<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_07_10_0452256</id>
	<title>Korean DDoS Bots To Self-Destruct</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1247247660000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>tsu doh nimh writes <i>"Several news sources are reporting that the tens of thousands of Microsoft Windows systems infected with the Mydoom worm and being used in an ongoing denial of service attack against US and S. Korean government Web sites <a href="http://voices.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2009/07/pcs\_used\_in\_korean\_ddos\_attack.html">will likely have their hard drives wiped of data come Friday</a>. From The Washington Post's Security Fix blog, the malware is 'designed to download a payload from a set of Web servers. Included in that payload is a Trojan horse program that overwrites the data on the hard drive with a message that reads "memory of the independence day," followed by as many "u" characters as it takes to write over every sector of every physical drive attached to the compromised system.' <a href="http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp\_asiapacific/view/441524/1/.html">ChannelNews Asia
carries similar information</a>."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>tsu doh nimh writes " Several news sources are reporting that the tens of thousands of Microsoft Windows systems infected with the Mydoom worm and being used in an ongoing denial of service attack against US and S. Korean government Web sites will likely have their hard drives wiped of data come Friday .
From The Washington Post 's Security Fix blog , the malware is 'designed to download a payload from a set of Web servers .
Included in that payload is a Trojan horse program that overwrites the data on the hard drive with a message that reads " memory of the independence day , " followed by as many " u " characters as it takes to write over every sector of every physical drive attached to the compromised system .
' ChannelNews Asia carries similar information .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>tsu doh nimh writes "Several news sources are reporting that the tens of thousands of Microsoft Windows systems infected with the Mydoom worm and being used in an ongoing denial of service attack against US and S. Korean government Web sites will likely have their hard drives wiped of data come Friday.
From The Washington Post's Security Fix blog, the malware is 'designed to download a payload from a set of Web servers.
Included in that payload is a Trojan horse program that overwrites the data on the hard drive with a message that reads "memory of the independence day," followed by as many "u" characters as it takes to write over every sector of every physical drive attached to the compromised system.
' ChannelNews Asia
carries similar information.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646285</id>
	<title>U ?</title>
	<author>clang\_jangle</author>
	<datestamp>1247165220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Trojan horse program that overwrites the data on the hard drive with a message that reads "memory of the independence day," followed by as many "u" characters as it takes to write over every sector of every physical drive attached to the compromised system</p></div></blockquote><p> Wow, and I thought only 0 and 1 could actually be written to the hard drive.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Trojan horse program that overwrites the data on the hard drive with a message that reads " memory of the independence day , " followed by as many " u " characters as it takes to write over every sector of every physical drive attached to the compromised system Wow , and I thought only 0 and 1 could actually be written to the hard drive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Trojan horse program that overwrites the data on the hard drive with a message that reads "memory of the independence day," followed by as many "u" characters as it takes to write over every sector of every physical drive attached to the compromised system Wow, and I thought only 0 and 1 could actually be written to the hard drive.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28651243</id>
	<title>Not quite how I intended it...</title>
	<author>zooblethorpe</author>
	<datestamp>1247246520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey there Psychotria --</p><p>Up again now that it's morning here, and I find myself saying, "Oh, dear..."  There was no delight in my initial posting, nor any self-satisfied "they're getting what they deserve".  My thinking was much more along EdIII's lines.  And, FWIW, at least some of my "clue bat" commentary was from personal experience.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:S  A good part of why I use Windows (and other MS software) as little as possible anymore has to do with being burned, repeatedly.  I consider myself lucky that Windows screwed me over back in 2000-01 without the aid of online nasties, prompting me to do the hard work of learning proper setup, configuration, and ultimately a whole different system, well before the current clusterbleep of DIY botnet-for-hire madness arose.  </p><p>So no, I wasn't intending any derision.  Grim sympathy instead, and silver-lining thanks that at least the botnet will cease to exist, quite likely taking other malware offline in the process.  </p><p> <em>NB: You might want to work on how you perceive tone in writing.  None of what you react to was intended, and while I now see how you might be able to read my post that way, it's also important to note that my post could be read multiple other ways as well.  Before getting all fired up and throwing around angry language, it could be a good thing to double-check a poster's intent.</em> </p><p>Cheers,</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey there Psychotria --Up again now that it 's morning here , and I find myself saying , " Oh , dear... " There was no delight in my initial posting , nor any self-satisfied " they 're getting what they deserve " .
My thinking was much more along EdIII 's lines .
And , FWIW , at least some of my " clue bat " commentary was from personal experience .
: S A good part of why I use Windows ( and other MS software ) as little as possible anymore has to do with being burned , repeatedly .
I consider myself lucky that Windows screwed me over back in 2000-01 without the aid of online nasties , prompting me to do the hard work of learning proper setup , configuration , and ultimately a whole different system , well before the current clusterbleep of DIY botnet-for-hire madness arose .
So no , I was n't intending any derision .
Grim sympathy instead , and silver-lining thanks that at least the botnet will cease to exist , quite likely taking other malware offline in the process .
NB : You might want to work on how you perceive tone in writing .
None of what you react to was intended , and while I now see how you might be able to read my post that way , it 's also important to note that my post could be read multiple other ways as well .
Before getting all fired up and throwing around angry language , it could be a good thing to double-check a poster 's intent .
Cheers,</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey there Psychotria --Up again now that it's morning here, and I find myself saying, "Oh, dear..."  There was no delight in my initial posting, nor any self-satisfied "they're getting what they deserve".
My thinking was much more along EdIII's lines.
And, FWIW, at least some of my "clue bat" commentary was from personal experience.
:S  A good part of why I use Windows (and other MS software) as little as possible anymore has to do with being burned, repeatedly.
I consider myself lucky that Windows screwed me over back in 2000-01 without the aid of online nasties, prompting me to do the hard work of learning proper setup, configuration, and ultimately a whole different system, well before the current clusterbleep of DIY botnet-for-hire madness arose.
So no, I wasn't intending any derision.
Grim sympathy instead, and silver-lining thanks that at least the botnet will cease to exist, quite likely taking other malware offline in the process.
NB: You might want to work on how you perceive tone in writing.
None of what you react to was intended, and while I now see how you might be able to read my post that way, it's also important to note that my post could be read multiple other ways as well.
Before getting all fired up and throwing around angry language, it could be a good thing to double-check a poster's intent.
Cheers,</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647427</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647181</id>
	<title>Silent running</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247220120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Its as if a million Windows machines were screaming and were suddenly silenced...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Its as if a million Windows machines were screaming and were suddenly silenced.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its as if a million Windows machines were screaming and were suddenly silenced...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646557</id>
	<title>Americans</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247169120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I suspected it when I saw the list of U.S. government sites that they hit, but now I'm sure. This is a U.S.-based attack by a right-wing group. The Korean angle is just stirring up shit, and cleverly taking advantage of S. Korea's ActiveX monoculture.</p><p>I'm sure that worse is to come, now that they have a proof-of-concept of an international-incident-producing device.</p><p>To all the anarchists, "Pirates" (not the kind you're thinking of, not people who disregard IP law, rather a self-styled "Pirate" group of web right-wingers), Teabaggers and Ron Paul Libertarians: Fuck you. Your advocacy is not appreciated. And fuck you for DDOSing our servers.</p><p>The <i>truly</i> fucked up thing is that anybody can do this for a couple of bucks a month. Ask any admin who's ever been naive enough to email the abuse contact. The scripted response from a New Delhi ISP? Get a warrant.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I suspected it when I saw the list of U.S. government sites that they hit , but now I 'm sure .
This is a U.S.-based attack by a right-wing group .
The Korean angle is just stirring up shit , and cleverly taking advantage of S. Korea 's ActiveX monoculture.I 'm sure that worse is to come , now that they have a proof-of-concept of an international-incident-producing device.To all the anarchists , " Pirates " ( not the kind you 're thinking of , not people who disregard IP law , rather a self-styled " Pirate " group of web right-wingers ) , Teabaggers and Ron Paul Libertarians : Fuck you .
Your advocacy is not appreciated .
And fuck you for DDOSing our servers.The truly fucked up thing is that anybody can do this for a couple of bucks a month .
Ask any admin who 's ever been naive enough to email the abuse contact .
The scripted response from a New Delhi ISP ?
Get a warrant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I suspected it when I saw the list of U.S. government sites that they hit, but now I'm sure.
This is a U.S.-based attack by a right-wing group.
The Korean angle is just stirring up shit, and cleverly taking advantage of S. Korea's ActiveX monoculture.I'm sure that worse is to come, now that they have a proof-of-concept of an international-incident-producing device.To all the anarchists, "Pirates" (not the kind you're thinking of, not people who disregard IP law, rather a self-styled "Pirate" group of web right-wingers), Teabaggers and Ron Paul Libertarians: Fuck you.
Your advocacy is not appreciated.
And fuck you for DDOSing our servers.The truly fucked up thing is that anybody can do this for a couple of bucks a month.
Ask any admin who's ever been naive enough to email the abuse contact.
The scripted response from a New Delhi ISP?
Get a warrant.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28660781</id>
	<title>Re:U ?</title>
	<author>cbiltcliffe</author>
	<datestamp>1247332380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <b>all nerds worldwide have an ascii chart, complete with hex and binary representation, taped up behind their monitor on their parents basement wall.</b></p> </div><p>n00b.</p><p>Real nerds have no need for that chart, as they've got all those codes memorized.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>all nerds worldwide have an ascii chart , complete with hex and binary representation , taped up behind their monitor on their parents basement wall .
n00b.Real nerds have no need for that chart , as they 've got all those codes memorized .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> all nerds worldwide have an ascii chart, complete with hex and binary representation, taped up behind their monitor on their parents basement wall.
n00b.Real nerds have no need for that chart, as they've got all those codes memorized.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28648081</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28651035</id>
	<title>Re:Really that bad of a thing?</title>
	<author>Just Some Guy</author>
	<datestamp>1247245440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Oh, and you can blame MS all you want but the truth is that Linux, if as widely adopted and used by ordinary computer illiterate users, and as targeted by the malware writers as Windows is, wouldn't be a whole lot batter.</p></div><p>Bullshit.  After the Morris Worm got everyone's attention, how many mass Unix server hacks have you seen, then though Unix has the majority of the server space?  Oh, let me guess: that's <em>different</em>, because only <em>experts</em> run servers, and never n00bs with a Ubuntu disk and a desire to learn PHP and MySQL who enable everything by default because it's confusing at first.</p><p>The "attractive target" myth is stupid and debunked, and <em>only</em> Microsoft apologists trot it around.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , and you can blame MS all you want but the truth is that Linux , if as widely adopted and used by ordinary computer illiterate users , and as targeted by the malware writers as Windows is , would n't be a whole lot batter.Bullshit .
After the Morris Worm got everyone 's attention , how many mass Unix server hacks have you seen , then though Unix has the majority of the server space ?
Oh , let me guess : that 's different , because only experts run servers , and never n00bs with a Ubuntu disk and a desire to learn PHP and MySQL who enable everything by default because it 's confusing at first.The " attractive target " myth is stupid and debunked , and only Microsoft apologists trot it around .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, and you can blame MS all you want but the truth is that Linux, if as widely adopted and used by ordinary computer illiterate users, and as targeted by the malware writers as Windows is, wouldn't be a whole lot batter.Bullshit.
After the Morris Worm got everyone's attention, how many mass Unix server hacks have you seen, then though Unix has the majority of the server space?
Oh, let me guess: that's different, because only experts run servers, and never n00bs with a Ubuntu disk and a desire to learn PHP and MySQL who enable everything by default because it's confusing at first.The "attractive target" myth is stupid and debunked, and only Microsoft apologists trot it around.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646465</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28651431</id>
	<title>Re:U ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247247480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe they are saying happy 4th to "All of U".</p><p>That is what I make of it.<br>Not that I made. I didn't make it.<br>Oh Shit, is the FBI is going to get into my computer again for something I wrote on Slashdot.</p><p>"When will U", I mean "I learn".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe they are saying happy 4th to " All of U " .That is what I make of it.Not that I made .
I did n't make it.Oh Shit , is the FBI is going to get into my computer again for something I wrote on Slashdot .
" When will U " , I mean " I learn " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe they are saying happy 4th to "All of U".That is what I make of it.Not that I made.
I didn't make it.Oh Shit, is the FBI is going to get into my computer again for something I wrote on Slashdot.
"When will U", I mean "I learn".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646327</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646743</id>
	<title>FFS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247257920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why don't YOU get a clue? Punishing the user of an insecure OS will not do a damn thing. It will not do a damn thing to increase security. There will just be lots of people who are fucking upset because they lost a whole heaps of important files or memories (e.g. photos). It is not THEIR fault that windows is so fucked up (is it)? So, why do you take delight in them losing their data?</p><p>So, I hit YOU with you so called "clue bat" and I hope your meagre brain manages to parse it. I hope you remember this.</p><p>Cheers,</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do n't YOU get a clue ?
Punishing the user of an insecure OS will not do a damn thing .
It will not do a damn thing to increase security .
There will just be lots of people who are fucking upset because they lost a whole heaps of important files or memories ( e.g .
photos ) . It is not THEIR fault that windows is so fucked up ( is it ) ?
So , why do you take delight in them losing their data ? So , I hit YOU with you so called " clue bat " and I hope your meagre brain manages to parse it .
I hope you remember this.Cheers,</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why don't YOU get a clue?
Punishing the user of an insecure OS will not do a damn thing.
It will not do a damn thing to increase security.
There will just be lots of people who are fucking upset because they lost a whole heaps of important files or memories (e.g.
photos). It is not THEIR fault that windows is so fucked up (is it)?
So, why do you take delight in them losing their data?So, I hit YOU with you so called "clue bat" and I hope your meagre brain manages to parse it.
I hope you remember this.Cheers,</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646309</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646491</id>
	<title>Re:U ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247168280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>.... "u" in ASCII, represented in binary is 0111 0101, not 1010 0101. "U" is 0101 0101, as you said though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>.... " u " in ASCII , represented in binary is 0111 0101 , not 1010 0101 .
" U " is 0101 0101 , as you said though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>.... "u" in ASCII, represented in binary is 0111 0101, not 1010 0101.
"U" is 0101 0101, as you said though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646327</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646711</id>
	<title>Re:U ?</title>
	<author>noundi</author>
	<datestamp>1247257560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I would have expected<br>
0101 0101<br>
which is "U"</p></div><p>But... why? It's not like U nor u makes sense. Seems pretty random to me.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would have expected 0101 0101 which is " U " But... why ? It 's not like U nor u makes sense .
Seems pretty random to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would have expected
0101 0101
which is "U"But... why? It's not like U nor u makes sense.
Seems pretty random to me.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646327</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646323</id>
	<title>Re:Really that bad of a thing?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247165760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>More likly they'll complain their kid's game broke their computer, buy a new one and continue punching the monkey.</htmltext>
<tokenext>More likly they 'll complain their kid 's game broke their computer , buy a new one and continue punching the monkey .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More likly they'll complain their kid's game broke their computer, buy a new one and continue punching the monkey.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647891</id>
	<title>Re:Final code</title>
	<author>hh4m</author>
	<datestamp>1247230680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>(Score:0)</htmltext>
<tokenext>( Score : 0 )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(Score:0)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646269</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647983</id>
	<title>Re:Blood in the water</title>
	<author>DeanFox</author>
	<datestamp>1247231400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><br>
"So this is how liberty dies...with thunderous applause."</htmltext>
<tokenext>" So this is how liberty dies...with thunderous applause .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
"So this is how liberty dies...with thunderous applause.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647759</id>
	<title>Re:U ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247229000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... or maybe they just went wild monkey on the keyboard and hit 'u'.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... or maybe they just went wild monkey on the keyboard and hit 'u' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... or maybe they just went wild monkey on the keyboard and hit 'u'.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646327</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647427</id>
	<title>Re:FFS</title>
	<author>Psychotria</author>
	<datestamp>1247223600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I understand what you're saying, Edlll, and I cannot say I disagree. But my original reply was to a user who seems to have his head so far up his arse that he cannot seem to see the obvious. This discussion is about an established Botnet that appears (from the summary) to be about to self destruct and take all it's "users" with it. zooblethorpe implies that this is a good thing and that the victims are getting what they deserve for using an insecure OS.  I, on the other hand, disagree with his comment and think that it (the comment) is bullshit. I also think that he/she is an idiot, based on the comment. To say (in his words) that the users are getting what they deserve is utter rubbish and I cannot believe that his comments is +5. It's an ignorant comment from a person who, through his comments, is stupider than the users he is deriding.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I understand what you 're saying , Edlll , and I can not say I disagree .
But my original reply was to a user who seems to have his head so far up his arse that he can not seem to see the obvious .
This discussion is about an established Botnet that appears ( from the summary ) to be about to self destruct and take all it 's " users " with it .
zooblethorpe implies that this is a good thing and that the victims are getting what they deserve for using an insecure OS .
I , on the other hand , disagree with his comment and think that it ( the comment ) is bullshit .
I also think that he/she is an idiot , based on the comment .
To say ( in his words ) that the users are getting what they deserve is utter rubbish and I can not believe that his comments is + 5 .
It 's an ignorant comment from a person who , through his comments , is stupider than the users he is deriding .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I understand what you're saying, Edlll, and I cannot say I disagree.
But my original reply was to a user who seems to have his head so far up his arse that he cannot seem to see the obvious.
This discussion is about an established Botnet that appears (from the summary) to be about to self destruct and take all it's "users" with it.
zooblethorpe implies that this is a good thing and that the victims are getting what they deserve for using an insecure OS.
I, on the other hand, disagree with his comment and think that it (the comment) is bullshit.
I also think that he/she is an idiot, based on the comment.
To say (in his words) that the users are getting what they deserve is utter rubbish and I cannot believe that his comments is +5.
It's an ignorant comment from a person who, through his comments, is stupider than the users he is deriding.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647015</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28648361</id>
	<title>This doesn't sound legit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247234160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It sounds like an attempt to mitigate the attack by getting complacent users to become worried about their data. I highly doubt anything at all will happen. Besides, why would someone dismantle their own botnet?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It sounds like an attempt to mitigate the attack by getting complacent users to become worried about their data .
I highly doubt anything at all will happen .
Besides , why would someone dismantle their own botnet ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It sounds like an attempt to mitigate the attack by getting complacent users to become worried about their data.
I highly doubt anything at all will happen.
Besides, why would someone dismantle their own botnet?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646539</id>
	<title>Re:Really that bad of a thing?</title>
	<author>rtfa-troll</author>
	<datestamp>1247168940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>of their pictures, tax returns, email and other important documents.</p></div><p>If they have proper backups they will only have a small amount wiped out.  If they don't have proper backups then there is only one way to learn to do proper backups.  That's to have everything wiped.   Right now we are beginning to build seriously important stuff on quicksand.  There will be more of this and if it's as small as it sounds (a few 10s of Ks of computers is nothing) then we should be happy.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>of their pictures , tax returns , email and other important documents.If they have proper backups they will only have a small amount wiped out .
If they do n't have proper backups then there is only one way to learn to do proper backups .
That 's to have everything wiped .
Right now we are beginning to build seriously important stuff on quicksand .
There will be more of this and if it 's as small as it sounds ( a few 10s of Ks of computers is nothing ) then we should be happy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>of their pictures, tax returns, email and other important documents.If they have proper backups they will only have a small amount wiped out.
If they don't have proper backups then there is only one way to learn to do proper backups.
That's to have everything wiped.
Right now we are beginning to build seriously important stuff on quicksand.
There will be more of this and if it's as small as it sounds (a few 10s of Ks of computers is nothing) then we should be happy.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646335</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646807</id>
	<title>Re:What is the source?</title>
	<author>value\_added</author>
	<datestamp>1247258940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Now, I'm a little skeptical that they didn't mean ISP instead of IP</i></p><p>When you read news of any kind, it's required that you be skeptical, read between the lines, compare with other sources, etc.  However, when you read tech related news, you first have to stop and wonder if the reporter knows WTF they're writing.</p><p>When this story first hit the airwaves, Katie Couric (anchorwoman for ABC News) described the DDoS as security breaches of government websites.  IP, ISP -- it's all just "arcane technical jargon"[1], right?</p><p>For now, we should all assume that it's 86 IP addresses.  The submitter probably picked this story from a number of possible sources and selected the best one.  If he/she was lax, I'm sure the editors would have caught the error.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p><p>----------------<br>1. Actual quote from a Slashdot post that was modded +5 Informative.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now , I 'm a little skeptical that they did n't mean ISP instead of IPWhen you read news of any kind , it 's required that you be skeptical , read between the lines , compare with other sources , etc .
However , when you read tech related news , you first have to stop and wonder if the reporter knows WTF they 're writing.When this story first hit the airwaves , Katie Couric ( anchorwoman for ABC News ) described the DDoS as security breaches of government websites .
IP , ISP -- it 's all just " arcane technical jargon " [ 1 ] , right ? For now , we should all assume that it 's 86 IP addresses .
The submitter probably picked this story from a number of possible sources and selected the best one .
If he/she was lax , I 'm sure the editors would have caught the error .
; - ) ----------------1. Actual quote from a Slashdot post that was modded + 5 Informative .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now, I'm a little skeptical that they didn't mean ISP instead of IPWhen you read news of any kind, it's required that you be skeptical, read between the lines, compare with other sources, etc.
However, when you read tech related news, you first have to stop and wonder if the reporter knows WTF they're writing.When this story first hit the airwaves, Katie Couric (anchorwoman for ABC News) described the DDoS as security breaches of government websites.
IP, ISP -- it's all just "arcane technical jargon"[1], right?For now, we should all assume that it's 86 IP addresses.
The submitter probably picked this story from a number of possible sources and selected the best one.
If he/she was lax, I'm sure the editors would have caught the error.
;-)----------------1. Actual quote from a Slashdot post that was modded +5 Informative.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646487</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646579</id>
	<title>Hardly Good At All</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247169420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thanks for posting.  I honestly cannot understand the nasty comments coming from some other people in this thread.  A <em>few</em> people making a joke is one thing, but to have dozens of Slashdotters honestly describing this situation as <strong>good</strong> is rather bizarre.</p><p>Even if learning the hard way is the only way for some people, that doesn't mean we have to have no compassion for them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thanks for posting .
I honestly can not understand the nasty comments coming from some other people in this thread .
A few people making a joke is one thing , but to have dozens of Slashdotters honestly describing this situation as good is rather bizarre.Even if learning the hard way is the only way for some people , that does n't mean we have to have no compassion for them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thanks for posting.
I honestly cannot understand the nasty comments coming from some other people in this thread.
A few people making a joke is one thing, but to have dozens of Slashdotters honestly describing this situation as good is rather bizarre.Even if learning the hard way is the only way for some people, that doesn't mean we have to have no compassion for them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646335</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28655727</id>
	<title>Re:FFS</title>
	<author>kelnos</author>
	<datestamp>1247226000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As another poster mentioned, if they're not making regular backups, they're at risk for losing their data for a variety of other reasons.<br>
<br>
But to answer your question, yes, it *is* their fault that Windows is fucked up.  The collective "yes, Windows sucks, but I'm going to tolerate it," attitude in the world is exactly why Window is as fucked up as it is.  If thousands (tens of thousands?  millions?) of computers get wiped because of this, that's the fault of everyone who runs Windows and doesn't care enough about security to keep themselves safe (either through backups, or constant attention to security).<br>
<br>
Sorry, but Windows users need to accept some responsibility for the platform they've chosen.  I won't delight in all these people losing data, but if it causes people to wise up and be more concerned about security, I'll consider it a net win.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As another poster mentioned , if they 're not making regular backups , they 're at risk for losing their data for a variety of other reasons .
But to answer your question , yes , it * is * their fault that Windows is fucked up .
The collective " yes , Windows sucks , but I 'm going to tolerate it , " attitude in the world is exactly why Window is as fucked up as it is .
If thousands ( tens of thousands ?
millions ? ) of computers get wiped because of this , that 's the fault of everyone who runs Windows and does n't care enough about security to keep themselves safe ( either through backups , or constant attention to security ) .
Sorry , but Windows users need to accept some responsibility for the platform they 've chosen .
I wo n't delight in all these people losing data , but if it causes people to wise up and be more concerned about security , I 'll consider it a net win .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As another poster mentioned, if they're not making regular backups, they're at risk for losing their data for a variety of other reasons.
But to answer your question, yes, it *is* their fault that Windows is fucked up.
The collective "yes, Windows sucks, but I'm going to tolerate it," attitude in the world is exactly why Window is as fucked up as it is.
If thousands (tens of thousands?
millions?) of computers get wiped because of this, that's the fault of everyone who runs Windows and doesn't care enough about security to keep themselves safe (either through backups, or constant attention to security).
Sorry, but Windows users need to accept some responsibility for the platform they've chosen.
I won't delight in all these people losing data, but if it causes people to wise up and be more concerned about security, I'll consider it a net win.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28655283</id>
	<title>Re:Really that bad of a thing?</title>
	<author>StormyWeather</author>
	<datestamp>1247222640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People don't spend their time trying to figure out how to plant crap on your car in order to make it screw up or break, or blurt out porn advertisements in the middle of a CD you are listening to.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People do n't spend their time trying to figure out how to plant crap on your car in order to make it screw up or break , or blurt out porn advertisements in the middle of a CD you are listening to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People don't spend their time trying to figure out how to plant crap on your car in order to make it screw up or break, or blurt out porn advertisements in the middle of a CD you are listening to.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646813</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646669</id>
	<title>Re:+1 Insightful</title>
	<author>religious freak</author>
	<datestamp>1247257020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who wants to take odds that a malware author will act to save these machines?  It's not an impossibility - who would want to potentially lose many thousand boxes when you could just push a fix down to the machines?  These machines are assets in the malware authors' "business".  <br> <br>
It'll be interesting to watch.  If it happens, it'll be kind of like a geek version of spy vs spy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who wants to take odds that a malware author will act to save these machines ?
It 's not an impossibility - who would want to potentially lose many thousand boxes when you could just push a fix down to the machines ?
These machines are assets in the malware authors ' " business " .
It 'll be interesting to watch .
If it happens , it 'll be kind of like a geek version of spy vs spy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who wants to take odds that a malware author will act to save these machines?
It's not an impossibility - who would want to potentially lose many thousand boxes when you could just push a fix down to the machines?
These machines are assets in the malware authors' "business".
It'll be interesting to watch.
If it happens, it'll be kind of like a geek version of spy vs spy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646309</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647931</id>
	<title>Re:U ?</title>
	<author>6Yankee</author>
	<datestamp>1247230980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They aren't Us, they're actually zeros with the tops lopped off.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They are n't Us , they 're actually zeros with the tops lopped off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They aren't Us, they're actually zeros with the tops lopped off.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646285</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28648069</id>
	<title>Re:FFS</title>
	<author>silanea</author>
	<datestamp>1247232060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It is not THEIR fault that windows is so fucked up (is it)?</p></div><p>I have been running a Windows machine without a local firewall and without an on-access AV software for over two years now, and if the periodic checks on the machine and the logs in my gateway's firewall don't deceive me, it's infection-free. And I certainly don't spend my online time at disney.com. So no, it's not the users' fault that Windows is insecure. But it <b>is</b> their fault if they manage to get their system compromised by not following the most basic safety procedures.</p><p>And judging by the many pointless discussions I have had about this subject in <i>corporate</i> environments, nevermind the clueless and disinterested home users, anything less aggressive than killing their data will not drive the point home.</p><p>So I wholeheartedly support the GP's point of view. If this malware causes widespread massive data loss it might
</p><ol>
<li>educate those users who are directly affected and</li><li>make it into international news and thereby get the issue on people's minds.</li></ol><p>Yes, this attack might turn out to be a great thing.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is not THEIR fault that windows is so fucked up ( is it ) ? I have been running a Windows machine without a local firewall and without an on-access AV software for over two years now , and if the periodic checks on the machine and the logs in my gateway 's firewall do n't deceive me , it 's infection-free .
And I certainly do n't spend my online time at disney.com .
So no , it 's not the users ' fault that Windows is insecure .
But it is their fault if they manage to get their system compromised by not following the most basic safety procedures.And judging by the many pointless discussions I have had about this subject in corporate environments , nevermind the clueless and disinterested home users , anything less aggressive than killing their data will not drive the point home.So I wholeheartedly support the GP 's point of view .
If this malware causes widespread massive data loss it might educate those users who are directly affected andmake it into international news and thereby get the issue on people 's minds.Yes , this attack might turn out to be a great thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is not THEIR fault that windows is so fucked up (is it)?I have been running a Windows machine without a local firewall and without an on-access AV software for over two years now, and if the periodic checks on the machine and the logs in my gateway's firewall don't deceive me, it's infection-free.
And I certainly don't spend my online time at disney.com.
So no, it's not the users' fault that Windows is insecure.
But it is their fault if they manage to get their system compromised by not following the most basic safety procedures.And judging by the many pointless discussions I have had about this subject in corporate environments, nevermind the clueless and disinterested home users, anything less aggressive than killing their data will not drive the point home.So I wholeheartedly support the GP's point of view.
If this malware causes widespread massive data loss it might

educate those users who are directly affected andmake it into international news and thereby get the issue on people's minds.Yes, this attack might turn out to be a great thing.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646609</id>
	<title>Shirts!</title>
	<author>binaryseraph</author>
	<datestamp>1247256300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm making that a tee shirt. <br>
"memory of the independence day, uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu"</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm making that a tee shirt .
" memory of the independence day , uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm making that a tee shirt.
"memory of the independence day, uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28648081</id>
	<title>Re:U ?</title>
	<author>Rockoon</author>
	<datestamp>1247232180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Time to school the Coward in the ways of Nerd.<br>
<br>
To convert from an upper case letter to a lower case letter in ascii, you simply add 32 decimal (0x20 in C-hex-speak, 20h in ASM-hex-speak, or 0010 0000 in binary.)<br>
<br>
Since this is a power-of-two, it becomes painfully obvious that "0101 0101" and "1010 0101" are not the upper and lower cases of the same letter, and further..<br>
<br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>... "1010 0101" has its high bit set, so it cannot be any alpha-numeric character at all, which is also painfully obvious to any nerd.<br>
<br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>..and finally... <b>all nerds worldwide have an ascii chart, complete with hex and binary representation, taped up behind their monitor on their parents basement wall.</b></htmltext>
<tokenext>Time to school the Coward in the ways of Nerd .
To convert from an upper case letter to a lower case letter in ascii , you simply add 32 decimal ( 0x20 in C-hex-speak , 20h in ASM-hex-speak , or 0010 0000 in binary .
) Since this is a power-of-two , it becomes painfully obvious that " 0101 0101 " and " 1010 0101 " are not the upper and lower cases of the same letter , and further. . ... " 1010 0101 " has its high bit set , so it can not be any alpha-numeric character at all , which is also painfully obvious to any nerd .
..and finally... all nerds worldwide have an ascii chart , complete with hex and binary representation , taped up behind their monitor on their parents basement wall .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Time to school the Coward in the ways of Nerd.
To convert from an upper case letter to a lower case letter in ascii, you simply add 32 decimal (0x20 in C-hex-speak, 20h in ASM-hex-speak, or 0010 0000 in binary.
)

Since this is a power-of-two, it becomes painfully obvious that "0101 0101" and "1010 0101" are not the upper and lower cases of the same letter, and further..
 ... "1010 0101" has its high bit set, so it cannot be any alpha-numeric character at all, which is also painfully obvious to any nerd.
..and finally... all nerds worldwide have an ascii chart, complete with hex and binary representation, taped up behind their monitor on their parents basement wall.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646327</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647219</id>
	<title>Re:U ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247220480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>In South Korea, virus writes U!</htmltext>
<tokenext>In South Korea , virus writes U !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In South Korea, virus writes U!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646285</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28648317</id>
	<title>Good riddance</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247233920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There should be something like "drivers license" when you are connected to Internet with such speed. People having 2 megabyte/sec lines doesn't install at least a free antivirus, they disable the OS firewall (even when it is free) to run some junk which doesn't use the firewall API of Windows are the ones who really deserves their HD to get wiped.</p><p>Man they don't even run Windows Update. It is 1 click! It backs up too. Don't start with how evil MS updates has been, if you are that bugged, please get rid of Windows itself.</p><p>I am frustrated as a guy who had to setup a mail filter on Yahoo Mail to get rid of Korean spam. Yes, I have setup to detect Korean charsets, the "!!!" in subject which Korean spammers seems to love.</p><p>Things like<br>"If...<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Body contains "charset="ISO-2022-KR""<br>Then...<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Move message to Trash folder"</p><p>Seriously, this must stop. Being highest bandwidth country really gives them some responsibilities. Just like German Autobahn. Yes, there is no speed limit but their license exams are close to torture.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There should be something like " drivers license " when you are connected to Internet with such speed .
People having 2 megabyte/sec lines does n't install at least a free antivirus , they disable the OS firewall ( even when it is free ) to run some junk which does n't use the firewall API of Windows are the ones who really deserves their HD to get wiped.Man they do n't even run Windows Update .
It is 1 click !
It backs up too .
Do n't start with how evil MS updates has been , if you are that bugged , please get rid of Windows itself.I am frustrated as a guy who had to setup a mail filter on Yahoo Mail to get rid of Korean spam .
Yes , I have setup to detect Korean charsets , the " ! ! !
" in subject which Korean spammers seems to love.Things like " If.. .       Body contains " charset = " ISO-2022-KR " " Then.. .       Move message to Trash folder " Seriously , this must stop .
Being highest bandwidth country really gives them some responsibilities .
Just like German Autobahn .
Yes , there is no speed limit but their license exams are close to torture .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There should be something like "drivers license" when you are connected to Internet with such speed.
People having 2 megabyte/sec lines doesn't install at least a free antivirus, they disable the OS firewall (even when it is free) to run some junk which doesn't use the firewall API of Windows are the ones who really deserves their HD to get wiped.Man they don't even run Windows Update.
It is 1 click!
It backs up too.
Don't start with how evil MS updates has been, if you are that bugged, please get rid of Windows itself.I am frustrated as a guy who had to setup a mail filter on Yahoo Mail to get rid of Korean spam.
Yes, I have setup to detect Korean charsets, the "!!!
" in subject which Korean spammers seems to love.Things like"If...
      Body contains "charset="ISO-2022-KR""Then...
      Move message to Trash folder"Seriously, this must stop.
Being highest bandwidth country really gives them some responsibilities.
Just like German Autobahn.
Yes, there is no speed limit but their license exams are close to torture.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646457</id>
	<title>I remember</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247167740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>back when we used to fill hard drives with pr0n.

Or the word "beable" repeated over and over.</htmltext>
<tokenext>back when we used to fill hard drives with pr0n .
Or the word " beable " repeated over and over .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>back when we used to fill hard drives with pr0n.
Or the word "beable" repeated over and over.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646335</id>
	<title>Re:Really that bad of a thing?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247166000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>You have to imagine if these computers are all infected with this one trojan, they are probably infected with god only knows how much other spyware, malware, backdoors, and spambots. This might just be a GOOD thing; when <b>my friends and family</b> wake up to a completely wiped drive, it might be the thing that drives <b>my 89yr old grandmother</b> to read up on computer security a little bit, perhaps switch to a more secure browser, buy a router with a hardware firewall, etc. Not to mention, it will also wipe out all <b>of their pictures, tax returns, email and other important documents.</b></p></div></blockquote><p>There fixed that for you.</p><p>Why don't you just wish them to total their car so that they can be <i>forced</i> to buy a newer, more fuel efficient car.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You have to imagine if these computers are all infected with this one trojan , they are probably infected with god only knows how much other spyware , malware , backdoors , and spambots .
This might just be a GOOD thing ; when my friends and family wake up to a completely wiped drive , it might be the thing that drives my 89yr old grandmother to read up on computer security a little bit , perhaps switch to a more secure browser , buy a router with a hardware firewall , etc .
Not to mention , it will also wipe out all of their pictures , tax returns , email and other important documents.There fixed that for you.Why do n't you just wish them to total their car so that they can be forced to buy a newer , more fuel efficient car .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have to imagine if these computers are all infected with this one trojan, they are probably infected with god only knows how much other spyware, malware, backdoors, and spambots.
This might just be a GOOD thing; when my friends and family wake up to a completely wiped drive, it might be the thing that drives my 89yr old grandmother to read up on computer security a little bit, perhaps switch to a more secure browser, buy a router with a hardware firewall, etc.
Not to mention, it will also wipe out all of their pictures, tax returns, email and other important documents.There fixed that for you.Why don't you just wish them to total their car so that they can be forced to buy a newer, more fuel efficient car.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647535</id>
	<title>Re:U ?</title>
	<author>SeaFox</author>
	<datestamp>1247225340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In Soviet Trojan, hard drive is overwritten by "U"!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In Soviet Trojan , hard drive is overwritten by " U " !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Soviet Trojan, hard drive is overwritten by "U"!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646285</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647711</id>
	<title>I thought there was too much money to be made?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247228280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Where are all the smarties explaining that no virus will wipe out a Windows system for there's too much money to be made by using it as a zombie?</p><p>Please, geniuses?</p><p>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Where are all the smarties explaining that no virus will wipe out a Windows system for there 's too much money to be made by using it as a zombie ? Please , geniuses ?
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where are all the smarties explaining that no virus will wipe out a Windows system for there's too much money to be made by using it as a zombie?Please, geniuses?
 </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646279</id>
	<title>Apple viral marketing campaign</title>
	<author>mokeyboy</author>
	<datestamp>1247165160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Its all a plot to make people buy Mac</htmltext>
<tokenext>Its all a plot to make people buy Mac</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its all a plot to make people buy Mac</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647175</id>
	<title>Re:Really that bad of a thing?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247220120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Cars are designed to be relatively simple to operate, yet can be highly reliable, safe, and low maintenance. At least for the majority of their lifetime, for the average person.</i></p><p>Sure, and (at least here) it's mandatory to bring your car in a certified garage once a year for a complete safety checkup where they check your tires, breaks, electronics, exhaust, and also all of your your pipes, and should any of those fail the inspection you have to have it repaired or you will not be allowed on the road 'til it's fixed. The police routinely checks trucks for safety reasons, they can (and do) also pull you over should they have the feeling that something ain't right with your car (and stop your car dead there if they're in any way right).</p><p>Once we got the same with computers, we're talking again, ok?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cars are designed to be relatively simple to operate , yet can be highly reliable , safe , and low maintenance .
At least for the majority of their lifetime , for the average person.Sure , and ( at least here ) it 's mandatory to bring your car in a certified garage once a year for a complete safety checkup where they check your tires , breaks , electronics , exhaust , and also all of your your pipes , and should any of those fail the inspection you have to have it repaired or you will not be allowed on the road 'til it 's fixed .
The police routinely checks trucks for safety reasons , they can ( and do ) also pull you over should they have the feeling that something ai n't right with your car ( and stop your car dead there if they 're in any way right ) .Once we got the same with computers , we 're talking again , ok ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cars are designed to be relatively simple to operate, yet can be highly reliable, safe, and low maintenance.
At least for the majority of their lifetime, for the average person.Sure, and (at least here) it's mandatory to bring your car in a certified garage once a year for a complete safety checkup where they check your tires, breaks, electronics, exhaust, and also all of your your pipes, and should any of those fail the inspection you have to have it repaired or you will not be allowed on the road 'til it's fixed.
The police routinely checks trucks for safety reasons, they can (and do) also pull you over should they have the feeling that something ain't right with your car (and stop your car dead there if they're in any way right).Once we got the same with computers, we're talking again, ok?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646813</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28653995</id>
	<title>Re:Really that bad of a thing?</title>
	<author>arkhan\_jg</author>
	<datestamp>1247258580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ease of use, ability for users to install any app they like, security. If the user is untrained, you only get to pick two. Even if the user is trained, human error on their part will still foul things up sometimes.</p><p>Computers are complex machines, and expected to be able to do a huge range of things. Add into that the human error inherent in building any complex system on the cheap as fast as possible, and another bunch of humans who can make a bunch of money from finding their mistakes, and you get where we are today.</p><p>Some of the mistakes are longstanding, such as the assumption that the mail client could be trusted not to lie, or the more complex trust issues with DNS. Some of the mistakes are because when it gets done cheap and fast, mistakes are inevitable. Windows may be less secure on the whole than linux, but they operate under different pressures. Linux is still a server OS at its heart, and demands more knowledge of its userbase. Windows has been marketed as the OS anyone can use, and pushed out to as many people as possible to make as much money as possible. Security simply isn't a concern of most windows users; they just assume that's what computers are like, and getting it serviced by a tech periodically to clean it up is no different than getting your car serviced by a mechanic.</p><p>Either we insist users be trained to a higher standard, restrict what they're allowed to do (as businesses do), force them to do things securely by proper process, or we just accept that some unskilled people's computers will be preyed on by those less scrupulous.</p><p>Computers are not TVs or DVD players, but that's precisely what they've been marketed as; home appliances for the unskilled that could be connected to millions of others in the world. People accepted that uncritically, and were happy to get one at such cheap prices, and the expected it to 'just work' without having to do anything themselves. Malware is the inevitable result.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ease of use , ability for users to install any app they like , security .
If the user is untrained , you only get to pick two .
Even if the user is trained , human error on their part will still foul things up sometimes.Computers are complex machines , and expected to be able to do a huge range of things .
Add into that the human error inherent in building any complex system on the cheap as fast as possible , and another bunch of humans who can make a bunch of money from finding their mistakes , and you get where we are today.Some of the mistakes are longstanding , such as the assumption that the mail client could be trusted not to lie , or the more complex trust issues with DNS .
Some of the mistakes are because when it gets done cheap and fast , mistakes are inevitable .
Windows may be less secure on the whole than linux , but they operate under different pressures .
Linux is still a server OS at its heart , and demands more knowledge of its userbase .
Windows has been marketed as the OS anyone can use , and pushed out to as many people as possible to make as much money as possible .
Security simply is n't a concern of most windows users ; they just assume that 's what computers are like , and getting it serviced by a tech periodically to clean it up is no different than getting your car serviced by a mechanic.Either we insist users be trained to a higher standard , restrict what they 're allowed to do ( as businesses do ) , force them to do things securely by proper process , or we just accept that some unskilled people 's computers will be preyed on by those less scrupulous.Computers are not TVs or DVD players , but that 's precisely what they 've been marketed as ; home appliances for the unskilled that could be connected to millions of others in the world .
People accepted that uncritically , and were happy to get one at such cheap prices , and the expected it to 'just work ' without having to do anything themselves .
Malware is the inevitable result .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ease of use, ability for users to install any app they like, security.
If the user is untrained, you only get to pick two.
Even if the user is trained, human error on their part will still foul things up sometimes.Computers are complex machines, and expected to be able to do a huge range of things.
Add into that the human error inherent in building any complex system on the cheap as fast as possible, and another bunch of humans who can make a bunch of money from finding their mistakes, and you get where we are today.Some of the mistakes are longstanding, such as the assumption that the mail client could be trusted not to lie, or the more complex trust issues with DNS.
Some of the mistakes are because when it gets done cheap and fast, mistakes are inevitable.
Windows may be less secure on the whole than linux, but they operate under different pressures.
Linux is still a server OS at its heart, and demands more knowledge of its userbase.
Windows has been marketed as the OS anyone can use, and pushed out to as many people as possible to make as much money as possible.
Security simply isn't a concern of most windows users; they just assume that's what computers are like, and getting it serviced by a tech periodically to clean it up is no different than getting your car serviced by a mechanic.Either we insist users be trained to a higher standard, restrict what they're allowed to do (as businesses do), force them to do things securely by proper process, or we just accept that some unskilled people's computers will be preyed on by those less scrupulous.Computers are not TVs or DVD players, but that's precisely what they've been marketed as; home appliances for the unskilled that could be connected to millions of others in the world.
People accepted that uncritically, and were happy to get one at such cheap prices, and the expected it to 'just work' without having to do anything themselves.
Malware is the inevitable result.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646465</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291</id>
	<title>Really that bad of a thing?</title>
	<author>Immostlyharmless</author>
	<datestamp>1247165280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>You have to imagine if these computers are all infected with this one trojan, they are probably infected with god only knows how much other spyware, malware, backdoors, and spambots. This might just be a GOOD thing; when these compromised twits wake up to a completely wiped drive, it might be the thing that drives them to read up on computer security a little bit, perhaps switch to a more secure browser, buy a router with a hardware firewall, etc. Not to mention, it will also wipe out all the aforementioned crapware.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You have to imagine if these computers are all infected with this one trojan , they are probably infected with god only knows how much other spyware , malware , backdoors , and spambots .
This might just be a GOOD thing ; when these compromised twits wake up to a completely wiped drive , it might be the thing that drives them to read up on computer security a little bit , perhaps switch to a more secure browser , buy a router with a hardware firewall , etc .
Not to mention , it will also wipe out all the aforementioned crapware .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have to imagine if these computers are all infected with this one trojan, they are probably infected with god only knows how much other spyware, malware, backdoors, and spambots.
This might just be a GOOD thing; when these compromised twits wake up to a completely wiped drive, it might be the thing that drives them to read up on computer security a little bit, perhaps switch to a more secure browser, buy a router with a hardware firewall, etc.
Not to mention, it will also wipe out all the aforementioned crapware.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646269</id>
	<title>Final code</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247164980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>0 0 0 Destruct 0</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>0 0 0 Destruct 0</tokentext>
<sentencetext>0 0 0 Destruct 0</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28653159</id>
	<title>Re:U ?</title>
	<author>ais523</author>
	<datestamp>1247254920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Assuming ASCII, 'u' is actually 0111 0101; not even palindromic. I agree, 'U' seems more likely.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Assuming ASCII , 'u ' is actually 0111 0101 ; not even palindromic .
I agree , 'U ' seems more likely .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Assuming ASCII, 'u' is actually 0111 0101; not even palindromic.
I agree, 'U' seems more likely.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646327</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647501</id>
	<title>IT Tech</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247224620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh Boy!<br>Sounds like business will be picking up!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh Boy ! Sounds like business will be picking up !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh Boy!Sounds like business will be picking up!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647337</id>
	<title>Re:Really that bad of a thing?</title>
	<author>TheP4st</author>
	<datestamp>1247222100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Car analogies are popular here on Slashdot (I don't know what that is about), so how about this one.  Why is that cars can only be properly and safely operated by mechanics, engineers, and aficionados?
Obviously, that is not true.  Cars are designed to be relatively simple to operate, yet can be highly reliable, safe, and low maintenance..</p></div><p>Exactly the reason why car anologies are popular here. My 67 years old mother is fully capable of changing oil, checking tyre pressure as well as determine when they need to be replaced. I even remember her changing them when I was a kid and she had a flat in the middle of nowhere, granted there were quite some muted cursing involved but nonetheless she did!
</p><p>
Not running as admin excpet when really needed,using a updated AV and Firewall is pretty much the computer equivalent to that, yet only a tiny minority of Windows users do those three things. Seriously, I have long since lost count of the times I have read Windows users proudly proclaim in forums "I have not used a AV or firewall in years and I have never had a virus" and I've met them in meatspace too. The only difference is that with these ones it have only taken me moments in front of their machine to prove how utterly wrong they are.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Car analogies are popular here on Slashdot ( I do n't know what that is about ) , so how about this one .
Why is that cars can only be properly and safely operated by mechanics , engineers , and aficionados ?
Obviously , that is not true .
Cars are designed to be relatively simple to operate , yet can be highly reliable , safe , and low maintenance..Exactly the reason why car anologies are popular here .
My 67 years old mother is fully capable of changing oil , checking tyre pressure as well as determine when they need to be replaced .
I even remember her changing them when I was a kid and she had a flat in the middle of nowhere , granted there were quite some muted cursing involved but nonetheless she did !
Not running as admin excpet when really needed,using a updated AV and Firewall is pretty much the computer equivalent to that , yet only a tiny minority of Windows users do those three things .
Seriously , I have long since lost count of the times I have read Windows users proudly proclaim in forums " I have not used a AV or firewall in years and I have never had a virus " and I 've met them in meatspace too .
The only difference is that with these ones it have only taken me moments in front of their machine to prove how utterly wrong they are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Car analogies are popular here on Slashdot (I don't know what that is about), so how about this one.
Why is that cars can only be properly and safely operated by mechanics, engineers, and aficionados?
Obviously, that is not true.
Cars are designed to be relatively simple to operate, yet can be highly reliable, safe, and low maintenance..Exactly the reason why car anologies are popular here.
My 67 years old mother is fully capable of changing oil, checking tyre pressure as well as determine when they need to be replaced.
I even remember her changing them when I was a kid and she had a flat in the middle of nowhere, granted there were quite some muted cursing involved but nonetheless she did!
Not running as admin excpet when really needed,using a updated AV and Firewall is pretty much the computer equivalent to that, yet only a tiny minority of Windows users do those three things.
Seriously, I have long since lost count of the times I have read Windows users proudly proclaim in forums "I have not used a AV or firewall in years and I have never had a virus" and I've met them in meatspace too.
The only difference is that with these ones it have only taken me moments in front of their machine to prove how utterly wrong they are.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646813</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647727</id>
	<title>Re:Really that bad of a thing?</title>
	<author>howlingmadhowie</author>
	<datestamp>1247228580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>absolutely wrong. if you're going to buy and use a computer, you should learn about it and how to use it safely. if not, you don't get to blame the programmers when something goes wrong.</htmltext>
<tokenext>absolutely wrong .
if you 're going to buy and use a computer , you should learn about it and how to use it safely .
if not , you do n't get to blame the programmers when something goes wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>absolutely wrong.
if you're going to buy and use a computer, you should learn about it and how to use it safely.
if not, you don't get to blame the programmers when something goes wrong.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646465</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646377</id>
	<title>Well...</title>
	<author>TheSpoom</author>
	<datestamp>1247166540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sucks to be running Windows.</p><p>*gets back to work in gedit*</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sucks to be running Windows .
* gets back to work in gedit *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sucks to be running Windows.
*gets back to work in gedit*</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646385</id>
	<title>Re:Really that bad of a thing?</title>
	<author>rodgster</author>
	<datestamp>1247166660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>hhhmmm</p><p>I wonder if the backbone network admins are going to block access to that "set of web servers" or just let nature take it course.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>hhhmmmI wonder if the backbone network admins are going to block access to that " set of web servers " or just let nature take it course .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>hhhmmmI wonder if the backbone network admins are going to block access to that "set of web servers" or just let nature take it course.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647953</id>
	<title>Re:U ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247231160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>it should have been "KE"</p><p>"KEKEKEKEKEKE"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it should have been " KE " " KEKEKEKEKEKE "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it should have been "KE""KEKEKEKEKEKE"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646285</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646763</id>
	<title>Re:What is the source?</title>
	<author>garyisabusyguy</author>
	<datestamp>1247258340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>over at <a href="http://www.darkreading.com/security/cybercrime/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=218401130" title="darkreading.com" rel="nofollow">DarkReading</a> [darkreading.com] they say:

Earlier Wednesday, the National Intelligence Service said in a statement that 12,000 computers in South Korea and 8,000 computers overseas had been infected and used for the cyberattack.

Seems a little more realistic for a national threat</htmltext>
<tokenext>over at DarkReading [ darkreading.com ] they say : Earlier Wednesday , the National Intelligence Service said in a statement that 12,000 computers in South Korea and 8,000 computers overseas had been infected and used for the cyberattack .
Seems a little more realistic for a national threat</tokentext>
<sentencetext>over at DarkReading [darkreading.com] they say:

Earlier Wednesday, the National Intelligence Service said in a statement that 12,000 computers in South Korea and 8,000 computers overseas had been infected and used for the cyberattack.
Seems a little more realistic for a national threat</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646487</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647103</id>
	<title>BBC</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247219220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's just the new awareness campaign from the BBC, this one with permission<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's just the new awareness campaign from the BBC , this one with permission ; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's just the new awareness campaign from the BBC, this one with permission ;-)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647599</id>
	<title>Re:Really that bad of a thing?</title>
	<author>X0563511</author>
	<datestamp>1247226480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If only the monkey would start punching them back. Sometimes, it seems that pain or loss is the only way to teach some people.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If only the monkey would start punching them back .
Sometimes , it seems that pain or loss is the only way to teach some people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If only the monkey would start punching them back.
Sometimes, it seems that pain or loss is the only way to teach some people.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646323</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646479</id>
	<title>Re:Really that bad of a thing?</title>
	<author>Volante3192</author>
	<datestamp>1247168100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Why don't you just wish them to total their car so that they can be forced to buy a newer, more fuel efficient car.</i></p><p>It's more like watching them make the engine explode in flames because they never changed the oil in 80,000 miles.</p><p>There's unavoidable mechanical failure and then there's not keeping up on maintenance.  The former is forgivable, despite being annoying.  The latter drives me to wreak havoc on my liver.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do n't you just wish them to total their car so that they can be forced to buy a newer , more fuel efficient car.It 's more like watching them make the engine explode in flames because they never changed the oil in 80,000 miles.There 's unavoidable mechanical failure and then there 's not keeping up on maintenance .
The former is forgivable , despite being annoying .
The latter drives me to wreak havoc on my liver .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why don't you just wish them to total their car so that they can be forced to buy a newer, more fuel efficient car.It's more like watching them make the engine explode in flames because they never changed the oil in 80,000 miles.There's unavoidable mechanical failure and then there's not keeping up on maintenance.
The former is forgivable, despite being annoying.
The latter drives me to wreak havoc on my liver.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646335</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646753</id>
	<title>Re:What is the source?</title>
	<author>tokyoahead</author>
	<datestamp>1247258160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If those WERE 86 IP's then it's definitely North Korea's work. Their IT personnel cannot handle more bots than that. They do not have enough IT folks among their slave laborers. And their "Windows ME Gulag" is still under construction.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If those WERE 86 IP 's then it 's definitely North Korea 's work .
Their IT personnel can not handle more bots than that .
They do not have enough IT folks among their slave laborers .
And their " Windows ME Gulag " is still under construction .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If those WERE 86 IP's then it's definitely North Korea's work.
Their IT personnel cannot handle more bots than that.
They do not have enough IT folks among their slave laborers.
And their "Windows ME Gulag" is still under construction.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646487</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646455</id>
	<title>Humbug!</title>
	<author>ZarathustraDK</author>
	<datestamp>1247167680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm pretty sure I'm samemory of the independence day uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm pretty sure I 'm samemory of the independence day uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm pretty sure I'm samemory of the independence day uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647307</id>
	<title>Has this happened to anybody yet ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247221680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's friday where I live now and not seen anything on this anywhere....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's friday where I live now and not seen anything on this anywhere... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's friday where I live now and not seen anything on this anywhere....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646533</id>
	<title>Blood in the water</title>
	<author>Pecisk</author>
	<datestamp>1247168880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This will be ugly and exciting at once. First of all, I bet all mob supported worm writers will be fuming, because someone broke silent agreement that there should be no destructive viruses, otherwise people would start to actually care. And if people care =&gt; more correctly patched boxes =&gt; less posibility to own them =&gt; no profit at all.</p><p>Second, it will send very interesting message to people who have ignored subject of IT security so far. Imagine company with 100 computers suddenly standing on nothing but the air - no data, no OSes to work with, nothing. Third, I am afraid that some control maniacs (those who usually end with having an actual power to be maniacal) will use it as an excuse to impose more control on Internet. Of course, it will be laughted at by serious IT security specs, but those freaks will freak out and it will be interesting and frightening at same time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This will be ugly and exciting at once .
First of all , I bet all mob supported worm writers will be fuming , because someone broke silent agreement that there should be no destructive viruses , otherwise people would start to actually care .
And if people care = &gt; more correctly patched boxes = &gt; less posibility to own them = &gt; no profit at all.Second , it will send very interesting message to people who have ignored subject of IT security so far .
Imagine company with 100 computers suddenly standing on nothing but the air - no data , no OSes to work with , nothing .
Third , I am afraid that some control maniacs ( those who usually end with having an actual power to be maniacal ) will use it as an excuse to impose more control on Internet .
Of course , it will be laughted at by serious IT security specs , but those freaks will freak out and it will be interesting and frightening at same time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This will be ugly and exciting at once.
First of all, I bet all mob supported worm writers will be fuming, because someone broke silent agreement that there should be no destructive viruses, otherwise people would start to actually care.
And if people care =&gt; more correctly patched boxes =&gt; less posibility to own them =&gt; no profit at all.Second, it will send very interesting message to people who have ignored subject of IT security so far.
Imagine company with 100 computers suddenly standing on nothing but the air - no data, no OSes to work with, nothing.
Third, I am afraid that some control maniacs (those who usually end with having an actual power to be maniacal) will use it as an excuse to impose more control on Internet.
Of course, it will be laughted at by serious IT security specs, but those freaks will freak out and it will be interesting and frightening at same time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646309</id>
	<title>+1 Insightful</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247165520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>This might just be a GOOD thing; when these compromised twits wake up to a completely wiped drive, it might be the thing that drives them to read up on computer security a little bit, perhaps switch to a more secure browser, buy a router with a hardware firewall, etc. Not to mention, it will also wipe out all the aforementioned crapware.</p></div></blockquote><p>Precisely my thought on reading the summary -- good riddance to some severely compromised systems on the one hand, and on the other, I sincerely hope the users gain a clue.  </p><p>Getting hit with the clue bat hurts.  Otherwise, folks tend not to remember.</p><p>Cheers,</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This might just be a GOOD thing ; when these compromised twits wake up to a completely wiped drive , it might be the thing that drives them to read up on computer security a little bit , perhaps switch to a more secure browser , buy a router with a hardware firewall , etc .
Not to mention , it will also wipe out all the aforementioned crapware.Precisely my thought on reading the summary -- good riddance to some severely compromised systems on the one hand , and on the other , I sincerely hope the users gain a clue .
Getting hit with the clue bat hurts .
Otherwise , folks tend not to remember.Cheers ,</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This might just be a GOOD thing; when these compromised twits wake up to a completely wiped drive, it might be the thing that drives them to read up on computer security a little bit, perhaps switch to a more secure browser, buy a router with a hardware firewall, etc.
Not to mention, it will also wipe out all the aforementioned crapware.Precisely my thought on reading the summary -- good riddance to some severely compromised systems on the one hand, and on the other, I sincerely hope the users gain a clue.
Getting hit with the clue bat hurts.
Otherwise, folks tend not to remember.Cheers,
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28648619</id>
	<title>Re:No SC players?</title>
	<author>H0p313ss</author>
	<datestamp>1247235660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm surprised they aren't filling the storage with "kekekekekekekekekekekeke"...</p></div><p>I can't wait for the Hollywood version: &lt;gravelly voice&gt;On July 4th America celebrates it's independence day, but on July 10th the gold farmers break free! KEK KEK KEK!&lt;/gravelly voice&gt;</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm surprised they are n't filling the storage with " kekekekekekekekekekekeke " ...I ca n't wait for the Hollywood version : On July 4th America celebrates it 's independence day , but on July 10th the gold farmers break free !
KEK KEK KEK !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm surprised they aren't filling the storage with "kekekekekekekekekekekeke"...I can't wait for the Hollywood version: On July 4th America celebrates it's independence day, but on July 10th the gold farmers break free!
KEK KEK KEK!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646441</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28649065</id>
	<title>I feel a strange disturbance in the force...</title>
	<author>jbn7343</author>
	<datestamp>1247237880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>its as if millions of insecure computers suddenly cried out and then fell silent.</htmltext>
<tokenext>its as if millions of insecure computers suddenly cried out and then fell silent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>its as if millions of insecure computers suddenly cried out and then fell silent.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647109</id>
	<title>marketing?</title>
	<author>euyis</author>
	<datestamp>1247219280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Maybe it's <a href="http://www.hardwarezone.com/news/view.php?id=14065&amp;cid=11" title="hardwarezone.com" rel="nofollow">Tmax Window</a> [hardwarezone.com]'s marketing campaign.<br>
That's the real "viral" marketing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe it 's Tmax Window [ hardwarezone.com ] 's marketing campaign .
That 's the real " viral " marketing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe it's Tmax Window [hardwarezone.com]'s marketing campaign.
That's the real "viral" marketing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647621</id>
	<title>Re:U ?</title>
	<author>howlingmadhowie</author>
	<datestamp>1247226720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>small correction<br>
U=0101 0101<br>
u=0111 0101<br>
<br>
it quite obviously cannot be a number larger than 128 in decimal<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>small correction U = 0101 0101 u = 0111 0101 it quite obviously can not be a number larger than 128 in decimal : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>small correction
U=0101 0101
u=0111 0101

it quite obviously cannot be a number larger than 128 in decimal :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646327</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646813</id>
	<title>Re:Really that bad of a thing?</title>
	<author>EdIII</author>
	<datestamp>1247258940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How on Earth is the above comment flamebait?  In any way, shape, or form?</p><p>This poster is absolutely <b> <i>RIGHT</i> </b>.</p><p>Car analogies are popular here on Slashdot (I don't know what that is about), so how about this one.  Why is that cars can only be properly and safely operated by mechanics, engineers, and aficionados?<br>Obviously, that is not true.  Cars are designed to be relatively simple to operate, yet can be highly reliable, safe, and low maintenance.  At least for the majority of their lifetime, for the <i>average</i> person.</p><p>It's easy to look down and speak badly about the <i>large</i> amount of computer users that have barely a fraction of the skills of the average Slashdotter.  However, the poster brings up something rather interesting.  Why is it that the various industries responsible for creating these computer systems don't take more responsibility for making it secure?</p><p>It's not impossible.  Unfortunately, it would probably require a heck of lot more work and cooperation between people and corporations that have no interest or advantage in cooperating.</p><p>This goes far beyond just the Evil Microsoft vs. Linux Rulez "debate".  The poster is asking why there seems to be a fundamental attitude in the industry to shift blame and responsibility.  It's a valid question, that is neither trolling or flaming anyone's point of view.</p><p>Is it that unreasonable to wish that computer systems get designed around unsophisticated users skill sets with an emphasis on security?  Designing systems that make it difficult to participate in Botnets and other activities that cause considerable financial damage?</p><p>I don't think so.  There really is a problem that needs to be addressed, and this poster brings up a valid point to discuss.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How on Earth is the above comment flamebait ?
In any way , shape , or form ? This poster is absolutely RIGHT .Car analogies are popular here on Slashdot ( I do n't know what that is about ) , so how about this one .
Why is that cars can only be properly and safely operated by mechanics , engineers , and aficionados ? Obviously , that is not true .
Cars are designed to be relatively simple to operate , yet can be highly reliable , safe , and low maintenance .
At least for the majority of their lifetime , for the average person.It 's easy to look down and speak badly about the large amount of computer users that have barely a fraction of the skills of the average Slashdotter .
However , the poster brings up something rather interesting .
Why is it that the various industries responsible for creating these computer systems do n't take more responsibility for making it secure ? It 's not impossible .
Unfortunately , it would probably require a heck of lot more work and cooperation between people and corporations that have no interest or advantage in cooperating.This goes far beyond just the Evil Microsoft vs. Linux Rulez " debate " .
The poster is asking why there seems to be a fundamental attitude in the industry to shift blame and responsibility .
It 's a valid question , that is neither trolling or flaming anyone 's point of view.Is it that unreasonable to wish that computer systems get designed around unsophisticated users skill sets with an emphasis on security ?
Designing systems that make it difficult to participate in Botnets and other activities that cause considerable financial damage ? I do n't think so .
There really is a problem that needs to be addressed , and this poster brings up a valid point to discuss .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How on Earth is the above comment flamebait?
In any way, shape, or form?This poster is absolutely  RIGHT .Car analogies are popular here on Slashdot (I don't know what that is about), so how about this one.
Why is that cars can only be properly and safely operated by mechanics, engineers, and aficionados?Obviously, that is not true.
Cars are designed to be relatively simple to operate, yet can be highly reliable, safe, and low maintenance.
At least for the majority of their lifetime, for the average person.It's easy to look down and speak badly about the large amount of computer users that have barely a fraction of the skills of the average Slashdotter.
However, the poster brings up something rather interesting.
Why is it that the various industries responsible for creating these computer systems don't take more responsibility for making it secure?It's not impossible.
Unfortunately, it would probably require a heck of lot more work and cooperation between people and corporations that have no interest or advantage in cooperating.This goes far beyond just the Evil Microsoft vs. Linux Rulez "debate".
The poster is asking why there seems to be a fundamental attitude in the industry to shift blame and responsibility.
It's a valid question, that is neither trolling or flaming anyone's point of view.Is it that unreasonable to wish that computer systems get designed around unsophisticated users skill sets with an emphasis on security?
Designing systems that make it difficult to participate in Botnets and other activities that cause considerable financial damage?I don't think so.
There really is a problem that needs to be addressed, and this poster brings up a valid point to discuss.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646465</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646421</id>
	<title>happy ending</title>
	<author>Errtu76</author>
	<datestamp>1247167140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm glad there's a happy ending to this story. Thousands of unpatched windows machines will cease to exist, hurray!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm glad there 's a happy ending to this story .
Thousands of unpatched windows machines will cease to exist , hurray !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm glad there's a happy ending to this story.
Thousands of unpatched windows machines will cease to exist, hurray!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28650111</id>
	<title>Re:Well...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247242020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>people use gedit?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>people use gedit ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>people use gedit?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646377</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646925</id>
	<title>gffg</title>
	<author>zharko</author>
	<datestamp>1247217240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/xiceddery.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> are musical patch cables screened </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/ccalexinseno.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> ba promotional code </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/belisked.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> smokey mountain knife works </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/aitussci.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> sprint tour </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/heryedndion.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> cherry van prunus avium </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/wayghomop.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> who is the best eyelid surgeon in michig </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/grinom.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> youngasiansex </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/ximess.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> scac code list </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/nypivesitere.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> phoenix magiician </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/jereredo.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> sprint blackberry tour </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/pthere.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> sweet devon </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/betonoforee.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> hyatt hotel boycott </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/edigh.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> interior decorator catalogue </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/esuto.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> onlydudes </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/andigofan.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> m d helicopters </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/poutione.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> ba promotion code </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/mivarar.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> gammes tom and jerry </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/index.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> mets trade rumors </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/xalyt.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> weightwatchers atworketools </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/moudis.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> cavs trade rumors </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/hessinedrli.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> british airways promotional code </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/orotederent.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> uno online play </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/xpoutedoua.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> tamilnude </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/dristosk.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> bravonude </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/fayoungh.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> free wow account </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/seeractten.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> compare the market </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/vedslythi.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> lezsex </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/onoounki.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> bsp </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/jeledesoul.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> toner </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/xcama.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> model no.dvp-s560d </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/ckerotonde.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> tom and jerry games </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/ftacedri.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> cash books for cerebral palsy </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/unenenghish.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> driving while intoxicated attorney or la </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/alishe.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> wow items for sale </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/himngomiedst.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> picturesex </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/zdanenokhay.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> spadroon sword </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/gonen.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> power inductors universal applications </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/whededith.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> cavs rumors </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/cchixalo.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> yugiohcardgame </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/ofrmaiv.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> picasso software </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/yorouthexa.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> circuit city locations </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/nindored.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> verizon blackberry tour </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/eavendezlas.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> online related links </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/thalionthi.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> kinkcarmen </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/otacorndic.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> cytherea </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/whefrthit.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> uno online </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/priglyoud.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> sprint blackberry </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/nghadrthe.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> hello kitty agame </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/alytoacrom.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> british airways promotion code </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/anthi.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> saas billing ipapplications case study </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/rerik.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> scooter ramps for cars </a> [2y.net]
<a href="http://screwfix.mnogo.2y.net/stanof.html" title="2y.net" rel="nofollow"> lawyer</a> [2y.net]</htmltext>
<tokenext>are musical patch cables screened [ 2y.net ] ba promotional code [ 2y.net ] smokey mountain knife works [ 2y.net ] sprint tour [ 2y.net ] cherry van prunus avium [ 2y.net ] who is the best eyelid surgeon in michig [ 2y.net ] youngasiansex [ 2y.net ] scac code list [ 2y.net ] phoenix magiician [ 2y.net ] sprint blackberry tour [ 2y.net ] sweet devon [ 2y.net ] hyatt hotel boycott [ 2y.net ] interior decorator catalogue [ 2y.net ] onlydudes [ 2y.net ] m d helicopters [ 2y.net ] ba promotion code [ 2y.net ] gammes tom and jerry [ 2y.net ] mets trade rumors [ 2y.net ] weightwatchers atworketools [ 2y.net ] cavs trade rumors [ 2y.net ] british airways promotional code [ 2y.net ] uno online play [ 2y.net ] tamilnude [ 2y.net ] bravonude [ 2y.net ] free wow account [ 2y.net ] compare the market [ 2y.net ] lezsex [ 2y.net ] bsp [ 2y.net ] toner [ 2y.net ] model no.dvp-s560d [ 2y.net ] tom and jerry games [ 2y.net ] cash books for cerebral palsy [ 2y.net ] driving while intoxicated attorney or la [ 2y.net ] wow items for sale [ 2y.net ] picturesex [ 2y.net ] spadroon sword [ 2y.net ] power inductors universal applications [ 2y.net ] cavs rumors [ 2y.net ] yugiohcardgame [ 2y.net ] picasso software [ 2y.net ] circuit city locations [ 2y.net ] verizon blackberry tour [ 2y.net ] online related links [ 2y.net ] kinkcarmen [ 2y.net ] cytherea [ 2y.net ] uno online [ 2y.net ] sprint blackberry [ 2y.net ] hello kitty agame [ 2y.net ] british airways promotion code [ 2y.net ] saas billing ipapplications case study [ 2y.net ] scooter ramps for cars [ 2y.net ] lawyer [ 2y.net ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext> are musical patch cables screened  [2y.net]
 ba promotional code  [2y.net]
 smokey mountain knife works  [2y.net]
 sprint tour  [2y.net]
 cherry van prunus avium  [2y.net]
 who is the best eyelid surgeon in michig  [2y.net]
 youngasiansex  [2y.net]
 scac code list  [2y.net]
 phoenix magiician  [2y.net]
 sprint blackberry tour  [2y.net]
 sweet devon  [2y.net]
 hyatt hotel boycott  [2y.net]
 interior decorator catalogue  [2y.net]
 onlydudes  [2y.net]
 m d helicopters  [2y.net]
 ba promotion code  [2y.net]
 gammes tom and jerry  [2y.net]
 mets trade rumors  [2y.net]
 weightwatchers atworketools  [2y.net]
 cavs trade rumors  [2y.net]
 british airways promotional code  [2y.net]
 uno online play  [2y.net]
 tamilnude  [2y.net]
 bravonude  [2y.net]
 free wow account  [2y.net]
 compare the market  [2y.net]
 lezsex  [2y.net]
 bsp  [2y.net]
 toner  [2y.net]
 model no.dvp-s560d  [2y.net]
 tom and jerry games  [2y.net]
 cash books for cerebral palsy  [2y.net]
 driving while intoxicated attorney or la  [2y.net]
 wow items for sale  [2y.net]
 picturesex  [2y.net]
 spadroon sword  [2y.net]
 power inductors universal applications  [2y.net]
 cavs rumors  [2y.net]
 yugiohcardgame  [2y.net]
 picasso software  [2y.net]
 circuit city locations  [2y.net]
 verizon blackberry tour  [2y.net]
 online related links  [2y.net]
 kinkcarmen  [2y.net]
 cytherea  [2y.net]
 uno online  [2y.net]
 sprint blackberry  [2y.net]
 hello kitty agame  [2y.net]
 british airways promotion code  [2y.net]
 saas billing ipapplications case study  [2y.net]
 scooter ramps for cars  [2y.net]
 lawyer [2y.net]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646383</id>
	<title>This might be a good thing...</title>
	<author>NervousNerd</author>
	<datestamp>1247166600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>When the infected idiots wake up tomorrow and find that their hard drive was wiped, they'll go out and buy a new computer, and throw their old ones on the curb. And since I need some new parts for my machine...</htmltext>
<tokenext>When the infected idiots wake up tomorrow and find that their hard drive was wiped , they 'll go out and buy a new computer , and throw their old ones on the curb .
And since I need some new parts for my machine.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When the infected idiots wake up tomorrow and find that their hard drive was wiped, they'll go out and buy a new computer, and throw their old ones on the curb.
And since I need some new parts for my machine...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28648455</id>
	<title>Re:Really that bad of a thing?</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1247234760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>THAT set of servers is probably just a best guess.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>THAT set of servers is probably just a best guess .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>THAT set of servers is probably just a best guess.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646385</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647549</id>
	<title>Re:Blood in the water</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247225700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Congress will pass "Homeland Computer" legislation authorizing warrantless federal invasion and inspection of all computers to ensure that they're "safe".</p><p>Corporate executives will issue insane edicts that make it impossible to get productive work done, totally fail to actually protect IT resources, and cut off access to SlashDo</p><p>Microsoft will publish another "Get the Facts" campaign proving that Windows is more secure than Linux.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Congress will pass " Homeland Computer " legislation authorizing warrantless federal invasion and inspection of all computers to ensure that they 're " safe " .Corporate executives will issue insane edicts that make it impossible to get productive work done , totally fail to actually protect IT resources , and cut off access to SlashDoMicrosoft will publish another " Get the Facts " campaign proving that Windows is more secure than Linux .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Congress will pass "Homeland Computer" legislation authorizing warrantless federal invasion and inspection of all computers to ensure that they're "safe".Corporate executives will issue insane edicts that make it impossible to get productive work done, totally fail to actually protect IT resources, and cut off access to SlashDoMicrosoft will publish another "Get the Facts" campaign proving that Windows is more secure than Linux.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647065</id>
	<title>Re:U ?</title>
	<author>zeromorph</author>
	<datestamp>1247218680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wau\_Holland" title="wikipedia.org">Wau Holland</a> [wikipedia.org] once said &ndash; long ago &ndash; that he liked binary technology because there's only high, low, and broken.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wau Holland [ wikipedia.org ] once said    long ago    that he liked binary technology because there 's only high , low , and broken .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wau Holland [wikipedia.org] once said – long ago – that he liked binary technology because there's only high, low, and broken.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646285</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647425</id>
	<title>Starcraft</title>
	<author>GF678</author>
	<datestamp>1247223600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The lack of any computers in South Korea still left alive to run Starcraft will cause a country-wide panic. There will be riots on the streets! Blood will run free, mark my words...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The lack of any computers in South Korea still left alive to run Starcraft will cause a country-wide panic .
There will be riots on the streets !
Blood will run free , mark my words.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The lack of any computers in South Korea still left alive to run Starcraft will cause a country-wide panic.
There will be riots on the streets!
Blood will run free, mark my words...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28649021</id>
	<title>Re:U ?</title>
	<author>QuantumRiff</author>
	<datestamp>1247237700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wouldn't the south Korean computers be using Unicode though and not ascii?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Would n't the south Korean computers be using Unicode though and not ascii ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wouldn't the south Korean computers be using Unicode though and not ascii?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646327</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28648665</id>
	<title>Re:What is the source?</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1247236020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>When this story first hit the airwaves, Katie Couric (anchorwoman for ABC News) described the DDoS as security breaches of government websites. IP, ISP -- it's all just "arcane technical jargon"[1], right?</p></div><p>Just yesterday afternoon, a local TV reporter was talking about "the new virus, called Distributed Denial of Service" that was tying up government websites.  They really need to pass their tech stories through a technical reviewer before they air.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>When this story first hit the airwaves , Katie Couric ( anchorwoman for ABC News ) described the DDoS as security breaches of government websites .
IP , ISP -- it 's all just " arcane technical jargon " [ 1 ] , right ? Just yesterday afternoon , a local TV reporter was talking about " the new virus , called Distributed Denial of Service " that was tying up government websites .
They really need to pass their tech stories through a technical reviewer before they air .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When this story first hit the airwaves, Katie Couric (anchorwoman for ABC News) described the DDoS as security breaches of government websites.
IP, ISP -- it's all just "arcane technical jargon"[1], right?Just yesterday afternoon, a local TV reporter was talking about "the new virus, called Distributed Denial of Service" that was tying up government websites.
They really need to pass their tech stories through a technical reviewer before they air.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646807</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646419</id>
	<title>It's worse than you think</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247167140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>NO.</p><p>In fact the S. Korean government is publically saying that North Korea is to suspect, along with some "pro-North" factions in South Korea.</p><p>Or, in terms you are more familiar with: "OMG! TEH TERRORISTS! WHERE IS NATIONAL SECURITY?"</p><p>This will be an opportunity for the current government to distract people from their having put our nation into a pile of horseshit, and to round up some anti-government people for being "pro-North" and "hating freedom."  Well, yes, *some* of them may be crazy enough to be pro-North, but many will be just innocent citizens who just can't stand any more crap from our current president.</p><p>Sounds familiar? Heh.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>NO.In fact the S. Korean government is publically saying that North Korea is to suspect , along with some " pro-North " factions in South Korea.Or , in terms you are more familiar with : " OMG !
TEH TERRORISTS !
WHERE IS NATIONAL SECURITY ?
" This will be an opportunity for the current government to distract people from their having put our nation into a pile of horseshit , and to round up some anti-government people for being " pro-North " and " hating freedom .
" Well , yes , * some * of them may be crazy enough to be pro-North , but many will be just innocent citizens who just ca n't stand any more crap from our current president.Sounds familiar ?
Heh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NO.In fact the S. Korean government is publically saying that North Korea is to suspect, along with some "pro-North" factions in South Korea.Or, in terms you are more familiar with: "OMG!
TEH TERRORISTS!
WHERE IS NATIONAL SECURITY?
"This will be an opportunity for the current government to distract people from their having put our nation into a pile of horseshit, and to round up some anti-government people for being "pro-North" and "hating freedom.
"  Well, yes, *some* of them may be crazy enough to be pro-North, but many will be just innocent citizens who just can't stand any more crap from our current president.Sounds familiar?
Heh.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646487</id>
	<title>What is the source?</title>
	<author>xenophrak</author>
	<datestamp>1247168220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Over at Yahoo ( <a href="http://tech.yahoo.com/news/ap/20090710/ap\_on\_hi\_te/as\_skorea\_cyber\_attack" title="yahoo.com">http://tech.yahoo.com/news/ap/20090710/ap\_on\_hi\_te/as\_skorea\_cyber\_attack</a> [yahoo.com] ) they are reporting that there are only 86 IP addresses causing the outages:
<br> <br>
"SEOUL, South Korea -<br>
Cyber attacks that caused a wave of Web site outages in the U.S. and South Korea<br>
used 86 IP addresses in 16 countries, South Korea's spy agency told lawmakers<br>
Friday, amid suspicions North Korea was behind the effort."
<br> <br>
Now, I'm a little skeptical that they didn't mean <i>ISP</i> instead of <i>IP</i>, but if it is true that there are only 86 hosts generating this much fanfare, then the network admins should be strung up with cat6 for not just blackholing these punks at the edge router. I guess we get the best govt. IT we can afford, right?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Over at Yahoo ( http : //tech.yahoo.com/news/ap/20090710/ap \ _on \ _hi \ _te/as \ _skorea \ _cyber \ _attack [ yahoo.com ] ) they are reporting that there are only 86 IP addresses causing the outages : " SEOUL , South Korea - Cyber attacks that caused a wave of Web site outages in the U.S. and South Korea used 86 IP addresses in 16 countries , South Korea 's spy agency told lawmakers Friday , amid suspicions North Korea was behind the effort .
" Now , I 'm a little skeptical that they did n't mean ISP instead of IP , but if it is true that there are only 86 hosts generating this much fanfare , then the network admins should be strung up with cat6 for not just blackholing these punks at the edge router .
I guess we get the best govt .
IT we can afford , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Over at Yahoo ( http://tech.yahoo.com/news/ap/20090710/ap\_on\_hi\_te/as\_skorea\_cyber\_attack [yahoo.com] ) they are reporting that there are only 86 IP addresses causing the outages:
 
"SEOUL, South Korea -
Cyber attacks that caused a wave of Web site outages in the U.S. and South Korea
used 86 IP addresses in 16 countries, South Korea's spy agency told lawmakers
Friday, amid suspicions North Korea was behind the effort.
"
 
Now, I'm a little skeptical that they didn't mean ISP instead of IP, but if it is true that there are only 86 hosts generating this much fanfare, then the network admins should be strung up with cat6 for not just blackholing these punks at the edge router.
I guess we get the best govt.
IT we can afford, right?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647909</id>
	<title>But Windows can play games....</title>
	<author>yossarianuk</author>
	<datestamp>1247230800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If peoples machines are wiped It will sort of serve them right - people claim they won't run Linux because 'its not shiny enough' and that they can play games in Windows.

Well they can still play the 'todays letter is U game'.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If peoples machines are wiped It will sort of serve them right - people claim they wo n't run Linux because 'its not shiny enough ' and that they can play games in Windows .
Well they can still play the 'todays letter is U game' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If peoples machines are wiped It will sort of serve them right - people claim they won't run Linux because 'its not shiny enough' and that they can play games in Windows.
Well they can still play the 'todays letter is U game'.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28654123</id>
	<title>Re:Really that bad of a thing?</title>
	<author>arkhan\_jg</author>
	<datestamp>1247259180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To drive a car, one needs to be trained to operate it safely. You're required to keep it maintained to a good mechanical standard, and it is tested regularly to make sure it meets those requirements. Failing to do so, and making mistakes (or deliberately ignoring the rules of operation) results in fines or jailtime.</p><p>Yet cars are far simpler devices than computers, and much easier to maintain (though admittedly with much greater consequences if you screw up). You want to see what can go wrong when such standards aren't enforced? Just look at the road fatalities of anywhere with no MOT and/or a basic driving test; where enforcement of the rules is non-existant.</p><p>Well, that's the internet right now - a barely regulated system where users are heavily marketed to buy computers designed to be as easy to use as possible, where they can connect it to the internet without having the first clue of safe operation, and they can install whatever the hell they like. Then you chuck in the number of people that can make oodles of money from exploiting their slackness with virtually no chance of legal consequence.</p><p>The biggest weakness in any computer system sits at the keyboard, whether its the coder chucking together code as quickly as possible as cheaply as possible, as that's what the market wants, or the sysadmin that lets them do what they want because he doesn't have the time or money to do it properly, or the user that simply doesn't care what happens to their system as long as they get their porn and pretty emoticons, or even the fraudster exploiting the gullible for profit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To drive a car , one needs to be trained to operate it safely .
You 're required to keep it maintained to a good mechanical standard , and it is tested regularly to make sure it meets those requirements .
Failing to do so , and making mistakes ( or deliberately ignoring the rules of operation ) results in fines or jailtime.Yet cars are far simpler devices than computers , and much easier to maintain ( though admittedly with much greater consequences if you screw up ) .
You want to see what can go wrong when such standards are n't enforced ?
Just look at the road fatalities of anywhere with no MOT and/or a basic driving test ; where enforcement of the rules is non-existant.Well , that 's the internet right now - a barely regulated system where users are heavily marketed to buy computers designed to be as easy to use as possible , where they can connect it to the internet without having the first clue of safe operation , and they can install whatever the hell they like .
Then you chuck in the number of people that can make oodles of money from exploiting their slackness with virtually no chance of legal consequence.The biggest weakness in any computer system sits at the keyboard , whether its the coder chucking together code as quickly as possible as cheaply as possible , as that 's what the market wants , or the sysadmin that lets them do what they want because he does n't have the time or money to do it properly , or the user that simply does n't care what happens to their system as long as they get their porn and pretty emoticons , or even the fraudster exploiting the gullible for profit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To drive a car, one needs to be trained to operate it safely.
You're required to keep it maintained to a good mechanical standard, and it is tested regularly to make sure it meets those requirements.
Failing to do so, and making mistakes (or deliberately ignoring the rules of operation) results in fines or jailtime.Yet cars are far simpler devices than computers, and much easier to maintain (though admittedly with much greater consequences if you screw up).
You want to see what can go wrong when such standards aren't enforced?
Just look at the road fatalities of anywhere with no MOT and/or a basic driving test; where enforcement of the rules is non-existant.Well, that's the internet right now - a barely regulated system where users are heavily marketed to buy computers designed to be as easy to use as possible, where they can connect it to the internet without having the first clue of safe operation, and they can install whatever the hell they like.
Then you chuck in the number of people that can make oodles of money from exploiting their slackness with virtually no chance of legal consequence.The biggest weakness in any computer system sits at the keyboard, whether its the coder chucking together code as quickly as possible as cheaply as possible, as that's what the market wants, or the sysadmin that lets them do what they want because he doesn't have the time or money to do it properly, or the user that simply doesn't care what happens to their system as long as they get their porn and pretty emoticons, or even the fraudster exploiting the gullible for profit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646813</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646275</id>
	<title>first post..</title>
	<author>stillpixel</author>
	<datestamp>1247165040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Good day to be a linux/mac user eh?

In South Korea the worm eats your data.. doh!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Good day to be a linux/mac user eh ?
In South Korea the worm eats your data.. doh !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good day to be a linux/mac user eh?
In South Korea the worm eats your data.. doh!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646863</id>
	<title>Re:Hardly Good At All</title>
	<author>EdIII</author>
	<datestamp>1247216460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think your reaction is rather emotional.  That's not a bad thing, and I understand your empathy and compassion for the victims here.</p><p>Being impartial, having these systems destroyed is going to be a good thing ultimately.  It's the bigger picture here.  A lot of posters are expressing this point.</p><p>It's not a lack of compassion for these unfortunate individuals.  Certainly not on my part.  However, it is better for the <i>community</i> at large that these infected systems get removed, regardless of damage to the owners.  After all, they are already causing damage to the rest of the community through their ignorance of what their systems are actually doing to others.</p><p>I would think that most of these unfortunate victims would agree if they were actively harming somebody else, that it should be stopped.  It would be rather strange to have one of them state that they should be allowed to continue participating in these Botnets until somebody makes them aware of the situation, or until something causes them to fix their systems without losing any data.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think your reaction is rather emotional .
That 's not a bad thing , and I understand your empathy and compassion for the victims here.Being impartial , having these systems destroyed is going to be a good thing ultimately .
It 's the bigger picture here .
A lot of posters are expressing this point.It 's not a lack of compassion for these unfortunate individuals .
Certainly not on my part .
However , it is better for the community at large that these infected systems get removed , regardless of damage to the owners .
After all , they are already causing damage to the rest of the community through their ignorance of what their systems are actually doing to others.I would think that most of these unfortunate victims would agree if they were actively harming somebody else , that it should be stopped .
It would be rather strange to have one of them state that they should be allowed to continue participating in these Botnets until somebody makes them aware of the situation , or until something causes them to fix their systems without losing any data .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think your reaction is rather emotional.
That's not a bad thing, and I understand your empathy and compassion for the victims here.Being impartial, having these systems destroyed is going to be a good thing ultimately.
It's the bigger picture here.
A lot of posters are expressing this point.It's not a lack of compassion for these unfortunate individuals.
Certainly not on my part.
However, it is better for the community at large that these infected systems get removed, regardless of damage to the owners.
After all, they are already causing damage to the rest of the community through their ignorance of what their systems are actually doing to others.I would think that most of these unfortunate victims would agree if they were actively harming somebody else, that it should be stopped.
It would be rather strange to have one of them state that they should be allowed to continue participating in these Botnets until somebody makes them aware of the situation, or until something causes them to fix their systems without losing any data.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646579</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28653609</id>
	<title>Congratulations!</title>
	<author>aaaantoine</author>
	<datestamp>1247256660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You win the Internet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You win the Internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You win the Internet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28655307</id>
	<title>Re:Well...</title>
	<author>Khyber</author>
	<datestamp>1247222760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, sucks to be a Windows user that doesn't have a clue.</p><p>No firewall, no AV, and I know to not download shit I didn't ask for.</p><p>Kinda funy, right around the same time this started happening camfrog came under attack. People were getting random file send requests from friends on their list (and stupidly accepting them and opening them, without thinking.) and if they got compromised, it hijacked their account, sent the message to everyone else on that user list, and tried to propagate.</p><p>But see, when you look at a filename and you see<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.jpg.scr, you should know better. CHECK THE EXTENSION.</p><p>*gets back to securing the laptop for airplane travel*</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , sucks to be a Windows user that does n't have a clue.No firewall , no AV , and I know to not download shit I did n't ask for.Kinda funy , right around the same time this started happening camfrog came under attack .
People were getting random file send requests from friends on their list ( and stupidly accepting them and opening them , without thinking .
) and if they got compromised , it hijacked their account , sent the message to everyone else on that user list , and tried to propagate.But see , when you look at a filename and you see .jpg.scr , you should know better .
CHECK THE EXTENSION .
* gets back to securing the laptop for airplane travel *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, sucks to be a Windows user that doesn't have a clue.No firewall, no AV, and I know to not download shit I didn't ask for.Kinda funy, right around the same time this started happening camfrog came under attack.
People were getting random file send requests from friends on their list (and stupidly accepting them and opening them, without thinking.
) and if they got compromised, it hijacked their account, sent the message to everyone else on that user list, and tried to propagate.But see, when you look at a filename and you see .jpg.scr, you should know better.
CHECK THE EXTENSION.
*gets back to securing the laptop for airplane travel*</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646377</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647833</id>
	<title>Friday? Friday!</title>
	<author>hoggoth</author>
	<datestamp>1247229780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Posted by timothy  on Fri 10 Jul 01:41AM<br>&gt; hard drives wiped of data come Friday.</p><p>NOW you tell me?!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Posted by timothy on Fri 10 Jul 01 : 41AM &gt; hard drives wiped of data come Friday.NOW you tell me ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Posted by timothy  on Fri 10 Jul 01:41AM&gt; hard drives wiped of data come Friday.NOW you tell me?
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28655055</id>
	<title>That is great</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247221020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://www.digitalempireshop.com/how\_do\_i\_get\_rid\_of\_the\_trojan\_horse\_virus.html</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.digitalempireshop.com/how \ _do \ _i \ _get \ _rid \ _of \ _the \ _trojan \ _horse \ _virus.html</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.digitalempireshop.com/how\_do\_i\_get\_rid\_of\_the\_trojan\_horse\_virus.html</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28650381</id>
	<title>Re:Really that bad of a thing?</title>
	<author>Erikderzweite</author>
	<datestamp>1247242980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But they should. Industry wants to make general public to believe that computers are easy. Computer are complicated devices with great processing power. They offer the user a good deal of choices and freedoms. These freedoms, however, come at a price.<br>Millions computers linked together with a global network offer unmatched possibilities to gain knowledge and information, to communicate and play. It is a great power with which should come great responsibility. But it doesn't.<br>It is because of that common belief that computer is a toy and simple to use we have much more SPAM than normal e-mails.<br>The industry is only partly to blame for this disaster -- all they want is to sell more. Clueless users who pollute the network with their infected powerful machines are the main reason for this -- they have bought a PC where all they needed is possibly an Internet-enabled game console, bought it without knowing how to use it and they refuse to learn at the expense of others.</p><p>As for Linux -- you don't download software from the Web, you use package managers. One attack vector less, especially for newbies who don't know the Windows' way. Besides, diversity rules.</p><p>No one safe for Microsoft PR people can argue that right now a Linux desktop is very close to be a 100\%-secure installation. Be it for better design or less widespread -- the point stands and it won't change overnight. Linux is secure. Even if that should change somehow some day in the distant future -- the needed infrastructure is ready, there already are AV products for Linux, one apt-get will take care of the rest.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But they should .
Industry wants to make general public to believe that computers are easy .
Computer are complicated devices with great processing power .
They offer the user a good deal of choices and freedoms .
These freedoms , however , come at a price.Millions computers linked together with a global network offer unmatched possibilities to gain knowledge and information , to communicate and play .
It is a great power with which should come great responsibility .
But it does n't.It is because of that common belief that computer is a toy and simple to use we have much more SPAM than normal e-mails.The industry is only partly to blame for this disaster -- all they want is to sell more .
Clueless users who pollute the network with their infected powerful machines are the main reason for this -- they have bought a PC where all they needed is possibly an Internet-enabled game console , bought it without knowing how to use it and they refuse to learn at the expense of others.As for Linux -- you do n't download software from the Web , you use package managers .
One attack vector less , especially for newbies who do n't know the Windows ' way .
Besides , diversity rules.No one safe for Microsoft PR people can argue that right now a Linux desktop is very close to be a 100 \ % -secure installation .
Be it for better design or less widespread -- the point stands and it wo n't change overnight .
Linux is secure .
Even if that should change somehow some day in the distant future -- the needed infrastructure is ready , there already are AV products for Linux , one apt-get will take care of the rest .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But they should.
Industry wants to make general public to believe that computers are easy.
Computer are complicated devices with great processing power.
They offer the user a good deal of choices and freedoms.
These freedoms, however, come at a price.Millions computers linked together with a global network offer unmatched possibilities to gain knowledge and information, to communicate and play.
It is a great power with which should come great responsibility.
But it doesn't.It is because of that common belief that computer is a toy and simple to use we have much more SPAM than normal e-mails.The industry is only partly to blame for this disaster -- all they want is to sell more.
Clueless users who pollute the network with their infected powerful machines are the main reason for this -- they have bought a PC where all they needed is possibly an Internet-enabled game console, bought it without knowing how to use it and they refuse to learn at the expense of others.As for Linux -- you don't download software from the Web, you use package managers.
One attack vector less, especially for newbies who don't know the Windows' way.
Besides, diversity rules.No one safe for Microsoft PR people can argue that right now a Linux desktop is very close to be a 100\%-secure installation.
Be it for better design or less widespread -- the point stands and it won't change overnight.
Linux is secure.
Even if that should change somehow some day in the distant future -- the needed infrastructure is ready, there already are AV products for Linux, one apt-get will take care of the rest.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646465</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646495</id>
	<title>WOW</title>
	<author>someone1234</author>
	<datestamp>1247168280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually it does something useful.<br>This will teach all negligent users to actually defend against zombifying.<br>One of my colleagues says, he wouldn't care if his machine is a zombie as long as it doesn't slow the machine significantly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually it does something useful.This will teach all negligent users to actually defend against zombifying.One of my colleagues says , he would n't care if his machine is a zombie as long as it does n't slow the machine significantly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually it does something useful.This will teach all negligent users to actually defend against zombifying.One of my colleagues says, he wouldn't care if his machine is a zombie as long as it doesn't slow the machine significantly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646923</id>
	<title>Re:WOW</title>
	<author>beowulfcluster</author>
	<datestamp>1247217240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It won't teach 'all' negligent users anything. At most the ones that will get their drives wiped and plenty of those will just buy a new computer since the old one's 'broken' and continue the same way as before. There were still negligent users left after CiH and there'll still be loads left after this.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It wo n't teach 'all ' negligent users anything .
At most the ones that will get their drives wiped and plenty of those will just buy a new computer since the old one 's 'broken ' and continue the same way as before .
There were still negligent users left after CiH and there 'll still be loads left after this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It won't teach 'all' negligent users anything.
At most the ones that will get their drives wiped and plenty of those will just buy a new computer since the old one's 'broken' and continue the same way as before.
There were still negligent users left after CiH and there'll still be loads left after this.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646495</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646783</id>
	<title>And something of value was gained?</title>
	<author>AliasMarlowe</author>
	<datestamp>1247258700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Bots and other malware that do no appreciable harm to their hosts have made users complacent about keeping their systems clean (or preferably secure). In the meantime, the collateral damage of spamfloods, spyware, and DDOS attacks has been inflicted on the whole community. An exemplary episode in which the infected machines actually suffer may wake users up again. Windows users are, as usual, the witless accomplices/culprits in this case, but Macs can be just as easily penetrated (demonstrated in the hackfests each year), and poorly administered Linux/BSD/Solaris systems can also be vulnerable.<br>
Let the vendors of protective measures celebrate! Sales of anti-virus, anti-spyware, anti-rootkit, firewalls, and so forth may benefit. The publicity may even cause some security holes to be patched, and better practices to become default. Maybe the rest of us will benefit...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bots and other malware that do no appreciable harm to their hosts have made users complacent about keeping their systems clean ( or preferably secure ) .
In the meantime , the collateral damage of spamfloods , spyware , and DDOS attacks has been inflicted on the whole community .
An exemplary episode in which the infected machines actually suffer may wake users up again .
Windows users are , as usual , the witless accomplices/culprits in this case , but Macs can be just as easily penetrated ( demonstrated in the hackfests each year ) , and poorly administered Linux/BSD/Solaris systems can also be vulnerable .
Let the vendors of protective measures celebrate !
Sales of anti-virus , anti-spyware , anti-rootkit , firewalls , and so forth may benefit .
The publicity may even cause some security holes to be patched , and better practices to become default .
Maybe the rest of us will benefit.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bots and other malware that do no appreciable harm to their hosts have made users complacent about keeping their systems clean (or preferably secure).
In the meantime, the collateral damage of spamfloods, spyware, and DDOS attacks has been inflicted on the whole community.
An exemplary episode in which the infected machines actually suffer may wake users up again.
Windows users are, as usual, the witless accomplices/culprits in this case, but Macs can be just as easily penetrated (demonstrated in the hackfests each year), and poorly administered Linux/BSD/Solaris systems can also be vulnerable.
Let the vendors of protective measures celebrate!
Sales of anti-virus, anti-spyware, anti-rootkit, firewalls, and so forth may benefit.
The publicity may even cause some security holes to be patched, and better practices to become default.
Maybe the rest of us will benefit...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646275</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646909</id>
	<title>Re:If I was still in Tech Support</title>
	<author>icebike</author>
	<datestamp>1247217000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You should just quit before they fire you.</p><p>If your site is that compromised that you have anything to worry about, and you relied on Slashdot to bring this to your attention, being shot at sunrise should bring relief.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You should just quit before they fire you.If your site is that compromised that you have anything to worry about , and you relied on Slashdot to bring this to your attention , being shot at sunrise should bring relief .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You should just quit before they fire you.If your site is that compromised that you have anything to worry about, and you relied on Slashdot to bring this to your attention, being shot at sunrise should bring relief.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646781</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647917</id>
	<title>Re:Well...</title>
	<author>CFBMoo1</author>
	<datestamp>1247230860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>*Tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink*<br>I know right?<br><br>*Tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink*<br>Oh well, back to work.<br><br>*Chissles submit on his stone tablet as the EMP goes off*<br><br>*Ka-tink*<br>[Submit]</htmltext>
<tokenext>* Tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink * I know right ?
* Tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink * Oh well , back to work .
* Chissles submit on his stone tablet as the EMP goes off * * Ka-tink * [ Submit ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>*Tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink*I know right?
*Tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink tink*Oh well, back to work.
*Chissles submit on his stone tablet as the EMP goes off**Ka-tink*[Submit]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646377</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28648859</id>
	<title>Only 50,000 machines</title>
	<author>Twillerror</author>
	<datestamp>1247236980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not a small amount, but considering there are 100s millions of machines around the world it is a pretty small amount.</p><p>How many machines out there have a HD failure everyday? I'm guessing it is less than 50,000, but probably not much lower. Google and wiki searching only gave me numbers like 3\% annualized failure rate up to 13\%.</p><p>Once the system is rebooted what kind of error message will they see? OS not Found from the bios? I wonder how many users will simply think their harddrive failed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not a small amount , but considering there are 100s millions of machines around the world it is a pretty small amount.How many machines out there have a HD failure everyday ?
I 'm guessing it is less than 50,000 , but probably not much lower .
Google and wiki searching only gave me numbers like 3 \ % annualized failure rate up to 13 \ % .Once the system is rebooted what kind of error message will they see ?
OS not Found from the bios ?
I wonder how many users will simply think their harddrive failed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not a small amount, but considering there are 100s millions of machines around the world it is a pretty small amount.How many machines out there have a HD failure everyday?
I'm guessing it is less than 50,000, but probably not much lower.
Google and wiki searching only gave me numbers like 3\% annualized failure rate up to 13\%.Once the system is rebooted what kind of error message will they see?
OS not Found from the bios?
I wonder how many users will simply think their harddrive failed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647245</id>
	<title>Re:Blood in the water</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247220780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's scary about that last part is that it is entirely possible, and that the clueless sheeple will actually applaud and welcome it as a bold step against those pesky malware writers. Finally we'll be safe, we will have a law against infections, and mandatory malware filters, and mandatory security software under government surveillance on every PC.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's scary about that last part is that it is entirely possible , and that the clueless sheeple will actually applaud and welcome it as a bold step against those pesky malware writers .
Finally we 'll be safe , we will have a law against infections , and mandatory malware filters , and mandatory security software under government surveillance on every PC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's scary about that last part is that it is entirely possible, and that the clueless sheeple will actually applaud and welcome it as a bold step against those pesky malware writers.
Finally we'll be safe, we will have a law against infections, and mandatory malware filters, and mandatory security software under government surveillance on every PC.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646749</id>
	<title>Re:Really that bad of a thing?</title>
	<author>EdIII</author>
	<datestamp>1247258160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><blockquote><div><p>    You have to imagine if these computers are all infected with this one trojan, they are probably infected with god only knows how much other spyware, malware, backdoors, and spambots. This might just be a GOOD thing; when my friends and family wake up to a completely wiped drive, it might be the thing that drives my 89yr old grandmother to read up on computer security a little bit, perhaps switch to a more secure browser, buy a router with a hardware firewall, etc. Not to mention, it will also wipe out all of their pictures, tax returns, email and other important documents.</p></div></blockquote><p>There fixed that for you.</p><p><b>Why don't you just wish them to total their car so that they can be forced to buy a newer, more fuel efficient car.</b></p></div></blockquote><p>I wish that every single day.  There is nothing more I hate then to be behind some pos car throwing out noxious fumes in traffic.  Most of them have faked smog reports, because lets face it, there is no WAY some of those cars can pass a smog check.  I know of plenty of mechanic friends in the past that would look the other way for 40$.  Some of then even feel bad for these people since they can't afford to actually fix the car and get it passing a smog check, and will be seriously harmed if they don't have a car to get to work.  4 kids, barely making it, you know the sad story.</p><p>I do understand the emotion and compassion that you are trying to convey.  It is <i>misplaced</i>.  If you want to keep with the car analogy, these people that are driving a total POS are:</p><p>1) Polluting our air.<br>2) Dinging our cars in the parking lot, because they don't care.  Primer is good enough for them, it should be good enough for us.<br>3) Stealing our gas when they get five seconds alone with our car.<br>4) Using the streets as their own personal wastebasket for cigarette butts, happy meal boxes, and bubble gum.<br>5) Loaning out their car on demand to complete losers that use it for drive by's to kill 9 year olds, rape 89 year old women, and steal lollipops from little kids.</p><p>Sounds harsh I know, but people that have infected unsecured computer systems are doing exactly that on the Internet.  They are the reason why system administrators have to fight so damn hard to get rid of spam.  Why we need redundant and expensive systems to cope with DDOS attacks.  Why it so hard to track down the real people behind these actions.</p><p>I do feel for these people, and I even know people that have lost considerable amounts of personal data due to this bullshit.  It's sad, really sad.  However, the Internet and the rest of us are better off, <i>when they finally get FOOBARd'.</i>  Otherwise, we have to wish for them to continue doing exactly what they are doing while probably being:</p><p>1) Ultimately harmed themselves more than the loss of data could ever do.  Identity theft, stolen money from bank accounts, fraud, etc.<br>2) Used to do the same to others.<br>3) To compromise businesses for considerably more amounts of money.</p><p>If it takes their complete destruction to open their eyes to <i>possibility</i> they at least need to find somebody to help with their own security, or handle their own, it may be worth doing so.  Your compassion, while understandable and admirable, is really just wishing to keep the status quo in their little world, as if they are not being harmed already.</p><p>Every child has to fall and scrape their knees when finally learning to walk and run.  It's just part of life and growing up.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You have to imagine if these computers are all infected with this one trojan , they are probably infected with god only knows how much other spyware , malware , backdoors , and spambots .
This might just be a GOOD thing ; when my friends and family wake up to a completely wiped drive , it might be the thing that drives my 89yr old grandmother to read up on computer security a little bit , perhaps switch to a more secure browser , buy a router with a hardware firewall , etc .
Not to mention , it will also wipe out all of their pictures , tax returns , email and other important documents.There fixed that for you.Why do n't you just wish them to total their car so that they can be forced to buy a newer , more fuel efficient car.I wish that every single day .
There is nothing more I hate then to be behind some pos car throwing out noxious fumes in traffic .
Most of them have faked smog reports , because lets face it , there is no WAY some of those cars can pass a smog check .
I know of plenty of mechanic friends in the past that would look the other way for 40 $ .
Some of then even feel bad for these people since they ca n't afford to actually fix the car and get it passing a smog check , and will be seriously harmed if they do n't have a car to get to work .
4 kids , barely making it , you know the sad story.I do understand the emotion and compassion that you are trying to convey .
It is misplaced .
If you want to keep with the car analogy , these people that are driving a total POS are : 1 ) Polluting our air.2 ) Dinging our cars in the parking lot , because they do n't care .
Primer is good enough for them , it should be good enough for us.3 ) Stealing our gas when they get five seconds alone with our car.4 ) Using the streets as their own personal wastebasket for cigarette butts , happy meal boxes , and bubble gum.5 ) Loaning out their car on demand to complete losers that use it for drive by 's to kill 9 year olds , rape 89 year old women , and steal lollipops from little kids.Sounds harsh I know , but people that have infected unsecured computer systems are doing exactly that on the Internet .
They are the reason why system administrators have to fight so damn hard to get rid of spam .
Why we need redundant and expensive systems to cope with DDOS attacks .
Why it so hard to track down the real people behind these actions.I do feel for these people , and I even know people that have lost considerable amounts of personal data due to this bullshit .
It 's sad , really sad .
However , the Internet and the rest of us are better off , when they finally get FOOBARd' .
Otherwise , we have to wish for them to continue doing exactly what they are doing while probably being : 1 ) Ultimately harmed themselves more than the loss of data could ever do .
Identity theft , stolen money from bank accounts , fraud , etc.2 ) Used to do the same to others.3 ) To compromise businesses for considerably more amounts of money.If it takes their complete destruction to open their eyes to possibility they at least need to find somebody to help with their own security , or handle their own , it may be worth doing so .
Your compassion , while understandable and admirable , is really just wishing to keep the status quo in their little world , as if they are not being harmed already.Every child has to fall and scrape their knees when finally learning to walk and run .
It 's just part of life and growing up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>    You have to imagine if these computers are all infected with this one trojan, they are probably infected with god only knows how much other spyware, malware, backdoors, and spambots.
This might just be a GOOD thing; when my friends and family wake up to a completely wiped drive, it might be the thing that drives my 89yr old grandmother to read up on computer security a little bit, perhaps switch to a more secure browser, buy a router with a hardware firewall, etc.
Not to mention, it will also wipe out all of their pictures, tax returns, email and other important documents.There fixed that for you.Why don't you just wish them to total their car so that they can be forced to buy a newer, more fuel efficient car.I wish that every single day.
There is nothing more I hate then to be behind some pos car throwing out noxious fumes in traffic.
Most of them have faked smog reports, because lets face it, there is no WAY some of those cars can pass a smog check.
I know of plenty of mechanic friends in the past that would look the other way for 40$.
Some of then even feel bad for these people since they can't afford to actually fix the car and get it passing a smog check, and will be seriously harmed if they don't have a car to get to work.
4 kids, barely making it, you know the sad story.I do understand the emotion and compassion that you are trying to convey.
It is misplaced.
If you want to keep with the car analogy, these people that are driving a total POS are:1) Polluting our air.2) Dinging our cars in the parking lot, because they don't care.
Primer is good enough for them, it should be good enough for us.3) Stealing our gas when they get five seconds alone with our car.4) Using the streets as their own personal wastebasket for cigarette butts, happy meal boxes, and bubble gum.5) Loaning out their car on demand to complete losers that use it for drive by's to kill 9 year olds, rape 89 year old women, and steal lollipops from little kids.Sounds harsh I know, but people that have infected unsecured computer systems are doing exactly that on the Internet.
They are the reason why system administrators have to fight so damn hard to get rid of spam.
Why we need redundant and expensive systems to cope with DDOS attacks.
Why it so hard to track down the real people behind these actions.I do feel for these people, and I even know people that have lost considerable amounts of personal data due to this bullshit.
It's sad, really sad.
However, the Internet and the rest of us are better off, when they finally get FOOBARd'.
Otherwise, we have to wish for them to continue doing exactly what they are doing while probably being:1) Ultimately harmed themselves more than the loss of data could ever do.
Identity theft, stolen money from bank accounts, fraud, etc.2) Used to do the same to others.3) To compromise businesses for considerably more amounts of money.If it takes their complete destruction to open their eyes to possibility they at least need to find somebody to help with their own security, or handle their own, it may be worth doing so.
Your compassion, while understandable and admirable, is really just wishing to keep the status quo in their little world, as if they are not being harmed already.Every child has to fall and scrape their knees when finally learning to walk and run.
It's just part of life and growing up.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646335</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28648121</id>
	<title>Re:U ?</title>
	<author>CaptainJeff</author>
	<datestamp>1247232540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>u in binary (yeah, I know what you meant):
1010 0101</p></div><p>Incorrect.<br>
u's ASCII encoding in binary -&gt; 1010 0101</p><p>Alot of modern systems use Unicode for text processing too, so you may instead see 0000 0000 1010 0101 being written.  Or 1010 0101 0000 0000, depending on byte ordering.</p><p>(yeah, I know what you meant)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>u in binary ( yeah , I know what you meant ) : 1010 0101Incorrect .
u 's ASCII encoding in binary - &gt; 1010 0101Alot of modern systems use Unicode for text processing too , so you may instead see 0000 0000 1010 0101 being written .
Or 1010 0101 0000 0000 , depending on byte ordering .
( yeah , I know what you meant )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>u in binary (yeah, I know what you meant):
1010 0101Incorrect.
u's ASCII encoding in binary -&gt; 1010 0101Alot of modern systems use Unicode for text processing too, so you may instead see 0000 0000 1010 0101 being written.
Or 1010 0101 0000 0000, depending on byte ordering.
(yeah, I know what you meant)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646327</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28653491</id>
	<title>Re:Really that bad of a thing?</title>
	<author>dbcad7</author>
	<datestamp>1247256240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>Oh, and you can blame MS all you want but the truth is that Linux, if as widely adopted and used by ordinary computer illiterate users, and as targeted by the malware writers as Windows is, wouldn't be a whole lot batter.</i> </p><p>I keep hearing things like this.. over and over.. However you would think, that all these malware and virii writers might take it as a challenge to do it now, perhaps just for the brief fame, or infamy. The whole "if it was more popular" argument doesn't fly very well, and is made be those who just can't (refuse to) believe that maybe, just maybe, the security model that Linux uses IS a whole lot  better.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , and you can blame MS all you want but the truth is that Linux , if as widely adopted and used by ordinary computer illiterate users , and as targeted by the malware writers as Windows is , would n't be a whole lot batter .
I keep hearing things like this.. over and over.. However you would think , that all these malware and virii writers might take it as a challenge to do it now , perhaps just for the brief fame , or infamy .
The whole " if it was more popular " argument does n't fly very well , and is made be those who just ca n't ( refuse to ) believe that maybe , just maybe , the security model that Linux uses IS a whole lot better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Oh, and you can blame MS all you want but the truth is that Linux, if as widely adopted and used by ordinary computer illiterate users, and as targeted by the malware writers as Windows is, wouldn't be a whole lot batter.
I keep hearing things like this.. over and over.. However you would think, that all these malware and virii writers might take it as a challenge to do it now, perhaps just for the brief fame, or infamy.
The whole "if it was more popular" argument doesn't fly very well, and is made be those who just can't (refuse to) believe that maybe, just maybe, the security model that Linux uses IS a whole lot  better.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646465</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646685</id>
	<title>I wonder...</title>
	<author>tokyoahead</author>
	<datestamp>1247257200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...how many people are sitting at their breakfast table, reading this in the newspaper and laughing at the idiots who do not protect their systems properly while their own PC is right now happily writing u's over their downloaded porn.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...how many people are sitting at their breakfast table , reading this in the newspaper and laughing at the idiots who do not protect their systems properly while their own PC is right now happily writing u 's over their downloaded porn .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...how many people are sitting at their breakfast table, reading this in the newspaper and laughing at the idiots who do not protect their systems properly while their own PC is right now happily writing u's over their downloaded porn.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647791</id>
	<title>Re:Well...</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1247229360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Sucks to be running Windows.</p></div><p>How about "sucks to be playing video games in mouse-and-keyboard genres"? Or "sucks to be developing and testing desktop software usable by the majority of home users"?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sucks to be running Windows.How about " sucks to be playing video games in mouse-and-keyboard genres " ?
Or " sucks to be developing and testing desktop software usable by the majority of home users " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sucks to be running Windows.How about "sucks to be playing video games in mouse-and-keyboard genres"?
Or "sucks to be developing and testing desktop software usable by the majority of home users"?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646377</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646465</id>
	<title>Re:Really that bad of a thing?</title>
	<author>clarkkent09</author>
	<datestamp>1247167980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>This seems to be a popular view here on slashdot but it ignores the fact that 90\% of the computer users neither understand nor should have to understand a single bit of what the hell you are talking about. It should be considered a failure of the part of the computer industry to be making products that are incapable of being used for storing important data without expert level knowledge on how to secure it. We in that industry should start admitting that the issue is our fault instead of calling people twits for not knowing what a "router with a hardware firewall" is. Oh, and you can blame MS all you want but the truth is that Linux, if as widely adopted and used by ordinary computer illiterate users, and as targeted by the malware writers as Windows is, wouldn't be a whole lot batter.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This seems to be a popular view here on slashdot but it ignores the fact that 90 \ % of the computer users neither understand nor should have to understand a single bit of what the hell you are talking about .
It should be considered a failure of the part of the computer industry to be making products that are incapable of being used for storing important data without expert level knowledge on how to secure it .
We in that industry should start admitting that the issue is our fault instead of calling people twits for not knowing what a " router with a hardware firewall " is .
Oh , and you can blame MS all you want but the truth is that Linux , if as widely adopted and used by ordinary computer illiterate users , and as targeted by the malware writers as Windows is , would n't be a whole lot batter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This seems to be a popular view here on slashdot but it ignores the fact that 90\% of the computer users neither understand nor should have to understand a single bit of what the hell you are talking about.
It should be considered a failure of the part of the computer industry to be making products that are incapable of being used for storing important data without expert level knowledge on how to secure it.
We in that industry should start admitting that the issue is our fault instead of calling people twits for not knowing what a "router with a hardware firewall" is.
Oh, and you can blame MS all you want but the truth is that Linux, if as widely adopted and used by ordinary computer illiterate users, and as targeted by the malware writers as Windows is, wouldn't be a whole lot batter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646441</id>
	<title>No SC players?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247167380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm surprised they aren't filling the storage with "kekekekekekekekekekekeke"...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm surprised they are n't filling the storage with " kekekekekekekekekekekeke " .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm surprised they aren't filling the storage with "kekekekekekekekekekekeke"...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647389</id>
	<title>Re:Must be N.Korea</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247223060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your question reduces to "what other country would be likely to attack S.Korea?", the US is pretty much a given.   It isn't necessarily a country that has been recently labeled an "evil bad doer".  It may be nothing more than an economic ploy - SK's automotive, appliance and electronics industries have been gaining steam for some time now....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your question reduces to " what other country would be likely to attack S.Korea ?
" , the US is pretty much a given .
It is n't necessarily a country that has been recently labeled an " evil bad doer " .
It may be nothing more than an economic ploy - SK 's automotive , appliance and electronics industries have been gaining steam for some time now... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your question reduces to "what other country would be likely to attack S.Korea?
", the US is pretty much a given.
It isn't necessarily a country that has been recently labeled an "evil bad doer".
It may be nothing more than an economic ploy - SK's automotive, appliance and electronics industries have been gaining steam for some time now....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646641</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28648193</id>
	<title>Bluffing...?</title>
	<author>hesaigo999ca</author>
	<datestamp>1247233020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This might be just a ploy to bluff the owners or writers of the doomsday botnet, to try and reconfigure their servers,<br>and give the people setting up this ploy the ability to rescan the systems they think might be the ping servers, to then compare with<br>the original images they have, and be able to not only confirm which are the payload servers, but also how they might get modified...sort of a bluff technique if you will to indirectly confirm what you might be thinking.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This might be just a ploy to bluff the owners or writers of the doomsday botnet , to try and reconfigure their servers,and give the people setting up this ploy the ability to rescan the systems they think might be the ping servers , to then compare withthe original images they have , and be able to not only confirm which are the payload servers , but also how they might get modified...sort of a bluff technique if you will to indirectly confirm what you might be thinking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This might be just a ploy to bluff the owners or writers of the doomsday botnet, to try and reconfigure their servers,and give the people setting up this ploy the ability to rescan the systems they think might be the ping servers, to then compare withthe original images they have, and be able to not only confirm which are the payload servers, but also how they might get modified...sort of a bluff technique if you will to indirectly confirm what you might be thinking.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28650041</id>
	<title>Re:It's worse than you think</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247241720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does no one in S. Korea see that this is a complete and utter bullshit? N. Korea has neither Internet access to raise nor money to acquire skilled hackers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does no one in S. Korea see that this is a complete and utter bullshit ?
N. Korea has neither Internet access to raise nor money to acquire skilled hackers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does no one in S. Korea see that this is a complete and utter bullshit?
N. Korea has neither Internet access to raise nor money to acquire skilled hackers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646419</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646287</id>
	<title>If you are stupid enough to run MS ...</title>
	<author>HW\_Hack</author>
	<datestamp>1247165220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>then OS stands for "Oh Shit"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>then OS stands for " Oh Shit "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>then OS stands for "Oh Shit"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28650231</id>
	<title>No such thing as consenting victim</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247242440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>It is not THEIR fault that windows is so fucked up</p></div></blockquote><p>
Those users <em>voted for Windows.</em>  They funded Windows.  They funded Windows application developers.  They not only are part of Windows' marketshare, but they <em>caused</em> Windows' market share.  They <strong>SCREAMED</strong> to the market with every dollar and cent they they had: <strong>We not want want quality</strong> and we will punish any developers who work on security, by purchasing from their competitor, Microsoft, instead of spending our money on stuff that works.
</p><p>
Each of them has known for many years that they are either part of a botnet, or they're still trying to join one.
</p><p>
They created the problem for everyone, and they consented to what happened to themselves.
</p><p>
They are not victims.
</p><p>
To the ones who aren't running this worm yet, ask yourself this: are you compatible with this worm?  Has blind luck -- you just didn't happen to get infected this time -- saved you?  If so, and you're still running Windows, then you've opted into the <em>next</em> worm.  You can choose for this to happen to you, but you can't choose to be a victim, because the act of choosing causes you to not be a victim.  Victimhood is all about unwillingness.
</p><p>
If you have already opted in (I don't know why you did that, but you did), you can still opt out, today.  Right now.  Being malware-free is as easy as Nancy Reagan advised: Just Say No. And the first step is to uninstall your existing malware: Windows itself.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is not THEIR fault that windows is so fucked up Those users voted for Windows .
They funded Windows .
They funded Windows application developers .
They not only are part of Windows ' marketshare , but they caused Windows ' market share .
They SCREAMED to the market with every dollar and cent they they had : We not want want quality and we will punish any developers who work on security , by purchasing from their competitor , Microsoft , instead of spending our money on stuff that works .
Each of them has known for many years that they are either part of a botnet , or they 're still trying to join one .
They created the problem for everyone , and they consented to what happened to themselves .
They are not victims .
To the ones who are n't running this worm yet , ask yourself this : are you compatible with this worm ?
Has blind luck -- you just did n't happen to get infected this time -- saved you ?
If so , and you 're still running Windows , then you 've opted into the next worm .
You can choose for this to happen to you , but you ca n't choose to be a victim , because the act of choosing causes you to not be a victim .
Victimhood is all about unwillingness .
If you have already opted in ( I do n't know why you did that , but you did ) , you can still opt out , today .
Right now .
Being malware-free is as easy as Nancy Reagan advised : Just Say No .
And the first step is to uninstall your existing malware : Windows itself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is not THEIR fault that windows is so fucked up
Those users voted for Windows.
They funded Windows.
They funded Windows application developers.
They not only are part of Windows' marketshare, but they caused Windows' market share.
They SCREAMED to the market with every dollar and cent they they had: We not want want quality and we will punish any developers who work on security, by purchasing from their competitor, Microsoft, instead of spending our money on stuff that works.
Each of them has known for many years that they are either part of a botnet, or they're still trying to join one.
They created the problem for everyone, and they consented to what happened to themselves.
They are not victims.
To the ones who aren't running this worm yet, ask yourself this: are you compatible with this worm?
Has blind luck -- you just didn't happen to get infected this time -- saved you?
If so, and you're still running Windows, then you've opted into the next worm.
You can choose for this to happen to you, but you can't choose to be a victim, because the act of choosing causes you to not be a victim.
Victimhood is all about unwillingness.
If you have already opted in (I don't know why you did that, but you did), you can still opt out, today.
Right now.
Being malware-free is as easy as Nancy Reagan advised: Just Say No.
And the first step is to uninstall your existing malware: Windows itself.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646641</id>
	<title>Must be N.Korea</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247256780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously, what other country would be likely to attack both the US and S.Korea?</p><p>I mean really. Most of the countries that hate one of those at least don't want to antagonize the other or don't give a shit about the other.</p><p>On the other hand, if we're all paranoids, it's one of those countries that publicly love both the US and S.Korea but secretly despise them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , what other country would be likely to attack both the US and S.Korea ? I mean really .
Most of the countries that hate one of those at least do n't want to antagonize the other or do n't give a shit about the other.On the other hand , if we 're all paranoids , it 's one of those countries that publicly love both the US and S.Korea but secretly despise them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, what other country would be likely to attack both the US and S.Korea?I mean really.
Most of the countries that hate one of those at least don't want to antagonize the other or don't give a shit about the other.On the other hand, if we're all paranoids, it's one of those countries that publicly love both the US and S.Korea but secretly despise them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28649099</id>
	<title>Re:No SC players?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247238000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm surprised they aren't filling the storage with "kekekekekekekekekekekeke"...</p></div><p>Beat me to it!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm surprised they are n't filling the storage with " kekekekekekekekekekekeke " ...Beat me to it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm surprised they aren't filling the storage with "kekekekekekekekekekekeke"...Beat me to it!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646441</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647341</id>
	<title>Re:Really that bad of a thing?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247222160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apache.</p><p>But when people are on the road, we don't say it's the vehicle's fault for wrapping itself around a tree.  I would say a firewall falls into the "changing a tire" segment.  Something that I wish people knew how to do, but isn't exactly required to drive around.  But virus scan, not clicking on random emails, popups, and whatnot fall into the "driving on the right side of the road" category.  Something that still isn't required to drive, but we would never let them on the highways with the rest of us.</p><p>I think it is just far more cost effective to educate users and limit them from getting on the internet till they know a few basics than to account for every stupid thing that a user might do.  Cause you design a tool that any fool can use... and only fools will use it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apache.But when people are on the road , we do n't say it 's the vehicle 's fault for wrapping itself around a tree .
I would say a firewall falls into the " changing a tire " segment .
Something that I wish people knew how to do , but is n't exactly required to drive around .
But virus scan , not clicking on random emails , popups , and whatnot fall into the " driving on the right side of the road " category .
Something that still is n't required to drive , but we would never let them on the highways with the rest of us.I think it is just far more cost effective to educate users and limit them from getting on the internet till they know a few basics than to account for every stupid thing that a user might do .
Cause you design a tool that any fool can use... and only fools will use it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apache.But when people are on the road, we don't say it's the vehicle's fault for wrapping itself around a tree.
I would say a firewall falls into the "changing a tire" segment.
Something that I wish people knew how to do, but isn't exactly required to drive around.
But virus scan, not clicking on random emails, popups, and whatnot fall into the "driving on the right side of the road" category.
Something that still isn't required to drive, but we would never let them on the highways with the rest of us.I think it is just far more cost effective to educate users and limit them from getting on the internet till they know a few basics than to account for every stupid thing that a user might do.
Cause you design a tool that any fool can use... and only fools will use it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646465</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647431</id>
	<title>Re:If I was still in Tech Support</title>
	<author>L4t3r4lu5</author>
	<datestamp>1247223660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You think having the day off during a disaster is going to fly? You'd best be in a foreign country when they call you, as your colleagues would be pulling all-night shifts to bring everything back up, especially if it's a big business / mission-critical system affected. <br> <br>If I'd found you knew of the possibility too? I'd fire you and refuse to give references. Either that, or they'd read "Work-shy POS who runs at the first sign of trouble. Employ at own risk." with evidence to prove it!</htmltext>
<tokenext>You think having the day off during a disaster is going to fly ?
You 'd best be in a foreign country when they call you , as your colleagues would be pulling all-night shifts to bring everything back up , especially if it 's a big business / mission-critical system affected .
If I 'd found you knew of the possibility too ?
I 'd fire you and refuse to give references .
Either that , or they 'd read " Work-shy POS who runs at the first sign of trouble .
Employ at own risk .
" with evidence to prove it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You think having the day off during a disaster is going to fly?
You'd best be in a foreign country when they call you, as your colleagues would be pulling all-night shifts to bring everything back up, especially if it's a big business / mission-critical system affected.
If I'd found you knew of the possibility too?
I'd fire you and refuse to give references.
Either that, or they'd read "Work-shy POS who runs at the first sign of trouble.
Employ at own risk.
" with evidence to prove it!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646781</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647649</id>
	<title>Re:Really that bad of a thing?</title>
	<author>Martin Spamer</author>
	<datestamp>1247227200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr><i>... cars can only be properly and safely operated by mechanics, engineers, and aficionados? Obviously, that is not true. Cars are designed to be relatively simple to operate, yet can be highly reliable, safe, and low maintenance. At least for the majority of their lifetime, for the average person.</i></p><p><i><i>Car Drivers need a licence to ensure they are <i>properly and safely operated<i>.<br>Car Drivers can be sanctioned for dangerous or irresponsible practices.<br>Car Drivers require insurance to compensate people who suffer a lost caused by incompetence or recklessness of the Driver.<br>Cars must be regularly serviced and maintained by trained experts.<br>Cars must be registered &amp; require regular safety inspections.</i></i></i></i></p><p><i><i><i><i>Some similar practices might avoid most of the problems with have with irresponsible PC owner/operators.  e.g. worms, virus, UCE/UBE, phishing, fraud, DDOS.</i></i></i></i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... cars can only be properly and safely operated by mechanics , engineers , and aficionados ?
Obviously , that is not true .
Cars are designed to be relatively simple to operate , yet can be highly reliable , safe , and low maintenance .
At least for the majority of their lifetime , for the average person.Car Drivers need a licence to ensure they are properly and safely operated.Car Drivers can be sanctioned for dangerous or irresponsible practices.Car Drivers require insurance to compensate people who suffer a lost caused by incompetence or recklessness of the Driver.Cars must be regularly serviced and maintained by trained experts.Cars must be registered &amp; require regular safety inspections.Some similar practices might avoid most of the problems with have with irresponsible PC owner/operators .
e.g. worms , virus , UCE/UBE , phishing , fraud , DDOS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ... cars can only be properly and safely operated by mechanics, engineers, and aficionados?
Obviously, that is not true.
Cars are designed to be relatively simple to operate, yet can be highly reliable, safe, and low maintenance.
At least for the majority of their lifetime, for the average person.Car Drivers need a licence to ensure they are properly and safely operated.Car Drivers can be sanctioned for dangerous or irresponsible practices.Car Drivers require insurance to compensate people who suffer a lost caused by incompetence or recklessness of the Driver.Cars must be regularly serviced and maintained by trained experts.Cars must be registered &amp; require regular safety inspections.Some similar practices might avoid most of the problems with have with irresponsible PC owner/operators.
e.g. worms, virus, UCE/UBE, phishing, fraud, DDOS.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646813</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28655789</id>
	<title>Re:Really that bad of a thing?</title>
	<author>kelnos</author>
	<datestamp>1247226300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Oh, and you can blame MS all you want but the truth is that Linux, if as widely adopted and used by ordinary computer illiterate users, and as targeted by the malware writers as Windows is, wouldn't be a whole lot batter.</p></div><p>[citation needed]

(Though if that batter makes some nice cake, who am I to argue?)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , and you can blame MS all you want but the truth is that Linux , if as widely adopted and used by ordinary computer illiterate users , and as targeted by the malware writers as Windows is , would n't be a whole lot batter .
[ citation needed ] ( Though if that batter makes some nice cake , who am I to argue ?
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, and you can blame MS all you want but the truth is that Linux, if as widely adopted and used by ordinary computer illiterate users, and as targeted by the malware writers as Windows is, wouldn't be a whole lot batter.
[citation needed]

(Though if that batter makes some nice cake, who am I to argue?
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646465</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646649</id>
	<title>Re:Really that bad of a thing?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247256840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You, Sir, have said something far too sensible for the Windows hating command-line lovers here to appreciate. They will no doubt vote you off their island of Windows mockery.</p><p>I agree with the parent about the blame game - and I can't see that having thousands of important computer systems blown away in an instant is in any way a good thing, no matter what operating system they're using. Love or hate any vendor or software development methodology as much as you like, but it's the complete ASSHOLES that make this security compromising shit we have to deal with that should be the targets of your mockey.</p><p>Unless you're chicken.</p><p>Which you probably are.</p><p>Else you'd run said insecure operating system just to live dangerously.</p><p>Ahhhh! Seriously, this argument about MS vs Linux vs whatever is getting more lame by each post in each story. It's about as lame as the Flash vs blah blah blah it's SOOO BORING I can't even write about it any more debates. There are different operating systems currently available that are guided by different principles and philosophies. Choose one (or more). Use it (or them). Then get over yourselves when the one(s) you use don't have the same market share as another one, or whatever the pissing contest de jour is.</p><p>And, if you think that a bunch of very smart people in Redmond aren't concerned with security then you're just extremely blinded and foolish. News flash, homeslice, Debian Woody users aren't the only ones in the world that care about keeping their systems secure.</p><p>post anonymously: check<br>upgrade antivirus that I don't run anyway: check<br>(because it makes everything run real slow: cheeeck)<br>offer erect single finger to virus-writers everywhere: check<br>offer the same to endless whinging about Microsoft: CHECK<br>wish for Amiga to triumphantly return: check (just for kicks to see if anyone's still reading)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You , Sir , have said something far too sensible for the Windows hating command-line lovers here to appreciate .
They will no doubt vote you off their island of Windows mockery.I agree with the parent about the blame game - and I ca n't see that having thousands of important computer systems blown away in an instant is in any way a good thing , no matter what operating system they 're using .
Love or hate any vendor or software development methodology as much as you like , but it 's the complete ASSHOLES that make this security compromising shit we have to deal with that should be the targets of your mockey.Unless you 're chicken.Which you probably are.Else you 'd run said insecure operating system just to live dangerously.Ahhhh !
Seriously , this argument about MS vs Linux vs whatever is getting more lame by each post in each story .
It 's about as lame as the Flash vs blah blah blah it 's SOOO BORING I ca n't even write about it any more debates .
There are different operating systems currently available that are guided by different principles and philosophies .
Choose one ( or more ) .
Use it ( or them ) .
Then get over yourselves when the one ( s ) you use do n't have the same market share as another one , or whatever the pissing contest de jour is.And , if you think that a bunch of very smart people in Redmond are n't concerned with security then you 're just extremely blinded and foolish .
News flash , homeslice , Debian Woody users are n't the only ones in the world that care about keeping their systems secure.post anonymously : checkupgrade antivirus that I do n't run anyway : check ( because it makes everything run real slow : cheeeck ) offer erect single finger to virus-writers everywhere : checkoffer the same to endless whinging about Microsoft : CHECKwish for Amiga to triumphantly return : check ( just for kicks to see if anyone 's still reading )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You, Sir, have said something far too sensible for the Windows hating command-line lovers here to appreciate.
They will no doubt vote you off their island of Windows mockery.I agree with the parent about the blame game - and I can't see that having thousands of important computer systems blown away in an instant is in any way a good thing, no matter what operating system they're using.
Love or hate any vendor or software development methodology as much as you like, but it's the complete ASSHOLES that make this security compromising shit we have to deal with that should be the targets of your mockey.Unless you're chicken.Which you probably are.Else you'd run said insecure operating system just to live dangerously.Ahhhh!
Seriously, this argument about MS vs Linux vs whatever is getting more lame by each post in each story.
It's about as lame as the Flash vs blah blah blah it's SOOO BORING I can't even write about it any more debates.
There are different operating systems currently available that are guided by different principles and philosophies.
Choose one (or more).
Use it (or them).
Then get over yourselves when the one(s) you use don't have the same market share as another one, or whatever the pissing contest de jour is.And, if you think that a bunch of very smart people in Redmond aren't concerned with security then you're just extremely blinded and foolish.
News flash, homeslice, Debian Woody users aren't the only ones in the world that care about keeping their systems secure.post anonymously: checkupgrade antivirus that I don't run anyway: check(because it makes everything run real slow: cheeeck)offer erect single finger to virus-writers everywhere: checkoffer the same to endless whinging about Microsoft: CHECKwish for Amiga to triumphantly return: check (just for kicks to see if anyone's still reading)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646465</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646781</id>
	<title>If I was still in Tech Support</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1247258700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd be scrambling now to get that day off. Failing that, I'll find a doc that writes me a sick leave, if necessary for a bribe. Failing that I'd quit.</p><p>There is no way anyone in support will survive that day without a ringing in his ears.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd be scrambling now to get that day off .
Failing that , I 'll find a doc that writes me a sick leave , if necessary for a bribe .
Failing that I 'd quit.There is no way anyone in support will survive that day without a ringing in his ears .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd be scrambling now to get that day off.
Failing that, I'll find a doc that writes me a sick leave, if necessary for a bribe.
Failing that I'd quit.There is no way anyone in support will survive that day without a ringing in his ears.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646371</id>
	<title>To think</title>
	<author>ZeroSerenity</author>
	<datestamp>1247166420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>A Microsoft patch/tool made...I dunno, four+ years ago could have prevented all of this? You know, if people bothered to install it? Much like...Conflicker(? is this right?) the patch is readily availble before the damage really gets underway or done.<br> <br>Security is not hard people...</htmltext>
<tokenext>A Microsoft patch/tool made...I dunno , four + years ago could have prevented all of this ?
You know , if people bothered to install it ?
Much like...Conflicker ( ?
is this right ?
) the patch is readily availble before the damage really gets underway or done .
Security is not hard people.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A Microsoft patch/tool made...I dunno, four+ years ago could have prevented all of this?
You know, if people bothered to install it?
Much like...Conflicker(?
is this right?
) the patch is readily availble before the damage really gets underway or done.
Security is not hard people...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647121</id>
	<title>Re:U ?</title>
	<author>lxs</author>
	<datestamp>1247219400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Which is why we need to write a counter virus that writes NO U!!!!!! on Korean drives.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Which is why we need to write a counter virus that writes NO U ! ! ! ! ! !
on Korean drives .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which is why we need to write a counter virus that writes NO U!!!!!!
on Korean drives.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646285</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28648003</id>
	<title>useless slashdot comments</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247231520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>253 comments and no one has offered a clue to those who might have been pwned.</p><p>call 'em names if you must but you might throw a rope to someone sinking in the mud.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>253 comments and no one has offered a clue to those who might have been pwned.call 'em names if you must but you might throw a rope to someone sinking in the mud .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>253 comments and no one has offered a clue to those who might have been pwned.call 'em names if you must but you might throw a rope to someone sinking in the mud.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28648529</id>
	<title>The end of IE6?</title>
	<author>noahisaac</author>
	<datestamp>1247235180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hmm... maybe this is all a secret plot by frustrated web developers trying to rid the world of IE6.  <br> <br>

In which case: Go Mydoom!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmm... maybe this is all a secret plot by frustrated web developers trying to rid the world of IE6 .
In which case : Go Mydoom !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmm... maybe this is all a secret plot by frustrated web developers trying to rid the world of IE6.
In which case: Go Mydoom!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647571</id>
	<title>Come and see the insecurity inherent in the system</title>
	<author>hattig</author>
	<datestamp>1247226000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can just see a Windows user getting ineffectually angry when they lose all their data: "Come and see the insecurity inherent in the system!"</p><p>Sad for the users that lose precious data, I doubt they backed up if they can't be bothered to do the bare minimum of free AV and free anti-spyware. Still, they get a weekend to back up now, assuming that they're informed in time.</p><p>After that there will be a load of restored from install CD Windows XP machines ready to be taken over again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can just see a Windows user getting ineffectually angry when they lose all their data : " Come and see the insecurity inherent in the system !
" Sad for the users that lose precious data , I doubt they backed up if they ca n't be bothered to do the bare minimum of free AV and free anti-spyware .
Still , they get a weekend to back up now , assuming that they 're informed in time.After that there will be a load of restored from install CD Windows XP machines ready to be taken over again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can just see a Windows user getting ineffectually angry when they lose all their data: "Come and see the insecurity inherent in the system!
"Sad for the users that lose precious data, I doubt they backed up if they can't be bothered to do the bare minimum of free AV and free anti-spyware.
Still, they get a weekend to back up now, assuming that they're informed in time.After that there will be a load of restored from install CD Windows XP machines ready to be taken over again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646275</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647883</id>
	<title>Re:U ?</title>
	<author>jridley</author>
	<datestamp>1247230560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's funny, I thought only magnetic patterns could be written to the hard drive.  When read back and decoded, they're interpreted as 0s and 1s.  When those are interpreted, they might look like a u.  How low do you want to go with pedanticism?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's funny , I thought only magnetic patterns could be written to the hard drive .
When read back and decoded , they 're interpreted as 0s and 1s .
When those are interpreted , they might look like a u. How low do you want to go with pedanticism ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's funny, I thought only magnetic patterns could be written to the hard drive.
When read back and decoded, they're interpreted as 0s and 1s.
When those are interpreted, they might look like a u.  How low do you want to go with pedanticism?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646285</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647243</id>
	<title>Come the day:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247220780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As If Millions Of Voices Suddenly Cried Out In Terror And Were Suddenly Silenced</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As If Millions Of Voices Suddenly Cried Out In Terror And Were Suddenly Silenced</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As If Millions Of Voices Suddenly Cried Out In Terror And Were Suddenly Silenced</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647015</id>
	<title>Re:FFS</title>
	<author>EdIII</author>
	<datestamp>1247218260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As long as we are passing around the Clue Bat..... Let me whack you one time too.</p><p>Nobody here is punishing the users.  They are victims.  The criminals that made them victims, are just killing them after raping them repeatedly.  Please forgive such a graphic analogy.</p><p>By having those systems destroyed, there is an inescapable conclusion that follows:  <i> <b>They are no longer participating in a Botnet that is harming other people and corporations</b></i> .</p><p>Does it have a chance of changing their behavior?  Of opening up their eyes to security and the implications of being added to a Botnet?  Who knows.  You may be right that it, "it will not do a damn thing to increase security".</p><p>It's absolutely horrible that these users are victims and they have to suffer such losses.  However, these posters are right.  It's a good thing..... <i>for the rest of us</i>.  Unsophisticated users and Slashdot geeks alike.</p><p>That does not mean, I am an ass**** or that I have no compassion.  Just recognizing that these victims can no longer be forced to participate in harming other people.</p><p>There....  Okay, who else wants the Clue Bat?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As long as we are passing around the Clue Bat..... Let me whack you one time too.Nobody here is punishing the users .
They are victims .
The criminals that made them victims , are just killing them after raping them repeatedly .
Please forgive such a graphic analogy.By having those systems destroyed , there is an inescapable conclusion that follows : They are no longer participating in a Botnet that is harming other people and corporations .Does it have a chance of changing their behavior ?
Of opening up their eyes to security and the implications of being added to a Botnet ?
Who knows .
You may be right that it , " it will not do a damn thing to increase security " .It 's absolutely horrible that these users are victims and they have to suffer such losses .
However , these posters are right .
It 's a good thing..... for the rest of us .
Unsophisticated users and Slashdot geeks alike.That does not mean , I am an ass * * * * or that I have no compassion .
Just recognizing that these victims can no longer be forced to participate in harming other people.There.... Okay , who else wants the Clue Bat ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As long as we are passing around the Clue Bat..... Let me whack you one time too.Nobody here is punishing the users.
They are victims.
The criminals that made them victims, are just killing them after raping them repeatedly.
Please forgive such a graphic analogy.By having those systems destroyed, there is an inescapable conclusion that follows:   They are no longer participating in a Botnet that is harming other people and corporations .Does it have a chance of changing their behavior?
Of opening up their eyes to security and the implications of being added to a Botnet?
Who knows.
You may be right that it, "it will not do a damn thing to increase security".It's absolutely horrible that these users are victims and they have to suffer such losses.
However, these posters are right.
It's a good thing..... for the rest of us.
Unsophisticated users and Slashdot geeks alike.That does not mean, I am an ass**** or that I have no compassion.
Just recognizing that these victims can no longer be forced to participate in harming other people.There....  Okay, who else wants the Clue Bat?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28653589</id>
	<title>Re:Really that bad of a thing?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247256600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Oh, and you can blame MS all you want but the truth is that Linux, if as widely adopted and used by ordinary computer illiterate users, and as targeted by the malware writers as Windows is, wouldn't be a whole lot batter.</p></div><p>Sorry, that's not true. It's a logical fallacy that says that the most effort is directed at the biggest target. They've *already* got those systems. People with a security clue or those running *nix are juicy targets that they would love to get into, and they try -ad nauseum. Ever checked out the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/var/auth.log on a system with an ipv4 address? It's called a dictionary attack. Linux being more prolific leading to it's insecurity is FUD. Don't spread it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , and you can blame MS all you want but the truth is that Linux , if as widely adopted and used by ordinary computer illiterate users , and as targeted by the malware writers as Windows is , would n't be a whole lot batter.Sorry , that 's not true .
It 's a logical fallacy that says that the most effort is directed at the biggest target .
They 've * already * got those systems .
People with a security clue or those running * nix are juicy targets that they would love to get into , and they try -ad nauseum .
Ever checked out the /var/auth.log on a system with an ipv4 address ?
It 's called a dictionary attack .
Linux being more prolific leading to it 's insecurity is FUD .
Do n't spread it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, and you can blame MS all you want but the truth is that Linux, if as widely adopted and used by ordinary computer illiterate users, and as targeted by the malware writers as Windows is, wouldn't be a whole lot batter.Sorry, that's not true.
It's a logical fallacy that says that the most effort is directed at the biggest target.
They've *already* got those systems.
People with a security clue or those running *nix are juicy targets that they would love to get into, and they try -ad nauseum.
Ever checked out the /var/auth.log on a system with an ipv4 address?
It's called a dictionary attack.
Linux being more prolific leading to it's insecurity is FUD.
Don't spread it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646465</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28650673</id>
	<title>Re:Really that bad of a thing?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247244180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why don't you just wish them to total their car so that they can be forced to buy a newer, more fuel efficient car.</p></div><p>I do wish this upon goddamned suv drivers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do n't you just wish them to total their car so that they can be forced to buy a newer , more fuel efficient car.I do wish this upon goddamned suv drivers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why don't you just wish them to total their car so that they can be forced to buy a newer, more fuel efficient car.I do wish this upon goddamned suv drivers.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646335</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646327</id>
	<title>Re:U ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247165880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>u in binary (yeah, I know what you meant):<br>1010 0101</p><p>I would have expected<br>0101 0101<br>which is "U"<br>(or 1010 1010, but that doesn't seem to be a nice ASCII character I can type)<br>Hmm, maybe it is a capitalization error on someones part, or maybe they just like the palindromic nature of 1010 0101?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>u in binary ( yeah , I know what you meant ) : 1010 0101I would have expected0101 0101which is " U " ( or 1010 1010 , but that does n't seem to be a nice ASCII character I can type ) Hmm , maybe it is a capitalization error on someones part , or maybe they just like the palindromic nature of 1010 0101 ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>u in binary (yeah, I know what you meant):1010 0101I would have expected0101 0101which is "U"(or 1010 1010, but that doesn't seem to be a nice ASCII character I can type)Hmm, maybe it is a capitalization error on someones part, or maybe they just like the palindromic nature of 1010 0101?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646285</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646641
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647389
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646309
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28650231
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646285
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647931
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646285
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646327
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646491
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646285
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646327
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28651431
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646335
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28650673
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646309
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647015
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647427
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28651243
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646923
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646487
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646807
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28648665
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646377
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28650111
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646377
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28655307
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646419
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28650041
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646465
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28653491
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646285
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647219
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28653609
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646335
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646749
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646465
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28655789
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646465
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647341
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646465
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646813
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28655283
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646465
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28650381
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646309
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28648069
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646441
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28649099
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646533
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646335
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646539
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646533
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647245
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646285
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647883
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646309
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28655727
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646285
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646327
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647759
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646285
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646327
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646711
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646487
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646763
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646465
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646813
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647175
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646781
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646909
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646781
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647431
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646465
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646813
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647337
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646285
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647065
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646465
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28653995
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646285
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647535
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646285
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647121
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646269
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647891
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646323
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647599
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646285
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646327
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28653159
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646385
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28648455
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646275
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646783
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646285
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646327
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647621
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646335
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646579
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646863
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646377
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647791
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646487
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646753
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646533
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647983
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646335
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646479
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646275
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647571
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646465
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646649
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646309
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646669
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646285
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646327
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28648121
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646377
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647917
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646465
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646813
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647649
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646465
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647727
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646285
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646327
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28648081
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28660781
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646285
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646327
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28649021
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646465
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28651035
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646465
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646813
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28654123
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646285
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647953
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646465
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28653589
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_0452256_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646441
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28648619
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_0452256.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646291
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646309
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646669
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646743
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647015
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647427
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28651243
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28650231
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28648069
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28655727
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646419
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28650041
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646465
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28655789
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646649
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28650381
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646813
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28655283
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647175
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28654123
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647337
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647649
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647727
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28653589
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647341
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28651035
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28653491
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28653995
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646335
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646579
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646863
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646479
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28650673
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646539
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646749
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646385
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28648455
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646323
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647599
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_0452256.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646495
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646923
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_0452256.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646533
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647983
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647245
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647549
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_0452256.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646487
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646753
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646807
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28648665
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646763
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_0452256.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647909
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_0452256.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646269
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647891
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_0452256.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647425
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_0452256.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646441
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28648619
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28649099
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_0452256.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28648193
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_0452256.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646377
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28655307
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28650111
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647791
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647917
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_0452256.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646287
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_0452256.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646781
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646909
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647431
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_0452256.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646641
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647389
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_0452256.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646421
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_0452256.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646557
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_0452256.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646275
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647571
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646783
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_0452256.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647833
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_0452256.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646285
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647883
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647065
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647219
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28653609
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646327
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647759
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28653159
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28648081
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28660781
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647621
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646711
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28648121
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646491
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28651431
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28649021
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647931
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647535
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647121
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647953
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_0452256.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28647711
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_0452256.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646279
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_0452256.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28648859
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_0452256.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28648317
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_0452256.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_0452256.28646371
</commentlist>
</conversation>
