<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_15_2056219</id>
	<title>The Next Ad You Click May Be a Virus</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1245065580000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.warriorsoflegend.com/" rel="nofollow">Jay</a> notes a Wall Street Journal report about <a href="http://www.totaltele.com/view.aspx?ID=446406&amp;Page=0">ad networks unintentionally selling empty space to malware loaders</a> (the link is to a syndicating site that doesn't require a subscription to view). The submitter comments: "The labeling of the fake ad sellers as hackers is pretty bogus; there's no hacking involved. Simply sign up for one of these networks, create your fake site, put up another company's creative, and you're good to go." The incidents being reported go back a few months, but the pattern of this criminal activity seems to be coming clear only recently.<i>"EWeek.com, a technology news site owned by Ziff Davis Enterprise, in February displayed an ad on its homepage masquerading as a promotion for LaCoste, the shirt maker. The retailer hadn't placed the ad &mdash; a hacker had, to direct users to a Web site where harmful programs would be downloaded to their computers, says Stephen Wellman, director of community and content for Ziff Davis."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Jay notes a Wall Street Journal report about ad networks unintentionally selling empty space to malware loaders ( the link is to a syndicating site that does n't require a subscription to view ) .
The submitter comments : " The labeling of the fake ad sellers as hackers is pretty bogus ; there 's no hacking involved .
Simply sign up for one of these networks , create your fake site , put up another company 's creative , and you 're good to go .
" The incidents being reported go back a few months , but the pattern of this criminal activity seems to be coming clear only recently .
" EWeek.com , a technology news site owned by Ziff Davis Enterprise , in February displayed an ad on its homepage masquerading as a promotion for LaCoste , the shirt maker .
The retailer had n't placed the ad    a hacker had , to direct users to a Web site where harmful programs would be downloaded to their computers , says Stephen Wellman , director of community and content for Ziff Davis .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jay notes a Wall Street Journal report about ad networks unintentionally selling empty space to malware loaders (the link is to a syndicating site that doesn't require a subscription to view).
The submitter comments: "The labeling of the fake ad sellers as hackers is pretty bogus; there's no hacking involved.
Simply sign up for one of these networks, create your fake site, put up another company's creative, and you're good to go.
" The incidents being reported go back a few months, but the pattern of this criminal activity seems to be coming clear only recently.
"EWeek.com, a technology news site owned by Ziff Davis Enterprise, in February displayed an ad on its homepage masquerading as a promotion for LaCoste, the shirt maker.
The retailer hadn't placed the ad — a hacker had, to direct users to a Web site where harmful programs would be downloaded to their computers, says Stephen Wellman, director of community and content for Ziff Davis.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343111</id>
	<title>Re:Aren't they all?</title>
	<author>Jurily</author>
	<datestamp>1245075720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm sure there's a firefox addon for that. Would go along nicely with adblock.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure there 's a firefox addon for that .
Would go along nicely with adblock .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure there's a firefox addon for that.
Would go along nicely with adblock.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342543</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343617</id>
	<title>Re:We allowed them in</title>
	<author>Saija</author>
	<datestamp>1245080160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You, Sir, are a poet, hope i could mod you +10 Insigthful and want to see more post like yours, Kudos.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You , Sir , are a poet , hope i could mod you + 10 Insigthful and want to see more post like yours , Kudos .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You, Sir, are a poet, hope i could mod you +10 Insigthful and want to see more post like yours, Kudos.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343101</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342543</id>
	<title>Re:Aren't they all?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245071160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>People actually click on ads?</htmltext>
<tokenext>People actually click on ads ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People actually click on ads?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342281</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342697</id>
	<title>Re:PC huh?</title>
	<author>Colonel Korn</author>
	<datestamp>1245072300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"direct users to a Web site where harmful programs would be downloaded to their computers, says Stephen Wellman, director of community and content for Ziff Davis."</p><p>Do these affect Linux or Apple PC's? I'm guessing it's the good old Windows<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.exe and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.dll again, an exclusive Windows issue disguised as a "PC" issue.</p><p>Why is it that areas where Microsoft want to portray a large market share (either exaggerated by reports from shills or real) they have the words Microsoft and Windows all over the stories, yet when it's something they have an almost 100\% market share on (malware compatibility and vulnerability), there's no mention of either Microsoft or Windows; it's all just PCs.</p><p>FAO the Microsoft Astroturfers, it was a rhetorical question but feel free to do your job and mod me down for pointing out the obvious. Wait, Ziff Davis does ring a familiar bell, hmmmmm.</p></div><p>As far as I can tell it's an exclusively non-adblock user issue.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" direct users to a Web site where harmful programs would be downloaded to their computers , says Stephen Wellman , director of community and content for Ziff Davis .
" Do these affect Linux or Apple PC 's ?
I 'm guessing it 's the good old Windows .exe and .dll again , an exclusive Windows issue disguised as a " PC " issue.Why is it that areas where Microsoft want to portray a large market share ( either exaggerated by reports from shills or real ) they have the words Microsoft and Windows all over the stories , yet when it 's something they have an almost 100 \ % market share on ( malware compatibility and vulnerability ) , there 's no mention of either Microsoft or Windows ; it 's all just PCs.FAO the Microsoft Astroturfers , it was a rhetorical question but feel free to do your job and mod me down for pointing out the obvious .
Wait , Ziff Davis does ring a familiar bell , hmmmmm.As far as I can tell it 's an exclusively non-adblock user issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"direct users to a Web site where harmful programs would be downloaded to their computers, says Stephen Wellman, director of community and content for Ziff Davis.
"Do these affect Linux or Apple PC's?
I'm guessing it's the good old Windows .exe and .dll again, an exclusive Windows issue disguised as a "PC" issue.Why is it that areas where Microsoft want to portray a large market share (either exaggerated by reports from shills or real) they have the words Microsoft and Windows all over the stories, yet when it's something they have an almost 100\% market share on (malware compatibility and vulnerability), there's no mention of either Microsoft or Windows; it's all just PCs.FAO the Microsoft Astroturfers, it was a rhetorical question but feel free to do your job and mod me down for pointing out the obvious.
Wait, Ziff Davis does ring a familiar bell, hmmmmm.As far as I can tell it's an exclusively non-adblock user issue.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342539</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343675</id>
	<title>Gotta ask a question...</title>
	<author>Mashiki</author>
	<datestamp>1245080580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So say someone clicks an ad at a reputable site to support them, which is actually malware which does 'software' damage(lost productivity, loss of PC uptime, etc) to a users PC by injecting something.  Who becomes responsible?  The end user?  The content provider?  Ad provider?  Guy making the malware?  Everyone?  Last 3 people in the chain?</p><p>Answers to this?  I realize those of us in the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. crowd are technically inclined, but the average person isn't.  I really do start to expect heads to start rolling over this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So say someone clicks an ad at a reputable site to support them , which is actually malware which does 'software ' damage ( lost productivity , loss of PC uptime , etc ) to a users PC by injecting something .
Who becomes responsible ?
The end user ?
The content provider ?
Ad provider ?
Guy making the malware ?
Everyone ? Last 3 people in the chain ? Answers to this ?
I realize those of us in the / .
crowd are technically inclined , but the average person is n't .
I really do start to expect heads to start rolling over this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So say someone clicks an ad at a reputable site to support them, which is actually malware which does 'software' damage(lost productivity, loss of PC uptime, etc) to a users PC by injecting something.
Who becomes responsible?
The end user?
The content provider?
Ad provider?
Guy making the malware?
Everyone?  Last 3 people in the chain?Answers to this?
I realize those of us in the /.
crowd are technically inclined, but the average person isn't.
I really do start to expect heads to start rolling over this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28347853</id>
	<title>Re:Aren't they all?</title>
	<author>sorak</author>
	<datestamp>1245168660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I mean really, its all just semantics (and semiotics) and we're all infected...cookie anyone?</p></div><p>But the difference is that cookies are only an "infection" in the same way that you grocery store card is an "infection".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean really , its all just semantics ( and semiotics ) and we 're all infected...cookie anyone ? But the difference is that cookies are only an " infection " in the same way that you grocery store card is an " infection " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean really, its all just semantics (and semiotics) and we're all infected...cookie anyone?But the difference is that cookies are only an "infection" in the same way that you grocery store card is an "infection".
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342281</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343209</id>
	<title>Re:When will this end?</title>
	<author>Nerdfest</author>
	<datestamp>1245076560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I believe some of those people may also need to be reminded about standing on your lawn. Sad<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... the memory is the first thing to go.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe some of those people may also need to be reminded about standing on your lawn .
Sad ... the memory is the first thing to go .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe some of those people may also need to be reminded about standing on your lawn.
Sad ... the memory is the first thing to go.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344445</id>
	<title>Re:So lucky me...</title>
	<author>elashish14</author>
	<datestamp>1245088860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey, if anyone wanted to write a malicious script for Linux, where else would they go?</p><p>Damn, we should feel so proud of ourselves.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey , if anyone wanted to write a malicious script for Linux , where else would they go ? Damn , we should feel so proud of ourselves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey, if anyone wanted to write a malicious script for Linux, where else would they go?Damn, we should feel so proud of ourselves.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342323</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342323</id>
	<title>So lucky me...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245069720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>...having that "Disable Advertising" checkbox from Slashdot<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)<br> <br>
"As our way of thanking you for your positive contributions to Slashdot, you are eligible to disable advertising. "<br>
Thank <b>you</b> for  preventing my Gentoo Linux system for being infec...<br> <br>
Oh, wait...</htmltext>
<tokenext>...having that " Disable Advertising " checkbox from Slashdot : ) " As our way of thanking you for your positive contributions to Slashdot , you are eligible to disable advertising .
" Thank you for preventing my Gentoo Linux system for being infec.. . Oh , wait.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...having that "Disable Advertising" checkbox from Slashdot :) 
"As our way of thanking you for your positive contributions to Slashdot, you are eligible to disable advertising.
"
Thank you for  preventing my Gentoo Linux system for being infec... 
Oh, wait...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342687</id>
	<title>Re:A virus? How?</title>
	<author>mkiwi</author>
	<datestamp>1245072240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The only way they can do this is if my browser is vulnerable to some kind of exploit.</p></div></blockquote><p>One such exploit could be Microsoft ActiveX. (There are legions of people who authorize that stuff without a second thought.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The only way they can do this is if my browser is vulnerable to some kind of exploit.One such exploit could be Microsoft ActiveX .
( There are legions of people who authorize that stuff without a second thought .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only way they can do this is if my browser is vulnerable to some kind of exploit.One such exploit could be Microsoft ActiveX.
(There are legions of people who authorize that stuff without a second thought.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342359</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342663</id>
	<title>Re:what ads?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245072060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>some ads are worth reviewing</p><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>/strokes cock</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>some ads are worth reviewing /strokes cock</tokentext>
<sentencetext>some ads are worth reviewing /strokes cock</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342297</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342953</id>
	<title>Re:what ads?</title>
	<author>Shikaku</author>
	<datestamp>1245074340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, it will be your fault for making an unsustainable website.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , it will be your fault for making an unsustainable website .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, it will be your fault for making an unsustainable website.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342501</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345569</id>
	<title>What last ad?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1245147180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In case you did not know it: Average click-rates of ads on the Internet are even <em>below</em> the number of random clicks that people do in error. I know, because I worked at a large company, and my colleagues studied exactly that.<br>0.1\% click rate is something, that ad companies will open bottles of champagne about. Usually it's much less.<br>Which can mean both, that ad-blockers are used more and more, and that people subconsciously click less on ads, even when they did not want to click there.<br>In my eyes, <em>all</em> ad clicks on the net are such unwanted clicks, (and company-own-bots making some cash, ) and the whole industry is fake.<br>The biggest joke is, that as those prices, they could also bill the user trough a micropayment. Because if I remember it correctly, 1000 clicks costed roughly 50 &euro;. At 0.05\% click rate, this is:<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 50 &euro; / 1000 clicks * 0.0005 (click rate) = 0.000025 &euro; / page-view = 400 page views per cent that you pay.<br>Now that is a price that we <em>all</em> can live with, isn't it? Hell, I would pay ten times that, and still be ok with it.<br>All we need, is some micropayment system that can track all our page views, across all servers... Oh, wait!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In case you did not know it : Average click-rates of ads on the Internet are even below the number of random clicks that people do in error .
I know , because I worked at a large company , and my colleagues studied exactly that.0.1 \ % click rate is something , that ad companies will open bottles of champagne about .
Usually it 's much less.Which can mean both , that ad-blockers are used more and more , and that people subconsciously click less on ads , even when they did not want to click there.In my eyes , all ad clicks on the net are such unwanted clicks , ( and company-own-bots making some cash , ) and the whole industry is fake.The biggest joke is , that as those prices , they could also bill the user trough a micropayment .
Because if I remember it correctly , 1000 clicks costed roughly 50    .
At 0.05 \ % click rate , this is :       50    / 1000 clicks * 0.0005 ( click rate ) = 0.000025    / page-view = 400 page views per cent that you pay.Now that is a price that we all can live with , is n't it ?
Hell , I would pay ten times that , and still be ok with it.All we need , is some micropayment system that can track all our page views , across all servers... Oh , wait !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In case you did not know it: Average click-rates of ads on the Internet are even below the number of random clicks that people do in error.
I know, because I worked at a large company, and my colleagues studied exactly that.0.1\% click rate is something, that ad companies will open bottles of champagne about.
Usually it's much less.Which can mean both, that ad-blockers are used more and more, and that people subconsciously click less on ads, even when they did not want to click there.In my eyes, all ad clicks on the net are such unwanted clicks, (and company-own-bots making some cash, ) and the whole industry is fake.The biggest joke is, that as those prices, they could also bill the user trough a micropayment.
Because if I remember it correctly, 1000 clicks costed roughly 50 €.
At 0.05\% click rate, this is:
      50 € / 1000 clicks * 0.0005 (click rate) = 0.000025 € / page-view = 400 page views per cent that you pay.Now that is a price that we all can live with, isn't it?
Hell, I would pay ten times that, and still be ok with it.All we need, is some micropayment system that can track all our page views, across all servers... Oh, wait!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342313</id>
	<title>There's, What, Three Web Publishers, Right?</title>
	<author>Quothz</author>
	<datestamp>1245069600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>From TFA:<p><div class="quote"><p>Web publishers say they have started limiting the number of companies they outsource their ad selling to and are working with security vendors, such as San Francisco-based ClickFacts, to detect malicious software on their networks and remove it as quickly as possible.</p></div><p>I'm impressed! The Wall Street Journal talked to <i>every Web publisher</i> and got them to agree to do this. We should send Emily to go negotiate peace in the middle east.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From TFA : Web publishers say they have started limiting the number of companies they outsource their ad selling to and are working with security vendors , such as San Francisco-based ClickFacts , to detect malicious software on their networks and remove it as quickly as possible.I 'm impressed !
The Wall Street Journal talked to every Web publisher and got them to agree to do this .
We should send Emily to go negotiate peace in the middle east .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From TFA:Web publishers say they have started limiting the number of companies they outsource their ad selling to and are working with security vendors, such as San Francisco-based ClickFacts, to detect malicious software on their networks and remove it as quickly as possible.I'm impressed!
The Wall Street Journal talked to every Web publisher and got them to agree to do this.
We should send Emily to go negotiate peace in the middle east.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342359</id>
	<title>A virus?  How?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245069840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Clicking an add will load, via http, an html page (maybe with some javascript) that my web browser will display.</p><p>A virus is a program that copies itself onto another program.</p><p>How is a web page going to execute arbitrary software of the attacker's choosing, on my machine?</p><p>The only way they can do this is if my browser is vulnerable to some kind of exploit.</p><p>Web pages cannot contain viruses unless the browser that loads them is fucked up.  A decent browser knows to never trust input from the public Internet.</p><p>Ads link to malware sites?!?  YAWN!  Ads themselves are malware and should be blocked.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Clicking an add will load , via http , an html page ( maybe with some javascript ) that my web browser will display.A virus is a program that copies itself onto another program.How is a web page going to execute arbitrary software of the attacker 's choosing , on my machine ? The only way they can do this is if my browser is vulnerable to some kind of exploit.Web pages can not contain viruses unless the browser that loads them is fucked up .
A decent browser knows to never trust input from the public Internet.Ads link to malware sites ? ! ?
YAWN ! Ads themselves are malware and should be blocked .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Clicking an add will load, via http, an html page (maybe with some javascript) that my web browser will display.A virus is a program that copies itself onto another program.How is a web page going to execute arbitrary software of the attacker's choosing, on my machine?The only way they can do this is if my browser is vulnerable to some kind of exploit.Web pages cannot contain viruses unless the browser that loads them is fucked up.
A decent browser knows to never trust input from the public Internet.Ads link to malware sites?!?
YAWN!  Ads themselves are malware and should be blocked.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344805</id>
	<title>Seriously...</title>
	<author>2fuf</author>
	<datestamp>1245092820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...the next ad you click? Do people still do that?</htmltext>
<tokenext>...the next ad you click ?
Do people still do that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...the next ad you click?
Do people still do that?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345291</id>
	<title>Re:yes, but - HOSTS FILES SAVE IE USERS TOO... apk</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245185940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><div class="quote"><p><b>"Internet Explorer does. Internet Explorer is so awesome, you don't even need to click on an add to get infected. It's will do all automatically for you, there is this new wonderful M$ caching feature that keep clicking the whole Internet for you. Join the botnet close to your home now, all free today thanks to IE9! Remember, iexplore.exe will be always there for you."</b> - by Krneki (1192201) on Monday June 15, @09:15PM (#28343077)</p></div><p>Versus that? Well - You can always use a HOSTS file! Why?? Read on:</p><p><b>The beauty of that is, IS that HOSTS files</b> (custom ones especially for THIS type of lunacy occurring) <b>extend to EVERY web-bound app you have</b> (unlike Adblock/AdBlock Plus, that only work in Mozilla/FireFox products)</p><p>So - think programs like Email also, where HTML is used (alongside scripting, the REAL "problem" (with bad adbanners for example, it IS the "delivery mechanism" basically - because it's truly the "root of all evil" here most times, &amp; anyone can verify that statement @ SECUNIA or SECURITYFOCUS.COM for example, from their last 4-5 yrs. of data or more on records of exploits they have)).</p><p><b>HOSTS files provide not only security benefits here, but, also speedup benefits too, as a bonus</b> (by blocking ads you gain speed, but blocking scripting even gets you more (only use it on sites you trust OR cannot do without to stay safe(r) vs. bad scripted pages/bad scripted adbanners)).</p><p>HOSTS files, customized ones, work here... &amp; it's a solution that's easily edited/added to, + understood by users, as a bonus - Because as one of my best pals whom I 'turned onto' these has stated, verbatim? "All you need to do, is know how to use notepad.exe, how to read english, &amp; to get a decent one to start with - as well as sources that update the data one needs to blockout bogus sites" (&amp; I list a few below!)</p><p>The one I use here is populated with my own lists for HOSTS files since 1997 (30.000 entries long, mostly for adbanner blocking @ first 1997-2001), then later for security 2002 onwards...</p><p>I extended it further (to 654,000 unique entries currently &amp; yes, I have to stop the Windows DNS client for that, it's 14mb for Windows NT/2000/XP/Server 2003, &amp; up to 19mb (using 0.0.0.0) OR 26mb (using 127.0.0.1) for Windows VISTA/Server 2008/Windows7) per sources like:</p><p>1.) StopBadWare.org<br>2.) SRI<br>3.) Dancho Danchev's ZDNet Blog<br>4.) SpyBot "Search &amp; Destroy" Immunize lists<br>5.) PLUS/LASTLY, using other reputable known HOSTS files shown @ wikipedia.com, here -&gt; <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosts\_file" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosts\_file</a> [wikipedia.org] [wikipedia.org]</p><p>All DAILY updated here, or nearly daily.</p><p>(&amp; kept free of repeat entries via a program I wrote to do that, as well as alphabetize the entries, plus change them to a "faster up off disk into memory" internal schema for blocking out bad sites &amp; adbanners, by going from the larger, slower 127.0.0.1 default loopback adapter IP, to either 0.0.0.0 (for VISTA/Server2k8/Windows 7, a mistake on MS' part I mentioned to they here -&gt; <a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/archive/2009/02/09/recognizing-improvements-in-windows-7-handwriting.aspx?CommentPosted=true#commentmessage" title="msdn.com" rel="nofollow">http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/archive/2009/02/09/recognizing-improvements-in-windows-7-handwriting.aspx?CommentPosted=true#commentmessage</a> [msdn.com] which they started on 12/09/2008), OR the fastest &amp; most efficient 0 blocking IP address))</p><p><b>HOSTS files are a good layer for this, then you can also "layer on" IE Restricted Zones, Opera filter.ini/urlfilter.ini, &amp; FireFox addons like NoScript + its internal to browser restricted sites lists ontop of them, for the utmost in security protection AND speed</b> (I do other things like use custom cascading style sheets &amp; PAC file filtering as well, but those are another subject)... <b>&amp; guys? LAYERED SECURITY IS "the trend" &amp; recommended pursuit by any 'security-saavy' person out there &amp; yes, it works!</b></p><p>APK</p><p>P.S.=&gt; HOSTS files give you that "Layered security" in addition to my last paragraphs' suggestions above &amp; this guide I authored AS WELL AS MORE SPEED ONLINE...:</p><p>----</p><p><b>HOW TO SECURE Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 &amp; even VISTA, + make it "fun-to-do", via CIS Tool Guidance (&amp; beyond):</b></p><p><a href="http://www.tcmagazine.com/forums/index.php?s=d9ab7ff1c912db0a0686e83b86da1e02&amp;showtopic=2662" title="tcmagazine.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.tcmagazine.com/forums/index.php?s=d9ab7ff1c912db0a0686e83b86da1e02&amp;showtopic=2662</a> [tcmagazine.com]</p><p>A testimonial of its effectiveness? Ok, here goes:</p><p><a href="http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=ae352cd32542fe49a55fe00b11086449&amp;t=28430&amp;page=3" title="xtremepccentral.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=ae352cd32542fe49a55fe00b11086449&amp;t=28430&amp;page=3</a> [xtremepccentral.com]</p><p>"Its 2009 - still trouble free! I was told last week by a co worker who does active directory administration, and he said I was doing overkill. I told him yes, but I just eliminated the half life in windows that you usually get. He said good point. So from 2008 till 2009. No speed decreases, its been to a lan party, moved around in a move, and it still NEVER has had the OS reinstalled besides the fact I imaged the drive over in 2008. Great stuff! My client STILL Hasn't called me back in regards to that one machine to get it locked down for the kid. I am glad it worked and I am sure her wallet is appreciated too now that it works. Speaking of which, I need to call her to see if I can get some leads. APK - I will say it again, the guide is FANTASTIC! Its made my PC experience much easier. Sandboxing was great. Getting my host file updated, setting services to system service, rather than system local. (except AVG updater, needed system local)" - <b>THRONKA</b> (forums user @ xtremepccentral)<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>AND guys, as far as THAT testimonial of that guide's effectiveness? Hey - That is just 1 of MANY like it I can produce! Enjoy... it works!</p><p>----</p><p>Face it - usually security things (like AntiVirus' programs for example) add another layer of processing complexity and slow you down... NOT HOSTS Files, &amp; they work with EVERY WEBBOUND PROGRAM YOU HAVE... not just FireFox/Mozilla variants! apk</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Internet Explorer does .
Internet Explorer is so awesome , you do n't even need to click on an add to get infected .
It 's will do all automatically for you , there is this new wonderful M $ caching feature that keep clicking the whole Internet for you .
Join the botnet close to your home now , all free today thanks to IE9 !
Remember , iexplore.exe will be always there for you .
" - by Krneki ( 1192201 ) on Monday June 15 , @ 09 : 15PM ( # 28343077 ) Versus that ?
Well - You can always use a HOSTS file !
Why ? ? Read on : The beauty of that is , IS that HOSTS files ( custom ones especially for THIS type of lunacy occurring ) extend to EVERY web-bound app you have ( unlike Adblock/AdBlock Plus , that only work in Mozilla/FireFox products ) So - think programs like Email also , where HTML is used ( alongside scripting , the REAL " problem " ( with bad adbanners for example , it IS the " delivery mechanism " basically - because it 's truly the " root of all evil " here most times , &amp; anyone can verify that statement @ SECUNIA or SECURITYFOCUS.COM for example , from their last 4-5 yrs .
of data or more on records of exploits they have ) ) .HOSTS files provide not only security benefits here , but , also speedup benefits too , as a bonus ( by blocking ads you gain speed , but blocking scripting even gets you more ( only use it on sites you trust OR can not do without to stay safe ( r ) vs. bad scripted pages/bad scripted adbanners ) ) .HOSTS files , customized ones , work here... &amp; it 's a solution that 's easily edited/added to , + understood by users , as a bonus - Because as one of my best pals whom I 'turned onto ' these has stated , verbatim ?
" All you need to do , is know how to use notepad.exe , how to read english , &amp; to get a decent one to start with - as well as sources that update the data one needs to blockout bogus sites " ( &amp; I list a few below !
) The one I use here is populated with my own lists for HOSTS files since 1997 ( 30.000 entries long , mostly for adbanner blocking @ first 1997-2001 ) , then later for security 2002 onwards...I extended it further ( to 654,000 unique entries currently &amp; yes , I have to stop the Windows DNS client for that , it 's 14mb for Windows NT/2000/XP/Server 2003 , &amp; up to 19mb ( using 0.0.0.0 ) OR 26mb ( using 127.0.0.1 ) for Windows VISTA/Server 2008/Windows7 ) per sources like : 1 .
) StopBadWare.org2 .
) SRI3 .
) Dancho Danchev 's ZDNet Blog4 .
) SpyBot " Search &amp; Destroy " Immunize lists5 .
) PLUS/LASTLY , using other reputable known HOSTS files shown @ wikipedia.com , here - &gt; http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosts \ _file [ wikipedia.org ] [ wikipedia.org ] All DAILY updated here , or nearly daily .
( &amp; kept free of repeat entries via a program I wrote to do that , as well as alphabetize the entries , plus change them to a " faster up off disk into memory " internal schema for blocking out bad sites &amp; adbanners , by going from the larger , slower 127.0.0.1 default loopback adapter IP , to either 0.0.0.0 ( for VISTA/Server2k8/Windows 7 , a mistake on MS ' part I mentioned to they here - &gt; http : //blogs.msdn.com/e7/archive/2009/02/09/recognizing-improvements-in-windows-7-handwriting.aspx ? CommentPosted = true # commentmessage [ msdn.com ] which they started on 12/09/2008 ) , OR the fastest &amp; most efficient 0 blocking IP address ) ) HOSTS files are a good layer for this , then you can also " layer on " IE Restricted Zones , Opera filter.ini/urlfilter.ini , &amp; FireFox addons like NoScript + its internal to browser restricted sites lists ontop of them , for the utmost in security protection AND speed ( I do other things like use custom cascading style sheets &amp; PAC file filtering as well , but those are another subject ) ... &amp; guys ?
LAYERED SECURITY IS " the trend " &amp; recommended pursuit by any 'security-saavy ' person out there &amp; yes , it works ! APKP.S. = &gt; HOSTS files give you that " Layered security " in addition to my last paragraphs ' suggestions above &amp; this guide I authored AS WELL AS MORE SPEED ONLINE... : ----HOW TO SECURE Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 &amp; even VISTA , + make it " fun-to-do " , via CIS Tool Guidance ( &amp; beyond ) : http : //www.tcmagazine.com/forums/index.php ? s = d9ab7ff1c912db0a0686e83b86da1e02&amp;showtopic = 2662 [ tcmagazine.com ] A testimonial of its effectiveness ?
Ok , here goes : http : //www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php ? s = ae352cd32542fe49a55fe00b11086449&amp;t = 28430&amp;page = 3 [ xtremepccentral.com ] " Its 2009 - still trouble free !
I was told last week by a co worker who does active directory administration , and he said I was doing overkill .
I told him yes , but I just eliminated the half life in windows that you usually get .
He said good point .
So from 2008 till 2009 .
No speed decreases , its been to a lan party , moved around in a move , and it still NEVER has had the OS reinstalled besides the fact I imaged the drive over in 2008 .
Great stuff !
My client STILL Has n't called me back in regards to that one machine to get it locked down for the kid .
I am glad it worked and I am sure her wallet is appreciated too now that it works .
Speaking of which , I need to call her to see if I can get some leads .
APK - I will say it again , the guide is FANTASTIC !
Its made my PC experience much easier .
Sandboxing was great .
Getting my host file updated , setting services to system service , rather than system local .
( except AVG updater , needed system local ) " - THRONKA ( forums user @ xtremepccentral ) ...AND guys , as far as THAT testimonial of that guide 's effectiveness ?
Hey - That is just 1 of MANY like it I can produce !
Enjoy... it works ! ----Face it - usually security things ( like AntiVirus ' programs for example ) add another layer of processing complexity and slow you down... NOT HOSTS Files , &amp; they work with EVERY WEBBOUND PROGRAM YOU HAVE... not just FireFox/Mozilla variants !
apk</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Internet Explorer does.
Internet Explorer is so awesome, you don't even need to click on an add to get infected.
It's will do all automatically for you, there is this new wonderful M$ caching feature that keep clicking the whole Internet for you.
Join the botnet close to your home now, all free today thanks to IE9!
Remember, iexplore.exe will be always there for you.
" - by Krneki (1192201) on Monday June 15, @09:15PM (#28343077)Versus that?
Well - You can always use a HOSTS file!
Why?? Read on:The beauty of that is, IS that HOSTS files (custom ones especially for THIS type of lunacy occurring) extend to EVERY web-bound app you have (unlike Adblock/AdBlock Plus, that only work in Mozilla/FireFox products)So - think programs like Email also, where HTML is used (alongside scripting, the REAL "problem" (with bad adbanners for example, it IS the "delivery mechanism" basically - because it's truly the "root of all evil" here most times, &amp; anyone can verify that statement @ SECUNIA or SECURITYFOCUS.COM for example, from their last 4-5 yrs.
of data or more on records of exploits they have)).HOSTS files provide not only security benefits here, but, also speedup benefits too, as a bonus (by blocking ads you gain speed, but blocking scripting even gets you more (only use it on sites you trust OR cannot do without to stay safe(r) vs. bad scripted pages/bad scripted adbanners)).HOSTS files, customized ones, work here... &amp; it's a solution that's easily edited/added to, + understood by users, as a bonus - Because as one of my best pals whom I 'turned onto' these has stated, verbatim?
"All you need to do, is know how to use notepad.exe, how to read english, &amp; to get a decent one to start with - as well as sources that update the data one needs to blockout bogus sites" (&amp; I list a few below!
)The one I use here is populated with my own lists for HOSTS files since 1997 (30.000 entries long, mostly for adbanner blocking @ first 1997-2001), then later for security 2002 onwards...I extended it further (to 654,000 unique entries currently &amp; yes, I have to stop the Windows DNS client for that, it's 14mb for Windows NT/2000/XP/Server 2003, &amp; up to 19mb (using 0.0.0.0) OR 26mb (using 127.0.0.1) for Windows VISTA/Server 2008/Windows7) per sources like:1.
) StopBadWare.org2.
) SRI3.
) Dancho Danchev's ZDNet Blog4.
) SpyBot "Search &amp; Destroy" Immunize lists5.
) PLUS/LASTLY, using other reputable known HOSTS files shown @ wikipedia.com, here -&gt; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosts\_file [wikipedia.org] [wikipedia.org]All DAILY updated here, or nearly daily.
(&amp; kept free of repeat entries via a program I wrote to do that, as well as alphabetize the entries, plus change them to a "faster up off disk into memory" internal schema for blocking out bad sites &amp; adbanners, by going from the larger, slower 127.0.0.1 default loopback adapter IP, to either 0.0.0.0 (for VISTA/Server2k8/Windows 7, a mistake on MS' part I mentioned to they here -&gt; http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/archive/2009/02/09/recognizing-improvements-in-windows-7-handwriting.aspx?CommentPosted=true#commentmessage [msdn.com] which they started on 12/09/2008), OR the fastest &amp; most efficient 0 blocking IP address))HOSTS files are a good layer for this, then you can also "layer on" IE Restricted Zones, Opera filter.ini/urlfilter.ini, &amp; FireFox addons like NoScript + its internal to browser restricted sites lists ontop of them, for the utmost in security protection AND speed (I do other things like use custom cascading style sheets &amp; PAC file filtering as well, but those are another subject)... &amp; guys?
LAYERED SECURITY IS "the trend" &amp; recommended pursuit by any 'security-saavy' person out there &amp; yes, it works!APKP.S.=&gt; HOSTS files give you that "Layered security" in addition to my last paragraphs' suggestions above &amp; this guide I authored AS WELL AS MORE SPEED ONLINE...:----HOW TO SECURE Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 &amp; even VISTA, + make it "fun-to-do", via CIS Tool Guidance (&amp; beyond):http://www.tcmagazine.com/forums/index.php?s=d9ab7ff1c912db0a0686e83b86da1e02&amp;showtopic=2662 [tcmagazine.com]A testimonial of its effectiveness?
Ok, here goes:http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=ae352cd32542fe49a55fe00b11086449&amp;t=28430&amp;page=3 [xtremepccentral.com]"Its 2009 - still trouble free!
I was told last week by a co worker who does active directory administration, and he said I was doing overkill.
I told him yes, but I just eliminated the half life in windows that you usually get.
He said good point.
So from 2008 till 2009.
No speed decreases, its been to a lan party, moved around in a move, and it still NEVER has had the OS reinstalled besides the fact I imaged the drive over in 2008.
Great stuff!
My client STILL Hasn't called me back in regards to that one machine to get it locked down for the kid.
I am glad it worked and I am sure her wallet is appreciated too now that it works.
Speaking of which, I need to call her to see if I can get some leads.
APK - I will say it again, the guide is FANTASTIC!
Its made my PC experience much easier.
Sandboxing was great.
Getting my host file updated, setting services to system service, rather than system local.
(except AVG updater, needed system local)" - THRONKA (forums user @ xtremepccentral) ...AND guys, as far as THAT testimonial of that guide's effectiveness?
Hey - That is just 1 of MANY like it I can produce!
Enjoy... it works!----Face it - usually security things (like AntiVirus' programs for example) add another layer of processing complexity and slow you down... NOT HOSTS Files, &amp; they work with EVERY WEBBOUND PROGRAM YOU HAVE... not just FireFox/Mozilla variants!
apk
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343077</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299</id>
	<title>When will this end?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245069420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>While the internet is a wonderful thing; I can't help but wonder where did all of the douchebags come from.
Every liar, cheat, grifter is taking their shot at fucking up the sandbox we all play in. Its all fun and games when windows users get hosed, but after awhile even that gets old.
I am just a tired old man.
It makes me sad that my poor view of humanity gets reinforced every time I turn around.</htmltext>
<tokenext>While the internet is a wonderful thing ; I ca n't help but wonder where did all of the douchebags come from .
Every liar , cheat , grifter is taking their shot at fucking up the sandbox we all play in .
Its all fun and games when windows users get hosed , but after awhile even that gets old .
I am just a tired old man .
It makes me sad that my poor view of humanity gets reinforced every time I turn around .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While the internet is a wonderful thing; I can't help but wonder where did all of the douchebags come from.
Every liar, cheat, grifter is taking their shot at fucking up the sandbox we all play in.
Its all fun and games when windows users get hosed, but after awhile even that gets old.
I am just a tired old man.
It makes me sad that my poor view of humanity gets reinforced every time I turn around.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28390485</id>
	<title>Trolls? See here, in regards to more on HOSTS...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245428520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1270901&amp;cid=28364263" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1270901&amp;cid=28364263</a> [slashdot.org] So much for your trollish b.s. that has no technical merits whatsoever, eh Trolls? I strongly suspect that would actually work, when not much else would or as easily, vs. udp port 53 DNS requests by users (vs. the tyrannical measure being put in place in Germany lately online).</p><p>(Heh - Between that, my original post, &amp; what MEK put up regarding HOSTS from securityfocus.com, it has TRULY been a pleasure watching you all RUN LIKE SCARED RABBITS from backing up your mod down of myself and also lacking any technical backing vs. my original points here, as regards HOSTS file usage)...</p><p>APK</p><p>P.S.=&gt; Nothing like putting ccwardly trolls in their places... they're the worst "A/C's" of all, &amp; this site? It's RIDDLED with them... apk</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 1270901&amp;cid = 28364263 [ slashdot.org ] So much for your trollish b.s .
that has no technical merits whatsoever , eh Trolls ?
I strongly suspect that would actually work , when not much else would or as easily , vs. udp port 53 DNS requests by users ( vs. the tyrannical measure being put in place in Germany lately online ) .
( Heh - Between that , my original post , &amp; what MEK put up regarding HOSTS from securityfocus.com , it has TRULY been a pleasure watching you all RUN LIKE SCARED RABBITS from backing up your mod down of myself and also lacking any technical backing vs. my original points here , as regards HOSTS file usage ) ...APKP.S. = &gt; Nothing like putting ccwardly trolls in their places... they 're the worst " A/C 's " of all , &amp; this site ?
It 's RIDDLED with them... apk</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1270901&amp;cid=28364263 [slashdot.org] So much for your trollish b.s.
that has no technical merits whatsoever, eh Trolls?
I strongly suspect that would actually work, when not much else would or as easily, vs. udp port 53 DNS requests by users (vs. the tyrannical measure being put in place in Germany lately online).
(Heh - Between that, my original post, &amp; what MEK put up regarding HOSTS from securityfocus.com, it has TRULY been a pleasure watching you all RUN LIKE SCARED RABBITS from backing up your mod down of myself and also lacking any technical backing vs. my original points here, as regards HOSTS file usage)...APKP.S.=&gt; Nothing like putting ccwardly trolls in their places... they're the worst "A/C's" of all, &amp; this site?
It's RIDDLED with them... apk</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28346653</id>
	<title>Not LaCoste</title>
	<author>smoker2</author>
	<datestamp>1245161580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The name is Lacoste, due to the fact it was founded by legendary tennis player Ren&#233; Lacoste.<br>Hardly surprising coming from a nation who think McDonalds is a restaurant instead of a burger bar.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The name is Lacoste , due to the fact it was founded by legendary tennis player Ren   Lacoste.Hardly surprising coming from a nation who think McDonalds is a restaurant instead of a burger bar .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The name is Lacoste, due to the fact it was founded by legendary tennis player René Lacoste.Hardly surprising coming from a nation who think McDonalds is a restaurant instead of a burger bar.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344283</id>
	<title>They come from Windows-land</title>
	<author>symbolset</author>
	<datestamp>1245086640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The rest of us don't have to worry about this nonsense.  If it bothers you, get a mac.  They don't have this problem.  Instead, we just click merrily away at any old thing that catches our interest for a moment.  You would like it.  It's called <i>browsing</i>.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The rest of us do n't have to worry about this nonsense .
If it bothers you , get a mac .
They do n't have this problem .
Instead , we just click merrily away at any old thing that catches our interest for a moment .
You would like it .
It 's called browsing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The rest of us don't have to worry about this nonsense.
If it bothers you, get a mac.
They don't have this problem.
Instead, we just click merrily away at any old thing that catches our interest for a moment.
You would like it.
It's called browsing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343405</id>
	<title>Re:When will this end?</title>
	<author>calmofthestorm</author>
	<datestamp>1245078300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Noniterated game.</p><p>Seriously. Reputation is everything. No effect on reputation ==&gt; no morals, at least for many people.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Noniterated game.Seriously .
Reputation is everything .
No effect on reputation = = &gt; no morals , at least for many people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Noniterated game.Seriously.
Reputation is everything.
No effect on reputation ==&gt; no morals, at least for many people.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28346349</id>
	<title>Re:We allowed them in</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245159060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I always maintained that the internet was a far more enjoyable place before AOL connected to it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I always maintained that the internet was a far more enjoyable place before AOL connected to it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I always maintained that the internet was a far more enjoyable place before AOL connected to it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343101</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345325</id>
	<title>Not  bloody likely!</title>
	<author>rts008</author>
	<datestamp>1245143340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I haven't even <i>seen</i> an ad in years...what am I going to click on that's not there?<br>(Firefox-since 0.8ver.-before it was called Firefox, Adblock [plus], noscript, and flashblock)</p><p>Does this advirus run on Linux?<br>(kubuntu 5.04 thru 9.04-presently)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have n't even seen an ad in years...what am I going to click on that 's not there ?
( Firefox-since 0.8ver.-before it was called Firefox , Adblock [ plus ] , noscript , and flashblock ) Does this advirus run on Linux ?
( kubuntu 5.04 thru 9.04-presently )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I haven't even seen an ad in years...what am I going to click on that's not there?
(Firefox-since 0.8ver.-before it was called Firefox, Adblock [plus], noscript, and flashblock)Does this advirus run on Linux?
(kubuntu 5.04 thru 9.04-presently)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342387</id>
	<title>The Next Ad You Click May Be a Virus</title>
	<author>PaganRitual</author>
	<datestamp>1245070020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or it may win you<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... A NEW CAR.</p><p>Are you prepared to take that risk?</p><p>Hmm<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... that's not appearing like it should. It's spelt B-L-I-N-K, right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or it may win you ... A NEW CAR.Are you prepared to take that risk ? Hmm ... that 's not appearing like it should .
It 's spelt B-L-I-N-K , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or it may win you ... A NEW CAR.Are you prepared to take that risk?Hmm ... that's not appearing like it should.
It's spelt B-L-I-N-K, right?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28346643</id>
	<title>Re:Aren't they all?</title>
	<author>hesaigo999ca</author>
	<datestamp>1245161460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe the "hacked" version of FireFox or IE you downloaded from what you thought was a great download site, does, as it has a built in auto clicker, to generate revenue for the guy that has adsense on his web page, and wants everyone to click on his ads...so he creates a bad version of each, sends it to his friends or family, and watches his revenue grow...although now he indirectly makes other people click on links that lead you to websites, then installs malware.Ooops.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe the " hacked " version of FireFox or IE you downloaded from what you thought was a great download site , does , as it has a built in auto clicker , to generate revenue for the guy that has adsense on his web page , and wants everyone to click on his ads...so he creates a bad version of each , sends it to his friends or family , and watches his revenue grow...although now he indirectly makes other people click on links that lead you to websites , then installs malware.Ooops .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe the "hacked" version of FireFox or IE you downloaded from what you thought was a great download site, does, as it has a built in auto clicker, to generate revenue for the guy that has adsense on his web page, and wants everyone to click on his ads...so he creates a bad version of each, sends it to his friends or family, and watches his revenue grow...although now he indirectly makes other people click on links that lead you to websites, then installs malware.Ooops.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342543</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342695</id>
	<title>Re:PC huh?</title>
	<author>dnaumov</author>
	<datestamp>1245072300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"direct users to a Web site where harmful programs would be downloaded to their computers, says Stephen Wellman, director of community and content for Ziff Davis."</p><p>Do these affect Linux or Apple PC's? I'm guessing it's the good old Windows<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.exe and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.dll again, an exclusive Windows issue disguised as a "PC" issue.</p></div><p><div class="quote"><p>"direct users to a Web site where harmful programs would be downloaded to their computers, says Stephen Wellman, director of community and content for Ziff Davis."</p><p>Do these affect Linux or Apple PC's? I'm guessing it's the good old Windows<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.exe and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.dll again, an exclusive Windows issue disguised as a "PC" issue.</p></div><p>Yes, this is a "PC" issue, more specifically it is a "moron PC user" issue. Trust me, if the Linux and Mac marketshare were actually worth targeting for malware writers, you would see the very same kind of malware attacks succeed, because if the user clicks "Yes" to all prompts, what's there to prevent the malware from doing it's thing if it's actually designed to run on Linux.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" direct users to a Web site where harmful programs would be downloaded to their computers , says Stephen Wellman , director of community and content for Ziff Davis .
" Do these affect Linux or Apple PC 's ?
I 'm guessing it 's the good old Windows .exe and .dll again , an exclusive Windows issue disguised as a " PC " issue .
" direct users to a Web site where harmful programs would be downloaded to their computers , says Stephen Wellman , director of community and content for Ziff Davis .
" Do these affect Linux or Apple PC 's ?
I 'm guessing it 's the good old Windows .exe and .dll again , an exclusive Windows issue disguised as a " PC " issue.Yes , this is a " PC " issue , more specifically it is a " moron PC user " issue .
Trust me , if the Linux and Mac marketshare were actually worth targeting for malware writers , you would see the very same kind of malware attacks succeed , because if the user clicks " Yes " to all prompts , what 's there to prevent the malware from doing it 's thing if it 's actually designed to run on Linux .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"direct users to a Web site where harmful programs would be downloaded to their computers, says Stephen Wellman, director of community and content for Ziff Davis.
"Do these affect Linux or Apple PC's?
I'm guessing it's the good old Windows .exe and .dll again, an exclusive Windows issue disguised as a "PC" issue.
"direct users to a Web site where harmful programs would be downloaded to their computers, says Stephen Wellman, director of community and content for Ziff Davis.
"Do these affect Linux or Apple PC's?
I'm guessing it's the good old Windows .exe and .dll again, an exclusive Windows issue disguised as a "PC" issue.Yes, this is a "PC" issue, more specifically it is a "moron PC user" issue.
Trust me, if the Linux and Mac marketshare were actually worth targeting for malware writers, you would see the very same kind of malware attacks succeed, because if the user clicks "Yes" to all prompts, what's there to prevent the malware from doing it's thing if it's actually designed to run on Linux.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342539</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345991</id>
	<title>Stickers</title>
	<author>flameproof</author>
	<datestamp>1245154140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As a house call tech, I eventually just made up some little 3 inch stickers to put on my customer's monitor: <b>NEVER CLICK ON ADS</b>.  Best antivirus tool ever.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a house call tech , I eventually just made up some little 3 inch stickers to put on my customer 's monitor : NEVER CLICK ON ADS .
Best antivirus tool ever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a house call tech, I eventually just made up some little 3 inch stickers to put on my customer's monitor: NEVER CLICK ON ADS.
Best antivirus tool ever.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342531</id>
	<title>Re:When will this end?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245071100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Botnets and financial data have value, so it makes sense that there's profit to be had in finding ways to infect new machines.  These are the same douchebags that fill up my gmail Spam folder.  If there's profit to be had, and nearly zero chance you'll be caught, people will do pretty much anything.  It's human nature.  All you can do is improve the sandbox so that people can't (profitably) abuse it, and most of the douchebags will leave.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Botnets and financial data have value , so it makes sense that there 's profit to be had in finding ways to infect new machines .
These are the same douchebags that fill up my gmail Spam folder .
If there 's profit to be had , and nearly zero chance you 'll be caught , people will do pretty much anything .
It 's human nature .
All you can do is improve the sandbox so that people ca n't ( profitably ) abuse it , and most of the douchebags will leave .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Botnets and financial data have value, so it makes sense that there's profit to be had in finding ways to infect new machines.
These are the same douchebags that fill up my gmail Spam folder.
If there's profit to be had, and nearly zero chance you'll be caught, people will do pretty much anything.
It's human nature.
All you can do is improve the sandbox so that people can't (profitably) abuse it, and most of the douchebags will leave.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343351</id>
	<title>Riiiing! 1998 Called...</title>
	<author>tunapez</author>
	<datestamp>1245077820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They want their headline back!
<br>
<br>



<b>AdBlockPlus FTW!</b></htmltext>
<tokenext>They want their headline back !
AdBlockPlus FTW !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They want their headline back!
AdBlockPlus FTW!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28349549</id>
	<title>Re:We allowed them in</title>
	<author>Jearil</author>
	<datestamp>1245175020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow, that was nice. Quite visual and everything...</p><p>Unfortunately this is slashdot, can you give me  a car analogy?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , that was nice .
Quite visual and everything...Unfortunately this is slashdot , can you give me a car analogy ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, that was nice.
Quite visual and everything...Unfortunately this is slashdot, can you give me  a car analogy?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343101</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342939</id>
	<title>Not surprised</title>
	<author>KingAlanI</author>
	<datestamp>1245074280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since I installed AdBlock Plus (for purposes of lowing annoyance level), I've noticed as a very pleasant side effect that my malware infection level has dropped tremendously.<br>Barely need to run AdAware &amp; SpyBot &amp; co any more, and when I do [even when their definitions are fully updated], there's barely anything for them to find</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since I installed AdBlock Plus ( for purposes of lowing annoyance level ) , I 've noticed as a very pleasant side effect that my malware infection level has dropped tremendously.Barely need to run AdAware &amp; SpyBot &amp; co any more , and when I do [ even when their definitions are fully updated ] , there 's barely anything for them to find</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since I installed AdBlock Plus (for purposes of lowing annoyance level), I've noticed as a very pleasant side effect that my malware infection level has dropped tremendously.Barely need to run AdAware &amp; SpyBot &amp; co any more, and when I do [even when their definitions are fully updated], there's barely anything for them to find</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342353</id>
	<title>yes, but...</title>
	<author>owlnation</author>
	<datestamp>1245069840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>... who clicks ads? (other than for click fraud purposes)</htmltext>
<tokenext>... who clicks ads ?
( other than for click fraud purposes )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... who clicks ads?
(other than for click fraud purposes)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28349973</id>
	<title>Re:what ads?</title>
	<author>Patch86</author>
	<datestamp>1245176400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most (all?) advertising is click-based, not view-based.</p><p>I've never knowingly clicked on a banner add, in all the many years before I found Adblock. Whether I see them or not makes no difference if I don't click on them anyway.</p><p>As an aside, I don't have a huge problem with reasonably sized static ads on websites. Text-based ads are even better. If they were just these, I might even be inclined to pay attention to them and consider clicking. If they take up half the page, have resource-crunching animated graphics that take an age to load, pop-up windows, or, worst of all, have audio, they deserve nothing but scorn. It's ads like these that have caused so many people to flock to Adblock and similar, the advertisers have only themselves to blame for it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most ( all ?
) advertising is click-based , not view-based.I 've never knowingly clicked on a banner add , in all the many years before I found Adblock .
Whether I see them or not makes no difference if I do n't click on them anyway.As an aside , I do n't have a huge problem with reasonably sized static ads on websites .
Text-based ads are even better .
If they were just these , I might even be inclined to pay attention to them and consider clicking .
If they take up half the page , have resource-crunching animated graphics that take an age to load , pop-up windows , or , worst of all , have audio , they deserve nothing but scorn .
It 's ads like these that have caused so many people to flock to Adblock and similar , the advertisers have only themselves to blame for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most (all?
) advertising is click-based, not view-based.I've never knowingly clicked on a banner add, in all the many years before I found Adblock.
Whether I see them or not makes no difference if I don't click on them anyway.As an aside, I don't have a huge problem with reasonably sized static ads on websites.
Text-based ads are even better.
If they were just these, I might even be inclined to pay attention to them and consider clicking.
If they take up half the page, have resource-crunching animated graphics that take an age to load, pop-up windows, or, worst of all, have audio, they deserve nothing but scorn.
It's ads like these that have caused so many people to flock to Adblock and similar, the advertisers have only themselves to blame for it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342501</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342335</id>
	<title>I can see!</title>
	<author>awarrenfells</author>
	<datestamp>1245069720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wait, they are just now realizing this?  And here I had thought this was common knowledge, and that they were actually doing something to fight it.
<br> <br>
No wonder I couldn't see anything being done about it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait , they are just now realizing this ?
And here I had thought this was common knowledge , and that they were actually doing something to fight it .
No wonder I could n't see anything being done about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait, they are just now realizing this?
And here I had thought this was common knowledge, and that they were actually doing something to fight it.
No wonder I couldn't see anything being done about it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342493</id>
	<title>Very simple asnwer</title>
	<author>Archfeld</author>
	<datestamp>1245070860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, I REPEAT NEVER EVER click an ad banner. If you see somthing you REALLY want to view get the source and go there in another browser window, but clicking thru an ad banner is somthing I can't ever remember doing in the entire time I've been on the net...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>NEVER , NEVER , NEVER , I REPEAT NEVER EVER click an ad banner .
If you see somthing you REALLY want to view get the source and go there in another browser window , but clicking thru an ad banner is somthing I ca n't ever remember doing in the entire time I 've been on the net.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, I REPEAT NEVER EVER click an ad banner.
If you see somthing you REALLY want to view get the source and go there in another browser window, but clicking thru an ad banner is somthing I can't ever remember doing in the entire time I've been on the net...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342297</id>
	<title>what ads?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245069420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>/strokes adblock</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>/strokes adblock</tokentext>
<sentencetext>/strokes adblock</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343263</id>
	<title>Good reason to block ads at the corporate firewall</title>
	<author>Animats</author>
	<datestamp>1245076920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
This is a good reason to block all ad sites at your corporate firewall.  You'll probably cut your Internet bandwidth usage in half, too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a good reason to block all ad sites at your corporate firewall .
You 'll probably cut your Internet bandwidth usage in half , too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
This is a good reason to block all ad sites at your corporate firewall.
You'll probably cut your Internet bandwidth usage in half, too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342763</id>
	<title>Re:what ads?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245072780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually it is the webmasters and advertisers fault that so many of us use ABP and Noscript. Pull up a chair young'un and let me explain.</p><p> Back in the old days (cue my oldest saying "when folks had 8-tracks and dinosaurs ruled the earth") ads were just a few lines of pretty text or a picture, or hell if you wanted to be fancy a little<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.gif. But we had us a problem. you see, all these video formats were competing, and most really REALLY sucked. Anybody who went through the heyday of Real player on Windows knows of which i speak, so somebody came up with flash, which worked okay.</p><p>But then the evil advertising execs saw the flash video and said "You know what? I bet we can use this to irritate the living hell out of folks. Let's see them ignore our fricking ads now baby!" and thus was born the Bonzi Buddy of web evil, the "shoot the monkey and win a ---" ads. And they truly were irritating as all hell. but then the other ad execs saw this, and being the evil creatures of Satan that they are, said "we can top that!" and so ads became ever more annoying and evil. In fact I am surprised somebody hasn't put <a href="http://www.tramsmail.se/tramsfiler/08/04/20/The\_Annoying\_Thing.wmv" title="tramsmail.se">that damned frog</a> [tramsmail.se] in a looping flash ad with little text that says "buy coke"</p><p>

Hell for all I know, they may have. I and many other wouldn't know, because one day a great and noble man named Wlad came along and said "Damn, that's irritating as fuck!" and being the great man that he is, created the wonder that is ABP. And all was good. Now if you and any other web masters want to appeal to those of us blessed with the ABP to let your puny site poison our eyes, that is fine. but woe be unto you if you show us even ONE of those damned "shoot the monkey and win a ---" ads for we shall put you in the blacklist for all eternity. Amen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually it is the webmasters and advertisers fault that so many of us use ABP and Noscript .
Pull up a chair young'un and let me explain .
Back in the old days ( cue my oldest saying " when folks had 8-tracks and dinosaurs ruled the earth " ) ads were just a few lines of pretty text or a picture , or hell if you wanted to be fancy a little .gif .
But we had us a problem .
you see , all these video formats were competing , and most really REALLY sucked .
Anybody who went through the heyday of Real player on Windows knows of which i speak , so somebody came up with flash , which worked okay.But then the evil advertising execs saw the flash video and said " You know what ?
I bet we can use this to irritate the living hell out of folks .
Let 's see them ignore our fricking ads now baby !
" and thus was born the Bonzi Buddy of web evil , the " shoot the monkey and win a --- " ads .
And they truly were irritating as all hell .
but then the other ad execs saw this , and being the evil creatures of Satan that they are , said " we can top that !
" and so ads became ever more annoying and evil .
In fact I am surprised somebody has n't put that damned frog [ tramsmail.se ] in a looping flash ad with little text that says " buy coke " Hell for all I know , they may have .
I and many other would n't know , because one day a great and noble man named Wlad came along and said " Damn , that 's irritating as fuck !
" and being the great man that he is , created the wonder that is ABP .
And all was good .
Now if you and any other web masters want to appeal to those of us blessed with the ABP to let your puny site poison our eyes , that is fine .
but woe be unto you if you show us even ONE of those damned " shoot the monkey and win a --- " ads for we shall put you in the blacklist for all eternity .
Amen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually it is the webmasters and advertisers fault that so many of us use ABP and Noscript.
Pull up a chair young'un and let me explain.
Back in the old days (cue my oldest saying "when folks had 8-tracks and dinosaurs ruled the earth") ads were just a few lines of pretty text or a picture, or hell if you wanted to be fancy a little .gif.
But we had us a problem.
you see, all these video formats were competing, and most really REALLY sucked.
Anybody who went through the heyday of Real player on Windows knows of which i speak, so somebody came up with flash, which worked okay.But then the evil advertising execs saw the flash video and said "You know what?
I bet we can use this to irritate the living hell out of folks.
Let's see them ignore our fricking ads now baby!
" and thus was born the Bonzi Buddy of web evil, the "shoot the monkey and win a ---" ads.
And they truly were irritating as all hell.
but then the other ad execs saw this, and being the evil creatures of Satan that they are, said "we can top that!
" and so ads became ever more annoying and evil.
In fact I am surprised somebody hasn't put that damned frog [tramsmail.se] in a looping flash ad with little text that says "buy coke"

Hell for all I know, they may have.
I and many other wouldn't know, because one day a great and noble man named Wlad came along and said "Damn, that's irritating as fuck!
" and being the great man that he is, created the wonder that is ABP.
And all was good.
Now if you and any other web masters want to appeal to those of us blessed with the ABP to let your puny site poison our eyes, that is fine.
but woe be unto you if you show us even ONE of those damned "shoot the monkey and win a ---" ads for we shall put you in the blacklist for all eternity.
Amen.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342501</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343959</id>
	<title>It will HAVE to have been a virus!</title>
	<author>dmomo</author>
	<datestamp>1245083340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because I sure as Hell ain't clicking on any ads, Honey.  I blame the virus.  I'm going to go dispose of these bad bad magazines right now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because I sure as Hell ai n't clicking on any ads , Honey .
I blame the virus .
I 'm going to go dispose of these bad bad magazines right now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because I sure as Hell ain't clicking on any ads, Honey.
I blame the virus.
I'm going to go dispose of these bad bad magazines right now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342297</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345355</id>
	<title>Re:what ads?</title>
	<author>dangitman</author>
	<datestamp>1245143700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>the "shoot the monkey and win a ---" ads.</p></div><p>You mean, I could really win three hyphens?! Where do I click?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>the " shoot the monkey and win a --- " ads.You mean , I could really win three hyphens ? !
Where do I click ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the "shoot the monkey and win a ---" ads.You mean, I could really win three hyphens?!
Where do I click?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342763</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28346673</id>
	<title>Whew!</title>
	<author>rehtonAesoohC</author>
	<datestamp>1245161700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well it sure is a good thing Slashdot just let me disable their ads!<br> <br>What timing, I tell ya...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well it sure is a good thing Slashdot just let me disable their ads !
What timing , I tell ya.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well it sure is a good thing Slashdot just let me disable their ads!
What timing, I tell ya...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28346619</id>
	<title>Re:Aren't they all?</title>
	<author>vaporland</author>
	<datestamp>1245161280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>people actually SEE ads on the internets? (cough)PRIVOXY(cough)</htmltext>
<tokenext>people actually SEE ads on the internets ?
( cough ) PRIVOXY ( cough )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>people actually SEE ads on the internets?
(cough)PRIVOXY(cough)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342543</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28348355</id>
	<title>Re:We allowed them in</title>
	<author>Aceticon</author>
	<datestamp>1245171060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My recollections of Usenet flamewars, MUD griefing and how much everybody bitched and moaned when AOL started letting their subscribers use the Internet does not match your description of an Idyllic past and us receiving the "common man" with open arms.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My recollections of Usenet flamewars , MUD griefing and how much everybody bitched and moaned when AOL started letting their subscribers use the Internet does not match your description of an Idyllic past and us receiving the " common man " with open arms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My recollections of Usenet flamewars, MUD griefing and how much everybody bitched and moaned when AOL started letting their subscribers use the Internet does not match your description of an Idyllic past and us receiving the "common man" with open arms.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343101</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344587</id>
	<title>Re:When will this end?</title>
	<author>Bill, Shooter of Bul</author>
	<datestamp>1245090120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Humanity, despite your perception of it, has always been what it is. Its not some entangled state cat in a box. Your observing its flaws did not cause them, nor did your ignoring them prevent their existence. Life is what it is and people are who they are. The question is, what are you going to do about it now that you know something closer to the truth? Stick you head back in the sand? Try to change individuals? Change the system? Fight the Power? Righteous indignation? Legislation?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Humanity , despite your perception of it , has always been what it is .
Its not some entangled state cat in a box .
Your observing its flaws did not cause them , nor did your ignoring them prevent their existence .
Life is what it is and people are who they are .
The question is , what are you going to do about it now that you know something closer to the truth ?
Stick you head back in the sand ?
Try to change individuals ?
Change the system ?
Fight the Power ?
Righteous indignation ?
Legislation ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Humanity, despite your perception of it, has always been what it is.
Its not some entangled state cat in a box.
Your observing its flaws did not cause them, nor did your ignoring them prevent their existence.
Life is what it is and people are who they are.
The question is, what are you going to do about it now that you know something closer to the truth?
Stick you head back in the sand?
Try to change individuals?
Change the system?
Fight the Power?
Righteous indignation?
Legislation?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343229</id>
	<title>Re:what ads?</title>
	<author>Fieryphoenix</author>
	<datestamp>1245076620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You mean virusblock?</htmltext>
<tokenext>You mean virusblock ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You mean virusblock?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342297</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342351</id>
	<title>Duh.</title>
	<author>EkriirkE</author>
	<datestamp>1245069840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Welcome to 1990 when Al Gore invented the intertubes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Welcome to 1990 when Al Gore invented the intertubes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Welcome to 1990 when Al Gore invented the intertubes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345229</id>
	<title>Re:what ads?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245184980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Editors Note: in most cases a large HOSTS file (over 135 kb) tends to slow down the machine.</p></div><p>It's nearly 600kB. I don't think it's going to be nice to use.</p><p>Also, wouldn't redirecting them to an invalid ip, say 0.0.0.0, work better than localhost?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Editors Note : in most cases a large HOSTS file ( over 135 kb ) tends to slow down the machine.It 's nearly 600kB .
I do n't think it 's going to be nice to use.Also , would n't redirecting them to an invalid ip , say 0.0.0.0 , work better than localhost ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Editors Note: in most cases a large HOSTS file (over 135 kb) tends to slow down the machine.It's nearly 600kB.
I don't think it's going to be nice to use.Also, wouldn't redirecting them to an invalid ip, say 0.0.0.0, work better than localhost?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343809</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342581</id>
	<title>Re:When will this end?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245071340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>While the internet is a wonderful thing; I can't help but wonder where did all of the douchebags come from</p></div></blockquote><p>Well here's a tip: those viruses only run on one platform.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>While the internet is a wonderful thing ; I ca n't help but wonder where did all of the douchebags come fromWell here 's a tip : those viruses only run on one platform .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While the internet is a wonderful thing; I can't help but wonder where did all of the douchebags come fromWell here's a tip: those viruses only run on one platform.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28347219</id>
	<title>Re:When will this end?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245165240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Really?  Where did all of the douchebags come from?  You're kidding, right?  Like the world was all goodness and light before the black hats found the Internets and a raison d'etre?  Read some 5th grade world history and get some freaking perspective, Grampa!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Really ?
Where did all of the douchebags come from ?
You 're kidding , right ?
Like the world was all goodness and light before the black hats found the Internets and a raison d'etre ?
Read some 5th grade world history and get some freaking perspective , Grampa !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really?
Where did all of the douchebags come from?
You're kidding, right?
Like the world was all goodness and light before the black hats found the Internets and a raison d'etre?
Read some 5th grade world history and get some freaking perspective, Grampa!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343031</id>
	<title>Where's the news?</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1245075000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's anything but news. And I'm not even talking about shady scareware or "come to the page and you already signed an abo for 2 years and 160 bucks" scams.</p><p>Drive-by infection ad pages have appeared in noticable amounts about 2-3 years ago when iframe infections became en vogue. They were (and are) even actually quite professional, not just a copy of another company's page, they appear legit, but usually sell crap no person would actually want to buy (either overpriced or obviously bogus). But that's not the point. The point is to appear legit and like just some other page trying to hawk crap, so people don't wonder why someone would advertise a page with no content.</p><p>Not that the average user would wonder, but<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's anything but news .
And I 'm not even talking about shady scareware or " come to the page and you already signed an abo for 2 years and 160 bucks " scams.Drive-by infection ad pages have appeared in noticable amounts about 2-3 years ago when iframe infections became en vogue .
They were ( and are ) even actually quite professional , not just a copy of another company 's page , they appear legit , but usually sell crap no person would actually want to buy ( either overpriced or obviously bogus ) .
But that 's not the point .
The point is to appear legit and like just some other page trying to hawk crap , so people do n't wonder why someone would advertise a page with no content.Not that the average user would wonder , but .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's anything but news.
And I'm not even talking about shady scareware or "come to the page and you already signed an abo for 2 years and 160 bucks" scams.Drive-by infection ad pages have appeared in noticable amounts about 2-3 years ago when iframe infections became en vogue.
They were (and are) even actually quite professional, not just a copy of another company's page, they appear legit, but usually sell crap no person would actually want to buy (either overpriced or obviously bogus).
But that's not the point.
The point is to appear legit and like just some other page trying to hawk crap, so people don't wonder why someone would advertise a page with no content.Not that the average user would wonder, but ...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342725</id>
	<title>Re:When will this end?</title>
	<author>Korin43</author>
	<datestamp>1245072540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's the current 'big thing'. Eventually people will realize you don't make much money with spam and they'll go back to robbing banks like civilized people.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's the current 'big thing' .
Eventually people will realize you do n't make much money with spam and they 'll go back to robbing banks like civilized people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's the current 'big thing'.
Eventually people will realize you don't make much money with spam and they'll go back to robbing banks like civilized people.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343077</id>
	<title>Re:yes, but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245075300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Internet Explorer does.

Internet Explorer is so awesome, you don't even need to click on an add to get infected. It's will do all automatically for you, there is this new wonderful M$ caching feature that keep clicking the whole Internet for you. Join the botnet close to your home now, all free today thanks to IE9!


Remember, iexplore.exe will be always there for you.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Internet Explorer does .
Internet Explorer is so awesome , you do n't even need to click on an add to get infected .
It 's will do all automatically for you , there is this new wonderful M $ caching feature that keep clicking the whole Internet for you .
Join the botnet close to your home now , all free today thanks to IE9 !
Remember , iexplore.exe will be always there for you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Internet Explorer does.
Internet Explorer is so awesome, you don't even need to click on an add to get infected.
It's will do all automatically for you, there is this new wonderful M$ caching feature that keep clicking the whole Internet for you.
Join the botnet close to your home now, all free today thanks to IE9!
Remember, iexplore.exe will be always there for you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342353</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345065</id>
	<title>Re:We allowed them in</title>
	<author>chromas</author>
	<datestamp>1245182880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You could just take the garden away and die for the people's destructiveness. Also, blame it on Mozilla and Python.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You could just take the garden away and die for the people 's destructiveness .
Also , blame it on Mozilla and Python .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You could just take the garden away and die for the people's destructiveness.
Also, blame it on Mozilla and Python.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343101</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344407</id>
	<title>Re:When will this end?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245088380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The internet just makes it easier to tally the grim statistics.</p></div><p>I wonder how long that will last? Because I am pretty sure almost no one wants to see that.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The internet just makes it easier to tally the grim statistics.I wonder how long that will last ?
Because I am pretty sure almost no one wants to see that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The internet just makes it easier to tally the grim statistics.I wonder how long that will last?
Because I am pretty sure almost no one wants to see that.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342635</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28350645</id>
	<title>Re:Aren't they all?</title>
	<author>2obvious4u</author>
	<datestamp>1245178500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I click on the ads at <a href="http://www.penny-arcade.com/" title="penny-arcade.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.penny-arcade.com/</a> [penny-arcade.com] they do a good job with their ads and I want to support their site, not only that, the products they advertise are usually pretty cool.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I click on the ads at http : //www.penny-arcade.com/ [ penny-arcade.com ] they do a good job with their ads and I want to support their site , not only that , the products they advertise are usually pretty cool .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I click on the ads at http://www.penny-arcade.com/ [penny-arcade.com] they do a good job with their ads and I want to support their site, not only that, the products they advertise are usually pretty cool.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342543</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343143</id>
	<title>How this works...</title>
	<author>binaryseraph</author>
	<datestamp>1245076020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"The labeling of the fake ad sellers as hackers is pretty bogus; there's no hacking involved. Simply sign up for one of these networks, create your fake site, put up another company's creative, and you're good to go."
<br> <br>
well yes and no. What we are dealing with here is a combination of both hacker (as i will describe shortly) and con artist (which i will also describe shortly). Its not quite as easy as you think...<br> <br>

This problem extends well beyond ad networks- but first lets take a look at the ad serving software. The primary databases used for serving ads are DART (now owned by google), Atlas (now owned by microsoft), Zedo and OAS. Ads are uploaded into these databases in a variety of formats. Typically limited to Jpegs, gifs,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.swfs as well as what is refered to as "rich media" which is often a few lines of code pasted into a file (usualy the code sources to a javascript) that serves up a redirected ad from another location. When these files are uploaded the database scans for malware that could potentially harm a computer system. More often than not these files are automatically turned off when the ad server detects an issue and emails the network administrator of the issue (presuming that the database of malicious software has been updated by the service provider a la google, microsoft, etc). Yes, on occasion something sneaks through.
<br> <br> <br> Now onto how media is bought and sold. Typically when a site is approached for a request for ads, the publisher will ask the "agency" or "network" for a credit check. This is wear the mechanics break down- more often than not. Salespeople, especially green ones who (like most sales people) are both anxious to close a deal on remnant space AND are not aware of the ad serving technology and the potential for malicious intent, will cut corners and get the ads up. When these ads come in, they are loaded into the server- 99\% of the time as real properly functioning ads. They click to the right locations and pass through the ad serving security services. A couple of days later, as the ad has been serving fine, the redirected urls (typically something like ads.somewebsite.com/324234/adserver/creative.js) have their<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.js file swapped out with the malicious software. Since this file has already passed the initial security check- it is not always scanned again for any potential exploits etc.<br> <br> <br>

So- the quick solution is having ad networks and publishers take accountability for their sales people. It does not take much effort to find out if a "agency" can be trusted. I had one company recently try to pass of malicious ads but we traced their address back to a pizza parlor in LA (obviously a fake) after realizing no credit check was run. Second, and most important will be the methods of security taking by the major ad publishing softwares. Unfortunately, if you know anything about working with ad servers- critical updates move about as fast as html5 development (sllloooowww).</htmltext>
<tokenext>" The labeling of the fake ad sellers as hackers is pretty bogus ; there 's no hacking involved .
Simply sign up for one of these networks , create your fake site , put up another company 's creative , and you 're good to go .
" well yes and no .
What we are dealing with here is a combination of both hacker ( as i will describe shortly ) and con artist ( which i will also describe shortly ) .
Its not quite as easy as you think.. . This problem extends well beyond ad networks- but first lets take a look at the ad serving software .
The primary databases used for serving ads are DART ( now owned by google ) , Atlas ( now owned by microsoft ) , Zedo and OAS .
Ads are uploaded into these databases in a variety of formats .
Typically limited to Jpegs , gifs , .swfs as well as what is refered to as " rich media " which is often a few lines of code pasted into a file ( usualy the code sources to a javascript ) that serves up a redirected ad from another location .
When these files are uploaded the database scans for malware that could potentially harm a computer system .
More often than not these files are automatically turned off when the ad server detects an issue and emails the network administrator of the issue ( presuming that the database of malicious software has been updated by the service provider a la google , microsoft , etc ) .
Yes , on occasion something sneaks through .
Now onto how media is bought and sold .
Typically when a site is approached for a request for ads , the publisher will ask the " agency " or " network " for a credit check .
This is wear the mechanics break down- more often than not .
Salespeople , especially green ones who ( like most sales people ) are both anxious to close a deal on remnant space AND are not aware of the ad serving technology and the potential for malicious intent , will cut corners and get the ads up .
When these ads come in , they are loaded into the server- 99 \ % of the time as real properly functioning ads .
They click to the right locations and pass through the ad serving security services .
A couple of days later , as the ad has been serving fine , the redirected urls ( typically something like ads.somewebsite.com/324234/adserver/creative.js ) have their .js file swapped out with the malicious software .
Since this file has already passed the initial security check- it is not always scanned again for any potential exploits etc .
So- the quick solution is having ad networks and publishers take accountability for their sales people .
It does not take much effort to find out if a " agency " can be trusted .
I had one company recently try to pass of malicious ads but we traced their address back to a pizza parlor in LA ( obviously a fake ) after realizing no credit check was run .
Second , and most important will be the methods of security taking by the major ad publishing softwares .
Unfortunately , if you know anything about working with ad servers- critical updates move about as fast as html5 development ( sllloooowww ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The labeling of the fake ad sellers as hackers is pretty bogus; there's no hacking involved.
Simply sign up for one of these networks, create your fake site, put up another company's creative, and you're good to go.
"
 
well yes and no.
What we are dealing with here is a combination of both hacker (as i will describe shortly) and con artist (which i will also describe shortly).
Its not quite as easy as you think... 

This problem extends well beyond ad networks- but first lets take a look at the ad serving software.
The primary databases used for serving ads are DART (now owned by google), Atlas (now owned by microsoft), Zedo and OAS.
Ads are uploaded into these databases in a variety of formats.
Typically limited to Jpegs, gifs, .swfs as well as what is refered to as "rich media" which is often a few lines of code pasted into a file (usualy the code sources to a javascript) that serves up a redirected ad from another location.
When these files are uploaded the database scans for malware that could potentially harm a computer system.
More often than not these files are automatically turned off when the ad server detects an issue and emails the network administrator of the issue (presuming that the database of malicious software has been updated by the service provider a la google, microsoft, etc).
Yes, on occasion something sneaks through.
Now onto how media is bought and sold.
Typically when a site is approached for a request for ads, the publisher will ask the "agency" or "network" for a credit check.
This is wear the mechanics break down- more often than not.
Salespeople, especially green ones who (like most sales people) are both anxious to close a deal on remnant space AND are not aware of the ad serving technology and the potential for malicious intent, will cut corners and get the ads up.
When these ads come in, they are loaded into the server- 99\% of the time as real properly functioning ads.
They click to the right locations and pass through the ad serving security services.
A couple of days later, as the ad has been serving fine, the redirected urls (typically something like ads.somewebsite.com/324234/adserver/creative.js) have their .js file swapped out with the malicious software.
Since this file has already passed the initial security check- it is not always scanned again for any potential exploits etc.
So- the quick solution is having ad networks and publishers take accountability for their sales people.
It does not take much effort to find out if a "agency" can be trusted.
I had one company recently try to pass of malicious ads but we traced their address back to a pizza parlor in LA (obviously a fake) after realizing no credit check was run.
Second, and most important will be the methods of security taking by the major ad publishing softwares.
Unfortunately, if you know anything about working with ad servers- critical updates move about as fast as html5 development (sllloooowww).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343373</id>
	<title>Re:what ads?</title>
	<author>Kranerian</author>
	<datestamp>1245077940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm never going to click on ads whether or not I can see them. There's no reason to have them sitting around annoying me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm never going to click on ads whether or not I can see them .
There 's no reason to have them sitting around annoying me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm never going to click on ads whether or not I can see them.
There's no reason to have them sitting around annoying me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342501</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342539</id>
	<title>PC huh?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245071100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"direct users to a Web site where harmful programs would be downloaded to their computers, says Stephen Wellman, director of community and content for Ziff Davis."<br><br>Do these affect Linux or Apple PC's? I'm guessing it's the good old Windows<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.exe and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.dll again, an exclusive Windows issue disguised as a "PC" issue.<br><br>Why is it that areas where Microsoft want to portray a large market share (either exaggerated by reports from shills or real) they have the words Microsoft and Windows all over the stories, yet when it's something they have an almost 100\% market share on (malware compatibility and vulnerability), there's no mention of either Microsoft or Windows; it's all just PCs.<br><br>FAO the Microsoft Astroturfers, it was a rhetorical question but feel free to do your job and mod me down for pointing out the obvious. Wait, Ziff Davis does ring a familiar bell, hmmmmm.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" direct users to a Web site where harmful programs would be downloaded to their computers , says Stephen Wellman , director of community and content for Ziff Davis .
" Do these affect Linux or Apple PC 's ?
I 'm guessing it 's the good old Windows .exe and .dll again , an exclusive Windows issue disguised as a " PC " issue.Why is it that areas where Microsoft want to portray a large market share ( either exaggerated by reports from shills or real ) they have the words Microsoft and Windows all over the stories , yet when it 's something they have an almost 100 \ % market share on ( malware compatibility and vulnerability ) , there 's no mention of either Microsoft or Windows ; it 's all just PCs.FAO the Microsoft Astroturfers , it was a rhetorical question but feel free to do your job and mod me down for pointing out the obvious .
Wait , Ziff Davis does ring a familiar bell , hmmmmm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"direct users to a Web site where harmful programs would be downloaded to their computers, says Stephen Wellman, director of community and content for Ziff Davis.
"Do these affect Linux or Apple PC's?
I'm guessing it's the good old Windows .exe and .dll again, an exclusive Windows issue disguised as a "PC" issue.Why is it that areas where Microsoft want to portray a large market share (either exaggerated by reports from shills or real) they have the words Microsoft and Windows all over the stories, yet when it's something they have an almost 100\% market share on (malware compatibility and vulnerability), there's no mention of either Microsoft or Windows; it's all just PCs.FAO the Microsoft Astroturfers, it was a rhetorical question but feel free to do your job and mod me down for pointing out the obvious.
Wait, Ziff Davis does ring a familiar bell, hmmmmm.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28346607</id>
	<title>Re:Aren't they all?</title>
	<author>matt328</author>
	<datestamp>1245161160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>People actually see ads?</htmltext>
<tokenext>People actually see ads ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People actually see ads?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342543</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343413</id>
	<title>Re:When will this end?</title>
	<author>AnalPerfume</author>
	<datestamp>1245078360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Every liar, cheat, grifter is taking their shot at fucking up the sandbox we all play in."<br><br>You forgot greedy corporations, they arguably do more damage than the rest put together since they have the power, influence and money to really fuck it up for us mere mortals.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Every liar , cheat , grifter is taking their shot at fucking up the sandbox we all play in .
" You forgot greedy corporations , they arguably do more damage than the rest put together since they have the power , influence and money to really fuck it up for us mere mortals .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Every liar, cheat, grifter is taking their shot at fucking up the sandbox we all play in.
"You forgot greedy corporations, they arguably do more damage than the rest put together since they have the power, influence and money to really fuck it up for us mere mortals.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345483</id>
	<title>Of course they are. That's why it's called...</title>
	<author>Klistvud</author>
	<datestamp>1245145380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... "viral" marketing! Oh, honey, trust me, I'm not infected. I'll lick your abs if you click my ads!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... " viral " marketing !
Oh , honey , trust me , I 'm not infected .
I 'll lick your abs if you click my ads !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... "viral" marketing!
Oh, honey, trust me, I'm not infected.
I'll lick your abs if you click my ads!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342281</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28351429</id>
	<title>Re:When will this end?</title>
	<author>TheQuantumShift</author>
	<datestamp>1245181440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>While the <b>world</b> is a wonderful thing; I can't help but wonder where did all of the douchebags come from. Every liar, cheat, grifter is taking their shot at fucking up the sandbox we all play in.
<br> <br>
Fixed that for you.</htmltext>
<tokenext>While the world is a wonderful thing ; I ca n't help but wonder where did all of the douchebags come from .
Every liar , cheat , grifter is taking their shot at fucking up the sandbox we all play in .
Fixed that for you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While the world is a wonderful thing; I can't help but wonder where did all of the douchebags come from.
Every liar, cheat, grifter is taking their shot at fucking up the sandbox we all play in.
Fixed that for you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28354545</id>
	<title>Re:When will this end?</title>
	<author>Ironica</author>
	<datestamp>1245151140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Our internet is still there.</p><p>Usenet, telnet, bash, text-based email, html without plugins, privoxy, linux. It's all still there.</p></div><p>I miss Clarinet.</p><p>And it's funny how we've come full-circle: first, we had shell accounts.  Back then, my boyfriend (now my ex-husband) was sooooo impressed when I had an account on a school network where EVERY computer had ITS OWN IP address and was DIRECTLY ON THE INTERNET.</p><p>Then we all got PPP/SLIP, and everyone was directly on the internet.</p><p>Now, though, I run Linux at home, or at work I SSH to my web host or whatever, so that I can have that handy-dandy shell account available when I want it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Our internet is still there.Usenet , telnet , bash , text-based email , html without plugins , privoxy , linux .
It 's all still there.I miss Clarinet.And it 's funny how we 've come full-circle : first , we had shell accounts .
Back then , my boyfriend ( now my ex-husband ) was sooooo impressed when I had an account on a school network where EVERY computer had ITS OWN IP address and was DIRECTLY ON THE INTERNET.Then we all got PPP/SLIP , and everyone was directly on the internet.Now , though , I run Linux at home , or at work I SSH to my web host or whatever , so that I can have that handy-dandy shell account available when I want it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Our internet is still there.Usenet, telnet, bash, text-based email, html without plugins, privoxy, linux.
It's all still there.I miss Clarinet.And it's funny how we've come full-circle: first, we had shell accounts.
Back then, my boyfriend (now my ex-husband) was sooooo impressed when I had an account on a school network where EVERY computer had ITS OWN IP address and was DIRECTLY ON THE INTERNET.Then we all got PPP/SLIP, and everyone was directly on the internet.Now, though, I run Linux at home, or at work I SSH to my web host or whatever, so that I can have that handy-dandy shell account available when I want it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344029</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28365513</id>
	<title>The person who modded you down's an ignorant troll</title>
	<author>MEK\_LoveBug</author>
	<datestamp>1245229320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>See my subject and this Oliver Day's SECURITYFOCUS.COM article titled "Resurrecting the Killfile" by Oliver Day, 2009-02-04

<a href="http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491" title="securityfocus.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491</a> [securityfocus.com]

It seems that security experts tend to agree with you apk. Whoever modded you down is nothing more than some ignorant troll.</htmltext>
<tokenext>See my subject and this Oliver Day 's SECURITYFOCUS.COM article titled " Resurrecting the Killfile " by Oliver Day , 2009-02-04 http : //www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491 [ securityfocus.com ] It seems that security experts tend to agree with you apk .
Whoever modded you down is nothing more than some ignorant troll .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>See my subject and this Oliver Day's SECURITYFOCUS.COM article titled "Resurrecting the Killfile" by Oliver Day, 2009-02-04

http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491 [securityfocus.com]

It seems that security experts tend to agree with you apk.
Whoever modded you down is nothing more than some ignorant troll.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28365685</id>
	<title>Whoever modded parent down is an ignorant troll</title>
	<author>MEK\_LoveBug</author>
	<datestamp>1245230220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>See my subject and this Oliver Day's SECURITYFOCUS.COM article titled "Resurrecting the Killfile" by Oliver Day, 2009-02-04

<a href="http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491" title="securityfocus.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491</a> [securityfocus.com]

It seems that security experts tend to agree with you apk. Whoever modded you down is nothing more than some ignorant troll.</htmltext>
<tokenext>See my subject and this Oliver Day 's SECURITYFOCUS.COM article titled " Resurrecting the Killfile " by Oliver Day , 2009-02-04 http : //www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491 [ securityfocus.com ] It seems that security experts tend to agree with you apk .
Whoever modded you down is nothing more than some ignorant troll .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>See my subject and this Oliver Day's SECURITYFOCUS.COM article titled "Resurrecting the Killfile" by Oliver Day, 2009-02-04

http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491 [securityfocus.com]

It seems that security experts tend to agree with you apk.
Whoever modded you down is nothing more than some ignorant troll.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345291</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343853</id>
	<title>Re:And this is why...</title>
	<author>indi0144</author>
	<datestamp>1245082380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't use ABP I prefer No-Script + SpyBot + Anal host file FTW. But, you know, whats the ABP share inside the 20\% share that Firefox has in the browser market? I think this warning is more relevant for that guy that supports a shitload of corporate drones that use IE6 because of some random corp application.<br><br>You don't have that little something thing called ABP there, because you know that Joe Accountant IS GOING to click on those "Lacoste SALE 60\% OFF in everything!!!1!one" Would you be unaffected when all you neighbor's botnet traffic makes your gamez lag? zOMG it's a net not a collection of private islands!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't use ABP I prefer No-Script + SpyBot + Anal host file FTW .
But , you know , whats the ABP share inside the 20 \ % share that Firefox has in the browser market ?
I think this warning is more relevant for that guy that supports a shitload of corporate drones that use IE6 because of some random corp application.You do n't have that little something thing called ABP there , because you know that Joe Accountant IS GOING to click on those " Lacoste SALE 60 \ % OFF in everything ! !
! 1 ! one " Would you be unaffected when all you neighbor 's botnet traffic makes your gamez lag ?
zOMG it 's a net not a collection of private islands !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't use ABP I prefer No-Script + SpyBot + Anal host file FTW.
But, you know, whats the ABP share inside the 20\% share that Firefox has in the browser market?
I think this warning is more relevant for that guy that supports a shitload of corporate drones that use IE6 because of some random corp application.You don't have that little something thing called ABP there, because you know that Joe Accountant IS GOING to click on those "Lacoste SALE 60\% OFF in everything!!
!1!one" Would you be unaffected when all you neighbor's botnet traffic makes your gamez lag?
zOMG it's a net not a collection of private islands!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342517</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342635</id>
	<title>Re:When will this end?</title>
	<author>Sponge Bath</author>
	<datestamp>1245071760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I feel your pain. The unfolding truth seems to be that they were always there and humanity really sucks for the most part. The internet just makes it easier to tally the grim statistics.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I feel your pain .
The unfolding truth seems to be that they were always there and humanity really sucks for the most part .
The internet just makes it easier to tally the grim statistics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I feel your pain.
The unfolding truth seems to be that they were always there and humanity really sucks for the most part.
The internet just makes it easier to tally the grim statistics.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343479</id>
	<title>Re:We allowed them in</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245078900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Personally, I wonder if it was a good idea to unlock those doors and pave some ways.</p></div></blockquote><p>
I had my second thoughts about that too, then I remembered that I spent most of the weekend following <a href="http://twitter.com/persiankiwi" title="twitter.com" rel="nofollow">this guy</a> [twitter.com], or <a href="http://twitter.com/IranElection09" title="twitter.com" rel="nofollow">this guy</a> [twitter.com] or <a href="http://twitter.com/Change\_for\_Iran" title="twitter.com" rel="nofollow">this guy</a> [twitter.com] any one of whom, for the past 72 hours, were (and may still be) providing better (more factual and timely) reporting than CNN and BBC put together.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Personally , I wonder if it was a good idea to unlock those doors and pave some ways .
I had my second thoughts about that too , then I remembered that I spent most of the weekend following this guy [ twitter.com ] , or this guy [ twitter.com ] or this guy [ twitter.com ] any one of whom , for the past 72 hours , were ( and may still be ) providing better ( more factual and timely ) reporting than CNN and BBC put together .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Personally, I wonder if it was a good idea to unlock those doors and pave some ways.
I had my second thoughts about that too, then I remembered that I spent most of the weekend following this guy [twitter.com], or this guy [twitter.com] or this guy [twitter.com] any one of whom, for the past 72 hours, were (and may still be) providing better (more factual and timely) reporting than CNN and BBC put together.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343101</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28348227</id>
	<title>Re:When will this end?</title>
	<author>sorak</author>
	<datestamp>1245170460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>While the internet is a wonderful thing; I can't help but wonder where did all of the douchebags come from.
Every liar, cheat, grifter is taking their shot at fucking up the sandbox we all play in. Its all fun and games when windows users get hosed, but after awhile even that gets old.
I am just a tired old man.
It makes me sad that my poor view of humanity gets reinforced every time I turn around.</p></div><p>Let's try a thought experiment...Let's say that we took every idiot, kiddie, and naive person on earth and stuck them all in one place. Now let's call this hypothetical place "yahoo.com". If you were a conman from a third world country, or just an American conman who doesn't want to leave his house, where would you want to be?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>While the internet is a wonderful thing ; I ca n't help but wonder where did all of the douchebags come from .
Every liar , cheat , grifter is taking their shot at fucking up the sandbox we all play in .
Its all fun and games when windows users get hosed , but after awhile even that gets old .
I am just a tired old man .
It makes me sad that my poor view of humanity gets reinforced every time I turn around.Let 's try a thought experiment...Let 's say that we took every idiot , kiddie , and naive person on earth and stuck them all in one place .
Now let 's call this hypothetical place " yahoo.com " .
If you were a conman from a third world country , or just an American conman who does n't want to leave his house , where would you want to be ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While the internet is a wonderful thing; I can't help but wonder where did all of the douchebags come from.
Every liar, cheat, grifter is taking their shot at fucking up the sandbox we all play in.
Its all fun and games when windows users get hosed, but after awhile even that gets old.
I am just a tired old man.
It makes me sad that my poor view of humanity gets reinforced every time I turn around.Let's try a thought experiment...Let's say that we took every idiot, kiddie, and naive person on earth and stuck them all in one place.
Now let's call this hypothetical place "yahoo.com".
If you were a conman from a third world country, or just an American conman who doesn't want to leave his house, where would you want to be?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345399</id>
	<title>Re:The Next Ad You Click May Be a Virus</title>
	<author>StiLL-TrAiNinG</author>
	<datestamp>1245144300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://xkcd.com/570/" title="xkcd.com" rel="nofollow">http://xkcd.com/570/</a> [xkcd.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //xkcd.com/570/ [ xkcd.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://xkcd.com/570/ [xkcd.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342387</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344265</id>
	<title>Re:We allowed them in</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245086520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Personally, I wonder if it was a good idea to unlock those doors and pave some ways.</p></div><p>Yes, because that is what brought the innovation.  We geeks could only take it so far before needing some help (i.e. money and resources).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Personally , I wonder if it was a good idea to unlock those doors and pave some ways.Yes , because that is what brought the innovation .
We geeks could only take it so far before needing some help ( i.e .
money and resources ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Personally, I wonder if it was a good idea to unlock those doors and pave some ways.Yes, because that is what brought the innovation.
We geeks could only take it so far before needing some help (i.e.
money and resources).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343101</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344659</id>
	<title>What ads?</title>
	<author>kheldan</author>
	<datestamp>1245090900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>All the more reason to use things like Adblock Plus, FLashblock, and NoScript (if you're using Firefox that is). I haven't seen an ad on my home or work computers in <i>months</i>.</htmltext>
<tokenext>All the more reason to use things like Adblock Plus , FLashblock , and NoScript ( if you 're using Firefox that is ) .
I have n't seen an ad on my home or work computers in months .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All the more reason to use things like Adblock Plus, FLashblock, and NoScript (if you're using Firefox that is).
I haven't seen an ad on my home or work computers in months.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28371267</id>
	<title>Re:Very simple asnwer</title>
	<author>helpacoder</author>
	<datestamp>1245320220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good luck with that at times when the HTML is so obsfucated you can't immediately tell what the destination link is as it is buried under some Javascript stored in a file or whatnot.</p><p>My 'favorites' are viewable images served up at 43-byte<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.GIF files when you right click them to get the properties -- People abusing(?) the HTML standard to try to hide their content from others so they can't copy it.  If you know what you are doing, that is pointless--the content that is seen and wanted WILL get saved for later (private noncommercial?) use and enjoyment.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good luck with that at times when the HTML is so obsfucated you ca n't immediately tell what the destination link is as it is buried under some Javascript stored in a file or whatnot.My 'favorites ' are viewable images served up at 43-byte .GIF files when you right click them to get the properties -- People abusing ( ?
) the HTML standard to try to hide their content from others so they ca n't copy it .
If you know what you are doing , that is pointless--the content that is seen and wanted WILL get saved for later ( private noncommercial ?
) use and enjoyment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good luck with that at times when the HTML is so obsfucated you can't immediately tell what the destination link is as it is buried under some Javascript stored in a file or whatnot.My 'favorites' are viewable images served up at 43-byte .GIF files when you right click them to get the properties -- People abusing(?
) the HTML standard to try to hide their content from others so they can't copy it.
If you know what you are doing, that is pointless--the content that is seen and wanted WILL get saved for later (private noncommercial?
) use and enjoyment.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342493</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345175</id>
	<title>Mastercard and Visa</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245184440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Isn't most of the malware due to Mastercard and Visa (and others) being quite happy to take their percentage of the money that the grifters, crooks and horse oil salesmen take in from the pillocks that buy their erectile dysfunction pills from some dodgy Interwebby site.<p>

If they started enforcing some rules and ensuring that the brainless pillock with a small dick and a credit card can only buy stuff from legitimate verified businesses then all the shite in the way of wonky banner ads, malware, scam and phishing sites would disappear overnight.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't most of the malware due to Mastercard and Visa ( and others ) being quite happy to take their percentage of the money that the grifters , crooks and horse oil salesmen take in from the pillocks that buy their erectile dysfunction pills from some dodgy Interwebby site .
If they started enforcing some rules and ensuring that the brainless pillock with a small dick and a credit card can only buy stuff from legitimate verified businesses then all the shite in the way of wonky banner ads , malware , scam and phishing sites would disappear overnight .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't most of the malware due to Mastercard and Visa (and others) being quite happy to take their percentage of the money that the grifters, crooks and horse oil salesmen take in from the pillocks that buy their erectile dysfunction pills from some dodgy Interwebby site.
If they started enforcing some rules and ensuring that the brainless pillock with a small dick and a credit card can only buy stuff from legitimate verified businesses then all the shite in the way of wonky banner ads, malware, scam and phishing sites would disappear overnight.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343809</id>
	<title>Re:what ads?</title>
	<author>mrbcs</author>
	<datestamp>1245082140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is my favourite piece of sanity:

<a href="http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm" title="mvps.org">http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm</a> [mvps.org]

One hosts file, one reboot, no more problems anywhere. Shit google ads don't even work. They may show up, but you can't click em.
I just got tired of waiting for shit ads to load. I never clicked em, so I'm actually saving the sites money by not having to serve me an ad I'll never click. This also stops tons of phishing sites and other malware.

I can even use ie and opera and don't see ads.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is my favourite piece of sanity : http : //www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm [ mvps.org ] One hosts file , one reboot , no more problems anywhere .
Shit google ads do n't even work .
They may show up , but you ca n't click em .
I just got tired of waiting for shit ads to load .
I never clicked em , so I 'm actually saving the sites money by not having to serve me an ad I 'll never click .
This also stops tons of phishing sites and other malware .
I can even use ie and opera and do n't see ads .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is my favourite piece of sanity:

http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm [mvps.org]

One hosts file, one reboot, no more problems anywhere.
Shit google ads don't even work.
They may show up, but you can't click em.
I just got tired of waiting for shit ads to load.
I never clicked em, so I'm actually saving the sites money by not having to serve me an ad I'll never click.
This also stops tons of phishing sites and other malware.
I can even use ie and opera and don't see ads.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342763</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344193</id>
	<title>Ads? What are ads?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245085680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't see any ads because I've got Firefox with Adblock Plus and Flashblock. In my case it's just a preemptive step to allow me to be able to read the page I'm visiting. Most pages are slathered with ads and the actual content - what I'm there to see - is crammed into a tiny corner of the page. With all the blinking, flashing (and sometimes talking) ads and my borderline epilepsy I would never be able to concentrate on the content.</p><p>I know this deprives the site operators of revenue but frankly I don't care. If you're enough of an asshole to put twenty ads on your page to compete with my attention for your content I don't mind shafting you. And I block Google's ads on principle. I don't really want Google to know what I'm doing every minute I'm on the Internet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't see any ads because I 've got Firefox with Adblock Plus and Flashblock .
In my case it 's just a preemptive step to allow me to be able to read the page I 'm visiting .
Most pages are slathered with ads and the actual content - what I 'm there to see - is crammed into a tiny corner of the page .
With all the blinking , flashing ( and sometimes talking ) ads and my borderline epilepsy I would never be able to concentrate on the content.I know this deprives the site operators of revenue but frankly I do n't care .
If you 're enough of an asshole to put twenty ads on your page to compete with my attention for your content I do n't mind shafting you .
And I block Google 's ads on principle .
I do n't really want Google to know what I 'm doing every minute I 'm on the Internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't see any ads because I've got Firefox with Adblock Plus and Flashblock.
In my case it's just a preemptive step to allow me to be able to read the page I'm visiting.
Most pages are slathered with ads and the actual content - what I'm there to see - is crammed into a tiny corner of the page.
With all the blinking, flashing (and sometimes talking) ads and my borderline epilepsy I would never be able to concentrate on the content.I know this deprives the site operators of revenue but frankly I don't care.
If you're enough of an asshole to put twenty ads on your page to compete with my attention for your content I don't mind shafting you.
And I block Google's ads on principle.
I don't really want Google to know what I'm doing every minute I'm on the Internet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343435</id>
	<title>Re:When will this end?</title>
	<author>bit01</author>
	<datestamp>1245078540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <em>I can't help but wonder where did all of the douchebags come from.</em> </p><p>It's simple statistics. In any large group of people, and on the internet we're talking billions, even if most people are wonderful it is a statistical certainty that a small fraction will be douchebags. Those douchebags have visibility out of all proportion to their numbers. e.g. <a href="http://consumerist.com/5291434/meet-the-people-behind-the-car-warranty-robocallers" title="consumerist.com">The 4 people who were responsible for 3 billion robocalls</a> [consumerist.com].</p><p>In addition, in the real world it's usually obvious when you're dealing with an possibly unsocialized child. On the net, not so much.</p><p>---</p><p> <em>The USA is &lt;5\% of the world's population. It is statistically insignificant.</em> </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't help but wonder where did all of the douchebags come from .
It 's simple statistics .
In any large group of people , and on the internet we 're talking billions , even if most people are wonderful it is a statistical certainty that a small fraction will be douchebags .
Those douchebags have visibility out of all proportion to their numbers .
e.g. The 4 people who were responsible for 3 billion robocalls [ consumerist.com ] .In addition , in the real world it 's usually obvious when you 're dealing with an possibly unsocialized child .
On the net , not so much.--- The USA is</tokentext>
<sentencetext> I can't help but wonder where did all of the douchebags come from.
It's simple statistics.
In any large group of people, and on the internet we're talking billions, even if most people are wonderful it is a statistical certainty that a small fraction will be douchebags.
Those douchebags have visibility out of all proportion to their numbers.
e.g. The 4 people who were responsible for 3 billion robocalls [consumerist.com].In addition, in the real world it's usually obvious when you're dealing with an possibly unsocialized child.
On the net, not so much.--- The USA is  </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344433</id>
	<title>Re:what ads?</title>
	<author>elashish14</author>
	<datestamp>1245088620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So I guess this was the case, back in the day. I remember those days, even though I was a wee one. But after installing a new system from scratch, customizing Firefox is one of the many arduous tasks that must be done (sure, it's as easy as just copying your ~/, but it still has to be done).</p><p>So I said forget it and just went along my way without doing it once and a couple months later, I still haven't installed it. Times have changed - now the only ads that I see are nothing like the ones of old. And you know what? I like it this way cause you know, if I see the ad of a company that I don't like (hint: it rhymes with Shmicrosoft), I click it knowing that said company will lose a couple fractions of a cent. And all feels good in the world.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So I guess this was the case , back in the day .
I remember those days , even though I was a wee one .
But after installing a new system from scratch , customizing Firefox is one of the many arduous tasks that must be done ( sure , it 's as easy as just copying your ~ / , but it still has to be done ) .So I said forget it and just went along my way without doing it once and a couple months later , I still have n't installed it .
Times have changed - now the only ads that I see are nothing like the ones of old .
And you know what ?
I like it this way cause you know , if I see the ad of a company that I do n't like ( hint : it rhymes with Shmicrosoft ) , I click it knowing that said company will lose a couple fractions of a cent .
And all feels good in the world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So I guess this was the case, back in the day.
I remember those days, even though I was a wee one.
But after installing a new system from scratch, customizing Firefox is one of the many arduous tasks that must be done (sure, it's as easy as just copying your ~/, but it still has to be done).So I said forget it and just went along my way without doing it once and a couple months later, I still haven't installed it.
Times have changed - now the only ads that I see are nothing like the ones of old.
And you know what?
I like it this way cause you know, if I see the ad of a company that I don't like (hint: it rhymes with Shmicrosoft), I click it knowing that said company will lose a couple fractions of a cent.
And all feels good in the world.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342763</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342303</id>
	<title>About time someone made a report on this.</title>
	<author>Girtych</author>
	<datestamp>1245069480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>My coworkers and I have been dealing with AntiVirus XP and its variants for the past few months, and it seems to infect computers in exactly this way. Badvertisements. It's hardly a new phenomenon, but it's nice to see the press pick up on it. Better late than never.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My coworkers and I have been dealing with AntiVirus XP and its variants for the past few months , and it seems to infect computers in exactly this way .
Badvertisements. It 's hardly a new phenomenon , but it 's nice to see the press pick up on it .
Better late than never .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My coworkers and I have been dealing with AntiVirus XP and its variants for the past few months, and it seems to infect computers in exactly this way.
Badvertisements. It's hardly a new phenomenon, but it's nice to see the press pick up on it.
Better late than never.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342517</id>
	<title>And this is why...</title>
	<author>FunPika</author>
	<datestamp>1245070980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>We have a little something called Ad Block Plus.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We have a little something called Ad Block Plus .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We have a little something called Ad Block Plus.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343025</id>
	<title>Re:When will this end?</title>
	<author>SkyDude</author>
	<datestamp>1245074940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p><i>Well here's a tip: those viruses only run on one platform.</i></p></div> </blockquote><p>OK, so next week, all Microsoft OSes are made illegal, and users have just thirty days to switch to another. What's your pleasure - Mac or Linux?</p><p>So everyone has changed to one or the other. Wanna take a bet how long it will take for viruses and exploits to start showing up in large quantities?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well here 's a tip : those viruses only run on one platform .
OK , so next week , all Microsoft OSes are made illegal , and users have just thirty days to switch to another .
What 's your pleasure - Mac or Linux ? So everyone has changed to one or the other .
Wan na take a bet how long it will take for viruses and exploits to start showing up in large quantities ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well here's a tip: those viruses only run on one platform.
OK, so next week, all Microsoft OSes are made illegal, and users have just thirty days to switch to another.
What's your pleasure - Mac or Linux?So everyone has changed to one or the other.
Wanna take a bet how long it will take for viruses and exploits to start showing up in large quantities?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28356773</id>
	<title>Re:what ads?</title>
	<author>mrbcs</author>
	<datestamp>1245164880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Turn off dns. Start, Run, services.msc, DNS Client - &gt; disable.  Reboot. Problem solved.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Turn off dns .
Start , Run , services.msc , DNS Client - &gt; disable .
Reboot. Problem solved .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Turn off dns.
Start, Run, services.msc, DNS Client - &gt; disable.
Reboot. Problem solved.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345229</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343501</id>
	<title>... And this is news how?</title>
	<author>znerk</author>
	<datestamp>1245079080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To be honest, "fake" ads dragging you to a hateful, malware-spewing website is rather tame. The <i>real</i> fun was the banner ads that infected you directly, simply by viewing the flash.</p><p>*Sigh*<br>Just another reason to use adblock and noscript.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To be honest , " fake " ads dragging you to a hateful , malware-spewing website is rather tame .
The real fun was the banner ads that infected you directly , simply by viewing the flash .
* Sigh * Just another reason to use adblock and noscript .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To be honest, "fake" ads dragging you to a hateful, malware-spewing website is rather tame.
The real fun was the banner ads that infected you directly, simply by viewing the flash.
*Sigh*Just another reason to use adblock and noscript.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343215</id>
	<title>Re:what ads?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245076560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Back in the old days (cue my oldest saying "when folks had 8-tracks and dinosaurs ruled the earth") ads were just a few lines of pretty text or a picture</p><p>Back in the old days, the internet did not HAVE ads.  Let alone pictures, unless you uudecoded them yourself.</p><p>Sheesh.  Noobs.</p><p>(It also didn't have Microsoft OS PCs on it.  I wonder if these things are related).</p><p>Eternal September.  Now get off my lawn!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Back in the old days ( cue my oldest saying " when folks had 8-tracks and dinosaurs ruled the earth " ) ads were just a few lines of pretty text or a pictureBack in the old days , the internet did not HAVE ads .
Let alone pictures , unless you uudecoded them yourself.Sheesh .
Noobs. ( It also did n't have Microsoft OS PCs on it .
I wonder if these things are related ) .Eternal September .
Now get off my lawn !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Back in the old days (cue my oldest saying "when folks had 8-tracks and dinosaurs ruled the earth") ads were just a few lines of pretty text or a pictureBack in the old days, the internet did not HAVE ads.
Let alone pictures, unless you uudecoded them yourself.Sheesh.
Noobs.(It also didn't have Microsoft OS PCs on it.
I wonder if these things are related).Eternal September.
Now get off my lawn!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342763</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345967</id>
	<title>Re:When will this end?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245153660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>While the internet is a wonderful thing; I can't help but wonder where did all of the douchebags come from.<br>Every liar, cheat, grifter is taking their shot at fucking up the sandbox we all play in.</p></div><p>The douchebags were always there, but it's easier to exhibit antisocial behaviour when you don't have to look the other person in the face. For the same reason some people turn into assholes when they're driving their car. Those people need constant correction to stay decent. In contexts with enough social interaction they generally don't go as far as in situations without it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>While the internet is a wonderful thing ; I ca n't help but wonder where did all of the douchebags come from.Every liar , cheat , grifter is taking their shot at fucking up the sandbox we all play in.The douchebags were always there , but it 's easier to exhibit antisocial behaviour when you do n't have to look the other person in the face .
For the same reason some people turn into assholes when they 're driving their car .
Those people need constant correction to stay decent .
In contexts with enough social interaction they generally do n't go as far as in situations without it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While the internet is a wonderful thing; I can't help but wonder where did all of the douchebags come from.Every liar, cheat, grifter is taking their shot at fucking up the sandbox we all play in.The douchebags were always there, but it's easier to exhibit antisocial behaviour when you don't have to look the other person in the face.
For the same reason some people turn into assholes when they're driving their car.
Those people need constant correction to stay decent.
In contexts with enough social interaction they generally don't go as far as in situations without it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345061</id>
	<title>Re:what ads?</title>
	<author>LKM</author>
	<datestamp>1245182880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a pretty simple setup. I block all Flash, but otherwise allow ads. I don't block Flash because I want to block Flash ads, I block it because it's almost always annoying and pointless and crashing my computer or slowing it down, regardless of whether it is an ad or not. The fact that Flash ads are blocked is collateral damage.</p><p>And I've found that I don't mind most non-Flash ads. I barely ever click on any (save for Google search results), but I don't mind them 99\% of the time. And if I do mind them, I just close the window and find the same content on a different site.</p><p>So here's a simple rule: If you want me to see your ad, don't use Flash.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a pretty simple setup .
I block all Flash , but otherwise allow ads .
I do n't block Flash because I want to block Flash ads , I block it because it 's almost always annoying and pointless and crashing my computer or slowing it down , regardless of whether it is an ad or not .
The fact that Flash ads are blocked is collateral damage.And I 've found that I do n't mind most non-Flash ads .
I barely ever click on any ( save for Google search results ) , but I do n't mind them 99 \ % of the time .
And if I do mind them , I just close the window and find the same content on a different site.So here 's a simple rule : If you want me to see your ad , do n't use Flash .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a pretty simple setup.
I block all Flash, but otherwise allow ads.
I don't block Flash because I want to block Flash ads, I block it because it's almost always annoying and pointless and crashing my computer or slowing it down, regardless of whether it is an ad or not.
The fact that Flash ads are blocked is collateral damage.And I've found that I don't mind most non-Flash ads.
I barely ever click on any (save for Google search results), but I don't mind them 99\% of the time.
And if I do mind them, I just close the window and find the same content on a different site.So here's a simple rule: If you want me to see your ad, don't use Flash.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342763</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343163</id>
	<title>Re:Very simple asnwer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245076140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem is that simply not-clicking is not enough. While the page of a less scrupulous video-host website sits in your browser, the ads will hurl viruses at your computer and if you're lucky your antivirus will alert you. I don't know which avenue the malware exploits (and which software is responsible), but Firefox is vulnerable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is that simply not-clicking is not enough .
While the page of a less scrupulous video-host website sits in your browser , the ads will hurl viruses at your computer and if you 're lucky your antivirus will alert you .
I do n't know which avenue the malware exploits ( and which software is responsible ) , but Firefox is vulnerable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is that simply not-clicking is not enough.
While the page of a less scrupulous video-host website sits in your browser, the ads will hurl viruses at your computer and if you're lucky your antivirus will alert you.
I don't know which avenue the malware exploits (and which software is responsible), but Firefox is vulnerable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342493</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343953</id>
	<title>Well...</title>
	<author>AmigaMMC</author>
	<datestamp>1245083340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's what you get for clicking on ads. If I see something interesting I type the name of the company myself.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's what you get for clicking on ads .
If I see something interesting I type the name of the company myself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's what you get for clicking on ads.
If I see something interesting I type the name of the company myself.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28346745</id>
	<title>Re:I don't think you have to click on them</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245162240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since most ads display in iFrames, and the ads that iframe displays are iframes themselves, couldn't the last iframe be displaying an ad that's actually some HTML containing a drive-by attack?  That was the sense I got when I visited a site with infected ads, didn't click on any, and got infected anyway.</p><p>P.S.  I don't know why people are so hung up on ad block.  What's the big deal?  Pop-over/under ads are somewhat annoying, but the rest is just background noise.  Ignore it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since most ads display in iFrames , and the ads that iframe displays are iframes themselves , could n't the last iframe be displaying an ad that 's actually some HTML containing a drive-by attack ?
That was the sense I got when I visited a site with infected ads , did n't click on any , and got infected anyway.P.S .
I do n't know why people are so hung up on ad block .
What 's the big deal ?
Pop-over/under ads are somewhat annoying , but the rest is just background noise .
Ignore it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since most ads display in iFrames, and the ads that iframe displays are iframes themselves, couldn't the last iframe be displaying an ad that's actually some HTML containing a drive-by attack?
That was the sense I got when I visited a site with infected ads, didn't click on any, and got infected anyway.P.S.
I don't know why people are so hung up on ad block.
What's the big deal?
Pop-over/under ads are somewhat annoying, but the rest is just background noise.
Ignore it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342543</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28389847</id>
	<title>HOSTS versus Black Day in Germany by apk</title>
	<author>MEK\_LoveBug</author>
	<datestamp>1245425820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>As usual ac apk makes another solid point in favor of HOSTS files usage online, and this time, versus the tyrannical oppression going on over in germany lately regarding DNS and port 53 monitoring and how custom hosts files with hardcoded ip addresses can get users around such things as logging requests for udp port 53 here <a href="http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1270901&amp;cid=28364263" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1270901&amp;cid=28364263</a> [slashdot.org] so once more my original reply calling whoever modded apk down an ignorant trolls stands and even moreso on top of security experts like securityfocus.com's Oliver Day also noting hosts files may be the thing to return to nowadays versus dns exploits and far more as apk states in his original post here which was modded down by some troll.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As usual ac apk makes another solid point in favor of HOSTS files usage online , and this time , versus the tyrannical oppression going on over in germany lately regarding DNS and port 53 monitoring and how custom hosts files with hardcoded ip addresses can get users around such things as logging requests for udp port 53 here http : //slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 1270901&amp;cid = 28364263 [ slashdot.org ] so once more my original reply calling whoever modded apk down an ignorant trolls stands and even moreso on top of security experts like securityfocus.com 's Oliver Day also noting hosts files may be the thing to return to nowadays versus dns exploits and far more as apk states in his original post here which was modded down by some troll .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As usual ac apk makes another solid point in favor of HOSTS files usage online, and this time, versus the tyrannical oppression going on over in germany lately regarding DNS and port 53 monitoring and how custom hosts files with hardcoded ip addresses can get users around such things as logging requests for udp port 53 here http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1270901&amp;cid=28364263 [slashdot.org] so once more my original reply calling whoever modded apk down an ignorant trolls stands and even moreso on top of security experts like securityfocus.com's Oliver Day also noting hosts files may be the thing to return to nowadays versus dns exploits and far more as apk states in his original post here which was modded down by some troll.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345291</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345505</id>
	<title>Re:what ads?</title>
	<author>jonbryce</author>
	<datestamp>1245145980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The original punch the monkey ad was a Java applet.  Flash wasn't so popular in those days.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The original punch the monkey ad was a Java applet .
Flash was n't so popular in those days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The original punch the monkey ad was a Java applet.
Flash wasn't so popular in those days.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342763</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342281</id>
	<title>Aren't they all?</title>
	<author>Bob\_Who</author>
	<datestamp>1245069300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I mean really, its all just semantics (and semiotics) and we're all infected...cookie anyone?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean really , its all just semantics ( and semiotics ) and we 're all infected...cookie anyone ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean really, its all just semantics (and semiotics) and we're all infected...cookie anyone?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344515</id>
	<title>Re:yes, but...</title>
	<author>debiansid</author>
	<datestamp>1245089460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I did, the first time ever that I got access to the internet many years ago. It said that I was the 1,000,000th viewer and was eligible for some gift. Learned quickly after that &mdash; many don't.
</p><p>
In many cases ad links are positioned in a manner that they look like they're part of your content or site links. That way many don't even realize that they're clicking on ads.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I did , the first time ever that I got access to the internet many years ago .
It said that I was the 1,000,000th viewer and was eligible for some gift .
Learned quickly after that    many do n't .
In many cases ad links are positioned in a manner that they look like they 're part of your content or site links .
That way many do n't even realize that they 're clicking on ads .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I did, the first time ever that I got access to the internet many years ago.
It said that I was the 1,000,000th viewer and was eligible for some gift.
Learned quickly after that — many don't.
In many cases ad links are positioned in a manner that they look like they're part of your content or site links.
That way many don't even realize that they're clicking on ads.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342353</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28346899</id>
	<title>Re:what ads?</title>
	<author>JimFive</author>
	<datestamp>1245163200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Also, wouldn't redirecting them to an invalid ip, say 0.0.0.0, work better than localhost?</p></div></blockquote><p>
As I understand it, No.  With an invalid ip you have to wait for a timeout, by sending to localhost you get the fail immediately.<br>--<br>JimFive</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Also , would n't redirecting them to an invalid ip , say 0.0.0.0 , work better than localhost ?
As I understand it , No .
With an invalid ip you have to wait for a timeout , by sending to localhost you get the fail immediately.--JimFive</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also, wouldn't redirecting them to an invalid ip, say 0.0.0.0, work better than localhost?
As I understand it, No.
With an invalid ip you have to wait for a timeout, by sending to localhost you get the fail immediately.--JimFive
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345229</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342393</id>
	<title>Creative? Huh?</title>
	<author>pestie</author>
	<datestamp>1245070080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Another company's "creative?" What the hell does that mean? Is it some industry term for "crappy banner ad?"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Another company 's " creative ?
" What the hell does that mean ?
Is it some industry term for " crappy banner ad ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another company's "creative?
" What the hell does that mean?
Is it some industry term for "crappy banner ad?
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343433</id>
	<title>Re:what ads?</title>
	<author>tonycheese</author>
	<datestamp>1245078540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Congratulations, you've won a free iPod Nano!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Congratulations , you 've won a free iPod Nano !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Congratulations, you've won a free iPod Nano!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342763</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343101</id>
	<title>We allowed them in</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245075660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know, back in the good ol' days of yore, when the internet was young and so were we, we created a beautiful garden. We, the geeks, we came together and we built. We created flowerbeds and hacked away the weed so people could find a path through the wilderness, we invited other geeks to join us in our creation so they would maybe build something even greater on top of ours. We looked at it and saw it was stunning and beautiful, and we looked outside for the "others", the "mundanes", the average guy and we thought, wouldn't it be a great idea if they, too, could see how beautiful and magical it all is? Imagine, when we, a handful of geeks, can create such wonders, what miracles are waiting for us to see if we just let others join in the creation?</p><p>Sure, they were no gardeners, so we paved a few ways through our wonderland, lest they got their feet dirty on the muddy paths we used to walk on. And the people came. They came in, and they looked. Few wanted to create, actually, most just enjoyed the view (hey, how many gardening exhibits do you know where you can see exotic plants without having to pay admission?), some tried to plant but soon got fed up when they noticed they'd have to know a bit about gardening.</p><p>And of course, in came also the ones that find pleasure in destruction, who wanted nothing but to destroy the creations. We had to fence them in, we had to hire guards for our creations so they wouldn't get destroyed. Often enough, those guards were not good enough and quite a few beauties are no more.</p><p>Personally, I wonder if it was a good idea to unlock those doors and pave some ways.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know , back in the good ol ' days of yore , when the internet was young and so were we , we created a beautiful garden .
We , the geeks , we came together and we built .
We created flowerbeds and hacked away the weed so people could find a path through the wilderness , we invited other geeks to join us in our creation so they would maybe build something even greater on top of ours .
We looked at it and saw it was stunning and beautiful , and we looked outside for the " others " , the " mundanes " , the average guy and we thought , would n't it be a great idea if they , too , could see how beautiful and magical it all is ?
Imagine , when we , a handful of geeks , can create such wonders , what miracles are waiting for us to see if we just let others join in the creation ? Sure , they were no gardeners , so we paved a few ways through our wonderland , lest they got their feet dirty on the muddy paths we used to walk on .
And the people came .
They came in , and they looked .
Few wanted to create , actually , most just enjoyed the view ( hey , how many gardening exhibits do you know where you can see exotic plants without having to pay admission ?
) , some tried to plant but soon got fed up when they noticed they 'd have to know a bit about gardening.And of course , in came also the ones that find pleasure in destruction , who wanted nothing but to destroy the creations .
We had to fence them in , we had to hire guards for our creations so they would n't get destroyed .
Often enough , those guards were not good enough and quite a few beauties are no more.Personally , I wonder if it was a good idea to unlock those doors and pave some ways .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know, back in the good ol' days of yore, when the internet was young and so were we, we created a beautiful garden.
We, the geeks, we came together and we built.
We created flowerbeds and hacked away the weed so people could find a path through the wilderness, we invited other geeks to join us in our creation so they would maybe build something even greater on top of ours.
We looked at it and saw it was stunning and beautiful, and we looked outside for the "others", the "mundanes", the average guy and we thought, wouldn't it be a great idea if they, too, could see how beautiful and magical it all is?
Imagine, when we, a handful of geeks, can create such wonders, what miracles are waiting for us to see if we just let others join in the creation?Sure, they were no gardeners, so we paved a few ways through our wonderland, lest they got their feet dirty on the muddy paths we used to walk on.
And the people came.
They came in, and they looked.
Few wanted to create, actually, most just enjoyed the view (hey, how many gardening exhibits do you know where you can see exotic plants without having to pay admission?
), some tried to plant but soon got fed up when they noticed they'd have to know a bit about gardening.And of course, in came also the ones that find pleasure in destruction, who wanted nothing but to destroy the creations.
We had to fence them in, we had to hire guards for our creations so they wouldn't get destroyed.
Often enough, those guards were not good enough and quite a few beauties are no more.Personally, I wonder if it was a good idea to unlock those doors and pave some ways.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28346295</id>
	<title>Re:When will this end?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245158580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey, the internet is a sandbox, and advertisers are cats. Leave the sandbox open, and you know what the cats will do.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey , the internet is a sandbox , and advertisers are cats .
Leave the sandbox open , and you know what the cats will do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey, the internet is a sandbox, and advertisers are cats.
Leave the sandbox open, and you know what the cats will do.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28347115</id>
	<title>Re:Aren't they all?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245164580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's <i>old</i> news. After having some data in cookies from various websites grabbed (if you do any online shopping, watch out for that!) and other annoying things associated with popups, this is why I use the AdBlock and NoScript Firefox extensions. If the malicious scripts don't run in the first place, then they're less of a problem. Also a lot of mainstream legit sites don't really do much to screen what runs in their ads, they don't give a squat as long as they get their money.</p><p>What took the WSJ sooo long to finally get around to figuring this one out?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's old news .
After having some data in cookies from various websites grabbed ( if you do any online shopping , watch out for that !
) and other annoying things associated with popups , this is why I use the AdBlock and NoScript Firefox extensions .
If the malicious scripts do n't run in the first place , then they 're less of a problem .
Also a lot of mainstream legit sites do n't really do much to screen what runs in their ads , they do n't give a squat as long as they get their money.What took the WSJ sooo long to finally get around to figuring this one out ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's old news.
After having some data in cookies from various websites grabbed (if you do any online shopping, watch out for that!
) and other annoying things associated with popups, this is why I use the AdBlock and NoScript Firefox extensions.
If the malicious scripts don't run in the first place, then they're less of a problem.
Also a lot of mainstream legit sites don't really do much to screen what runs in their ads, they don't give a squat as long as they get their money.What took the WSJ sooo long to finally get around to figuring this one out?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342281</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342501</id>
	<title>Re:what ads?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245070920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And when the good sites on the internet disappear from lack of advertising revenue, it'll be YOUR FAULT! In the hereafter you will be shrunk down to sub-micron size and burn for all eternity under the heatsink of a poorly cooled Pentium 4 based web server!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And when the good sites on the internet disappear from lack of advertising revenue , it 'll be YOUR FAULT !
In the hereafter you will be shrunk down to sub-micron size and burn for all eternity under the heatsink of a poorly cooled Pentium 4 based web server !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And when the good sites on the internet disappear from lack of advertising revenue, it'll be YOUR FAULT!
In the hereafter you will be shrunk down to sub-micron size and burn for all eternity under the heatsink of a poorly cooled Pentium 4 based web server!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342297</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342955</id>
	<title>Re:When will this end?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245074400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Someone said it before, "You have to understand economics to understand security."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Someone said it before , " You have to understand economics to understand security .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Someone said it before, "You have to understand economics to understand security.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342963</id>
	<title>Re:The Next Ad You Click May Be a Virus</title>
	<author>cyberfunkr</author>
	<datestamp>1245074460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oblig Family Guy:</p><p>Peter: A BOAT'S A BOAT, but the mystery box could be anything. IT COULD EVEN BE A BOAT. You know how much we wanted one of those.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oblig Family Guy : Peter : A BOAT 'S A BOAT , but the mystery box could be anything .
IT COULD EVEN BE A BOAT .
You know how much we wanted one of those .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oblig Family Guy:Peter: A BOAT'S A BOAT, but the mystery box could be anything.
IT COULD EVEN BE A BOAT.
You know how much we wanted one of those.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342387</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28365333</id>
	<title>The next what that I what now?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245271560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've never clicked on an ad and I never will. Yay, I get to not worry now!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've never clicked on an ad and I never will .
Yay , I get to not worry now !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've never clicked on an ad and I never will.
Yay, I get to not worry now!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344129</id>
	<title>Re:what ads?</title>
	<author>TornCityVenz</author>
	<datestamp>1245084960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It was SHOCK the monkey you insenstive clod..

Sadly one of the best web based games of the time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It was SHOCK the monkey you insenstive clod. . Sadly one of the best web based games of the time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It was SHOCK the monkey you insenstive clod..

Sadly one of the best web based games of the time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342763</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345547</id>
	<title>Re:The Next Ad You Click May Be a Virus</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245146760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually a friend of mine did win a new car from an internet site (many years ago). I saw the picture of him in the paper sitting in it! I couldn't believe my own eyes... Pity he didn't have a drivers licence though!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually a friend of mine did win a new car from an internet site ( many years ago ) .
I saw the picture of him in the paper sitting in it !
I could n't believe my own eyes... Pity he did n't have a drivers licence though !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually a friend of mine did win a new car from an internet site (many years ago).
I saw the picture of him in the paper sitting in it!
I couldn't believe my own eyes... Pity he didn't have a drivers licence though!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342387</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344571</id>
	<title>FFXI sites have been hit with these repeatedly</title>
	<author>rodney l. stubbs</author>
	<datestamp>1245089940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I know there were plenty of scammers specifically targeting Final Fantasy XI community sites with these types of exploits to nab account details from players (and I'm sure WoW and all the other major MMOs were targeted as well). IIRC, that kind of activity was heaviest throughout 2007 and into early '08, although it seems to have died down a lot lately. Folks who got infected found their accounts getting hijacked, with their in-game money and valuables being shuffled off to mule accounts, where they're in turn sold off for real money.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I know there were plenty of scammers specifically targeting Final Fantasy XI community sites with these types of exploits to nab account details from players ( and I 'm sure WoW and all the other major MMOs were targeted as well ) .
IIRC , that kind of activity was heaviest throughout 2007 and into early '08 , although it seems to have died down a lot lately .
Folks who got infected found their accounts getting hijacked , with their in-game money and valuables being shuffled off to mule accounts , where they 're in turn sold off for real money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know there were plenty of scammers specifically targeting Final Fantasy XI community sites with these types of exploits to nab account details from players (and I'm sure WoW and all the other major MMOs were targeted as well).
IIRC, that kind of activity was heaviest throughout 2007 and into early '08, although it seems to have died down a lot lately.
Folks who got infected found their accounts getting hijacked, with their in-game money and valuables being shuffled off to mule accounts, where they're in turn sold off for real money.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344843</id>
	<title>Re:Aren't they all?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245093300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>cookies are a BIT DIFFERENT than a system killing virus my friend!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>cookies are a BIT DIFFERENT than a system killing virus my friend !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>cookies are a BIT DIFFERENT than a system killing virus my friend!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342281</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345223</id>
	<title>HOSTS FILES ARE SUPERIOR &amp; UNIVERSAL</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245184860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can always use a HOSTS file! Why?</p><p> <b>The beauty of that is, IS that HOSTS files</b> (custom ones especially for THIS type of lunacy occurring) <b>extend to EVERY web-bound app you have</b> (unlike Adblock/AdBlock Plus, that only work in Mozilla/FireFox products)</p><p>So - think programs like Email also, where HTML is used (alongside scripting, the REAL "problem" (with bad adbanners for example, it IS the "delivery mechanism" basically - because it's truly the "root of all evil" here most times, &amp; anyone can verify that statement @ SECUNIA or SECURITYFOCUS.COM for example, from their last 4-5 yrs. of data or more on records of exploits they have)).</p><p> <b>HOSTS files provide not only security benefits here, but, also speedup benefits too, as a bonus</b> (by blocking ads you gain speed, but blocking scripting even gets you more (only use it on sites you trust OR cannot do without to stay safe(r) vs. bad scripted pages/bad scripted adbanners)).</p><p>HOSTS files, customized ones, work here... &amp; it's a solution that's easily edited/added to, + understood by users, as a bonus - Because as one of my best pals whom I 'turned onto' these has stated, verbatim? "All you need to do, is know how to use notepad.exe, how to read english, &amp; to get a decent one to start with - as well as sources that update the data one needs to blockout bogus sites" (&amp; I list a few below!)</p><p>The one I use here is populated with my own lists for HOSTS files since 1997 (30.000 entries long, mostly for adbanner blocking @ first 1997-2001), then later for security 2002 onwards...</p><p>I extended it further (to 654,000 unique entries currently &amp; yes, I have to stop the Windows DNS client for that, it's 14mb for Windows NT/2000/XP/Server 2003, &amp; up to 19mb (using 0.0.0.0) OR 26mb (using 127.0.0.1) for Windows VISTA/Server 2008/Windows7) per sources like:</p><p>1.) StopBadWare.org<br>2.) SRI<br>3.) Dancho Danchev's ZDNet Blog<br>4.) SpyBot "Search &amp; Destroy" Immunize lists<br>5.) PLUS/LASTLY, using other reputable known HOSTS files shown @ wikipedia.com, here -&gt; <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosts\_file" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosts\_file</a> [wikipedia.org] [wikipedia.org]</p><p>All DAILY updated here, or nearly daily.</p><p>(&amp; kept free of repeat entries via a program I wrote to do that, as well as alphabetize the entries, plus change them to a "faster up off disk into memory" internal schema for blocking out bad sites &amp; adbanners, by going from the larger, slower 127.0.0.1 default loopback adapter IP, to either 0.0.0.0 (for VISTA/Server2k8/Windows 7, a mistake on MS' part I mentioned to they here -&gt; <a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/archive/2009/02/09/recognizing-improvements-in-windows-7-handwriting.aspx?CommentPosted=true#commentmessage" title="msdn.com" rel="nofollow">http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/archive/2009/02/09/recognizing-improvements-in-windows-7-handwriting.aspx?CommentPosted=true#commentmessage</a> [msdn.com] which they started on 12/09/2008), OR the fastest &amp; most efficient 0 blocking IP address))</p><p> <b>HOSTS files are a good layer for this, then you can also "layer on" IE Restricted Zones, Opera filter.ini/urlfilter.ini, &amp; FireFox addons like NoScript + its internal to browser restricted sites lists ontop of them, for the utmost in security protection AND speed</b> (I do other things like use custom cascading style sheets &amp; PAC file filtering as well, but those are another subject)... <b>&amp; guys? LAYERED SECURITY IS "the trend" &amp; recommended pursuit by any 'security-saavy' person out there &amp; yes, it works!</b> </p><p>APK</p><p>P.S.=&gt; HOSTS files give you that "Layered security" in addition to my last paragraphs' suggestions above &amp; this guide I authored AS WELL AS MORE SPEED ONLINE...:</p><p>----</p><p> <b>HOW TO SECURE Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 &amp; even VISTA, + make it "fun-to-do", via CIS Tool Guidance (&amp; beyond):</b> </p><p> <a href="http://www.tcmagazine.com/forums/index.php?s=d9ab7ff1c912db0a0686e83b86da1e02&amp;showtopic=2662" title="tcmagazine.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.tcmagazine.com/forums/index.php?s=d9ab7ff1c912db0a0</a> [tcmagazine.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can always use a HOSTS file !
Why ? The beauty of that is , IS that HOSTS files ( custom ones especially for THIS type of lunacy occurring ) extend to EVERY web-bound app you have ( unlike Adblock/AdBlock Plus , that only work in Mozilla/FireFox products ) So - think programs like Email also , where HTML is used ( alongside scripting , the REAL " problem " ( with bad adbanners for example , it IS the " delivery mechanism " basically - because it 's truly the " root of all evil " here most times , &amp; anyone can verify that statement @ SECUNIA or SECURITYFOCUS.COM for example , from their last 4-5 yrs .
of data or more on records of exploits they have ) ) .
HOSTS files provide not only security benefits here , but , also speedup benefits too , as a bonus ( by blocking ads you gain speed , but blocking scripting even gets you more ( only use it on sites you trust OR can not do without to stay safe ( r ) vs. bad scripted pages/bad scripted adbanners ) ) .HOSTS files , customized ones , work here... &amp; it 's a solution that 's easily edited/added to , + understood by users , as a bonus - Because as one of my best pals whom I 'turned onto ' these has stated , verbatim ?
" All you need to do , is know how to use notepad.exe , how to read english , &amp; to get a decent one to start with - as well as sources that update the data one needs to blockout bogus sites " ( &amp; I list a few below !
) The one I use here is populated with my own lists for HOSTS files since 1997 ( 30.000 entries long , mostly for adbanner blocking @ first 1997-2001 ) , then later for security 2002 onwards...I extended it further ( to 654,000 unique entries currently &amp; yes , I have to stop the Windows DNS client for that , it 's 14mb for Windows NT/2000/XP/Server 2003 , &amp; up to 19mb ( using 0.0.0.0 ) OR 26mb ( using 127.0.0.1 ) for Windows VISTA/Server 2008/Windows7 ) per sources like : 1 .
) StopBadWare.org2 .
) SRI3 .
) Dancho Danchev 's ZDNet Blog4 .
) SpyBot " Search &amp; Destroy " Immunize lists5 .
) PLUS/LASTLY , using other reputable known HOSTS files shown @ wikipedia.com , here - &gt; http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosts \ _file [ wikipedia.org ] [ wikipedia.org ] All DAILY updated here , or nearly daily .
( &amp; kept free of repeat entries via a program I wrote to do that , as well as alphabetize the entries , plus change them to a " faster up off disk into memory " internal schema for blocking out bad sites &amp; adbanners , by going from the larger , slower 127.0.0.1 default loopback adapter IP , to either 0.0.0.0 ( for VISTA/Server2k8/Windows 7 , a mistake on MS ' part I mentioned to they here - &gt; http : //blogs.msdn.com/e7/archive/2009/02/09/recognizing-improvements-in-windows-7-handwriting.aspx ? CommentPosted = true # commentmessage [ msdn.com ] which they started on 12/09/2008 ) , OR the fastest &amp; most efficient 0 blocking IP address ) ) HOSTS files are a good layer for this , then you can also " layer on " IE Restricted Zones , Opera filter.ini/urlfilter.ini , &amp; FireFox addons like NoScript + its internal to browser restricted sites lists ontop of them , for the utmost in security protection AND speed ( I do other things like use custom cascading style sheets &amp; PAC file filtering as well , but those are another subject ) ... &amp; guys ?
LAYERED SECURITY IS " the trend " &amp; recommended pursuit by any 'security-saavy ' person out there &amp; yes , it works !
APKP.S. = &gt; HOSTS files give you that " Layered security " in addition to my last paragraphs ' suggestions above &amp; this guide I authored AS WELL AS MORE SPEED ONLINE... : ---- HOW TO SECURE Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 &amp; even VISTA , + make it " fun-to-do " , via CIS Tool Guidance ( &amp; beyond ) : http : //www.tcmagazine.com/forums/index.php ? s = d9ab7ff1c912db0a0 [ tcmagazine.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can always use a HOSTS file!
Why? The beauty of that is, IS that HOSTS files (custom ones especially for THIS type of lunacy occurring) extend to EVERY web-bound app you have (unlike Adblock/AdBlock Plus, that only work in Mozilla/FireFox products)So - think programs like Email also, where HTML is used (alongside scripting, the REAL "problem" (with bad adbanners for example, it IS the "delivery mechanism" basically - because it's truly the "root of all evil" here most times, &amp; anyone can verify that statement @ SECUNIA or SECURITYFOCUS.COM for example, from their last 4-5 yrs.
of data or more on records of exploits they have)).
HOSTS files provide not only security benefits here, but, also speedup benefits too, as a bonus (by blocking ads you gain speed, but blocking scripting even gets you more (only use it on sites you trust OR cannot do without to stay safe(r) vs. bad scripted pages/bad scripted adbanners)).HOSTS files, customized ones, work here... &amp; it's a solution that's easily edited/added to, + understood by users, as a bonus - Because as one of my best pals whom I 'turned onto' these has stated, verbatim?
"All you need to do, is know how to use notepad.exe, how to read english, &amp; to get a decent one to start with - as well as sources that update the data one needs to blockout bogus sites" (&amp; I list a few below!
)The one I use here is populated with my own lists for HOSTS files since 1997 (30.000 entries long, mostly for adbanner blocking @ first 1997-2001), then later for security 2002 onwards...I extended it further (to 654,000 unique entries currently &amp; yes, I have to stop the Windows DNS client for that, it's 14mb for Windows NT/2000/XP/Server 2003, &amp; up to 19mb (using 0.0.0.0) OR 26mb (using 127.0.0.1) for Windows VISTA/Server 2008/Windows7) per sources like:1.
) StopBadWare.org2.
) SRI3.
) Dancho Danchev's ZDNet Blog4.
) SpyBot "Search &amp; Destroy" Immunize lists5.
) PLUS/LASTLY, using other reputable known HOSTS files shown @ wikipedia.com, here -&gt; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosts\_file [wikipedia.org] [wikipedia.org]All DAILY updated here, or nearly daily.
(&amp; kept free of repeat entries via a program I wrote to do that, as well as alphabetize the entries, plus change them to a "faster up off disk into memory" internal schema for blocking out bad sites &amp; adbanners, by going from the larger, slower 127.0.0.1 default loopback adapter IP, to either 0.0.0.0 (for VISTA/Server2k8/Windows 7, a mistake on MS' part I mentioned to they here -&gt; http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/archive/2009/02/09/recognizing-improvements-in-windows-7-handwriting.aspx?CommentPosted=true#commentmessage [msdn.com] which they started on 12/09/2008), OR the fastest &amp; most efficient 0 blocking IP address)) HOSTS files are a good layer for this, then you can also "layer on" IE Restricted Zones, Opera filter.ini/urlfilter.ini, &amp; FireFox addons like NoScript + its internal to browser restricted sites lists ontop of them, for the utmost in security protection AND speed (I do other things like use custom cascading style sheets &amp; PAC file filtering as well, but those are another subject)... &amp; guys?
LAYERED SECURITY IS "the trend" &amp; recommended pursuit by any 'security-saavy' person out there &amp; yes, it works!
APKP.S.=&gt; HOSTS files give you that "Layered security" in addition to my last paragraphs' suggestions above &amp; this guide I authored AS WELL AS MORE SPEED ONLINE...:---- HOW TO SECURE Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 &amp; even VISTA, + make it "fun-to-do", via CIS Tool Guidance (&amp; beyond):  http://www.tcmagazine.com/forums/index.php?s=d9ab7ff1c912db0a0 [tcmagazine.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342297</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342469</id>
	<title>Re:When will this end?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245070620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everyone has a price.  For some people, it's making $100/mo in profit in selling dick pills.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everyone has a price .
For some people , it 's making $ 100/mo in profit in selling dick pills .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everyone has a price.
For some people, it's making $100/mo in profit in selling dick pills.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344029</id>
	<title>Re:When will this end?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245084000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Our internet is still there.<br> <br>

Usenet, telnet, bash, text-based email, html without plugins, privoxy, linux. It's all still there. Leave the Flash ads and latest "screw you" schemes for the "consumers". <br> <br>

For What It's Worth, I don't know how anybody can stand it. I walked up to a Co-worker's Vista machine running IE and just about had a seizure as the endless barrage of blinking flashing running ads flew about his screen, occupying at least 2/3rds of the real estate. I don't know why the lusers even bother.<br> <br>

If my machines looked like that, I'd unplug them all and do something useful like cook for a living.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Our internet is still there .
Usenet , telnet , bash , text-based email , html without plugins , privoxy , linux .
It 's all still there .
Leave the Flash ads and latest " screw you " schemes for the " consumers " .
For What It 's Worth , I do n't know how anybody can stand it .
I walked up to a Co-worker 's Vista machine running IE and just about had a seizure as the endless barrage of blinking flashing running ads flew about his screen , occupying at least 2/3rds of the real estate .
I do n't know why the lusers even bother .
If my machines looked like that , I 'd unplug them all and do something useful like cook for a living .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Our internet is still there.
Usenet, telnet, bash, text-based email, html without plugins, privoxy, linux.
It's all still there.
Leave the Flash ads and latest "screw you" schemes for the "consumers".
For What It's Worth, I don't know how anybody can stand it.
I walked up to a Co-worker's Vista machine running IE and just about had a seizure as the endless barrage of blinking flashing running ads flew about his screen, occupying at least 2/3rds of the real estate.
I don't know why the lusers even bother.
If my machines looked like that, I'd unplug them all and do something useful like cook for a living.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344065</id>
	<title>Re:Creative? Huh?</title>
	<author>dbIII</author>
	<datestamp>1245084420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It means the submitter lurnt how to wread under Raygun.<br>No child left behind and ebonics for all!</htmltext>
<tokenext>It means the submitter lurnt how to wread under Raygun.No child left behind and ebonics for all !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It means the submitter lurnt how to wread under Raygun.No child left behind and ebonics for all!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342393</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342297
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342501
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342763
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344129
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342635
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344407
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28347219
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342281
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342543
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343111
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342297
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342501
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342763
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343809
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345229
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28356773
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343405
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342297
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342501
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342763
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345061
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344587
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343101
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343617
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342353
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344515
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342297
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343959
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342393
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344065
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342353
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343077
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28389847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342353
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343077
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28365685
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342297
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342501
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342763
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345505
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344283
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342581
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343025
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342281
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28347853
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342539
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342695
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342539
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342697
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342517
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343853
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342725
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343413
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343101
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28349549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342281
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342543
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28346619
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343101
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345065
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342281
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344843
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342297
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342501
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342763
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345355
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344029
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28354545
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342297
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342501
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343373
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342281
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28347115
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345399
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343101
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28348355
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342297
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343229
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343101
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344265
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342281
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342543
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28346745
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28351429
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342297
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342501
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342953
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342281
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342543
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28346607
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342281
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345483
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345547
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342297
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342501
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342763
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343433
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342323
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344445
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342297
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342501
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342763
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343215
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342297
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342501
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342763
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344433
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342531
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342297
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342501
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28349973
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343163
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342297
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342663
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342297
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28390485
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342281
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342543
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28346643
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28348227
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28346295
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343101
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28346349
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342359
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342687
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28371267
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343209
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343435
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342955
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342297
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342501
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342763
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343809
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345229
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28346899
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342281
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342543
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28350645
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342387
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342963
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342297
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28365513
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342469
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345967
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2056219_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343101
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343479
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2056219.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342313
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2056219.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342281
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344843
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342543
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28346745
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28346619
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343111
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28346607
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28346643
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28350645
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28347853
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345483
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28347115
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2056219.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342539
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342695
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342697
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2056219.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342359
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342687
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2056219.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342493
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343163
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28371267
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2056219.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342393
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344065
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2056219.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342299
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343413
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344587
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343435
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344283
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345967
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28351429
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342955
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28346295
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342469
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28347219
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344029
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28354545
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342581
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343025
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343101
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344265
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343617
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28346349
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28348355
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345065
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28349549
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343479
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342635
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344407
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28348227
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343405
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343209
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342725
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342531
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2056219.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28346653
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2056219.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342297
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342663
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345223
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28390485
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28365513
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343229
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342501
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28349973
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343373
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342953
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342763
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343215
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345061
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344129
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343433
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345505
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344433
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343809
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345229
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28346899
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28356773
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345355
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343959
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2056219.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342353
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343077
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345291
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28365685
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28389847
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344515
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2056219.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342323
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344445
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2056219.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28344805
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2056219.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342939
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2056219.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342517
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28343853
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2056219.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342387
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345547
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28342963
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2056219.28345399
</commentlist>
</conversation>
