityFacebook users provide their real names and information , and we need your help to keep it that way .
Here are some commitments you make to us relating to registering and maintaining the security of your account :       1 .
You will not provide any false personal information on Facebook , or create an account for anyone other than yourself without permission.end quotebut then who would expect our law enforcement officials to obey the law ?
Oh , wait... we do .
: (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This agreement was written in English (US).
Please note that Section 16 contains certain changes to the general terms for users outside the United States.Date of Last Revision: December 21, 2009Statement of Rights and ResponsibilitiesThis Statement of Rights and Responsibilities ("Statement") derives from the Facebook Principles, and governs our relationship with users and others who interact with Facebook.
By using or accessing Facebook, you agree to this Statement.
...Registration and Account SecurityFacebook users provide their real names and information, and we need your help to keep it that way.
Here are some commitments you make to us relating to registering and maintaining the security of your account:
      1.
You will not provide any false personal information on Facebook, or create an account for anyone other than yourself without permission.end quotebut then who would expect our law enforcement officials to obey the law?
Oh, wait... we do.
:(
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501286</id>
	<title>Well perhaps they're not allowed speakers at work</title>
	<author>Orga</author>
	<datestamp>1268733360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wouldn't be surprised if they're all using headphones to listen to youtube videos and peoples favorites songs on myspace.  I believe their latex gloves also make typing quieter</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would n't be surprised if they 're all using headphones to listen to youtube videos and peoples favorites songs on myspace .
I believe their latex gloves also make typing quieter</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wouldn't be surprised if they're all using headphones to listen to youtube videos and peoples favorites songs on myspace.
I believe their latex gloves also make typing quieter</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31504038</id>
	<title>Re:I'd hope so.</title>
	<author>tarball</author>
	<datestamp>1268751780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yup</p><p>Anyone complaining about this has what we in Garage Logic commonly call a "Moron Chip Problem".  In other words, your Moron Chip is broken.</p><p>This piece of your personal logic array attempts to keep you from making stupid mistakes.  If it's broken you are probably SOL.</p><p>tom</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>YupAnyone complaining about this has what we in Garage Logic commonly call a " Moron Chip Problem " .
In other words , your Moron Chip is broken.This piece of your personal logic array attempts to keep you from making stupid mistakes .
If it 's broken you are probably SOL.tom</tokentext>
<sentencetext>YupAnyone complaining about this has what we in Garage Logic commonly call a "Moron Chip Problem".
In other words, your Moron Chip is broken.This piece of your personal logic array attempts to keep you from making stupid mistakes.
If it's broken you are probably SOL.tom</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501262</id>
	<title>"Private" Information?</title>
	<author>The Angry Mick</author>
	<datestamp>1268733300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> <i>The document... makes clear that US agents are already logging on surreptitiously to exchange messages with suspects, identify a target's friends or relatives and browse private information such as postings, personal photographs, and video clips.</i></p></div> </blockquote><p>Is this <b>private</b> data that they've "hacked" into (a la <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/how-mark-zuckerberg-hacked-into-the-harvard-crimson-2010-3" title="businessinsider.com">Zuckerberg</a> [businessinsider.com]), or is this a case of the feds reading whatever they found posted on the dude's wall or open Twitter page?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The document... makes clear that US agents are already logging on surreptitiously to exchange messages with suspects , identify a target 's friends or relatives and browse private information such as postings , personal photographs , and video clips .
Is this private data that they 've " hacked " into ( a la Zuckerberg [ businessinsider.com ] ) , or is this a case of the feds reading whatever they found posted on the dude 's wall or open Twitter page ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> The document... makes clear that US agents are already logging on surreptitiously to exchange messages with suspects, identify a target's friends or relatives and browse private information such as postings, personal photographs, and video clips.
Is this private data that they've "hacked" into (a la Zuckerberg [businessinsider.com]), or is this a case of the feds reading whatever they found posted on the dude's wall or open Twitter page?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501320</id>
	<title>Re:Is anyone surprised?</title>
	<author>interkin3tic</author>
	<datestamp>1268733480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you need a leaked document to know that spies are spying, you fail at <b>espionage.</b></p> </div><p>I think it was an overstatement to say "life" especially since, to me, facebook and other social networking sites are quite the opposite of life.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you need a leaked document to know that spies are spying , you fail at espionage .
I think it was an overstatement to say " life " especially since , to me , facebook and other social networking sites are quite the opposite of life .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you need a leaked document to know that spies are spying, you fail at espionage.
I think it was an overstatement to say "life" especially since, to me, facebook and other social networking sites are quite the opposite of life.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501184</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31502682</id>
	<title>So FB fans of Defcon are playing "spot the fed"??</title>
	<author>RobertLTux</author>
	<datestamp>1268740740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously how many folks "here" and have facebook accounts are looking for feds now??</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously how many folks " here " and have facebook accounts are looking for feds now ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously how many folks "here" and have facebook accounts are looking for feds now?
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31506566</id>
	<title>why keep running these kind of stories?</title>
	<author>circletimessquare</author>
	<datestamp>1268828460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>look: if you make it public, its public. it can be abused. if you don't want it abused, don't make it public. and anything going over a wire to a wide open internet and not encrypted, is public</p><p>its really that simple. do you expect corporations or governments to act virtuous? it is YOUR job to protect your privacy. if your privacy is violated, its YOUR fault. no, really. the alternative is that, for whatever reason, you actually trust the sharks and wolves to protect you</p><p>why do people not realize this obvious concept? why does slashdot continuously post such stories and then the same tired characters are shocked, SHOCKED i tell you, that sharks act like sharks and wolves act like wolves?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>look : if you make it public , its public .
it can be abused .
if you do n't want it abused , do n't make it public .
and anything going over a wire to a wide open internet and not encrypted , is publicits really that simple .
do you expect corporations or governments to act virtuous ?
it is YOUR job to protect your privacy .
if your privacy is violated , its YOUR fault .
no , really .
the alternative is that , for whatever reason , you actually trust the sharks and wolves to protect youwhy do people not realize this obvious concept ?
why does slashdot continuously post such stories and then the same tired characters are shocked , SHOCKED i tell you , that sharks act like sharks and wolves act like wolves ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>look: if you make it public, its public.
it can be abused.
if you don't want it abused, don't make it public.
and anything going over a wire to a wide open internet and not encrypted, is publicits really that simple.
do you expect corporations or governments to act virtuous?
it is YOUR job to protect your privacy.
if your privacy is violated, its YOUR fault.
no, really.
the alternative is that, for whatever reason, you actually trust the sharks and wolves to protect youwhy do people not realize this obvious concept?
why does slashdot continuously post such stories and then the same tired characters are shocked, SHOCKED i tell you, that sharks act like sharks and wolves act like wolves?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501562</id>
	<title>Re:Also..</title>
	<author>betterunixthanunix</author>
	<datestamp>1268734740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Except that this is different, in that once an agent has "friended" you on Facebook, your profile becomes available to the entire investigative agency.  If an agent meets me at the bar and engages me in conversation, they learn only as much as I tell them -- perhaps that is a significant amount, perhaps they can use that conversation to investigate me further, but they are not receiving a profile of my entire life, and they cannot continue questioning me when I am not around.  It is the nature of round-the-clock access to a person's profile and life, and the spillover into their friend's lives (now the agent can read wall posts and various other little hints about what your friends are up to) that makes this a more intrusive form of investigation.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Except that this is different , in that once an agent has " friended " you on Facebook , your profile becomes available to the entire investigative agency .
If an agent meets me at the bar and engages me in conversation , they learn only as much as I tell them -- perhaps that is a significant amount , perhaps they can use that conversation to investigate me further , but they are not receiving a profile of my entire life , and they can not continue questioning me when I am not around .
It is the nature of round-the-clock access to a person 's profile and life , and the spillover into their friend 's lives ( now the agent can read wall posts and various other little hints about what your friends are up to ) that makes this a more intrusive form of investigation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except that this is different, in that once an agent has "friended" you on Facebook, your profile becomes available to the entire investigative agency.
If an agent meets me at the bar and engages me in conversation, they learn only as much as I tell them -- perhaps that is a significant amount, perhaps they can use that conversation to investigate me further, but they are not receiving a profile of my entire life, and they cannot continue questioning me when I am not around.
It is the nature of round-the-clock access to a person's profile and life, and the spillover into their friend's lives (now the agent can read wall posts and various other little hints about what your friends are up to) that makes this a more intrusive form of investigation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501260</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31503624</id>
	<title>Re:Well, yes, but it's not that clear cut .....</title>
	<author>Moridin42</author>
	<datestamp>1268747700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd hazard a guess that law enforcement wouldn't move on people like that former girlfriend of yours based on what they found on her social networking. Like any interaction with the police, anything said can be used against you. It will not be used <i>for</i> you. If there is evidence of criminal action on your social network's of choice page, it will be used against you. If there is only shady, but not illegal, content they will keep investigating you. But it obviously isn't going to exonerate you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd hazard a guess that law enforcement would n't move on people like that former girlfriend of yours based on what they found on her social networking .
Like any interaction with the police , anything said can be used against you .
It will not be used for you .
If there is evidence of criminal action on your social network 's of choice page , it will be used against you .
If there is only shady , but not illegal , content they will keep investigating you .
But it obviously is n't going to exonerate you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd hazard a guess that law enforcement wouldn't move on people like that former girlfriend of yours based on what they found on her social networking.
Like any interaction with the police, anything said can be used against you.
It will not be used for you.
If there is evidence of criminal action on your social network's of choice page, it will be used against you.
If there is only shady, but not illegal, content they will keep investigating you.
But it obviously isn't going to exonerate you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31502228</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501852</id>
	<title>Re:alibis</title>
	<author>Shotgun</author>
	<datestamp>1268736240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're not thinking on the level of a criminal, bsDaemon.  Face it, we're not talking the fairest and brightest of society here.  We're talking about that species of human that has barely above being an evolutionary kickback.  They're STUPID.  We're talking about the sort of people that would kill Michael Jordan's father on the side of a lonely NC highway, hear and see the ensuing hoopla spread through the news, and THEN go around showing off his NBA championship ring.</p><p>Collecting Tweets and Facebook entries is just picking the low hanging fruit for law enforcement.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're not thinking on the level of a criminal , bsDaemon .
Face it , we 're not talking the fairest and brightest of society here .
We 're talking about that species of human that has barely above being an evolutionary kickback .
They 're STUPID .
We 're talking about the sort of people that would kill Michael Jordan 's father on the side of a lonely NC highway , hear and see the ensuing hoopla spread through the news , and THEN go around showing off his NBA championship ring.Collecting Tweets and Facebook entries is just picking the low hanging fruit for law enforcement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're not thinking on the level of a criminal, bsDaemon.
Face it, we're not talking the fairest and brightest of society here.
We're talking about that species of human that has barely above being an evolutionary kickback.
They're STUPID.
We're talking about the sort of people that would kill Michael Jordan's father on the side of a lonely NC highway, hear and see the ensuing hoopla spread through the news, and THEN go around showing off his NBA championship ring.Collecting Tweets and Facebook entries is just picking the low hanging fruit for law enforcement.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501316</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31503998</id>
	<title>They are also mining facebook photos with tags</title>
	<author>CPE1704TKS</author>
	<datestamp>1268751480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who is surprised that the Feds are using Facebook??</p><p>Does anyone not realize that they are mining all the photos on Facebook, Flickr, Picasa, etc, for pictures of people, and cross-referencing them based on tags?  Talk about a wealth of photos that can be used to definitively identify a person.</p><p>If you have been tagged on any photo on Facebook, most likely you are already in the Fed's database, as well as the ability to recognize your face as well.  Walk anywhere near a camera, and those cameras can instantly use facial recognition to figure out your name, age, etc, simply based on freely available information from these social networks.</p><p>Privacy is dead.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who is surprised that the Feds are using Facebook ?
? Does anyone not realize that they are mining all the photos on Facebook , Flickr , Picasa , etc , for pictures of people , and cross-referencing them based on tags ?
Talk about a wealth of photos that can be used to definitively identify a person.If you have been tagged on any photo on Facebook , most likely you are already in the Fed 's database , as well as the ability to recognize your face as well .
Walk anywhere near a camera , and those cameras can instantly use facial recognition to figure out your name , age , etc , simply based on freely available information from these social networks.Privacy is dead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who is surprised that the Feds are using Facebook?
?Does anyone not realize that they are mining all the photos on Facebook, Flickr, Picasa, etc, for pictures of people, and cross-referencing them based on tags?
Talk about a wealth of photos that can be used to definitively identify a person.If you have been tagged on any photo on Facebook, most likely you are already in the Fed's database, as well as the ability to recognize your face as well.
Walk anywhere near a camera, and those cameras can instantly use facial recognition to figure out your name, age, etc, simply based on freely available information from these social networks.Privacy is dead.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31502228</id>
	<title>Well, yes, but it's not that clear cut .....</title>
	<author>King\_TJ</author>
	<datestamp>1268738100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why do people get so upset when they find out that H.R. departments are trying to comb MySpace or Facebook before hiring a candidate?  Same idea, but simply a group trying to glean the data for a different purpose.</p><p>The thing is, yes - I fully realize law enforcement is going to make use of the tools available to them.  If they can see my info on Facebook and they're interested in me, obviously they'll take a peek at it.</p><p>BUT, there's a danger here that comes by misinterpreting the data, too.  For starters, who's to say someone's profile on a social networking site is an accurate depiction of who they *really* are, vs. a persona they like to project?</p><p>EG.  I once dated a gal who had a MySpace account that gave a VERY different idea of who she was from reality.  It's not that her photos weren't really her, or that she *lied* about anything.  It's more that she was trying to be as "hip" and "trendy" as possible on her page.  So, despite the fact she was basically an "A" student and spent most of her time studying in grad. school, all of that was conveniently left out, and things that in reality were only minor footnotes in her daily life were accentuated instead.  Her photo gallery?  Pretty sparse in the way of photos showing her typical clothing and "look", or of pictures of the family.  Instead?  A whole collection of photos she asked a friend to take one time when she was all "made up" in clothes she didn't usually wear, and trying to do a "photo shoot" type of thing with it.  Even her listed "favorite books" and "favorite music" were carefully picked and chosen.  Once I knew her a while, I realized she listened to quite a bit of classic rock<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... yet she didn't seem to think that was part of the image she wanted to portray on her profile, so it was ignored in favor of the latest alternative and dance bands she also happened to like.</p><p>And that's all really just harmless, "fun" stuff.  But what about people who are thinking along those same lines when they post the set of 50 crazy, drunk party photos they've got from one of the ONLY times they really went out and partied?  What about the people who take an interest in something like computer hacking, so they post a lot of links related to the subject and list those types of books as their favorites?  Does that mean they're actually INVOLVED in hacking, or does it mean they're actively trying to STOP hacking (a "white hat" type)?</p><p>You have to remember that whether or not people go to the effort to lock their FB or MySpace profiles down as "private" -- they often only have a certain audience in mind.  They're not building the whole page thinking "This is what I'd want law enforcement to know about me, in case they come looking."  They're not generally thinking, "I'm putting this here because I'm job hunting." either.  It's a *social* network, meaning friends, family and like-minded individuals they consider "brethren" in some fashion.   I think anyone trying to use the info from OTHER angles than that need to be very cautious how they interpret what they see.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do people get so upset when they find out that H.R .
departments are trying to comb MySpace or Facebook before hiring a candidate ?
Same idea , but simply a group trying to glean the data for a different purpose.The thing is , yes - I fully realize law enforcement is going to make use of the tools available to them .
If they can see my info on Facebook and they 're interested in me , obviously they 'll take a peek at it.BUT , there 's a danger here that comes by misinterpreting the data , too .
For starters , who 's to say someone 's profile on a social networking site is an accurate depiction of who they * really * are , vs. a persona they like to project ? EG .
I once dated a gal who had a MySpace account that gave a VERY different idea of who she was from reality .
It 's not that her photos were n't really her , or that she * lied * about anything .
It 's more that she was trying to be as " hip " and " trendy " as possible on her page .
So , despite the fact she was basically an " A " student and spent most of her time studying in grad .
school , all of that was conveniently left out , and things that in reality were only minor footnotes in her daily life were accentuated instead .
Her photo gallery ?
Pretty sparse in the way of photos showing her typical clothing and " look " , or of pictures of the family .
Instead ? A whole collection of photos she asked a friend to take one time when she was all " made up " in clothes she did n't usually wear , and trying to do a " photo shoot " type of thing with it .
Even her listed " favorite books " and " favorite music " were carefully picked and chosen .
Once I knew her a while , I realized she listened to quite a bit of classic rock ... yet she did n't seem to think that was part of the image she wanted to portray on her profile , so it was ignored in favor of the latest alternative and dance bands she also happened to like.And that 's all really just harmless , " fun " stuff .
But what about people who are thinking along those same lines when they post the set of 50 crazy , drunk party photos they 've got from one of the ONLY times they really went out and partied ?
What about the people who take an interest in something like computer hacking , so they post a lot of links related to the subject and list those types of books as their favorites ?
Does that mean they 're actually INVOLVED in hacking , or does it mean they 're actively trying to STOP hacking ( a " white hat " type ) ? You have to remember that whether or not people go to the effort to lock their FB or MySpace profiles down as " private " -- they often only have a certain audience in mind .
They 're not building the whole page thinking " This is what I 'd want law enforcement to know about me , in case they come looking .
" They 're not generally thinking , " I 'm putting this here because I 'm job hunting .
" either .
It 's a * social * network , meaning friends , family and like-minded individuals they consider " brethren " in some fashion .
I think anyone trying to use the info from OTHER angles than that need to be very cautious how they interpret what they see .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why do people get so upset when they find out that H.R.
departments are trying to comb MySpace or Facebook before hiring a candidate?
Same idea, but simply a group trying to glean the data for a different purpose.The thing is, yes - I fully realize law enforcement is going to make use of the tools available to them.
If they can see my info on Facebook and they're interested in me, obviously they'll take a peek at it.BUT, there's a danger here that comes by misinterpreting the data, too.
For starters, who's to say someone's profile on a social networking site is an accurate depiction of who they *really* are, vs. a persona they like to project?EG.
I once dated a gal who had a MySpace account that gave a VERY different idea of who she was from reality.
It's not that her photos weren't really her, or that she *lied* about anything.
It's more that she was trying to be as "hip" and "trendy" as possible on her page.
So, despite the fact she was basically an "A" student and spent most of her time studying in grad.
school, all of that was conveniently left out, and things that in reality were only minor footnotes in her daily life were accentuated instead.
Her photo gallery?
Pretty sparse in the way of photos showing her typical clothing and "look", or of pictures of the family.
Instead?  A whole collection of photos she asked a friend to take one time when she was all "made up" in clothes she didn't usually wear, and trying to do a "photo shoot" type of thing with it.
Even her listed "favorite books" and "favorite music" were carefully picked and chosen.
Once I knew her a while, I realized she listened to quite a bit of classic rock ... yet she didn't seem to think that was part of the image she wanted to portray on her profile, so it was ignored in favor of the latest alternative and dance bands she also happened to like.And that's all really just harmless, "fun" stuff.
But what about people who are thinking along those same lines when they post the set of 50 crazy, drunk party photos they've got from one of the ONLY times they really went out and partied?
What about the people who take an interest in something like computer hacking, so they post a lot of links related to the subject and list those types of books as their favorites?
Does that mean they're actually INVOLVED in hacking, or does it mean they're actively trying to STOP hacking (a "white hat" type)?You have to remember that whether or not people go to the effort to lock their FB or MySpace profiles down as "private" -- they often only have a certain audience in mind.
They're not building the whole page thinking "This is what I'd want law enforcement to know about me, in case they come looking.
"  They're not generally thinking, "I'm putting this here because I'm job hunting.
" either.
It's a *social* network, meaning friends, family and like-minded individuals they consider "brethren" in some fashion.
I think anyone trying to use the info from OTHER angles than that need to be very cautious how they interpret what they see.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31502088</id>
	<title>As someone contracted to investigate</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268737380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As someone contracting with the Feds to provide security clearance investigations (You didn't think the Feds did that themselves, did you?) I can assure you that the social networking sights are one of my first stops, along with a routine credit check with the top three reporting agencies, the IRS, etc. I also visit your neighbors and ask them if they know someone else I can talk to. Your neighbors are only too happy to help, btw. I investigate your buying habits, see whether you have too much credit or are too much in debt, check the court systems. It's amazing what's out there and freely available without the need for a warrant.</p><p>Oh, yes, and places like Facenbook are a gold mine because they show you at your worst. You like dissing your boss and calling him an asshole? You like posting your drunken mug or yourself smoking some weed with your buddies? That's enough to deny you a clearance right there. In fact, it's enough to get your sorry ass fired.</p><p>I don't need a warrant because you are so stupid that you'll tell me this stuff gratis. And don't whine about your so-called 'rights.' You don't have half the rights you think you do. Besides, if you choose to be stupid in public it's your own damn fault.</p><p>Obviously, I'll have to post this AC or risk getting fired myself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As someone contracting with the Feds to provide security clearance investigations ( You did n't think the Feds did that themselves , did you ?
) I can assure you that the social networking sights are one of my first stops , along with a routine credit check with the top three reporting agencies , the IRS , etc .
I also visit your neighbors and ask them if they know someone else I can talk to .
Your neighbors are only too happy to help , btw .
I investigate your buying habits , see whether you have too much credit or are too much in debt , check the court systems .
It 's amazing what 's out there and freely available without the need for a warrant.Oh , yes , and places like Facenbook are a gold mine because they show you at your worst .
You like dissing your boss and calling him an asshole ?
You like posting your drunken mug or yourself smoking some weed with your buddies ?
That 's enough to deny you a clearance right there .
In fact , it 's enough to get your sorry ass fired.I do n't need a warrant because you are so stupid that you 'll tell me this stuff gratis .
And do n't whine about your so-called 'rights .
' You do n't have half the rights you think you do .
Besides , if you choose to be stupid in public it 's your own damn fault.Obviously , I 'll have to post this AC or risk getting fired myself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As someone contracting with the Feds to provide security clearance investigations (You didn't think the Feds did that themselves, did you?
) I can assure you that the social networking sights are one of my first stops, along with a routine credit check with the top three reporting agencies, the IRS, etc.
I also visit your neighbors and ask them if they know someone else I can talk to.
Your neighbors are only too happy to help, btw.
I investigate your buying habits, see whether you have too much credit or are too much in debt, check the court systems.
It's amazing what's out there and freely available without the need for a warrant.Oh, yes, and places like Facenbook are a gold mine because they show you at your worst.
You like dissing your boss and calling him an asshole?
You like posting your drunken mug or yourself smoking some weed with your buddies?
That's enough to deny you a clearance right there.
In fact, it's enough to get your sorry ass fired.I don't need a warrant because you are so stupid that you'll tell me this stuff gratis.
And don't whine about your so-called 'rights.
' You don't have half the rights you think you do.
Besides, if you choose to be stupid in public it's your own damn fault.Obviously, I'll have to post this AC or risk getting fired myself.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501260</id>
	<title>Also..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268733240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They can also meet you at a bar and pretend they want some coke. A fucking travesty of justice I tell you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They can also meet you at a bar and pretend they want some coke .
A fucking travesty of justice I tell you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They can also meet you at a bar and pretend they want some coke.
A fucking travesty of justice I tell you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501668</id>
	<title>Re:"Private" Information?</title>
	<author>Thinboy00</author>
	<datestamp>1268735340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's social engineering (a la phising, but assumes that the reader is competent (knows how to use the system) but dumb (can't tell a good idea from a bad idea)).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's social engineering ( a la phising , but assumes that the reader is competent ( knows how to use the system ) but dumb ( ca n't tell a good idea from a bad idea ) ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's social engineering (a la phising, but assumes that the reader is competent (knows how to use the system) but dumb (can't tell a good idea from a bad idea)).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501430</id>
	<title>No privileged access == no problem</title>
	<author>surmak</author>
	<datestamp>1268734020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't see a problem as long as they are not doing anything that any other user can do.  If they lie to you to get you to accept them as a friend, or browse public data, that is perfectly OK.</p><p>On the other hand, I would have problem if they get access to the database, or otherwise bypass the user-managed access control/privacy features.  I would also have a problem if they developed a Facebook app and tricked a suspect into running it. (apps can have more access to your profile than friends do.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't see a problem as long as they are not doing anything that any other user can do .
If they lie to you to get you to accept them as a friend , or browse public data , that is perfectly OK.On the other hand , I would have problem if they get access to the database , or otherwise bypass the user-managed access control/privacy features .
I would also have a problem if they developed a Facebook app and tricked a suspect into running it .
( apps can have more access to your profile than friends do .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't see a problem as long as they are not doing anything that any other user can do.
If they lie to you to get you to accept them as a friend, or browse public data, that is perfectly OK.On the other hand, I would have problem if they get access to the database, or otherwise bypass the user-managed access control/privacy features.
I would also have a problem if they developed a Facebook app and tricked a suspect into running it.
(apps can have more access to your profile than friends do.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31502010</id>
	<title>Facebook profiles</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268736960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So this guy I don't know invited me to become friends on Facebook. He only has 36 friends, and they're all convicted felons.</p><p>Seriously though, all fake profiles I know have so few friends it gives them away. Sheesh, but they're the feds, so they probably know what they're doing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So this guy I do n't know invited me to become friends on Facebook .
He only has 36 friends , and they 're all convicted felons.Seriously though , all fake profiles I know have so few friends it gives them away .
Sheesh , but they 're the feds , so they probably know what they 're doing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So this guy I don't know invited me to become friends on Facebook.
He only has 36 friends, and they're all convicted felons.Seriously though, all fake profiles I know have so few friends it gives them away.
Sheesh, but they're the feds, so they probably know what they're doing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501628</id>
	<title>Heavens to Betsy!</title>
	<author>hargrand</author>
	<datestamp>1268735040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is just terrible!  Next thing you know they'll be looking at Craigslist, or Angieslist, or, or, or, newspapers and the White Pages.  What ever are we to do?!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is just terrible !
Next thing you know they 'll be looking at Craigslist , or Angieslist , or , or , or , newspapers and the White Pages .
What ever are we to do ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is just terrible!
Next thing you know they'll be looking at Craigslist, or Angieslist, or, or, or, newspapers and the White Pages.
What ever are we to do?
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501750</id>
	<title>Re:Also..</title>
	<author>Shotgun</author>
	<datestamp>1268735760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unless they become your friend, and then you invite them back to your 'crib' and give them a key to your front door.  Maybe they become close enough of a 'friend' that you invite them to your next drug deal, where the other cops that are listening in over the hidden microphone learn the names of the other dealers and start surveillenc on them.  Eventually, they map out your entire friend network and arrest everyone in one big bust.</p><p>Of course, that cost thousands of dollars to pull off and puts policemen in danger.  Facebook, OTOH, allows them to do the same surveillance and avoid the messy "initiation" routines that all the TV cops have to do to get to the inner circle of the gang.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unless they become your friend , and then you invite them back to your 'crib ' and give them a key to your front door .
Maybe they become close enough of a 'friend ' that you invite them to your next drug deal , where the other cops that are listening in over the hidden microphone learn the names of the other dealers and start surveillenc on them .
Eventually , they map out your entire friend network and arrest everyone in one big bust.Of course , that cost thousands of dollars to pull off and puts policemen in danger .
Facebook , OTOH , allows them to do the same surveillance and avoid the messy " initiation " routines that all the TV cops have to do to get to the inner circle of the gang .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unless they become your friend, and then you invite them back to your 'crib' and give them a key to your front door.
Maybe they become close enough of a 'friend' that you invite them to your next drug deal, where the other cops that are listening in over the hidden microphone learn the names of the other dealers and start surveillenc on them.
Eventually, they map out your entire friend network and arrest everyone in one big bust.Of course, that cost thousands of dollars to pull off and puts policemen in danger.
Facebook, OTOH, allows them to do the same surveillance and avoid the messy "initiation" routines that all the TV cops have to do to get to the inner circle of the gang.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31507418</id>
	<title>Re:Also..</title>
	<author>e2d2</author>
	<datestamp>1268835660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would put forward that it's within their rights, as they are charged with the safety of society, to use any tools necessary to investigate crime. The fact that the suspect has to engage the agent and interact with them means it's fair play. It's when they are not privy to it that judicial oversight is needed to ensure that it warrants investigation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would put forward that it 's within their rights , as they are charged with the safety of society , to use any tools necessary to investigate crime .
The fact that the suspect has to engage the agent and interact with them means it 's fair play .
It 's when they are not privy to it that judicial oversight is needed to ensure that it warrants investigation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would put forward that it's within their rights, as they are charged with the safety of society, to use any tools necessary to investigate crime.
The fact that the suspect has to engage the agent and interact with them means it's fair play.
It's when they are not privy to it that judicial oversight is needed to ensure that it warrants investigation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31505462</id>
	<title>The most rotten thing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268856480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is that even if you're careful yourself on who you friend, some of your friends might have a moment of poor judgement and that is enough to mine your profile.  For example, a friend of yours accepts an application - any application - and then the owners of that application are able to instantly mine whatever your friend has access to.  This is a huge travesty.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is that even if you 're careful yourself on who you friend , some of your friends might have a moment of poor judgement and that is enough to mine your profile .
For example , a friend of yours accepts an application - any application - and then the owners of that application are able to instantly mine whatever your friend has access to .
This is a huge travesty .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is that even if you're careful yourself on who you friend, some of your friends might have a moment of poor judgement and that is enough to mine your profile.
For example, a friend of yours accepts an application - any application - and then the owners of that application are able to instantly mine whatever your friend has access to.
This is a huge travesty.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501200</id>
	<title>I'd hope so.</title>
	<author>Mekkah</author>
	<datestamp>1268733000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you are making your information publicly available, wouldn't you expect your government to take advantage of it?

<br> <br>

Hint: Don't accept friend requests from someone named, Uncle Sam, Uncle Sammy, or that super model that wants to know where you live and were Saturday night between 10pm and 2 am.

<br> <br> Oh and don't tweet if you're gonna lie about it later to police.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you are making your information publicly available , would n't you expect your government to take advantage of it ?
Hint : Do n't accept friend requests from someone named , Uncle Sam , Uncle Sammy , or that super model that wants to know where you live and were Saturday night between 10pm and 2 am .
Oh and do n't tweet if you 're gon na lie about it later to police .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you are making your information publicly available, wouldn't you expect your government to take advantage of it?
Hint: Don't accept friend requests from someone named, Uncle Sam, Uncle Sammy, or that super model that wants to know where you live and were Saturday night between 10pm and 2 am.
Oh and don't tweet if you're gonna lie about it later to police.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501304</id>
	<title>Good</title>
	<author>SoupGuru</author>
	<datestamp>1268733420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>If they weren't doing something like this, I'd wonder what the hell was wrong with them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If they were n't doing something like this , I 'd wonder what the hell was wrong with them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they weren't doing something like this, I'd wonder what the hell was wrong with them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31503194</id>
	<title>Message to ...</title>
	<author>PPH</author>
	<datestamp>1268744040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://www.twitter.com/JoeFBI:
<br>I'll be at the corner of 1st and Main at 1:00AM with the goods. Look for a black SUV, tinted windows. Bring the money.
</p><p>http://www.twitter.com/BobDEA:
<br>I'll be at the corner of 1st and Main at 1:00AM with the money. Look for a black SUV, tinted windows. Bring the goods.
</p><p>And now the fun ensues.....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.twitter.com/JoeFBI : I 'll be at the corner of 1st and Main at 1 : 00AM with the goods .
Look for a black SUV , tinted windows .
Bring the money .
http : //www.twitter.com/BobDEA : I 'll be at the corner of 1st and Main at 1 : 00AM with the money .
Look for a black SUV , tinted windows .
Bring the goods .
And now the fun ensues.... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.twitter.com/JoeFBI:
I'll be at the corner of 1st and Main at 1:00AM with the goods.
Look for a black SUV, tinted windows.
Bring the money.
http://www.twitter.com/BobDEA:
I'll be at the corner of 1st and Main at 1:00AM with the money.
Look for a black SUV, tinted windows.
Bring the goods.
And now the fun ensues.....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501378</id>
	<title>Is this what EFF should be doing with ACTA about ?</title>
	<author>unity100</author>
	<datestamp>1268733780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ACTA battle is much more important than any of these, for if it is lost, all of these will be petty issues and already lost by default.</p><p>i dont think EFF is doing enough to combat acta. they should be pushing more, and also doing consciousness raising campaigns. Notice how the u.s. govt. and us mainstream media avoids the subject to fool people. its as if nothing is happening, there is no ACTA.</p><p>this needs to be fixed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ACTA battle is much more important than any of these , for if it is lost , all of these will be petty issues and already lost by default.i dont think EFF is doing enough to combat acta .
they should be pushing more , and also doing consciousness raising campaigns .
Notice how the u.s. govt. and us mainstream media avoids the subject to fool people .
its as if nothing is happening , there is no ACTA.this needs to be fixed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ACTA battle is much more important than any of these, for if it is lost, all of these will be petty issues and already lost by default.i dont think EFF is doing enough to combat acta.
they should be pushing more, and also doing consciousness raising campaigns.
Notice how the u.s. govt. and us mainstream media avoids the subject to fool people.
its as if nothing is happening, there is no ACTA.this needs to be fixed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501386</id>
	<title>Re:Is anyone surprised?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268733840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A lot of  people feel their right to privacy is being violated.  The right to privacy, of course, is a protection from the government.  If you share your whole life story on Facebook (et al) you can't have a reasonable expectation of privacy according to how case law is currently interpreted.</p><p>Federal agents can wait for you to send mail, and then examine that mail (ala Snail Mail).  How and why is electronic delivery any different?</p><p>People tend to believe their right to privacy means equal protection among public or private corporations as well.  On our service we have to look through user data at times to debug issues.  Is it wrong for us to report a pedophile (for example) if we run across it?  Wrong in the sense that that pedophile thought he had some reasonable expectation of privacy...</p><p>It's a strange line to walk on because it seems like you're teetering on the brink of the destruction of a very important protection given by our constitution (for those in the US).  But I wouldn't have much guilt about putting a sicko away.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A lot of people feel their right to privacy is being violated .
The right to privacy , of course , is a protection from the government .
If you share your whole life story on Facebook ( et al ) you ca n't have a reasonable expectation of privacy according to how case law is currently interpreted.Federal agents can wait for you to send mail , and then examine that mail ( ala Snail Mail ) .
How and why is electronic delivery any different ? People tend to believe their right to privacy means equal protection among public or private corporations as well .
On our service we have to look through user data at times to debug issues .
Is it wrong for us to report a pedophile ( for example ) if we run across it ?
Wrong in the sense that that pedophile thought he had some reasonable expectation of privacy...It 's a strange line to walk on because it seems like you 're teetering on the brink of the destruction of a very important protection given by our constitution ( for those in the US ) .
But I would n't have much guilt about putting a sicko away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A lot of  people feel their right to privacy is being violated.
The right to privacy, of course, is a protection from the government.
If you share your whole life story on Facebook (et al) you can't have a reasonable expectation of privacy according to how case law is currently interpreted.Federal agents can wait for you to send mail, and then examine that mail (ala Snail Mail).
How and why is electronic delivery any different?People tend to believe their right to privacy means equal protection among public or private corporations as well.
On our service we have to look through user data at times to debug issues.
Is it wrong for us to report a pedophile (for example) if we run across it?
Wrong in the sense that that pedophile thought he had some reasonable expectation of privacy...It's a strange line to walk on because it seems like you're teetering on the brink of the destruction of a very important protection given by our constitution (for those in the US).
But I wouldn't have much guilt about putting a sicko away.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501184</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31502282</id>
	<title>Can't be...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268738400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can't be that quietly. This is like the fifth time I've seen a headline like this on here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ca n't be that quietly .
This is like the fifth time I 've seen a headline like this on here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can't be that quietly.
This is like the fifth time I've seen a headline like this on here.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501354</id>
	<title>Possible good things...</title>
	<author>Darkness404</author>
	<datestamp>1268733660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>However, sometimes social media can work for the greater good. Take this instance <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/11/12/facebook.alibi/index.html" title="cnn.com">http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/11/12/facebook.alibi/index.html</a> [cnn.com] where police were able to verify a status update to prove that someone was falsely accused of a crime.</htmltext>
<tokenext>However , sometimes social media can work for the greater good .
Take this instance http : //www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/11/12/facebook.alibi/index.html [ cnn.com ] where police were able to verify a status update to prove that someone was falsely accused of a crime .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>However, sometimes social media can work for the greater good.
Take this instance http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/11/12/facebook.alibi/index.html [cnn.com] where police were able to verify a status update to prove that someone was falsely accused of a crime.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501408</id>
	<title>Re:I'd hope so.</title>
	<author>aztektum</author>
	<datestamp>1268733960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But Uncle Sams wants ME!... to accept his friend request!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But Uncle Sams wants ME ! .. .
to accept his friend request !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But Uncle Sams wants ME!...
to accept his friend request!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31503652</id>
	<title>Re:Is anyone surprised?</title>
	<author>HiThere</author>
	<datestamp>1268748000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, this seems reasonable.</p><p>N.B.:  That *DOESN'T* mean I think that it's reasonable for them to be able to snoop on my e-mail, or anything I didn't intentionally make public.  But for them to look at publicly posted information is quite reasonable, even if they are pretending to be someone else.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , this seems reasonable.N.B .
: That * DOES N'T * mean I think that it 's reasonable for them to be able to snoop on my e-mail , or anything I did n't intentionally make public .
But for them to look at publicly posted information is quite reasonable , even if they are pretending to be someone else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, this seems reasonable.N.B.
:  That *DOESN'T* mean I think that it's reasonable for them to be able to snoop on my e-mail, or anything I didn't intentionally make public.
But for them to look at publicly posted information is quite reasonable, even if they are pretending to be someone else.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501184</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501442</id>
	<title>Oh, thats a naive article</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268734080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>All of the data from facebook or myspace can be obtained in a far more complete form than just creating a profile and copying it by hand.... just pay someone off that works in their IT departments, or, worse case scenario, at the NOC that supplies the tubes to their sites.<br> <br> <br>

The idea that feds would have to play some childish game of making false profiles to gather data is so obviously naive that I can only suggest that the very idea that they would have to sink to such kindergarten methods is spawned by false opposition.<br> <br> <br>

The only part that makes any sense at all would be to communicate with the suspect anonymously to force an extraction of specific information, but, other than that--- how many of us have worked in IT for a relatively large sized company? If you have, its so obvious to you that if you were some unscrupulous shiesty dishonorable admin that every single secret or sensitive piece of information contained in your company would be for sale to the highest bidder... one of the last places I worked for had 10+ years of stuff like every single credit card number that had been processed there--- literally hundreds of thousands of CC#s, if not millions, etc... and all of it would have fit easily several times over on a standard DVD-R. Luckily for them, I have a convicting sense of right and wrong and am more concerned for how well I sleep at night than I am over how much is in my bank account.<br> <br> <br>

Anyone thats worked in IT knows that there are, for most companies, almost no checks and balances for this sort of thing. If the feds, or anyone else with enough money wanted every single 1 and 0 on the platters that house facebook or myspace, they would have it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>All of the data from facebook or myspace can be obtained in a far more complete form than just creating a profile and copying it by hand.... just pay someone off that works in their IT departments , or , worse case scenario , at the NOC that supplies the tubes to their sites .
The idea that feds would have to play some childish game of making false profiles to gather data is so obviously naive that I can only suggest that the very idea that they would have to sink to such kindergarten methods is spawned by false opposition .
The only part that makes any sense at all would be to communicate with the suspect anonymously to force an extraction of specific information , but , other than that--- how many of us have worked in IT for a relatively large sized company ?
If you have , its so obvious to you that if you were some unscrupulous shiesty dishonorable admin that every single secret or sensitive piece of information contained in your company would be for sale to the highest bidder... one of the last places I worked for had 10 + years of stuff like every single credit card number that had been processed there--- literally hundreds of thousands of CC # s , if not millions , etc... and all of it would have fit easily several times over on a standard DVD-R. Luckily for them , I have a convicting sense of right and wrong and am more concerned for how well I sleep at night than I am over how much is in my bank account .
Anyone thats worked in IT knows that there are , for most companies , almost no checks and balances for this sort of thing .
If the feds , or anyone else with enough money wanted every single 1 and 0 on the platters that house facebook or myspace , they would have it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All of the data from facebook or myspace can be obtained in a far more complete form than just creating a profile and copying it by hand.... just pay someone off that works in their IT departments, or, worse case scenario, at the NOC that supplies the tubes to their sites.
The idea that feds would have to play some childish game of making false profiles to gather data is so obviously naive that I can only suggest that the very idea that they would have to sink to such kindergarten methods is spawned by false opposition.
The only part that makes any sense at all would be to communicate with the suspect anonymously to force an extraction of specific information, but, other than that--- how many of us have worked in IT for a relatively large sized company?
If you have, its so obvious to you that if you were some unscrupulous shiesty dishonorable admin that every single secret or sensitive piece of information contained in your company would be for sale to the highest bidder... one of the last places I worked for had 10+ years of stuff like every single credit card number that had been processed there--- literally hundreds of thousands of CC#s, if not millions, etc... and all of it would have fit easily several times over on a standard DVD-R. Luckily for them, I have a convicting sense of right and wrong and am more concerned for how well I sleep at night than I am over how much is in my bank account.
Anyone thats worked in IT knows that there are, for most companies, almost no checks and balances for this sort of thing.
If the feds, or anyone else with enough money wanted every single 1 and 0 on the platters that house facebook or myspace, they would have it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501268</id>
	<title>Why is this different?</title>
	<author>captaindomon</author>
	<datestamp>1268733300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>How is this different than what the FBI does offline? It's just an online version of an offline undercover sting, right?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How is this different than what the FBI does offline ?
It 's just an online version of an offline undercover sting , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is this different than what the FBI does offline?
It's just an online version of an offline undercover sting, right?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31502816</id>
	<title>What about EULAs?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268741400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I assume some social sites require you to be you by way of their terms or EULA<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I guess they can get around that? I mean, it makes sense they would read public information but if they are using fake profiles without prior approval for a case it seems like something is going wrong<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I assume some social sites require you to be you by way of their terms or EULA ... I guess they can get around that ?
I mean , it makes sense they would read public information but if they are using fake profiles without prior approval for a case it seems like something is going wrong .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I assume some social sites require you to be you by way of their terms or EULA ... I guess they can get around that?
I mean, it makes sense they would read public information but if they are using fake profiles without prior approval for a case it seems like something is going wrong ...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_16_1857259_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31504038
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501200
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_16_1857259_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31507418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501260
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_16_1857259_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501184
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_16_1857259_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31505370
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501200
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_16_1857259_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501852
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501316
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_16_1857259_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501408
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501200
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_16_1857259_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31505656
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501182
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_16_1857259_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31502350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501260
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_16_1857259_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31503652
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501184
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_16_1857259_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501668
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501262
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_16_1857259_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31505558
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501184
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_16_1857259_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501346
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501200
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_16_1857259_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31505008
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501732
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_16_1857259_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501184
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_16_1857259_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501386
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501184
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_16_1857259_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31504048
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501182
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_16_1857259_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501750
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501260
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_16_1857259_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31503624
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31502228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501200
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_16_1857259_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501610
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_16_1857259.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31503998
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_16_1857259.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501184
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31503652
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501272
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31505558
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501320
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501386
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_16_1857259.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501384
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_16_1857259.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501200
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501346
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31502228
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31503624
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31504038
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501408
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501390
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31505370
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_16_1857259.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501268
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_16_1857259.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501548
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_16_1857259.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501448
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_16_1857259.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501378
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_16_1857259.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31502120
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_16_1857259.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501260
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501562
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501750
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31502350
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31507418
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_16_1857259.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501262
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501668
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_16_1857259.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501732
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31505008
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_16_1857259.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501182
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31505656
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31504048
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_16_1857259.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501316
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501852
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_16_1857259.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501670
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_16_1857259.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501610
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31501882
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_16_1857259.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_16_1857259.31502816
</commentlist>
</conversation>
