<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_10_1341220</id>
	<title>Facebook Masks Worse Privacy With New Interface</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1260457140000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"Facebook launched new privacy settings this week. Cosmetically, this means that the settings are explained more clearly and are marginally easier to manage. Unfortunately, some of the most significant changes actually <a href="http://www.facebook.com/help.php?page=927">make preserving privacy harder for its users</a>: profile elements that could previously be restricted to 'Only Friends' are now designated as irrevocably publicly available: 'Publicly available information includes your name, profile picture, gender, current city, networks, friend list, and Pages.'  Where you could previously preserve the privacy of this information and remain publicly searchable only by name, Facebook now forces you to either give up this information (including your current city!) to anyone with a Facebook account, or to restrict your search visibility &mdash; which of course limits the usefulness of the site far beyond how not publicly sharing your profile picture would. That Facebook made this change while simultaneously rolling out major changes to the privacy settings interface seems disingenuous."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " Facebook launched new privacy settings this week .
Cosmetically , this means that the settings are explained more clearly and are marginally easier to manage .
Unfortunately , some of the most significant changes actually make preserving privacy harder for its users : profile elements that could previously be restricted to 'Only Friends ' are now designated as irrevocably publicly available : 'Publicly available information includes your name , profile picture , gender , current city , networks , friend list , and Pages .
' Where you could previously preserve the privacy of this information and remain publicly searchable only by name , Facebook now forces you to either give up this information ( including your current city !
) to anyone with a Facebook account , or to restrict your search visibility    which of course limits the usefulness of the site far beyond how not publicly sharing your profile picture would .
That Facebook made this change while simultaneously rolling out major changes to the privacy settings interface seems disingenuous .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "Facebook launched new privacy settings this week.
Cosmetically, this means that the settings are explained more clearly and are marginally easier to manage.
Unfortunately, some of the most significant changes actually make preserving privacy harder for its users: profile elements that could previously be restricted to 'Only Friends' are now designated as irrevocably publicly available: 'Publicly available information includes your name, profile picture, gender, current city, networks, friend list, and Pages.
'  Where you could previously preserve the privacy of this information and remain publicly searchable only by name, Facebook now forces you to either give up this information (including your current city!
) to anyone with a Facebook account, or to restrict your search visibility — which of course limits the usefulness of the site far beyond how not publicly sharing your profile picture would.
That Facebook made this change while simultaneously rolling out major changes to the privacy settings interface seems disingenuous.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30392252</id>
	<title>Re:If you want privacy then don't use</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260475200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><blockquote><div><p>If you don't want your name, address, phone, measurements,</p></div></blockquote><p>If everyone knows my measurement, why do I keep getting penis enlargement spam?!</p></div><p>Because everyone knows your measurement.<br>*Ducks for cover*</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you do n't want your name , address , phone , measurements,If everyone knows my measurement , why do I keep getting penis enlargement spam ?
! Because everyone knows your measurement .
* Ducks for cover *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you don't want your name, address, phone, measurements,If everyone knows my measurement, why do I keep getting penis enlargement spam?
!Because everyone knows your measurement.
*Ducks for cover*
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30393582</id>
	<title>well</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260437220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>at least they are doing something...If I went to your house would your mailbox be invisible or could I steal your mail?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>at least they are doing something...If I went to your house would your mailbox be invisible or could I steal your mail ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>at least they are doing something...If I went to your house would your mailbox be invisible or could I steal your mail?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388470</id>
	<title>Re:Where are they making their money?</title>
	<author>Shajenko42</author>
	<datestamp>1260462840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm sure that that's what Facebook is doing, but this move doesn't really help with that.  If they want to sell your information, wouldn't it make more sense to offer a service that allows you to see any profile regardless of privacy settings (especially if you don't make knowledge of this service widely available to the general public)?  Allowing anyone to see more information about everyone else doesn't exactly advance this goal.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure that that 's what Facebook is doing , but this move does n't really help with that .
If they want to sell your information , would n't it make more sense to offer a service that allows you to see any profile regardless of privacy settings ( especially if you do n't make knowledge of this service widely available to the general public ) ?
Allowing anyone to see more information about everyone else does n't exactly advance this goal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure that that's what Facebook is doing, but this move doesn't really help with that.
If they want to sell your information, wouldn't it make more sense to offer a service that allows you to see any profile regardless of privacy settings (especially if you don't make knowledge of this service widely available to the general public)?
Allowing anyone to see more information about everyone else doesn't exactly advance this goal.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388222</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389150</id>
	<title>this article is nothing but hot air</title>
	<author>Bauguss</author>
	<datestamp>1260465300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm sorry.  I just went to my facebook account and got the popup for the new settings.   There were what, 10 settings to choose?  Sure the defaults were as open as possible, but is it so f'ing difficult to click 10 times and hit save?  And I don't see what they are talking about either.  I can still set all my settings to friends only or friends of friends, or everyone.  It took me all of 1 minute to answer the pop up questions.  Another minute digging into the privacy screens show nothing out of the ordinary.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sorry .
I just went to my facebook account and got the popup for the new settings .
There were what , 10 settings to choose ?
Sure the defaults were as open as possible , but is it so f'ing difficult to click 10 times and hit save ?
And I do n't see what they are talking about either .
I can still set all my settings to friends only or friends of friends , or everyone .
It took me all of 1 minute to answer the pop up questions .
Another minute digging into the privacy screens show nothing out of the ordinary .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sorry.
I just went to my facebook account and got the popup for the new settings.
There were what, 10 settings to choose?
Sure the defaults were as open as possible, but is it so f'ing difficult to click 10 times and hit save?
And I don't see what they are talking about either.
I can still set all my settings to friends only or friends of friends, or everyone.
It took me all of 1 minute to answer the pop up questions.
Another minute digging into the privacy screens show nothing out of the ordinary.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390156</id>
	<title>Re:If you want privacy then don't use</title>
	<author>siride</author>
	<datestamp>1260468360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Then use email.  It's really easy and you can control exactly who gets to see what.

Don't go on a site whose explicit purpose is to share lots of stuff with lots of people and complain that you can't use it for something completely different.  As always in the computer world: use the right tool for the job.  If you don't want to use Facebook as a social networking site, then don't use it and use something like email or a personal website that is more appropriate.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Then use email .
It 's really easy and you can control exactly who gets to see what .
Do n't go on a site whose explicit purpose is to share lots of stuff with lots of people and complain that you ca n't use it for something completely different .
As always in the computer world : use the right tool for the job .
If you do n't want to use Facebook as a social networking site , then do n't use it and use something like email or a personal website that is more appropriate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then use email.
It's really easy and you can control exactly who gets to see what.
Don't go on a site whose explicit purpose is to share lots of stuff with lots of people and complain that you can't use it for something completely different.
As always in the computer world: use the right tool for the job.
If you don't want to use Facebook as a social networking site, then don't use it and use something like email or a personal website that is more appropriate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389920</id>
	<title>What really changed?</title>
	<author>benro03</author>
	<datestamp>1260467580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was presented with two choices; Public (recommended) and to keep the current settings.  I like the way my settings were, so I kept them.  I'm looking at the privacy page right now and the ONLY difference that I can see is it wants a password to access the privacy settings.  Everything underneath is exactly the same way it was before they made their changes, which BTW are Everyone for adding me &amp; my location with everything else locked down to "Only Friends".  If something's changed under there, I can't see it.</p><p>Now, it's pretty sneaky of them to call it a change and put up a big screen with just a few choices that are defaulted to Everybody.  Still, I don't see where it's irrevocable; surely they learned something from the Beacon fiasco.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was presented with two choices ; Public ( recommended ) and to keep the current settings .
I like the way my settings were , so I kept them .
I 'm looking at the privacy page right now and the ONLY difference that I can see is it wants a password to access the privacy settings .
Everything underneath is exactly the same way it was before they made their changes , which BTW are Everyone for adding me &amp; my location with everything else locked down to " Only Friends " .
If something 's changed under there , I ca n't see it.Now , it 's pretty sneaky of them to call it a change and put up a big screen with just a few choices that are defaulted to Everybody .
Still , I do n't see where it 's irrevocable ; surely they learned something from the Beacon fiasco .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was presented with two choices; Public (recommended) and to keep the current settings.
I like the way my settings were, so I kept them.
I'm looking at the privacy page right now and the ONLY difference that I can see is it wants a password to access the privacy settings.
Everything underneath is exactly the same way it was before they made their changes, which BTW are Everyone for adding me &amp; my location with everything else locked down to "Only Friends".
If something's changed under there, I can't see it.Now, it's pretty sneaky of them to call it a change and put up a big screen with just a few choices that are defaulted to Everybody.
Still, I don't see where it's irrevocable; surely they learned something from the Beacon fiasco.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388550</id>
	<title>Re:If you want privacy then don't use</title>
	<author>orangedan</author>
	<datestamp>1260463140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Though Facebook does need to step up on privacy, not posting information, or even not signing up for the service does not make you immune.  People are, as always, the real security leak.  I haven't signed up for Facebook, but my friends still tag pictures of me with my full name.  Whether I like it or not, I'm still "on" Facebook.   Now, all of their "friends", who I may not even know, can now know my name and face, which is a good start to the beginning of identity theft.
<br> <br>The only real way to hide from the internet these days is to hole yourself up in your house and never sign up or purchase any service.  Eventually, the data hits the 'net.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Though Facebook does need to step up on privacy , not posting information , or even not signing up for the service does not make you immune .
People are , as always , the real security leak .
I have n't signed up for Facebook , but my friends still tag pictures of me with my full name .
Whether I like it or not , I 'm still " on " Facebook .
Now , all of their " friends " , who I may not even know , can now know my name and face , which is a good start to the beginning of identity theft .
The only real way to hide from the internet these days is to hole yourself up in your house and never sign up or purchase any service .
Eventually , the data hits the 'net .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Though Facebook does need to step up on privacy, not posting information, or even not signing up for the service does not make you immune.
People are, as always, the real security leak.
I haven't signed up for Facebook, but my friends still tag pictures of me with my full name.
Whether I like it or not, I'm still "on" Facebook.
Now, all of their "friends", who I may not even know, can now know my name and face, which is a good start to the beginning of identity theft.
The only real way to hide from the internet these days is to hole yourself up in your house and never sign up or purchase any service.
Eventually, the data hits the 'net.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388484</id>
	<title>Friends List</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260462900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your friends list can be hidden from strangers, it's just not in the privacy settings.</p><p>You have to go to your profile page, then click the pencil icon in the upper right corner of the friends box.  Uncheck 'show my friends in my profile'.</p><p>It will still show your friends to your other friends, though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your friends list can be hidden from strangers , it 's just not in the privacy settings.You have to go to your profile page , then click the pencil icon in the upper right corner of the friends box .
Uncheck 'show my friends in my profile'.It will still show your friends to your other friends , though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your friends list can be hidden from strangers, it's just not in the privacy settings.You have to go to your profile page, then click the pencil icon in the upper right corner of the friends box.
Uncheck 'show my friends in my profile'.It will still show your friends to your other friends, though.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389510</id>
	<title>Re:Our privacy is not their concern</title>
	<author>plague3106</author>
	<datestamp>1260466500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Again, if you are THAT concerned about your privacy, WHY are you giving our your 'private' information to people you don't know?<br></i></p><p>Simple.  I care a great deal about my privacy, but I'm opening to sharing a lot of details with friends and family.  Previously, I had everything locked down so that ONLY friends could see my information.  I don't care if my family knows I'm a fan of, say, Capt. Morgan (maybe they want to do something different for a gift or something), but do I want any jackass in the world to know that?  No.  But FB decided that if I want to share something like that, everyone in the world can know, or I no one can.</p><p>Yes, I could go through the hassle of my own web site... but I actively need to tell them about it, instead of them signing on and finding me.  And it's easier to click a few buttons than manage my own site.</p><p>Before you ask, yes, I have gone through and deleted all the information which I no longer have control over.  People can find I have an account, and that's it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Again , if you are THAT concerned about your privacy , WHY are you giving our your 'private ' information to people you do n't know ? Simple .
I care a great deal about my privacy , but I 'm opening to sharing a lot of details with friends and family .
Previously , I had everything locked down so that ONLY friends could see my information .
I do n't care if my family knows I 'm a fan of , say , Capt .
Morgan ( maybe they want to do something different for a gift or something ) , but do I want any jackass in the world to know that ?
No. But FB decided that if I want to share something like that , everyone in the world can know , or I no one can.Yes , I could go through the hassle of my own web site... but I actively need to tell them about it , instead of them signing on and finding me .
And it 's easier to click a few buttons than manage my own site.Before you ask , yes , I have gone through and deleted all the information which I no longer have control over .
People can find I have an account , and that 's it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Again, if you are THAT concerned about your privacy, WHY are you giving our your 'private' information to people you don't know?Simple.
I care a great deal about my privacy, but I'm opening to sharing a lot of details with friends and family.
Previously, I had everything locked down so that ONLY friends could see my information.
I don't care if my family knows I'm a fan of, say, Capt.
Morgan (maybe they want to do something different for a gift or something), but do I want any jackass in the world to know that?
No.  But FB decided that if I want to share something like that, everyone in the world can know, or I no one can.Yes, I could go through the hassle of my own web site... but I actively need to tell them about it, instead of them signing on and finding me.
And it's easier to click a few buttons than manage my own site.Before you ask, yes, I have gone through and deleted all the information which I no longer have control over.
People can find I have an account, and that's it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388724</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388214</id>
	<title>Re:If you want privacy then don't use</title>
	<author>tylernt</author>
	<datestamp>1260461460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>If you don't want your name, address, phone, measurements,</p></div> </blockquote><p>If everyone knows my measurement, why do I keep getting penis enlargement spam?!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you do n't want your name , address , phone , measurements , If everyone knows my measurement , why do I keep getting penis enlargement spam ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you don't want your name, address, phone, measurements, If everyone knows my measurement, why do I keep getting penis enlargement spam?
!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388460</id>
	<title>Oh no it is not.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260462720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>they just want to make enough money to keep the doors open and break even.</p></div><p>No. They're going to do an IPO and the principals are doing everything they to make sure they become instant billionaires at the IPO.</p><p>As for you Facebook users, there's a KY sale at Walmart - stock up.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>they just want to make enough money to keep the doors open and break even.No .
They 're going to do an IPO and the principals are doing everything they to make sure they become instant billionaires at the IPO.As for you Facebook users , there 's a KY sale at Walmart - stock up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they just want to make enough money to keep the doors open and break even.No.
They're going to do an IPO and the principals are doing everything they to make sure they become instant billionaires at the IPO.As for you Facebook users, there's a KY sale at Walmart - stock up.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388222</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388428</id>
	<title>Re:Facebook is not about privacy.</title>
	<author>TheGratefulNet</author>
	<datestamp>1260462600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>what??  a corporation is not looking out for the best interest of its customers?</p><p>what is the world coming to?</p><p>life HAS to be disney-like.  they all told me that as I was growing up.  it HAS to be true.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>what ? ?
a corporation is not looking out for the best interest of its customers ? what is the world coming to ? life HAS to be disney-like .
they all told me that as I was growing up .
it HAS to be true .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>what??
a corporation is not looking out for the best interest of its customers?what is the world coming to?life HAS to be disney-like.
they all told me that as I was growing up.
it HAS to be true.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389476</id>
	<title>Re:privacy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260466380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Save your profile picture, the white pages would provide all of this information.  And you don't even have to be on the Internet for people to see it!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Save your profile picture , the white pages would provide all of this information .
And you do n't even have to be on the Internet for people to see it !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Save your profile picture, the white pages would provide all of this information.
And you don't even have to be on the Internet for people to see it!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388244</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30394950</id>
	<title>Not Applicable...</title>
	<author>SeeSp0tRun</author>
	<datestamp>1260442500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Still no Facebook, Twitter, Myspace, etc.
<br>
Am I the only person like this still?  I don't find it difficult to make plans, find friends, and *gasp* use my phone to actually speak to people!
<br>
Maybe it's just me...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Still no Facebook , Twitter , Myspace , etc .
Am I the only person like this still ?
I do n't find it difficult to make plans , find friends , and * gasp * use my phone to actually speak to people !
Maybe it 's just me.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Still no Facebook, Twitter, Myspace, etc.
Am I the only person like this still?
I don't find it difficult to make plans, find friends, and *gasp* use my phone to actually speak to people!
Maybe it's just me...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388286</id>
	<title>dammit, facebook</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260461820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I do not appreciate Facebook bringing privacy settings to the attention of a certain woman who I may or may not have been cyber-stalking for the past 10 years, causing her to change her settings and making her profile no longer visible to me.</p><p>I say that in the least creepy way possible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do not appreciate Facebook bringing privacy settings to the attention of a certain woman who I may or may not have been cyber-stalking for the past 10 years , causing her to change her settings and making her profile no longer visible to me.I say that in the least creepy way possible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I do not appreciate Facebook bringing privacy settings to the attention of a certain woman who I may or may not have been cyber-stalking for the past 10 years, causing her to change her settings and making her profile no longer visible to me.I say that in the least creepy way possible.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391844</id>
	<title>Re:If you want privacy then don't use</title>
	<author>Jesus\_666</author>
	<datestamp>1260473820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, though luck. Online informations work exactly like Unix file permissions: They're either 700 or 744, there are no other possibilities.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , though luck .
Online informations work exactly like Unix file permissions : They 're either 700 or 744 , there are no other possibilities .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, though luck.
Online informations work exactly like Unix file permissions: They're either 700 or 744, there are no other possibilities.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30395386</id>
	<title>Re:If you want privacy then don't use</title>
	<author>SmlFreshwaterBuffalo</author>
	<datestamp>1260444120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I had the same problem. Turns out it was an overflow error in their system. They were only using a long to store the measurements.</p><p>*rimshot*</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had the same problem .
Turns out it was an overflow error in their system .
They were only using a long to store the measurements .
* rimshot *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had the same problem.
Turns out it was an overflow error in their system.
They were only using a long to store the measurements.
*rimshot*</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30394300</id>
	<title>Re:Friends List</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260440340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Removing the friends list from your profile does not make it inaccessible to strangers. It can still be accessed through the same URL. Mark Zuckerberg's friends are here:</p><p>http://www.facebook.com/friends/?id=4</p><p>Replacing the id in the URL with any user id yields their friends list irrespective of that user's privacy and profile display settings.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Removing the friends list from your profile does not make it inaccessible to strangers .
It can still be accessed through the same URL .
Mark Zuckerberg 's friends are here : http : //www.facebook.com/friends/ ? id = 4Replacing the id in the URL with any user id yields their friends list irrespective of that user 's privacy and profile display settings .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Removing the friends list from your profile does not make it inaccessible to strangers.
It can still be accessed through the same URL.
Mark Zuckerberg's friends are here:http://www.facebook.com/friends/?id=4Replacing the id in the URL with any user id yields their friends list irrespective of that user's privacy and profile display settings.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388208</id>
	<title>Facebook is not about privacy.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260461460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>They do not "get" it.   I am convinced Facebook does not want to preserve the privacy of its users.  When I went to Facebook last night, I was presented with a pop up menu to select my new privacy options.  All the defaults were set to looser privacy than I had previously set for my account.  I had to manually restore the stricter privacy settings.
<p>.<br>
<b>Facebook does not care about the privacy of its users.</b>   Get used to it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They do not " get " it .
I am convinced Facebook does not want to preserve the privacy of its users .
When I went to Facebook last night , I was presented with a pop up menu to select my new privacy options .
All the defaults were set to looser privacy than I had previously set for my account .
I had to manually restore the stricter privacy settings .
. Facebook does not care about the privacy of its users .
Get used to it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They do not "get" it.
I am convinced Facebook does not want to preserve the privacy of its users.
When I went to Facebook last night, I was presented with a pop up menu to select my new privacy options.
All the defaults were set to looser privacy than I had previously set for my account.
I had to manually restore the stricter privacy settings.
.
Facebook does not care about the privacy of its users.
Get used to it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30392260</id>
	<title>The Internet is the ultimate tool</title>
	<author>nysus</author>
	<datestamp>1260475200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm afraid the Internet will come to be seen as the ultimate tool as the ultimate tool for allowing the powerful, smart, and/or well-connected individuals and organizations to find and exploit the gullible, stupid, and/or powerless amongst us.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm afraid the Internet will come to be seen as the ultimate tool as the ultimate tool for allowing the powerful , smart , and/or well-connected individuals and organizations to find and exploit the gullible , stupid , and/or powerless amongst us .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm afraid the Internet will come to be seen as the ultimate tool as the ultimate tool for allowing the powerful, smart, and/or well-connected individuals and organizations to find and exploit the gullible, stupid, and/or powerless amongst us.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30392004</id>
	<title>I have been an active Facebook user</title>
	<author>jlintern</author>
	<datestamp>1260474360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...for nearly 5 years. My profile is completely public except for 1) phone number and 2) photos tagged of me.

I have never experienced any event that would cause me to reconsider these privacy options nor has an argument ever been advanced that would convince me to change them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...for nearly 5 years .
My profile is completely public except for 1 ) phone number and 2 ) photos tagged of me .
I have never experienced any event that would cause me to reconsider these privacy options nor has an argument ever been advanced that would convince me to change them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...for nearly 5 years.
My profile is completely public except for 1) phone number and 2) photos tagged of me.
I have never experienced any event that would cause me to reconsider these privacy options nor has an argument ever been advanced that would convince me to change them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390014</id>
	<title>Re:If you want privacy then don't use</title>
	<author>mrdoogee</author>
	<datestamp>1260467820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does "bait and switch" apply to a free service?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does " bait and switch " apply to a free service ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does "bait and switch" apply to a free service?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388726</id>
	<title>Re:Give false info</title>
	<author>canajin56</author>
	<datestamp>1260463980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>whether you wear dresses, or ties (or both - but not together: that's just weird).</p></div>
</blockquote><p>

<a href="http://fancydressheaven.co.uk/bmz\_cache/b/b5527e7a5bb048ba43e9f3d1a60cd4b7.image.300x450.jpg" title="fancydressheaven.co.uk">I respectful disagree!</a> [fancydressheaven.co.uk]   <a href="http://cdn.costumesupercenter.com/csc\_inc/images/items/343x432/SH7464.jpg" title="costumesupercenter.com">Also this one.</a> [costumesupercenter.com]

<a href="http://www.atasda.org.au/img/student\_award/2007/edwina\_tait/tie\_dress.jpg" title="atasda.org.au">And for completness, a dress made of ties!</a> [atasda.org.au] (Though I guess that's not a good candidate for proving it's not weird).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>whether you wear dresses , or ties ( or both - but not together : that 's just weird ) .
I respectful disagree !
[ fancydressheaven.co.uk ] Also this one .
[ costumesupercenter.com ] And for completness , a dress made of ties !
[ atasda.org.au ] ( Though I guess that 's not a good candidate for proving it 's not weird ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>whether you wear dresses, or ties (or both - but not together: that's just weird).
I respectful disagree!
[fancydressheaven.co.uk]   Also this one.
[costumesupercenter.com]

And for completness, a dress made of ties!
[atasda.org.au] (Though I guess that's not a good candidate for proving it's not weird).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388312</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30392776</id>
	<title>Re:Social networking is not about privacy</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1260477420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know that you may never heard of such things, but in <em>social</em> networks, there is a concept of <em>trust</em>. Which means that all information to you has a privacy value attached to it. And every person has a trustworthiness value associated with it. Then every person gets that information, for which the trustworthiness is higher or equal to the privacy value. And this is still simplified.<br>But at least not oversimplified, like your view.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know that you may never heard of such things , but in social networks , there is a concept of trust .
Which means that all information to you has a privacy value attached to it .
And every person has a trustworthiness value associated with it .
Then every person gets that information , for which the trustworthiness is higher or equal to the privacy value .
And this is still simplified.But at least not oversimplified , like your view .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know that you may never heard of such things, but in social networks, there is a concept of trust.
Which means that all information to you has a privacy value attached to it.
And every person has a trustworthiness value associated with it.
Then every person gets that information, for which the trustworthiness is higher or equal to the privacy value.
And this is still simplified.But at least not oversimplified, like your view.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388490</id>
	<title>Boo-Hoo</title>
	<author>Lieutenant Buddha</author>
	<datestamp>1260462900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>It appears people still don't understand that Facebook is a company and a BUSINESS. Not a government institute, not a public service. Making money is their sole purpose. Anything else they do is just a means to make that money. People seem to think they can have some expectation of privacy from Facebook when their primary business model is advertising revenues. The way to make the advertising most effective is to base it on your information. Why should they care who you want to see it or what you want done with it? I'd say you're lucky they aren't selling your personal information en masse to advertisers, and they very well may be. If you put your information on Facebook, you should be aware that you are forfeiting all rights to it and you have no right to demand it be private. The people who complain about Facebook not having enough privacy are the same people who complain about Google knowing your search history. It's time to grow up now, this is how the world works.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It appears people still do n't understand that Facebook is a company and a BUSINESS .
Not a government institute , not a public service .
Making money is their sole purpose .
Anything else they do is just a means to make that money .
People seem to think they can have some expectation of privacy from Facebook when their primary business model is advertising revenues .
The way to make the advertising most effective is to base it on your information .
Why should they care who you want to see it or what you want done with it ?
I 'd say you 're lucky they are n't selling your personal information en masse to advertisers , and they very well may be .
If you put your information on Facebook , you should be aware that you are forfeiting all rights to it and you have no right to demand it be private .
The people who complain about Facebook not having enough privacy are the same people who complain about Google knowing your search history .
It 's time to grow up now , this is how the world works .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It appears people still don't understand that Facebook is a company and a BUSINESS.
Not a government institute, not a public service.
Making money is their sole purpose.
Anything else they do is just a means to make that money.
People seem to think they can have some expectation of privacy from Facebook when their primary business model is advertising revenues.
The way to make the advertising most effective is to base it on your information.
Why should they care who you want to see it or what you want done with it?
I'd say you're lucky they aren't selling your personal information en masse to advertisers, and they very well may be.
If you put your information on Facebook, you should be aware that you are forfeiting all rights to it and you have no right to demand it be private.
The people who complain about Facebook not having enough privacy are the same people who complain about Google knowing your search history.
It's time to grow up now, this is how the world works.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390562</id>
	<title>Privacy Comissioner</title>
	<author>celester78</author>
	<datestamp>1260469500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So I wonder what Canada's Privacy Commissioner will have to say about these changes now?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So I wonder what Canada 's Privacy Commissioner will have to say about these changes now ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So I wonder what Canada's Privacy Commissioner will have to say about these changes now?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390362</id>
	<title>GO LOOK FIRST</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260468900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously.  I just went through the settings, and you're able to lock all of it, down to what your friends' apps can share.  If that STILL doesn't satisfy you, then delete your Facebook account - that will be the end.  What data you've shared is already out on the Internet, but you can prevent more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously .
I just went through the settings , and you 're able to lock all of it , down to what your friends ' apps can share .
If that STILL does n't satisfy you , then delete your Facebook account - that will be the end .
What data you 've shared is already out on the Internet , but you can prevent more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously.
I just went through the settings, and you're able to lock all of it, down to what your friends' apps can share.
If that STILL doesn't satisfy you, then delete your Facebook account - that will be the end.
What data you've shared is already out on the Internet, but you can prevent more.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388752</id>
	<title>Re:Where are they making their money?</title>
	<author>Abcd1234</author>
	<datestamp>1260464040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>It was an eye-opener for me when I realized that television networks are not in the business of putting out quality programming and paying for it with advertising, they're in the business of selling advertising and the programs are the means of attracting enough eyeballs to give that ad time value.</i></p><p>While that's true of the networks, it's less true for cable, telcos, and satellite, as the dollars per sub those services get from advertising is actually fairly low.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It was an eye-opener for me when I realized that television networks are not in the business of putting out quality programming and paying for it with advertising , they 're in the business of selling advertising and the programs are the means of attracting enough eyeballs to give that ad time value.While that 's true of the networks , it 's less true for cable , telcos , and satellite , as the dollars per sub those services get from advertising is actually fairly low .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It was an eye-opener for me when I realized that television networks are not in the business of putting out quality programming and paying for it with advertising, they're in the business of selling advertising and the programs are the means of attracting enough eyeballs to give that ad time value.While that's true of the networks, it's less true for cable, telcos, and satellite, as the dollars per sub those services get from advertising is actually fairly low.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388222</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389406</id>
	<title>Re:If you want privacy then don't use</title>
	<author>Pandrake</author>
	<datestamp>1260466140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><blockquote><div><p>The rest of us have a more subtle approach to social networking. Sometimes we want to share things with some people and not with others.</p></div> </blockquote></div><p>The subtlety anti-social behavior is lost on me; essentially, wanting to be social with some people but not with others. True it can hardly be called strange behavior, I'd call it cordial behavior or maybe even personable behavior; but calling it social behavior seems disingenious.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The rest of us have a more subtle approach to social networking .
Sometimes we want to share things with some people and not with others .
The subtlety anti-social behavior is lost on me ; essentially , wanting to be social with some people but not with others .
True it can hardly be called strange behavior , I 'd call it cordial behavior or maybe even personable behavior ; but calling it social behavior seems disingenious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The rest of us have a more subtle approach to social networking.
Sometimes we want to share things with some people and not with others.
The subtlety anti-social behavior is lost on me; essentially, wanting to be social with some people but not with others.
True it can hardly be called strange behavior, I'd call it cordial behavior or maybe even personable behavior; but calling it social behavior seems disingenious.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388270</id>
	<title>Smackdown</title>
	<author>whisper\_jeff</author>
	<datestamp>1260461700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>While I realize that the best way to preserve your privacy online is to not sign up for sites like Facebook, the fact remains that Facebook appears to be intent on being free and loose with people's details despite constant pressure to allow people to control access to that information. Each time they "fix" their privacy issues, they just shift it to another aspect. They aren't really changing anything - they're just moving things around. Until they get a massive smackdown that makes them realize it's not profitable to keep up this shell game with their user's private information, they will continue just moving things around, making "this" thing private while making "that" thing available to the public.<br> <br>
But, like I said, if it's really a massive concern, just don't sign up for a Facebook account...</htmltext>
<tokenext>While I realize that the best way to preserve your privacy online is to not sign up for sites like Facebook , the fact remains that Facebook appears to be intent on being free and loose with people 's details despite constant pressure to allow people to control access to that information .
Each time they " fix " their privacy issues , they just shift it to another aspect .
They are n't really changing anything - they 're just moving things around .
Until they get a massive smackdown that makes them realize it 's not profitable to keep up this shell game with their user 's private information , they will continue just moving things around , making " this " thing private while making " that " thing available to the public .
But , like I said , if it 's really a massive concern , just do n't sign up for a Facebook account.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While I realize that the best way to preserve your privacy online is to not sign up for sites like Facebook, the fact remains that Facebook appears to be intent on being free and loose with people's details despite constant pressure to allow people to control access to that information.
Each time they "fix" their privacy issues, they just shift it to another aspect.
They aren't really changing anything - they're just moving things around.
Until they get a massive smackdown that makes them realize it's not profitable to keep up this shell game with their user's private information, they will continue just moving things around, making "this" thing private while making "that" thing available to the public.
But, like I said, if it's really a massive concern, just don't sign up for a Facebook account...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391038</id>
	<title>Re:Give false info</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260471120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Better hope your not on Verizon's service  href=http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/12/01/1743252/Verizon-Changes-FiOS-AUP--1-Offtopic</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Better hope your not on Verizon 's service href = http : //tech.slashdot.org/story/09/12/01/1743252/Verizon-Changes-FiOS-AUP--1-Offtopic</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Better hope your not on Verizon's service  href=http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/12/01/1743252/Verizon-Changes-FiOS-AUP--1-Offtopic</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388312</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30396930</id>
	<title>Re:Friends List</title>
	<author>billybob2001</author>
	<datestamp>1260451260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't see the problem...</p><p>Nobody can see my friends, because I have no friends.</p><p>C'mon, you knew that already - I'm on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.</p><p>OK, I have one friend - she's called ELIZA.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't see the problem...Nobody can see my friends , because I have no friends.C'mon , you knew that already - I 'm on /.OK , I have one friend - she 's called ELIZA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't see the problem...Nobody can see my friends, because I have no friends.C'mon, you knew that already - I'm on /.OK, I have one friend - she's called ELIZA.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30393366</id>
	<title>I have to wonder what changed?</title>
	<author>Khyber</author>
	<datestamp>1260436440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because as I go through my facebook profile, I don't see one thing that restricts me from setting ANY potentially PRIVATE information in such a manner that nobody can see it. In fact, everything I've marked private is still private, as I check from another computer that isn't logged in to facebook.</p><p>Sounds like someone's trying to drum up some bullshit, or they're just fucking blind.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because as I go through my facebook profile , I do n't see one thing that restricts me from setting ANY potentially PRIVATE information in such a manner that nobody can see it .
In fact , everything I 've marked private is still private , as I check from another computer that is n't logged in to facebook.Sounds like someone 's trying to drum up some bullshit , or they 're just fucking blind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because as I go through my facebook profile, I don't see one thing that restricts me from setting ANY potentially PRIVATE information in such a manner that nobody can see it.
In fact, everything I've marked private is still private, as I check from another computer that isn't logged in to facebook.Sounds like someone's trying to drum up some bullshit, or they're just fucking blind.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390782</id>
	<title>pencil icon doesn't protect anything</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260470280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That only keeps the link off of the profile - doesn't protect it. e.g. copy your Facebook ID#, log out, log in with a fake/2ndary account that you are not friends with, then paste your real ID in:</p><p>http://www.facebook.com/friends/?id=</p><p>it's all there. I'm deactivating my account until they change this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That only keeps the link off of the profile - does n't protect it .
e.g. copy your Facebook ID # , log out , log in with a fake/2ndary account that you are not friends with , then paste your real ID in : http : //www.facebook.com/friends/ ? id = it 's all there .
I 'm deactivating my account until they change this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That only keeps the link off of the profile - doesn't protect it.
e.g. copy your Facebook ID#, log out, log in with a fake/2ndary account that you are not friends with, then paste your real ID in:http://www.facebook.com/friends/?id=it's all there.
I'm deactivating my account until they change this.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30392618</id>
	<title>Wha????</title>
	<author>notnAP</author>
	<datestamp>1260476760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seems I can edit many of the things you complain about?<br>Either you're looking about something I don't see, or you don't know how to do it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seems I can edit many of the things you complain about ? Either you 're looking about something I do n't see , or you do n't know how to do it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seems I can edit many of the things you complain about?Either you're looking about something I don't see, or you don't know how to do it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389240</id>
	<title>What do they mean by "Friends of friends"?</title>
	<author>British</author>
	<datestamp>1260465660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I see a privacy option(before the change) of "friends of friends". can someone clarify it? Does this mean if I'm A, and I'm friends with B, and B is friends with C, C can see mine(A's) stuff? Or does it go deeper in the degrees of separation? Need to clarify.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I see a privacy option ( before the change ) of " friends of friends " .
can someone clarify it ?
Does this mean if I 'm A , and I 'm friends with B , and B is friends with C , C can see mine ( A 's ) stuff ?
Or does it go deeper in the degrees of separation ?
Need to clarify .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I see a privacy option(before the change) of "friends of friends".
can someone clarify it?
Does this mean if I'm A, and I'm friends with B, and B is friends with C, C can see mine(A's) stuff?
Or does it go deeper in the degrees of separation?
Need to clarify.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30394134</id>
	<title>Re:If you want privacy then don't use</title>
	<author>marqs</author>
	<datestamp>1260439560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yet you do nor publish your name here so that all<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.:ers can look you up.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yet you do nor publish your name here so that all / .
: ers can look you up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yet you do nor publish your name here so that all /.
:ers can look you up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391294</id>
	<title>Re:Social networking is not about privacy</title>
	<author>blair1q</author>
	<datestamp>1260471840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If the rules all along were that everyone could see everything you typed into the personal information database, then that would be the correct attitude.</p><p>But people entered data into that database with the belief that the scope of its visibility was limited to a known set of the population, and that the site was at least somewhat reliable in its ability to prevent leakage.</p><p>That belief was correct, until this week.  Not only can't Facebook prevent leakage, it put a big faucet on your data, turned it on, and left the room.</p><p>Sleazy and incompetent at the same time.  A betrayal of trust at the very least.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the rules all along were that everyone could see everything you typed into the personal information database , then that would be the correct attitude.But people entered data into that database with the belief that the scope of its visibility was limited to a known set of the population , and that the site was at least somewhat reliable in its ability to prevent leakage.That belief was correct , until this week .
Not only ca n't Facebook prevent leakage , it put a big faucet on your data , turned it on , and left the room.Sleazy and incompetent at the same time .
A betrayal of trust at the very least .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the rules all along were that everyone could see everything you typed into the personal information database, then that would be the correct attitude.But people entered data into that database with the belief that the scope of its visibility was limited to a known set of the population, and that the site was at least somewhat reliable in its ability to prevent leakage.That belief was correct, until this week.
Not only can't Facebook prevent leakage, it put a big faucet on your data, turned it on, and left the room.Sleazy and incompetent at the same time.
A betrayal of trust at the very least.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390934</id>
	<title>Re:If you want privacy then don't use</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260470760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Sometimes we want to share things with some people and not with others. This is hardly strange behaviour.</p></div><p>Great, then use email, send them a text, give them a phone call or *GASP!* share it with them in person next time you see them. Facebook provides a FREE service, the fact that people expect them to look after their privacy for them is B.S. When it comes to the internet, especially free services, your privacy is your responsibility. If you don't like the way facebook handles your information then don't use it, it's not a necessity and there are alternatives.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sometimes we want to share things with some people and not with others .
This is hardly strange behaviour.Great , then use email , send them a text , give them a phone call or * GASP !
* share it with them in person next time you see them .
Facebook provides a FREE service , the fact that people expect them to look after their privacy for them is B.S .
When it comes to the internet , especially free services , your privacy is your responsibility .
If you do n't like the way facebook handles your information then do n't use it , it 's not a necessity and there are alternatives .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sometimes we want to share things with some people and not with others.
This is hardly strange behaviour.Great, then use email, send them a text, give them a phone call or *GASP!
* share it with them in person next time you see them.
Facebook provides a FREE service, the fact that people expect them to look after their privacy for them is B.S.
When it comes to the internet, especially free services, your privacy is your responsibility.
If you don't like the way facebook handles your information then don't use it, it's not a necessity and there are alternatives.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391004</id>
	<title>Possible fumble...</title>
	<author>hesaigo999ca</author>
	<datestamp>1260470940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree, when I do not want everyone to know where I live, why should facebook make this public?<br>I did not agree to anything like this, when I signed up, and it was changed after the fact, there should have been some<br>advance warnings before such a move happened as now it is too late, the info has been given out.</p><p>And any of the facebook CEOs that back the idea , well if you have something to hide, then you should not be on facebook are signing facebook's death warrant. They are going public, and I wonder if this is some lame *ss idea a competitor came up with and planted to seed their destruction. I see this taking them way down in terms of standads, and will immediately take down my page of their site!<br>I just hope google has not cached it yet, with the newly public info.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree , when I do not want everyone to know where I live , why should facebook make this public ? I did not agree to anything like this , when I signed up , and it was changed after the fact , there should have been someadvance warnings before such a move happened as now it is too late , the info has been given out.And any of the facebook CEOs that back the idea , well if you have something to hide , then you should not be on facebook are signing facebook 's death warrant .
They are going public , and I wonder if this is some lame * ss idea a competitor came up with and planted to seed their destruction .
I see this taking them way down in terms of standads , and will immediately take down my page of their site ! I just hope google has not cached it yet , with the newly public info .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree, when I do not want everyone to know where I live, why should facebook make this public?I did not agree to anything like this, when I signed up, and it was changed after the fact, there should have been someadvance warnings before such a move happened as now it is too late, the info has been given out.And any of the facebook CEOs that back the idea , well if you have something to hide, then you should not be on facebook are signing facebook's death warrant.
They are going public, and I wonder if this is some lame *ss idea a competitor came up with and planted to seed their destruction.
I see this taking them way down in terms of standads, and will immediately take down my page of their site!I just hope google has not cached it yet, with the newly public info.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388612</id>
	<title>It was already public</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260463440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I understand correctly, before this change this information was already accessible not only to any apps you used but any apps that your friends used. Those apps could do whatever they like with it and you don't have any control over what apps your friends use. Also much of it was available to anyone who happened to want to serve an ad on your page.</p><p>By designating it as irredeemably public, they're not making privacy worse, they're just admitting what was already true.</p><p>I wish they didn't include friends list and pages in the must-be-public information, but I'd rather this approach than having it be ACTUALLY public (because any app can access it) while allowing you to set a setting making it "private" that didn't actually do anything to really make it so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I understand correctly , before this change this information was already accessible not only to any apps you used but any apps that your friends used .
Those apps could do whatever they like with it and you do n't have any control over what apps your friends use .
Also much of it was available to anyone who happened to want to serve an ad on your page.By designating it as irredeemably public , they 're not making privacy worse , they 're just admitting what was already true.I wish they did n't include friends list and pages in the must-be-public information , but I 'd rather this approach than having it be ACTUALLY public ( because any app can access it ) while allowing you to set a setting making it " private " that did n't actually do anything to really make it so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I understand correctly, before this change this information was already accessible not only to any apps you used but any apps that your friends used.
Those apps could do whatever they like with it and you don't have any control over what apps your friends use.
Also much of it was available to anyone who happened to want to serve an ad on your page.By designating it as irredeemably public, they're not making privacy worse, they're just admitting what was already true.I wish they didn't include friends list and pages in the must-be-public information, but I'd rather this approach than having it be ACTUALLY public (because any app can access it) while allowing you to set a setting making it "private" that didn't actually do anything to really make it so.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388372</id>
	<title>Re:DON'T LIKE iT? DOn'T USE IT !!</title>
	<author>bmearns</author>
	<datestamp>1260462300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I understand your sentiment: social web services like Facebook are about sharing information, if that's not what you want to do, don't use them. On the other hand, less tech-savvy folks are not always so keenly aware of the implications of such privacy issues.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I understand your sentiment : social web services like Facebook are about sharing information , if that 's not what you want to do , do n't use them .
On the other hand , less tech-savvy folks are not always so keenly aware of the implications of such privacy issues .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I understand your sentiment: social web services like Facebook are about sharing information, if that's not what you want to do, don't use them.
On the other hand, less tech-savvy folks are not always so keenly aware of the implications of such privacy issues.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388114</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30393632</id>
	<title>The solution: Lie.</title>
	<author>cuantar</author>
	<datestamp>1260437340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Falsify the information in every category that you would rather keep private. Nobody who actually knows you needs to ask what your gender is.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Falsify the information in every category that you would rather keep private .
Nobody who actually knows you needs to ask what your gender is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Falsify the information in every category that you would rather keep private.
Nobody who actually knows you needs to ask what your gender is.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388468</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260462840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>feces book hysteria... duh'... no thanks, not for me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>feces book hysteria... duh'... no thanks , not for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>feces book hysteria... duh'... no thanks, not for me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391812</id>
	<title>online vs real life</title>
	<author>slick\_shoes</author>
	<datestamp>1260473700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have two Twitter accounts and two Facebook ones. One with a fake name that I use for trolling, harassing celebrities, attempting to get laid and using applications that my real-life friends would scoff at me for. And one in my real name with very minimal personal info and nothing that could be damaging should a prospective employer search me out, simply to see what old mates are up to, stay 'in the loop' with my real life friends and receive PMs, (no one I know seems to use email any more. I always <i>reply</i> via gmail though - better the devil you know...) event invitations and stuff.
<br> 
<br> 
You deserve everything you get if you are naive enough to think that free social networking sites aren't going to use whatever information you disclose, however transparent their privacy policy is.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have two Twitter accounts and two Facebook ones .
One with a fake name that I use for trolling , harassing celebrities , attempting to get laid and using applications that my real-life friends would scoff at me for .
And one in my real name with very minimal personal info and nothing that could be damaging should a prospective employer search me out , simply to see what old mates are up to , stay 'in the loop ' with my real life friends and receive PMs , ( no one I know seems to use email any more .
I always reply via gmail though - better the devil you know... ) event invitations and stuff .
You deserve everything you get if you are naive enough to think that free social networking sites are n't going to use whatever information you disclose , however transparent their privacy policy is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have two Twitter accounts and two Facebook ones.
One with a fake name that I use for trolling, harassing celebrities, attempting to get laid and using applications that my real-life friends would scoff at me for.
And one in my real name with very minimal personal info and nothing that could be damaging should a prospective employer search me out, simply to see what old mates are up to, stay 'in the loop' with my real life friends and receive PMs, (no one I know seems to use email any more.
I always reply via gmail though - better the devil you know...) event invitations and stuff.
You deserve everything you get if you are naive enough to think that free social networking sites aren't going to use whatever information you disclose, however transparent their privacy policy is.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388570</id>
	<title>So what?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260463260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use facebook.  When someone who isn't one of my friends looks at my profile, they see:<br>1) My name.  Why else would they be looking at my profile?<br>2) My user photo.  This isn't actually me, so I don't care.  I didn't want my face up there, so I didn't put a picture of myself in.<br>3) My website -- actually just my flickr page, since I don't care if people find it.  It's not like it has any more information about me.<br>4) My education and work listings.  Again.. I left those up on the grounds that it would make it easier for people to find me, and I don't care if people see them.</p><p>So... where's the risk in those?  No one can see my current address, because I don't see a need for it.  If someone wants to know where I live, they can ask me.  If someone wants to know my IM name, they can ask.  It's not hard... they can still send me a message, even without declaring themselves my friend.  Sure, if I'd filled out every piece of information and it was being shared, I'd be upset.  But really... you don't have to fill any of it out that you don't want to, and anything you fill out on a site like FB should be considered to be public anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use facebook .
When someone who is n't one of my friends looks at my profile , they see : 1 ) My name .
Why else would they be looking at my profile ? 2 ) My user photo .
This is n't actually me , so I do n't care .
I did n't want my face up there , so I did n't put a picture of myself in.3 ) My website -- actually just my flickr page , since I do n't care if people find it .
It 's not like it has any more information about me.4 ) My education and work listings .
Again.. I left those up on the grounds that it would make it easier for people to find me , and I do n't care if people see them.So... where 's the risk in those ?
No one can see my current address , because I do n't see a need for it .
If someone wants to know where I live , they can ask me .
If someone wants to know my IM name , they can ask .
It 's not hard... they can still send me a message , even without declaring themselves my friend .
Sure , if I 'd filled out every piece of information and it was being shared , I 'd be upset .
But really... you do n't have to fill any of it out that you do n't want to , and anything you fill out on a site like FB should be considered to be public anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use facebook.
When someone who isn't one of my friends looks at my profile, they see:1) My name.
Why else would they be looking at my profile?2) My user photo.
This isn't actually me, so I don't care.
I didn't want my face up there, so I didn't put a picture of myself in.3) My website -- actually just my flickr page, since I don't care if people find it.
It's not like it has any more information about me.4) My education and work listings.
Again.. I left those up on the grounds that it would make it easier for people to find me, and I don't care if people see them.So... where's the risk in those?
No one can see my current address, because I don't see a need for it.
If someone wants to know where I live, they can ask me.
If someone wants to know my IM name, they can ask.
It's not hard... they can still send me a message, even without declaring themselves my friend.
Sure, if I'd filled out every piece of information and it was being shared, I'd be upset.
But really... you don't have to fill any of it out that you don't want to, and anything you fill out on a site like FB should be considered to be public anyway.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30401392</id>
	<title>I went through the new "Wizard" yesterday..</title>
	<author>natehoy</author>
	<datestamp>1260545280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Once you are done, I urge you to use the "view your profile as a guest" feature (or use another browser to view your profile).  I had turned off a few things from public view, but when I left the "wizard" they got turned back on.</p><p>Not City, Friends, etc, I expected those.  Things like my photo albums, birthdate, and email address.  None of which are vital (photo albums are mostly of my daughter playing, birthdate is set but with the wrong year, and the email address is a spamcatcher dedicated to Facebook use), but I did set specific privacy levels for each type of data, and I know I set those three to "friends only".</p><p>I only noticed it because I decided to run my account through the "view as guest" and saw a lot more information there than I expected.</p><p>I don't know what happened, but several specific decisions I was asked by the new "wizard" to make did not get respected.  The defaults for the new "wizard" are very permissive (basically defaults to "everyone sees everything" regardless of your current privacy settings), and I was disappointed but not too upset about that, but then most of the settings changed themselves to "everyone" after I used the "wizard" to lock them down.</p><p>I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt and say that something went wrong with the wizard, but I figured it was worth mentioning just in case someone else trusted "Mr. Wizard" to do as they asked, because it apparently ain't always so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Once you are done , I urge you to use the " view your profile as a guest " feature ( or use another browser to view your profile ) .
I had turned off a few things from public view , but when I left the " wizard " they got turned back on.Not City , Friends , etc , I expected those .
Things like my photo albums , birthdate , and email address .
None of which are vital ( photo albums are mostly of my daughter playing , birthdate is set but with the wrong year , and the email address is a spamcatcher dedicated to Facebook use ) , but I did set specific privacy levels for each type of data , and I know I set those three to " friends only " .I only noticed it because I decided to run my account through the " view as guest " and saw a lot more information there than I expected.I do n't know what happened , but several specific decisions I was asked by the new " wizard " to make did not get respected .
The defaults for the new " wizard " are very permissive ( basically defaults to " everyone sees everything " regardless of your current privacy settings ) , and I was disappointed but not too upset about that , but then most of the settings changed themselves to " everyone " after I used the " wizard " to lock them down.I 'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt and say that something went wrong with the wizard , but I figured it was worth mentioning just in case someone else trusted " Mr. Wizard " to do as they asked , because it apparently ai n't always so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Once you are done, I urge you to use the "view your profile as a guest" feature (or use another browser to view your profile).
I had turned off a few things from public view, but when I left the "wizard" they got turned back on.Not City, Friends, etc, I expected those.
Things like my photo albums, birthdate, and email address.
None of which are vital (photo albums are mostly of my daughter playing, birthdate is set but with the wrong year, and the email address is a spamcatcher dedicated to Facebook use), but I did set specific privacy levels for each type of data, and I know I set those three to "friends only".I only noticed it because I decided to run my account through the "view as guest" and saw a lot more information there than I expected.I don't know what happened, but several specific decisions I was asked by the new "wizard" to make did not get respected.
The defaults for the new "wizard" are very permissive (basically defaults to "everyone sees everything" regardless of your current privacy settings), and I was disappointed but not too upset about that, but then most of the settings changed themselves to "everyone" after I used the "wizard" to lock them down.I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt and say that something went wrong with the wizard, but I figured it was worth mentioning just in case someone else trusted "Mr. Wizard" to do as they asked, because it apparently ain't always so.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388724</id>
	<title>Re:Our privacy is not their concern</title>
	<author>Shotgun</author>
	<datestamp>1260463920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>'If You Have Something You Don't Want Anyone To Know, Maybe You Shouldn't Be Doing It'.</p></div><p>I think the CEO said that wrong in this case.  What it should be is:  'If You Have Something You Don't Want Anyone To Know, Maybe You Shouldn't Be Posting It On A Public Social Networking Site'</p><p>I mean, dang, if you're in the federal witness protection program, why are you posting your picture on Facebook?  By requiring the picture and address to be public information, maybe Facebook is saying, "We only want our social networking site to be targetted to people that want to network socially."</p><p>Again, if you are THAT concerned about your privacy, WHY are you giving our your 'private' information to people you don't know?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>'If You Have Something You Do n't Want Anyone To Know , Maybe You Should n't Be Doing It'.I think the CEO said that wrong in this case .
What it should be is : 'If You Have Something You Do n't Want Anyone To Know , Maybe You Should n't Be Posting It On A Public Social Networking Site'I mean , dang , if you 're in the federal witness protection program , why are you posting your picture on Facebook ?
By requiring the picture and address to be public information , maybe Facebook is saying , " We only want our social networking site to be targetted to people that want to network socially .
" Again , if you are THAT concerned about your privacy , WHY are you giving our your 'private ' information to people you do n't know ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'If You Have Something You Don't Want Anyone To Know, Maybe You Shouldn't Be Doing It'.I think the CEO said that wrong in this case.
What it should be is:  'If You Have Something You Don't Want Anyone To Know, Maybe You Shouldn't Be Posting It On A Public Social Networking Site'I mean, dang, if you're in the federal witness protection program, why are you posting your picture on Facebook?
By requiring the picture and address to be public information, maybe Facebook is saying, "We only want our social networking site to be targetted to people that want to network socially.
"Again, if you are THAT concerned about your privacy, WHY are you giving our your 'private' information to people you don't know?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388144</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390152</id>
	<title>Useful feature gone.</title>
	<author>soup4you2</author>
	<datestamp>1260468360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>With the new privacy controls added in, it seems a feature that would have now been useful for this change is now gone.  and thats the ability to view your Wall as one of your friends.

Since you can now restrict posts to groups, it would be nice to have this feature to see what all information each group is seeing.

You still have the ability to view your information as one of your friends, but they removed the wall tab.</htmltext>
<tokenext>With the new privacy controls added in , it seems a feature that would have now been useful for this change is now gone .
and thats the ability to view your Wall as one of your friends .
Since you can now restrict posts to groups , it would be nice to have this feature to see what all information each group is seeing .
You still have the ability to view your information as one of your friends , but they removed the wall tab .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With the new privacy controls added in, it seems a feature that would have now been useful for this change is now gone.
and thats the ability to view your Wall as one of your friends.
Since you can now restrict posts to groups, it would be nice to have this feature to see what all information each group is seeing.
You still have the ability to view your information as one of your friends, but they removed the wall tab.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389080</id>
	<title>Re:Social networking is not about privacy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260465120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's really not unreasonable to expect Facebook to allow people to use their site with more granular privacy controls. I really don't think "don't share it if you don't want it to be public" is the right approach. Facebook recognizes this and pays lip service to the idea of being able to share different things with different groups -- but they don't go far enough. Of course I understand why they don't (more connections and information = more site use), but that doesn't make it right.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's really not unreasonable to expect Facebook to allow people to use their site with more granular privacy controls .
I really do n't think " do n't share it if you do n't want it to be public " is the right approach .
Facebook recognizes this and pays lip service to the idea of being able to share different things with different groups -- but they do n't go far enough .
Of course I understand why they do n't ( more connections and information = more site use ) , but that does n't make it right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's really not unreasonable to expect Facebook to allow people to use their site with more granular privacy controls.
I really don't think "don't share it if you don't want it to be public" is the right approach.
Facebook recognizes this and pays lip service to the idea of being able to share different things with different groups -- but they don't go far enough.
Of course I understand why they don't (more connections and information = more site use), but that doesn't make it right.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388152</id>
	<title>What's the complaint?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260461160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh, that Facebook notified all users of the change and clearly explained it in advance? Is that what's being cried about here? Ok, I get that then. Carry on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , that Facebook notified all users of the change and clearly explained it in advance ?
Is that what 's being cried about here ?
Ok , I get that then .
Carry on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, that Facebook notified all users of the change and clearly explained it in advance?
Is that what's being cried about here?
Ok, I get that then.
Carry on.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388420</id>
	<title>Re:If you want privacy then don't use</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260462600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Being visible in public is not necessarily the same as being searchable on facebook. At least if you're not usually walking around with a big fat floating nametag somewhere above your head.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Being visible in public is not necessarily the same as being searchable on facebook .
At least if you 're not usually walking around with a big fat floating nametag somewhere above your head .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Being visible in public is not necessarily the same as being searchable on facebook.
At least if you're not usually walking around with a big fat floating nametag somewhere above your head.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30429648</id>
	<title>Re:If you want privacy then don't use</title>
	<author>Anachragnome</author>
	<datestamp>1260795120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Life itself has very few privacy controls when you are in a public space."</p><p>And this is why we all live in basements...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Life itself has very few privacy controls when you are in a public space .
" And this is why we all live in basements.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Life itself has very few privacy controls when you are in a public space.
"And this is why we all live in basements...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388448</id>
	<title>Re:Facebook is not about privacy.</title>
	<author>Ephemeriis</author>
	<datestamp>1260462660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>They do not "get" it.   I am convinced Facebook does not want to preserve the privacy of its users.  When I went to Facebook last night, I was presented with a pop up menu to select my new privacy options.  All the defaults were set to looser privacy than I had previously set for my account.  I had to manually restore the stricter privacy settings.</p><p>.</p><p><b>Facebook does not care about the privacy of its users.</b>   Get used to it.</p></div><p>I suspect that it is you that does not "get it."</p><p>Facebook is a social networking site on the Internet.  The Internet is quite possibly the most public place in the world.  Anything you post anywhere on the Internet is pretty much guaranteed to show up somewhere you'd rather it didn't - privacy policies be damned.  Social networking sites are all about finding and connecting with other people.  This is done by being able to see the names, locations, and interests of those other people.</p><p>In other words, if you want privacy, you shouldn't be using Facebook.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They do not " get " it .
I am convinced Facebook does not want to preserve the privacy of its users .
When I went to Facebook last night , I was presented with a pop up menu to select my new privacy options .
All the defaults were set to looser privacy than I had previously set for my account .
I had to manually restore the stricter privacy settings..Facebook does not care about the privacy of its users .
Get used to it.I suspect that it is you that does not " get it .
" Facebook is a social networking site on the Internet .
The Internet is quite possibly the most public place in the world .
Anything you post anywhere on the Internet is pretty much guaranteed to show up somewhere you 'd rather it did n't - privacy policies be damned .
Social networking sites are all about finding and connecting with other people .
This is done by being able to see the names , locations , and interests of those other people.In other words , if you want privacy , you should n't be using Facebook .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They do not "get" it.
I am convinced Facebook does not want to preserve the privacy of its users.
When I went to Facebook last night, I was presented with a pop up menu to select my new privacy options.
All the defaults were set to looser privacy than I had previously set for my account.
I had to manually restore the stricter privacy settings..Facebook does not care about the privacy of its users.
Get used to it.I suspect that it is you that does not "get it.
"Facebook is a social networking site on the Internet.
The Internet is quite possibly the most public place in the world.
Anything you post anywhere on the Internet is pretty much guaranteed to show up somewhere you'd rather it didn't - privacy policies be damned.
Social networking sites are all about finding and connecting with other people.
This is done by being able to see the names, locations, and interests of those other people.In other words, if you want privacy, you shouldn't be using Facebook.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388346</id>
	<title>Awww, boo hoo...</title>
	<author>Evil Shabazz</author>
	<datestamp>1260462120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The naive narcissists still fawning over getting to have their own web page about nothing but THEM are now sad that people will actually SEE that webpage.  Awww, boo hoo...  Guess what, folks - you're not paying customers, you're using a free service.  You don't like it, don't use it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The naive narcissists still fawning over getting to have their own web page about nothing but THEM are now sad that people will actually SEE that webpage .
Awww , boo hoo... Guess what , folks - you 're not paying customers , you 're using a free service .
You do n't like it , do n't use it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The naive narcissists still fawning over getting to have their own web page about nothing but THEM are now sad that people will actually SEE that webpage.
Awww, boo hoo...  Guess what, folks - you're not paying customers, you're using a free service.
You don't like it, don't use it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30393470</id>
	<title>Re:Friends List</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260436860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Facebook's last "privacy update" before this one allowed one to segregate friends into lists and then allowed you to allow or disallow what each list could see. This made it possible, for example, to limit "Work Friends" to seeing content from only friends on that friends list. This allowed one to have both "work' and "non-work" friends in the same FB account while protecting yourself from "Joe Kink" on a non-work list from posting something unfortunate to your wall and having your boss/co-workers see it.</p><p>Since we<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/don't/ control content that is posted to our walls, continuing to use FB under the new [anti]privacy rules can put us at risk of being compromised in a number of ways.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Facebook 's last " privacy update " before this one allowed one to segregate friends into lists and then allowed you to allow or disallow what each list could see .
This made it possible , for example , to limit " Work Friends " to seeing content from only friends on that friends list .
This allowed one to have both " work ' and " non-work " friends in the same FB account while protecting yourself from " Joe Kink " on a non-work list from posting something unfortunate to your wall and having your boss/co-workers see it.Since we /do n't/ control content that is posted to our walls , continuing to use FB under the new [ anti ] privacy rules can put us at risk of being compromised in a number of ways .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Facebook's last "privacy update" before this one allowed one to segregate friends into lists and then allowed you to allow or disallow what each list could see.
This made it possible, for example, to limit "Work Friends" to seeing content from only friends on that friends list.
This allowed one to have both "work' and "non-work" friends in the same FB account while protecting yourself from "Joe Kink" on a non-work list from posting something unfortunate to your wall and having your boss/co-workers see it.Since we /don't/ control content that is posted to our walls, continuing to use FB under the new [anti]privacy rules can put us at risk of being compromised in a number of ways.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391696</id>
	<title>Re:Summary is dead wrong!</title>
	<author>nevermore94</author>
	<datestamp>1260473280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, then, tell me how to set my Friend List and Pages sections to be Only Friends.
I do not need strangers seeing who my friends are or what other pages I like.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , then , tell me how to set my Friend List and Pages sections to be Only Friends .
I do not need strangers seeing who my friends are or what other pages I like .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, then, tell me how to set my Friend List and Pages sections to be Only Friends.
I do not need strangers seeing who my friends are or what other pages I like.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388930</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30393658</id>
	<title>Re:Social networking is not about privacy</title>
	<author>mano.m</author>
	<datestamp>1260437460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I believe you are being mislead by the word 'friend'.
<br>
It is supposed to be a person whose company one enjoys and who is there in good times and bad to give advice and encouragement as a confidant(e) and a sounding board. Not the 400-odd people who you may have met once in a long-forgotten party and have collected like baseball cards.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe you are being mislead by the word 'friend' .
It is supposed to be a person whose company one enjoys and who is there in good times and bad to give advice and encouragement as a confidant ( e ) and a sounding board .
Not the 400-odd people who you may have met once in a long-forgotten party and have collected like baseball cards .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe you are being mislead by the word 'friend'.
It is supposed to be a person whose company one enjoys and who is there in good times and bad to give advice and encouragement as a confidant(e) and a sounding board.
Not the 400-odd people who you may have met once in a long-forgotten party and have collected like baseball cards.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389580</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388224</id>
	<title>Re:If you want privacy then don't use</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260461520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FB originally allowed privacy, they're now changing the rules. Do you honestly think 200+ million people would have joined if the new privacy policy was there from day one? Of course not. This is bordering on bait and switch.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FB originally allowed privacy , they 're now changing the rules .
Do you honestly think 200 + million people would have joined if the new privacy policy was there from day one ?
Of course not .
This is bordering on bait and switch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FB originally allowed privacy, they're now changing the rules.
Do you honestly think 200+ million people would have joined if the new privacy policy was there from day one?
Of course not.
This is bordering on bait and switch.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391122</id>
	<title>Re:Friends List</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260471360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Still a subset of all friends are shown on your public Facebook page even if you uncheck 'show my friends in my profile' (e.g. if someone googles your name).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Still a subset of all friends are shown on your public Facebook page even if you uncheck 'show my friends in my profile ' ( e.g .
if someone googles your name ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Still a subset of all friends are shown on your public Facebook page even if you uncheck 'show my friends in my profile' (e.g.
if someone googles your name).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389404</id>
	<title>HR loves you</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260466140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I work in the IT department of an HR &amp; headhunting firm. Sites like facebook, netlog, etc have become real goldmines of information to separate the dumbasses from the decent candidates. You can tell a lot from a profile, pictures and who are in the friends list.</p><p>I myself extremely value my privacy and will never post anything on any network site other than professional network sites like LinkedIn (and even then, my BIO will be limited). It doesn't help that my father used to be in direct marketing ages ago. Even back then, direct marketing databases contained more combined and linked information about people than the friggin' government had... I can only imagine what it has become now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I work in the IT department of an HR &amp; headhunting firm .
Sites like facebook , netlog , etc have become real goldmines of information to separate the dumbasses from the decent candidates .
You can tell a lot from a profile , pictures and who are in the friends list.I myself extremely value my privacy and will never post anything on any network site other than professional network sites like LinkedIn ( and even then , my BIO will be limited ) .
It does n't help that my father used to be in direct marketing ages ago .
Even back then , direct marketing databases contained more combined and linked information about people than the friggin ' government had... I can only imagine what it has become now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work in the IT department of an HR &amp; headhunting firm.
Sites like facebook, netlog, etc have become real goldmines of information to separate the dumbasses from the decent candidates.
You can tell a lot from a profile, pictures and who are in the friends list.I myself extremely value my privacy and will never post anything on any network site other than professional network sites like LinkedIn (and even then, my BIO will be limited).
It doesn't help that my father used to be in direct marketing ages ago.
Even back then, direct marketing databases contained more combined and linked information about people than the friggin' government had... I can only imagine what it has become now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388200</id>
	<title>Re:If you want privacy then don't use</title>
	<author>kevinbr</author>
	<datestamp>1260461400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everything I put on Facebook is public. if I want some secrets I keep it off of facebook. You can watch me walk down the road, watch me shop, watch me play with my kids in the park etc etc etc. Life itself has very few privacy controls when you are in a public space. Facebook is a public space.</p><p>You don't need to be my "friend" to see my content.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everything I put on Facebook is public .
if I want some secrets I keep it off of facebook .
You can watch me walk down the road , watch me shop , watch me play with my kids in the park etc etc etc .
Life itself has very few privacy controls when you are in a public space .
Facebook is a public space.You do n't need to be my " friend " to see my content .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everything I put on Facebook is public.
if I want some secrets I keep it off of facebook.
You can watch me walk down the road, watch me shop, watch me play with my kids in the park etc etc etc.
Life itself has very few privacy controls when you are in a public space.
Facebook is a public space.You don't need to be my "friend" to see my content.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388668</id>
	<title>Re:Social networking is not about privacy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260463680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>BINGO!</p><p>The internet is anything but "Private". It is a "PUBLIC" network. Putting things on MyFace or Spacebook, and even the stupid twits tweeting on twitter are all exposing themselves better than the perv in the park ever could.</p><p>I have a Facebook account, and it doesn't use my real name, uses a throwaway email address, doesn't contain any personal information, and I don't use it for "social networking" at all.</p><p>So, why do I have it? To keep the idiots from asking me "Do you have a Facebook". I tell them Yeah I do, and not lie.</p><p>I tell them if they can find me, they can add me. If they really are my friends, they don't need facebook to talk to me.</p><p>So, if you're reading this post, and can find me on facebook, great. Send me a note you're from slashdot, and I'll add you. You already have all the information needed to find me. And good luck with that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>BINGO ! The internet is anything but " Private " .
It is a " PUBLIC " network .
Putting things on MyFace or Spacebook , and even the stupid twits tweeting on twitter are all exposing themselves better than the perv in the park ever could.I have a Facebook account , and it does n't use my real name , uses a throwaway email address , does n't contain any personal information , and I do n't use it for " social networking " at all.So , why do I have it ?
To keep the idiots from asking me " Do you have a Facebook " .
I tell them Yeah I do , and not lie.I tell them if they can find me , they can add me .
If they really are my friends , they do n't need facebook to talk to me.So , if you 're reading this post , and can find me on facebook , great .
Send me a note you 're from slashdot , and I 'll add you .
You already have all the information needed to find me .
And good luck with that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>BINGO!The internet is anything but "Private".
It is a "PUBLIC" network.
Putting things on MyFace or Spacebook, and even the stupid twits tweeting on twitter are all exposing themselves better than the perv in the park ever could.I have a Facebook account, and it doesn't use my real name, uses a throwaway email address, doesn't contain any personal information, and I don't use it for "social networking" at all.So, why do I have it?
To keep the idiots from asking me "Do you have a Facebook".
I tell them Yeah I do, and not lie.I tell them if they can find me, they can add me.
If they really are my friends, they don't need facebook to talk to me.So, if you're reading this post, and can find me on facebook, great.
Send me a note you're from slashdot, and I'll add you.
You already have all the information needed to find me.
And good luck with that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390020</id>
	<title>Re:Remember to block your information from Apps!</title>
	<author>Tetrarchy</author>
	<datestamp>1260467820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>What I think is really hilarious about these apps, specifically game-type ones, is that they are basically a front for 3rd parties working with facebook to bribe you for all of your and your friend's information.  Its probably fairly valuable once you get enough of it, and all they offer in exchange is some... flash game.

wow we're getting cheap these days.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What I think is really hilarious about these apps , specifically game-type ones , is that they are basically a front for 3rd parties working with facebook to bribe you for all of your and your friend 's information .
Its probably fairly valuable once you get enough of it , and all they offer in exchange is some... flash game .
wow we 're getting cheap these days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What I think is really hilarious about these apps, specifically game-type ones, is that they are basically a front for 3rd parties working with facebook to bribe you for all of your and your friend's information.
Its probably fairly valuable once you get enough of it, and all they offer in exchange is some... flash game.
wow we're getting cheap these days.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388586</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390290</id>
	<title>Password???</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260468720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I find it interesting that for each level of security you must enter your password again, "For Better Security."  Does anyone else see this as a blatant way of facebook trying to further the illusion of privacy?  There is no point to putting in a password except for the act of putting in a password, which makes users feel more secure.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I find it interesting that for each level of security you must enter your password again , " For Better Security .
" Does anyone else see this as a blatant way of facebook trying to further the illusion of privacy ?
There is no point to putting in a password except for the act of putting in a password , which makes users feel more secure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find it interesting that for each level of security you must enter your password again, "For Better Security.
"  Does anyone else see this as a blatant way of facebook trying to further the illusion of privacy?
There is no point to putting in a password except for the act of putting in a password, which makes users feel more secure.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389986</id>
	<title>Re:privacy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260467760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That should still be the user's choice.</p><p>Some people use it as a social tool, and a way to find others.  For instance, I am one of the heavy privacy users, and I hardly even allow "Friends of Friends" to see things, let alone Everyone. Still, I am able to connect with friends and one friend (on my list) just out of the blue sent me a message; more importantly, I can go through my friends to find other friends, and that is honestly how I want my friends to find me as well. If he was using my email address, I probably would not have even noticed as he probably does not even have my primary one.</p><p>I do not use Facebook so that people that lost contact can easily find me. I use it to stay in contact with people already on my list. As I get older, the list grows to include people in the former category (lost contacts), and in many cases I unfriend those people.  I also use it to give a glance of what people are up too--the ones that I care about.</p><p>I guess you could say that I use it like a secondary email account that has the added benefit of including public (of/to friends) announcements and pictures.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That should still be the user 's choice.Some people use it as a social tool , and a way to find others .
For instance , I am one of the heavy privacy users , and I hardly even allow " Friends of Friends " to see things , let alone Everyone .
Still , I am able to connect with friends and one friend ( on my list ) just out of the blue sent me a message ; more importantly , I can go through my friends to find other friends , and that is honestly how I want my friends to find me as well .
If he was using my email address , I probably would not have even noticed as he probably does not even have my primary one.I do not use Facebook so that people that lost contact can easily find me .
I use it to stay in contact with people already on my list .
As I get older , the list grows to include people in the former category ( lost contacts ) , and in many cases I unfriend those people .
I also use it to give a glance of what people are up too--the ones that I care about.I guess you could say that I use it like a secondary email account that has the added benefit of including public ( of/to friends ) announcements and pictures .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That should still be the user's choice.Some people use it as a social tool, and a way to find others.
For instance, I am one of the heavy privacy users, and I hardly even allow "Friends of Friends" to see things, let alone Everyone.
Still, I am able to connect with friends and one friend (on my list) just out of the blue sent me a message; more importantly, I can go through my friends to find other friends, and that is honestly how I want my friends to find me as well.
If he was using my email address, I probably would not have even noticed as he probably does not even have my primary one.I do not use Facebook so that people that lost contact can easily find me.
I use it to stay in contact with people already on my list.
As I get older, the list grows to include people in the former category (lost contacts), and in many cases I unfriend those people.
I also use it to give a glance of what people are up too--the ones that I care about.I guess you could say that I use it like a secondary email account that has the added benefit of including public (of/to friends) announcements and pictures.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388244</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388934</id>
	<title>Re:Our privacy is not their concern</title>
	<author>ArundelCastle</author>
	<datestamp>1260464640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I know it's a different company, but what did the CEO of Google say? 'If You Have Something You Don't Want Anyone To Know, Maybe You Shouldn't Be Doing It'.  I see Facebook has the same attitude.</p></div><p>Fortunately politicians and celebrities don't, or else the daily news would be pretty boring.</p><p>If all our vices were known, society would first degenerate into constant name calling, then eventually stop caring.  Every stone we throw would shatter and strike us back.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I know it 's a different company , but what did the CEO of Google say ?
'If You Have Something You Do n't Want Anyone To Know , Maybe You Should n't Be Doing It' .
I see Facebook has the same attitude.Fortunately politicians and celebrities do n't , or else the daily news would be pretty boring.If all our vices were known , society would first degenerate into constant name calling , then eventually stop caring .
Every stone we throw would shatter and strike us back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know it's a different company, but what did the CEO of Google say?
'If You Have Something You Don't Want Anyone To Know, Maybe You Shouldn't Be Doing It'.
I see Facebook has the same attitude.Fortunately politicians and celebrities don't, or else the daily news would be pretty boring.If all our vices were known, society would first degenerate into constant name calling, then eventually stop caring.
Every stone we throw would shatter and strike us back.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388144</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388148</id>
	<title>Social networking is not about privacy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260461160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wash me but don't make me wet. If you're concerned about your privacy, you should not be using social networking web sites. Any information you put into these services will leak one way or another, regardless of "privacy settings".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wash me but do n't make me wet .
If you 're concerned about your privacy , you should not be using social networking web sites .
Any information you put into these services will leak one way or another , regardless of " privacy settings " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wash me but don't make me wet.
If you're concerned about your privacy, you should not be using social networking web sites.
Any information you put into these services will leak one way or another, regardless of "privacy settings".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30397412</id>
	<title>Re:DON'T LIKE iT? DOn'T USE IT !!</title>
	<author>AmberBlackCat</author>
	<datestamp>1260455100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Cool people trust Facebook with all their information. Slashdotters trust Google with all their information. They both laugh at each other for being so stupid.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Cool people trust Facebook with all their information .
Slashdotters trust Google with all their information .
They both laugh at each other for being so stupid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cool people trust Facebook with all their information.
Slashdotters trust Google with all their information.
They both laugh at each other for being so stupid.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388502</id>
	<title>Re:If you want privacy then don't use</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260462960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rNgCnY1lPg" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rNgCnY1lPg</a> [youtube.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = 6rNgCnY1lPg [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rNgCnY1lPg [youtube.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30394100</id>
	<title>Whats the big concern?</title>
	<author>chucklebutte</author>
	<datestamp>1260439380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't understand this whole privacy issue, why is it such a problem? Who is really out there looking for me? Why would it bother me? I put myself out there to be found I want to reconnect to people in my past and want to meet new people isn't this the whole reason for social networking? Am I missing something?

People are too paranoid. Be smart about what you post and you should be fine, if your tin foil hat transmit the signals that your teeth fillings/CIA radios are receiving to your brain and tells you that your privacy is going to be sold to obama so the feds can come and get you in the middle of the night, well then you have some serious issues the surpasses that of your "privacy" being exposed....

I sound like a broken record, but people really need to watch The Grinch cartoon, seriously! The Grinch taught us that no matter what spooky/scary men out there (terrorist) trying to harm us by stealing our xmas (freedom) cant keep us down cause who hash and who roast isnt xmas its the spirit we have inside of us. If we keep being scared, paranoid, and retarded we let "them" win.

Grow some balls people, use your brain, and stop being so emo over crap that isnt important!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't understand this whole privacy issue , why is it such a problem ?
Who is really out there looking for me ?
Why would it bother me ?
I put myself out there to be found I want to reconnect to people in my past and want to meet new people is n't this the whole reason for social networking ?
Am I missing something ?
People are too paranoid .
Be smart about what you post and you should be fine , if your tin foil hat transmit the signals that your teeth fillings/CIA radios are receiving to your brain and tells you that your privacy is going to be sold to obama so the feds can come and get you in the middle of the night , well then you have some serious issues the surpasses that of your " privacy " being exposed... . I sound like a broken record , but people really need to watch The Grinch cartoon , seriously !
The Grinch taught us that no matter what spooky/scary men out there ( terrorist ) trying to harm us by stealing our xmas ( freedom ) cant keep us down cause who hash and who roast isnt xmas its the spirit we have inside of us .
If we keep being scared , paranoid , and retarded we let " them " win .
Grow some balls people , use your brain , and stop being so emo over crap that isnt important !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't understand this whole privacy issue, why is it such a problem?
Who is really out there looking for me?
Why would it bother me?
I put myself out there to be found I want to reconnect to people in my past and want to meet new people isn't this the whole reason for social networking?
Am I missing something?
People are too paranoid.
Be smart about what you post and you should be fine, if your tin foil hat transmit the signals that your teeth fillings/CIA radios are receiving to your brain and tells you that your privacy is going to be sold to obama so the feds can come and get you in the middle of the night, well then you have some serious issues the surpasses that of your "privacy" being exposed....

I sound like a broken record, but people really need to watch The Grinch cartoon, seriously!
The Grinch taught us that no matter what spooky/scary men out there (terrorist) trying to harm us by stealing our xmas (freedom) cant keep us down cause who hash and who roast isnt xmas its the spirit we have inside of us.
If we keep being scared, paranoid, and retarded we let "them" win.
Grow some balls people, use your brain, and stop being so emo over crap that isnt important!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388498</id>
	<title>greg...let's go to the map!</title>
	<author>phillipao</author>
	<datestamp>1260462960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>so you can't hide your city anymore...carmen sandiego is FUCKED</htmltext>
<tokenext>so you ca n't hide your city anymore...carmen sandiego is FUCKED</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so you can't hide your city anymore...carmen sandiego is FUCKED</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30395426</id>
	<title>facebook privacy "researcher"</title>
	<author>gizmo\_mathboy</author>
	<datestamp>1260444240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This guy has done some decent research into Facebook privacy in terms of their API and such.</p><p><a href="http://use.perl.org/~pjf/journal/39998" title="perl.org">http://use.perl.org/~pjf/journal/39998</a> [perl.org]</p><p>good read.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This guy has done some decent research into Facebook privacy in terms of their API and such.http : //use.perl.org/ ~ pjf/journal/39998 [ perl.org ] good read .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This guy has done some decent research into Facebook privacy in terms of their API and such.http://use.perl.org/~pjf/journal/39998 [perl.org]good read.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390150</id>
	<title>Re:Facebook is not about privacy.</title>
	<author>mrdoogee</author>
	<datestamp>1260468360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That was really the only objection I had. I'm a paranoid guy so I set most of my privacy settings back to the old ones, and customized the rest,  but I can guarantee you that several of the people I know just clicked right through that popup, windows style. Hopefully their next *LOL I GOT DRUNK B4 WORK - BOSS IS AN A-HOLE* post won't come back to bite them in the butt. But then again, a lack of decorum and common sense is its own punishment.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That was really the only objection I had .
I 'm a paranoid guy so I set most of my privacy settings back to the old ones , and customized the rest , but I can guarantee you that several of the people I know just clicked right through that popup , windows style .
Hopefully their next * LOL I GOT DRUNK B4 WORK - BOSS IS AN A-HOLE * post wo n't come back to bite them in the butt .
But then again , a lack of decorum and common sense is its own punishment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That was really the only objection I had.
I'm a paranoid guy so I set most of my privacy settings back to the old ones, and customized the rest,  but I can guarantee you that several of the people I know just clicked right through that popup, windows style.
Hopefully their next *LOL I GOT DRUNK B4 WORK - BOSS IS AN A-HOLE* post won't come back to bite them in the butt.
But then again, a lack of decorum and common sense is its own punishment.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391204</id>
	<title>Re:Our privacy is not their concern</title>
	<author>blair1q</author>
	<datestamp>1260471600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>maybe Facebook is saying, "We only want our social networking site to be targetted to people that want to network socially."</i></p><p>There's a difference between "network socially" and "broadcast to everyone on the planet."</p><p>Until this week, Facebook gave you the option to limit your network.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>maybe Facebook is saying , " We only want our social networking site to be targetted to people that want to network socially .
" There 's a difference between " network socially " and " broadcast to everyone on the planet .
" Until this week , Facebook gave you the option to limit your network .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>maybe Facebook is saying, "We only want our social networking site to be targetted to people that want to network socially.
"There's a difference between "network socially" and "broadcast to everyone on the planet.
"Until this week, Facebook gave you the option to limit your network.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388724</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388114</id>
	<title>DON'T LIKE iT?  DOn'T USE IT !!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260460980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>DON'T LIKE iT?  DOn'T USE IT !!  There, now you know.</p><p>And don't whine to your mama !!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>DO N'T LIKE iT ?
DO n'T USE IT ! !
There , now you know.And do n't whine to your mama !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DON'T LIKE iT?
DOn'T USE IT !!
There, now you know.And don't whine to your mama !
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391890</id>
	<title>Thank You!</title>
	<author>ardle</author>
	<datestamp>1260474060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This was the thing that bugged me most about the "improved security": I get increased privacy but FB gets to pimp out my friends.<br>I'll pay more attention to those pencils in future<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</htmltext>
<tokenext>This was the thing that bugged me most about the " improved security " : I get increased privacy but FB gets to pimp out my friends.I 'll pay more attention to those pencils in future ; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This was the thing that bugged me most about the "improved security": I get increased privacy but FB gets to pimp out my friends.I'll pay more attention to those pencils in future ;-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388536</id>
	<title>Data mining sites</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260463080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Facebook, Twitter and other "social networking" sites are nothing but poorly disguised data mining enterprises at best.  Privacy?  What privacy!?  There never was any privacy on these sites to begin with.  Every bit of data you give them is sold to whoever will pay for it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Facebook , Twitter and other " social networking " sites are nothing but poorly disguised data mining enterprises at best .
Privacy ? What privacy ! ?
There never was any privacy on these sites to begin with .
Every bit of data you give them is sold to whoever will pay for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Facebook, Twitter and other "social networking" sites are nothing but poorly disguised data mining enterprises at best.
Privacy?  What privacy!?
There never was any privacy on these sites to begin with.
Every bit of data you give them is sold to whoever will pay for it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388150</id>
	<title>If you want privacy then don't use</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260461160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It seems to me that when you sign up for a social networking site like facebook any of the information you give them is going to be well.. socially networked.</p><p>If you don't want your name, address, phone, measurements, work history and other info made available for the whole world to see, DON'T POST IT.</p><p>It's odd that anyone wanting privacy would be using a social networking tool when that is precisely what the tool was not designed to do.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems to me that when you sign up for a social networking site like facebook any of the information you give them is going to be well.. socially networked.If you do n't want your name , address , phone , measurements , work history and other info made available for the whole world to see , DO N'T POST IT.It 's odd that anyone wanting privacy would be using a social networking tool when that is precisely what the tool was not designed to do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems to me that when you sign up for a social networking site like facebook any of the information you give them is going to be well.. socially networked.If you don't want your name, address, phone, measurements, work history and other info made available for the whole world to see, DON'T POST IT.It's odd that anyone wanting privacy would be using a social networking tool when that is precisely what the tool was not designed to do.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30398054</id>
	<title>Re:If you want privacy then don't use</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260461040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> If everyone knows my measurement, why do I keep getting penis enlargement spam?!</p> </div><p>You answered your own question.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If everyone knows my measurement , why do I keep getting penis enlargement spam ? !
You answered your own question .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> If everyone knows my measurement, why do I keep getting penis enlargement spam?!
You answered your own question.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388254</id>
	<title>Re:If you want privacy then don't use</title>
	<author>Kohath</author>
	<datestamp>1260461580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This seems like the point people are missing.  Facebook isn't a data vault.  It does not exist to protect you from people finding out what city you live in.  (Horrors!  Someone might find out your current city!!!)</p><p>If you can't give up any info about yourself, Facebook isn't for you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This seems like the point people are missing .
Facebook is n't a data vault .
It does not exist to protect you from people finding out what city you live in .
( Horrors ! Someone might find out your current city ! ! !
) If you ca n't give up any info about yourself , Facebook is n't for you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This seems like the point people are missing.
Facebook isn't a data vault.
It does not exist to protect you from people finding out what city you live in.
(Horrors!  Someone might find out your current city!!!
)If you can't give up any info about yourself, Facebook isn't for you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30392130</id>
	<title>Re:If you want privacy then don't use</title>
	<author>Shane dot H</author>
	<datestamp>1260474900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm pretty sure email includes a "forward" function. Nobody has full control over their privacy, but we all rely on social norms and human decency to keep certain things private. In the electronic world, we haven't had enough time to develop robust social norms to account for the ease of transmitting information.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm pretty sure email includes a " forward " function .
Nobody has full control over their privacy , but we all rely on social norms and human decency to keep certain things private .
In the electronic world , we have n't had enough time to develop robust social norms to account for the ease of transmitting information .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm pretty sure email includes a "forward" function.
Nobody has full control over their privacy, but we all rely on social norms and human decency to keep certain things private.
In the electronic world, we haven't had enough time to develop robust social norms to account for the ease of transmitting information.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390156</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30393036</id>
	<title>Re:Social networking is not about privacy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260478500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Any information you put into these services will leak one way or another, regardless of "privacy settings".</p></div><p>For myself, it's not so much that I care if my boss sees that I was skipping work for an awesome concert (or whatever the case may be), so much as that they don't know that knowledge in a usable sense. If I post some information, and that information is incriminating, as long as I went out of my way to make it private from whatever eyes shouldn't see it, I have a grounds for fighting any repercussions that might arise.</p><p>Just because someone hacked FBs server and post my party pictures on a public webserver does not give my boss the ability to fire me, as those were ill-gotten images.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Any information you put into these services will leak one way or another , regardless of " privacy settings " .For myself , it 's not so much that I care if my boss sees that I was skipping work for an awesome concert ( or whatever the case may be ) , so much as that they do n't know that knowledge in a usable sense .
If I post some information , and that information is incriminating , as long as I went out of my way to make it private from whatever eyes should n't see it , I have a grounds for fighting any repercussions that might arise.Just because someone hacked FBs server and post my party pictures on a public webserver does not give my boss the ability to fire me , as those were ill-gotten images .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any information you put into these services will leak one way or another, regardless of "privacy settings".For myself, it's not so much that I care if my boss sees that I was skipping work for an awesome concert (or whatever the case may be), so much as that they don't know that knowledge in a usable sense.
If I post some information, and that information is incriminating, as long as I went out of my way to make it private from whatever eyes shouldn't see it, I have a grounds for fighting any repercussions that might arise.Just because someone hacked FBs server and post my party pictures on a public webserver does not give my boss the ability to fire me, as those were ill-gotten images.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388222</id>
	<title>Where are they making their money?</title>
	<author>jollyreaper</author>
	<datestamp>1260461460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It was an eye-opener for me when I realized that television networks are not in the business of putting out quality programming and paying for it with advertising, they're in the business of selling advertising and the programs are the means of attracting enough eyeballs to give that ad time value. "If they can come up with something cheaper than news magazines, comedies and dramas, they'll air it." And sure enough, there's now channels out there specializing in repackaging what are effectively Youtube videos into half hour shows complete with the requisite commercial breaks. You have your police chases, animal attacks, painful stunts, and cute animals. Whatever it takes to keep you fuckers watching until the next commercial break.</p><p>So, Facebook's mission isn't to provide a friendly place for friendly people to connect and gee, they just want to make enough money to keep the doors open and break even. I haven't made a thorough exploration of Facebook's business model but it's gotta be something related to selling PI or allowing marketing firms to conduct real world research. I know that stupid farm game gets people to spend real world money on virtual assets. I don't know how much of a rent Facebook charges them for operating on their app.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It was an eye-opener for me when I realized that television networks are not in the business of putting out quality programming and paying for it with advertising , they 're in the business of selling advertising and the programs are the means of attracting enough eyeballs to give that ad time value .
" If they can come up with something cheaper than news magazines , comedies and dramas , they 'll air it .
" And sure enough , there 's now channels out there specializing in repackaging what are effectively Youtube videos into half hour shows complete with the requisite commercial breaks .
You have your police chases , animal attacks , painful stunts , and cute animals .
Whatever it takes to keep you fuckers watching until the next commercial break.So , Facebook 's mission is n't to provide a friendly place for friendly people to connect and gee , they just want to make enough money to keep the doors open and break even .
I have n't made a thorough exploration of Facebook 's business model but it 's got ta be something related to selling PI or allowing marketing firms to conduct real world research .
I know that stupid farm game gets people to spend real world money on virtual assets .
I do n't know how much of a rent Facebook charges them for operating on their app .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It was an eye-opener for me when I realized that television networks are not in the business of putting out quality programming and paying for it with advertising, they're in the business of selling advertising and the programs are the means of attracting enough eyeballs to give that ad time value.
"If they can come up with something cheaper than news magazines, comedies and dramas, they'll air it.
" And sure enough, there's now channels out there specializing in repackaging what are effectively Youtube videos into half hour shows complete with the requisite commercial breaks.
You have your police chases, animal attacks, painful stunts, and cute animals.
Whatever it takes to keep you fuckers watching until the next commercial break.So, Facebook's mission isn't to provide a friendly place for friendly people to connect and gee, they just want to make enough money to keep the doors open and break even.
I haven't made a thorough exploration of Facebook's business model but it's gotta be something related to selling PI or allowing marketing firms to conduct real world research.
I know that stupid farm game gets people to spend real world money on virtual assets.
I don't know how much of a rent Facebook charges them for operating on their app.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388230</id>
	<title>I'm glad I don't have an account</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260461520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm glad I don't have a faceplant account. If I did, I would have told it my city and put a picture and all that on it and had it restricted to friends and it would now apparently be exposed. I don't tell random people on the internet what city I live in. I'll usually go as far as what state in the US I am in (it's a big one), but I don't want people knowing where I am unless they actually already know me. This sounds like a bad move.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm glad I do n't have a faceplant account .
If I did , I would have told it my city and put a picture and all that on it and had it restricted to friends and it would now apparently be exposed .
I do n't tell random people on the internet what city I live in .
I 'll usually go as far as what state in the US I am in ( it 's a big one ) , but I do n't want people knowing where I am unless they actually already know me .
This sounds like a bad move .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm glad I don't have a faceplant account.
If I did, I would have told it my city and put a picture and all that on it and had it restricted to friends and it would now apparently be exposed.
I don't tell random people on the internet what city I live in.
I'll usually go as far as what state in the US I am in (it's a big one), but I don't want people knowing where I am unless they actually already know me.
This sounds like a bad move.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389758</id>
	<title>Re:Facebook is not about privacy.</title>
	<author>BOFslime</author>
	<datestamp>1260467160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I had no such experience.  I was presented with the new security menu, but all the options were defaulted to 'use previous settings'.  I have had my privacy settings pretty fine tunned to separate work and outside work friends, so I can still post crazy weekend shenanigans without having to hear about it from co workers.  And further, I enjoy that you can individually hide status and updates from select users or groups of users.</p><p>I'm for the most part satisfied and welcome the privacy additions (especially since I can now prevent my friends from sharing my data with their applications).  If you want more privacy, then don't have an online profile, its as simple as that.  With logic like that however you have to decide where to draw the line, the only secure computer is the one not even connected and has no physical access, but thats also not very useful.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had no such experience .
I was presented with the new security menu , but all the options were defaulted to 'use previous settings' .
I have had my privacy settings pretty fine tunned to separate work and outside work friends , so I can still post crazy weekend shenanigans without having to hear about it from co workers .
And further , I enjoy that you can individually hide status and updates from select users or groups of users.I 'm for the most part satisfied and welcome the privacy additions ( especially since I can now prevent my friends from sharing my data with their applications ) .
If you want more privacy , then do n't have an online profile , its as simple as that .
With logic like that however you have to decide where to draw the line , the only secure computer is the one not even connected and has no physical access , but thats also not very useful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had no such experience.
I was presented with the new security menu, but all the options were defaulted to 'use previous settings'.
I have had my privacy settings pretty fine tunned to separate work and outside work friends, so I can still post crazy weekend shenanigans without having to hear about it from co workers.
And further, I enjoy that you can individually hide status and updates from select users or groups of users.I'm for the most part satisfied and welcome the privacy additions (especially since I can now prevent my friends from sharing my data with their applications).
If you want more privacy, then don't have an online profile, its as simple as that.
With logic like that however you have to decide where to draw the line, the only secure computer is the one not even connected and has no physical access, but thats also not very useful.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388320</id>
	<title>Facebook - worse-er and boring-er by the day</title>
	<author>snotclot</author>
	<datestamp>1260461940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Every day, facebook becomes worse and worse. The apps are pointless, and the site is slower and cumbersome (compared to its spritely version in 2004 when it came out).  It is fun to be tagged in photos with your friends, and to post on each others' "walls", but that's about it.  During college it was great to use, since everyone is growing up and want to meet new people. However, after college theres not as much use for it and I find myself barely using it.. its basically functioning as a "bridge" between when you just meet someone, to when you get their IM and you chat on IM instead.
<br> <br>The only thing keeping facebook going is that its achieved critical mass.  I can see Google one day knocking out Facebook easily, since everyone now has gmail and eventually Facebook will need to move from "stupid, 3rd party, spyware apps" to real apps such as Calendars, maps, and such -- and google already has these features.  <br> <br>
Zuckerberg should have sold for $750 million or whatever was offered.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Every day , facebook becomes worse and worse .
The apps are pointless , and the site is slower and cumbersome ( compared to its spritely version in 2004 when it came out ) .
It is fun to be tagged in photos with your friends , and to post on each others ' " walls " , but that 's about it .
During college it was great to use , since everyone is growing up and want to meet new people .
However , after college theres not as much use for it and I find myself barely using it.. its basically functioning as a " bridge " between when you just meet someone , to when you get their IM and you chat on IM instead .
The only thing keeping facebook going is that its achieved critical mass .
I can see Google one day knocking out Facebook easily , since everyone now has gmail and eventually Facebook will need to move from " stupid , 3rd party , spyware apps " to real apps such as Calendars , maps , and such -- and google already has these features .
Zuckerberg should have sold for $ 750 million or whatever was offered .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Every day, facebook becomes worse and worse.
The apps are pointless, and the site is slower and cumbersome (compared to its spritely version in 2004 when it came out).
It is fun to be tagged in photos with your friends, and to post on each others' "walls", but that's about it.
During college it was great to use, since everyone is growing up and want to meet new people.
However, after college theres not as much use for it and I find myself barely using it.. its basically functioning as a "bridge" between when you just meet someone, to when you get their IM and you chat on IM instead.
The only thing keeping facebook going is that its achieved critical mass.
I can see Google one day knocking out Facebook easily, since everyone now has gmail and eventually Facebook will need to move from "stupid, 3rd party, spyware apps" to real apps such as Calendars, maps, and such -- and google already has these features.
Zuckerberg should have sold for $750 million or whatever was offered.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388366</id>
	<title>Re:DON'T LIKE iT? DOn'T USE IT !!</title>
	<author>moz25</author>
	<datestamp>1260462240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, but people have to *know* about it before they can choose to not use it, right?</p><p>And don't worry, I've stopped whining to my mama about internet trolls many years ago.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , but people have to * know * about it before they can choose to not use it , right ? And do n't worry , I 've stopped whining to my mama about internet trolls many years ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, but people have to *know* about it before they can choose to not use it, right?And don't worry, I've stopped whining to my mama about internet trolls many years ago.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388114</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388244</id>
	<title>privacy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260461580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Limits socializing, who knew? Seriously though, I have some friends from highschool that I wouldn't mind getting back in contact with and tried to look up on facebook. But with a common name like Mike Smith and no profile picture or friend information how are you supposed to find people? Maybe these people don't want to be found but that seems to be odd seeing as you have a Facebook profile. If you only want to have contact with people you are already in contact with something else would work, eg. email, Facebook IMHO is meant to help people find people they've lost contact with. This is impossible with too much privacy on the site.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Limits socializing , who knew ?
Seriously though , I have some friends from highschool that I would n't mind getting back in contact with and tried to look up on facebook .
But with a common name like Mike Smith and no profile picture or friend information how are you supposed to find people ?
Maybe these people do n't want to be found but that seems to be odd seeing as you have a Facebook profile .
If you only want to have contact with people you are already in contact with something else would work , eg .
email , Facebook IMHO is meant to help people find people they 've lost contact with .
This is impossible with too much privacy on the site .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Limits socializing, who knew?
Seriously though, I have some friends from highschool that I wouldn't mind getting back in contact with and tried to look up on facebook.
But with a common name like Mike Smith and no profile picture or friend information how are you supposed to find people?
Maybe these people don't want to be found but that seems to be odd seeing as you have a Facebook profile.
If you only want to have contact with people you are already in contact with something else would work, eg.
email, Facebook IMHO is meant to help people find people they've lost contact with.
This is impossible with too much privacy on the site.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388348</id>
	<title>Re:If you want privacy then don't use</title>
	<author>Ephemeriis</author>
	<datestamp>1260462120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It seems to me that when you sign up for a social networking site like facebook any of the information you give them is going to be well.. socially networked.</p><p>If you don't want your name, address, phone, measurements, work history and other info made available for the whole world to see, DON'T POST IT.</p><p>It's odd that anyone wanting privacy would be using a social networking tool when that is precisely what the tool was not designed to do.</p></div><p>I agree.</p><p>It's one thing to talk about privacy policies in respect to, for example, generic web searches.  If I'm just looking for random information I should be able to expect some degree of privacy.  I don't expect Google or Microsoft or Yahoo attach my name and address to my search results and send them to all my friends and family.</p><p>But on a social networking site like Facebook or Myspace...  Well, the whole point is to be social.  You're supposed to be able to find people you know and communicate with them.  Maybe meet new people in the area.  Find interesting things going on.  Etc.  If everyone's privacy is carefully protected, how are you going to find anyone?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems to me that when you sign up for a social networking site like facebook any of the information you give them is going to be well.. socially networked.If you do n't want your name , address , phone , measurements , work history and other info made available for the whole world to see , DO N'T POST IT.It 's odd that anyone wanting privacy would be using a social networking tool when that is precisely what the tool was not designed to do.I agree.It 's one thing to talk about privacy policies in respect to , for example , generic web searches .
If I 'm just looking for random information I should be able to expect some degree of privacy .
I do n't expect Google or Microsoft or Yahoo attach my name and address to my search results and send them to all my friends and family.But on a social networking site like Facebook or Myspace... Well , the whole point is to be social .
You 're supposed to be able to find people you know and communicate with them .
Maybe meet new people in the area .
Find interesting things going on .
Etc. If everyone 's privacy is carefully protected , how are you going to find anyone ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems to me that when you sign up for a social networking site like facebook any of the information you give them is going to be well.. socially networked.If you don't want your name, address, phone, measurements, work history and other info made available for the whole world to see, DON'T POST IT.It's odd that anyone wanting privacy would be using a social networking tool when that is precisely what the tool was not designed to do.I agree.It's one thing to talk about privacy policies in respect to, for example, generic web searches.
If I'm just looking for random information I should be able to expect some degree of privacy.
I don't expect Google or Microsoft or Yahoo attach my name and address to my search results and send them to all my friends and family.But on a social networking site like Facebook or Myspace...  Well, the whole point is to be social.
You're supposed to be able to find people you know and communicate with them.
Maybe meet new people in the area.
Find interesting things going on.
Etc.  If everyone's privacy is carefully protected, how are you going to find anyone?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388334</id>
	<title>Seems OK</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260462000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think Facebook is being on the up-and-up on this.<br>When I logged yesterday there was a big modal dialog box (thickbox?) giving choices.<br>The defaults were to keep stuff private.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think Facebook is being on the up-and-up on this.When I logged yesterday there was a big modal dialog box ( thickbox ?
) giving choices.The defaults were to keep stuff private .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think Facebook is being on the up-and-up on this.When I logged yesterday there was a big modal dialog box (thickbox?
) giving choices.The defaults were to keep stuff private.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390918</id>
	<title>Pages</title>
	<author>DJCater</author>
	<datestamp>1260470700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't think many people will be that fussed about non-friends knowing who their friends are. A bigger problem will probably be that Pages that you are a fan of are now visible to everyone. This may go against other privacy measures if for example you're a fan of your hometown, or your employer/college etc. Or something that you generally don't want strangers to know that you like...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think many people will be that fussed about non-friends knowing who their friends are .
A bigger problem will probably be that Pages that you are a fan of are now visible to everyone .
This may go against other privacy measures if for example you 're a fan of your hometown , or your employer/college etc .
Or something that you generally do n't want strangers to know that you like.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think many people will be that fussed about non-friends knowing who their friends are.
A bigger problem will probably be that Pages that you are a fan of are now visible to everyone.
This may go against other privacy measures if for example you're a fan of your hometown, or your employer/college etc.
Or something that you generally don't want strangers to know that you like...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388568</id>
	<title>It's not a matter of don't like it / don't use it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260463200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I see a lot of comments here stating that if you don't like it, don't use it.</p><p>The crux of the problem is that facebook did not tell users that the access controls changed. Information that was previously had a setting to restrict access to your friends just disappeared</p><p>The whole problem is that people didn't know about it to decide that they didn't like it.</p><p>Would you be fine if this was a firewall product that suddenly chose to ignore your rules to block low ports in an undocumented change to the access controls, even though it says that it is now advertised as stronger protection than it was before? Of course not, and just saying that "if you don't like it, don't use it" won't fix the problem. We need companies to operate at a higher standard than this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I see a lot of comments here stating that if you do n't like it , do n't use it.The crux of the problem is that facebook did not tell users that the access controls changed .
Information that was previously had a setting to restrict access to your friends just disappearedThe whole problem is that people did n't know about it to decide that they did n't like it.Would you be fine if this was a firewall product that suddenly chose to ignore your rules to block low ports in an undocumented change to the access controls , even though it says that it is now advertised as stronger protection than it was before ?
Of course not , and just saying that " if you do n't like it , do n't use it " wo n't fix the problem .
We need companies to operate at a higher standard than this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I see a lot of comments here stating that if you don't like it, don't use it.The crux of the problem is that facebook did not tell users that the access controls changed.
Information that was previously had a setting to restrict access to your friends just disappearedThe whole problem is that people didn't know about it to decide that they didn't like it.Would you be fine if this was a firewall product that suddenly chose to ignore your rules to block low ports in an undocumented change to the access controls, even though it says that it is now advertised as stronger protection than it was before?
Of course not, and just saying that "if you don't like it, don't use it" won't fix the problem.
We need companies to operate at a higher standard than this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388500</id>
	<title>Re:Seems OK</title>
	<author>LandDolphin</author>
	<datestamp>1260462960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My old defaults were set to "friends only".  When I logged on today, it did promt me to make new selections.  However, everything was defaulted to "everyone".  But, I only have "Public" information about me on Facebook anyways, so no big deal.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My old defaults were set to " friends only " .
When I logged on today , it did promt me to make new selections .
However , everything was defaulted to " everyone " .
But , I only have " Public " information about me on Facebook anyways , so no big deal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My old defaults were set to "friends only".
When I logged on today, it did promt me to make new selections.
However, everything was defaulted to "everyone".
But, I only have "Public" information about me on Facebook anyways, so no big deal.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388334</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388496</id>
	<title>Re:If you want privacy then don't use</title>
	<author>jareth-0205</author>
	<datestamp>1260462900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Everything I put on Facebook is public. if I want some secrets I keep it off of facebook.</p></div></blockquote><p>Bully for you. The rest of us have a more subtle approach to social networking. Sometimes we want to share things with some people and not with others. This is hardly strange behaviour.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Everything I put on Facebook is public .
if I want some secrets I keep it off of facebook.Bully for you .
The rest of us have a more subtle approach to social networking .
Sometimes we want to share things with some people and not with others .
This is hardly strange behaviour .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everything I put on Facebook is public.
if I want some secrets I keep it off of facebook.Bully for you.
The rest of us have a more subtle approach to social networking.
Sometimes we want to share things with some people and not with others.
This is hardly strange behaviour.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30393084</id>
	<title>Re:Our privacy is not their concern</title>
	<author>Akira Kogami</author>
	<datestamp>1260478620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's a messed up attitude to have. In my eyes, it amounts to "You should be willing to do everything publicly and personal privacy is completely worthless."</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's a messed up attitude to have .
In my eyes , it amounts to " You should be willing to do everything publicly and personal privacy is completely worthless .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's a messed up attitude to have.
In my eyes, it amounts to "You should be willing to do everything publicly and personal privacy is completely worthless.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388144</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391504</id>
	<title>Oh no...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260472560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm wondering how many people will be disciplined or fired at work as a result of their Facebook profiles.</p><p>I used to be a high school teacher, and I'm well aware that teachers' personal lives are under a microscope. In one local case, an elementary school teacher was photographed in the newspaper protesting animal rights when the circus came to town. Sure enough, parents were calling her principal wanting their children removed from her class.</p><p>Granted, I had a strict rule with Facebook: absolutely no friending students unless the students had graduated. Of course, if I were still a teacher, a non-friend student could still look up my profile and next thing you know: "Mr. Principal, I don't want my Sally in Mr. Smith's class because he's a fan of 'Creationists are morons' on Facebook."</p><p>I was a "fan" of about 40 things. Last night, I un-fanned every one of them. I'm no longer a teacher, but I don't want the public seeing what I'm a fan of...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm wondering how many people will be disciplined or fired at work as a result of their Facebook profiles.I used to be a high school teacher , and I 'm well aware that teachers ' personal lives are under a microscope .
In one local case , an elementary school teacher was photographed in the newspaper protesting animal rights when the circus came to town .
Sure enough , parents were calling her principal wanting their children removed from her class.Granted , I had a strict rule with Facebook : absolutely no friending students unless the students had graduated .
Of course , if I were still a teacher , a non-friend student could still look up my profile and next thing you know : " Mr. Principal , I do n't want my Sally in Mr. Smith 's class because he 's a fan of 'Creationists are morons ' on Facebook .
" I was a " fan " of about 40 things .
Last night , I un-fanned every one of them .
I 'm no longer a teacher , but I do n't want the public seeing what I 'm a fan of.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm wondering how many people will be disciplined or fired at work as a result of their Facebook profiles.I used to be a high school teacher, and I'm well aware that teachers' personal lives are under a microscope.
In one local case, an elementary school teacher was photographed in the newspaper protesting animal rights when the circus came to town.
Sure enough, parents were calling her principal wanting their children removed from her class.Granted, I had a strict rule with Facebook: absolutely no friending students unless the students had graduated.
Of course, if I were still a teacher, a non-friend student could still look up my profile and next thing you know: "Mr. Principal, I don't want my Sally in Mr. Smith's class because he's a fan of 'Creationists are morons' on Facebook.
"I was a "fan" of about 40 things.
Last night, I un-fanned every one of them.
I'm no longer a teacher, but I don't want the public seeing what I'm a fan of...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388122</id>
	<title>In b4 poll..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260461040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What were?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What were ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What were?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30396640</id>
	<title>Re:privacy</title>
	<author>don\_bear\_wilkinson</author>
	<datestamp>1260449460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't use Facebook to expand my existing social network.  I use it to have a sort of 'chat room' amongst my friends where we can keep each other updated on the things we are doing with our lives.  It's a one-to-many 'sharing' environment.  I post about the book I am reading.  All my Friends can see that.  Maybe someone is reading the same book and has a remark.  Or they had meant to read it but forgot the name of it and my posting it reminded them.  Or a thousand other options.  I can say that I plan to go to that Goth/SM club tomorrow and since it's only Friends that can see that, it's cool - and maybe they want to go with me. But the point is, something like Facebook is a way to stay connected.  To deepen connections.  To know what is going on with each other without having to make 100 phone calls or address an email to 100+ people, etc.

When people send me a Friend invite, I have an easy choice;  is this someone I already know or someone I'm acquainted with that I want to know better *and* do I care what they are doing with their life?  If yes, I accept the invite.  If not, I mostly don't.

I don't use Facebook to find old friends. If they are old friends, we probably drifted apart for a good reason - with I think exactly 2 exceptions out of 100+ on my list so far.

So it makes perfect sense to me to want to have the option to NOT put up my pic or location to strangers.  That said, I do think that having JUST the picture can be forced.  That way I can confirm if this is the John Smith I think it is.

But, for me, the real, true bottom line is this.  GIVE ME THE FUCKING OPTION to control what information I see fit.  If I clamp it down so that no one can find me, that might be exactly what I WANT.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't use Facebook to expand my existing social network .
I use it to have a sort of 'chat room ' amongst my friends where we can keep each other updated on the things we are doing with our lives .
It 's a one-to-many 'sharing ' environment .
I post about the book I am reading .
All my Friends can see that .
Maybe someone is reading the same book and has a remark .
Or they had meant to read it but forgot the name of it and my posting it reminded them .
Or a thousand other options .
I can say that I plan to go to that Goth/SM club tomorrow and since it 's only Friends that can see that , it 's cool - and maybe they want to go with me .
But the point is , something like Facebook is a way to stay connected .
To deepen connections .
To know what is going on with each other without having to make 100 phone calls or address an email to 100 + people , etc .
When people send me a Friend invite , I have an easy choice ; is this someone I already know or someone I 'm acquainted with that I want to know better * and * do I care what they are doing with their life ?
If yes , I accept the invite .
If not , I mostly do n't .
I do n't use Facebook to find old friends .
If they are old friends , we probably drifted apart for a good reason - with I think exactly 2 exceptions out of 100 + on my list so far .
So it makes perfect sense to me to want to have the option to NOT put up my pic or location to strangers .
That said , I do think that having JUST the picture can be forced .
That way I can confirm if this is the John Smith I think it is .
But , for me , the real , true bottom line is this .
GIVE ME THE FUCKING OPTION to control what information I see fit .
If I clamp it down so that no one can find me , that might be exactly what I WANT .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't use Facebook to expand my existing social network.
I use it to have a sort of 'chat room' amongst my friends where we can keep each other updated on the things we are doing with our lives.
It's a one-to-many 'sharing' environment.
I post about the book I am reading.
All my Friends can see that.
Maybe someone is reading the same book and has a remark.
Or they had meant to read it but forgot the name of it and my posting it reminded them.
Or a thousand other options.
I can say that I plan to go to that Goth/SM club tomorrow and since it's only Friends that can see that, it's cool - and maybe they want to go with me.
But the point is, something like Facebook is a way to stay connected.
To deepen connections.
To know what is going on with each other without having to make 100 phone calls or address an email to 100+ people, etc.
When people send me a Friend invite, I have an easy choice;  is this someone I already know or someone I'm acquainted with that I want to know better *and* do I care what they are doing with their life?
If yes, I accept the invite.
If not, I mostly don't.
I don't use Facebook to find old friends.
If they are old friends, we probably drifted apart for a good reason - with I think exactly 2 exceptions out of 100+ on my list so far.
So it makes perfect sense to me to want to have the option to NOT put up my pic or location to strangers.
That said, I do think that having JUST the picture can be forced.
That way I can confirm if this is the John Smith I think it is.
But, for me, the real, true bottom line is this.
GIVE ME THE FUCKING OPTION to control what information I see fit.
If I clamp it down so that no one can find me, that might be exactly what I WANT.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388244</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389144</id>
	<title>Re:DON'T LIKE iT? DOn'T USE IT !!</title>
	<author>athowell</author>
	<datestamp>1260465300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't think most people realize that friends of friends of friends etc can see status messages or What's on your Mind posts?

And to all those people who post the incriminating pictures I pity the fools.

There is no such thing as privacy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think most people realize that friends of friends of friends etc can see status messages or What 's on your Mind posts ?
And to all those people who post the incriminating pictures I pity the fools .
There is no such thing as privacy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think most people realize that friends of friends of friends etc can see status messages or What's on your Mind posts?
And to all those people who post the incriminating pictures I pity the fools.
There is no such thing as privacy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388114</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388670</id>
	<title>Still Can Set Privacy to Only Friends</title>
	<author>wisesifu</author>
	<datestamp>1260463680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was able to keep everything the way it was.  I don't know about you but when I went to the privacy controls I had more options including to keeping everything to Only Friends.  I think the new controls are well done.  I do think that the wizard they had is a bit confusing but I was able to lock everything down from the privacy settings. I think this article may be wrong.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was able to keep everything the way it was .
I do n't know about you but when I went to the privacy controls I had more options including to keeping everything to Only Friends .
I think the new controls are well done .
I do think that the wizard they had is a bit confusing but I was able to lock everything down from the privacy settings .
I think this article may be wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was able to keep everything the way it was.
I don't know about you but when I went to the privacy controls I had more options including to keeping everything to Only Friends.
I think the new controls are well done.
I do think that the wizard they had is a bit confusing but I was able to lock everything down from the privacy settings.
I think this article may be wrong.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30396936</id>
	<title>Re:So what?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260451320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>RTFA. The EFF addresses this explicitly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>RTFA .
The EFF addresses this explicitly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>RTFA.
The EFF addresses this explicitly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388570</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30396794</id>
	<title>The ridiculous part about this, it's not uniform!</title>
	<author>AbRASiON</author>
	<datestamp>1260450420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When this change occured yesterday afternoon, I found that a wizard popped up and it prompted me to set new settings or import old ones.<br>Long story short, I did anything and everything I could to lock stuff down but sadly could not lock as much down as I previously had.<br>However I've found several people who have got completely blocked profile pictures, friends list, the whole lot. They are completely locked down as I used to be, no 'add this friend' no 'send message' no 'view friends' etc.<br>Furthermore I've already found a loophole in the new system, I've personally locked my account down so you can't do a search to find me, however if you find one of my friends, go through his friends list - bam, there I am, then click on my profile and you can view my friends and my picture.<br>The lack of consistency is frankly, bullshit and the invasion of privacy sucks.</p><p>The **REAL** problem here, from what I read is that Facebook want to get some of the twitter market and that's fine, I understand why they would want to do this, I have no qualms with that.<br>The problem is they simply didn't think this out, they should have flat created a new blogging interface based off the status updates, so you can be a 'fan of' someone without being a friend, so you can follow their 'facebook feed' of 'tweets' assuming they have them set to public.<br>This way, I can follow someones feed without seeing their personal shit.   It's simply a case of being a fan of someones feed or being a friend with someone.<br>They could have stolen the twitter market within 6 months, just replicate twitters functionality with a full social network and friend backend the same way the previous system runs, once people are 'friended'<br>They've pissed off quite a few people with this change and I've no doubt a few people may actually leave.  I'm not willing to call it the beginning of the end for them but it's certainly not a good move.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When this change occured yesterday afternoon , I found that a wizard popped up and it prompted me to set new settings or import old ones.Long story short , I did anything and everything I could to lock stuff down but sadly could not lock as much down as I previously had.However I 've found several people who have got completely blocked profile pictures , friends list , the whole lot .
They are completely locked down as I used to be , no 'add this friend ' no 'send message ' no 'view friends ' etc.Furthermore I 've already found a loophole in the new system , I 've personally locked my account down so you ca n't do a search to find me , however if you find one of my friends , go through his friends list - bam , there I am , then click on my profile and you can view my friends and my picture.The lack of consistency is frankly , bullshit and the invasion of privacy sucks.The * * REAL * * problem here , from what I read is that Facebook want to get some of the twitter market and that 's fine , I understand why they would want to do this , I have no qualms with that.The problem is they simply did n't think this out , they should have flat created a new blogging interface based off the status updates , so you can be a 'fan of ' someone without being a friend , so you can follow their 'facebook feed ' of 'tweets ' assuming they have them set to public.This way , I can follow someones feed without seeing their personal shit .
It 's simply a case of being a fan of someones feed or being a friend with someone.They could have stolen the twitter market within 6 months , just replicate twitters functionality with a full social network and friend backend the same way the previous system runs , once people are 'friended'They 've pissed off quite a few people with this change and I 've no doubt a few people may actually leave .
I 'm not willing to call it the beginning of the end for them but it 's certainly not a good move .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When this change occured yesterday afternoon, I found that a wizard popped up and it prompted me to set new settings or import old ones.Long story short, I did anything and everything I could to lock stuff down but sadly could not lock as much down as I previously had.However I've found several people who have got completely blocked profile pictures, friends list, the whole lot.
They are completely locked down as I used to be, no 'add this friend' no 'send message' no 'view friends' etc.Furthermore I've already found a loophole in the new system, I've personally locked my account down so you can't do a search to find me, however if you find one of my friends, go through his friends list - bam, there I am, then click on my profile and you can view my friends and my picture.The lack of consistency is frankly, bullshit and the invasion of privacy sucks.The **REAL** problem here, from what I read is that Facebook want to get some of the twitter market and that's fine, I understand why they would want to do this, I have no qualms with that.The problem is they simply didn't think this out, they should have flat created a new blogging interface based off the status updates, so you can be a 'fan of' someone without being a friend, so you can follow their 'facebook feed' of 'tweets' assuming they have them set to public.This way, I can follow someones feed without seeing their personal shit.
It's simply a case of being a fan of someones feed or being a friend with someone.They could have stolen the twitter market within 6 months, just replicate twitters functionality with a full social network and friend backend the same way the previous system runs, once people are 'friended'They've pissed off quite a few people with this change and I've no doubt a few people may actually leave.
I'm not willing to call it the beginning of the end for them but it's certainly not a good move.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390984</id>
	<title>Re:If you want privacy then don't use</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260470880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><blockquote><div><p>If you don't want your name, address, phone, measurements,</p></div></blockquote><p>If everyone knows my measurement, why do I keep getting penis enlargement spam?!</p></div><p>Because they know your measurements.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you do n't want your name , address , phone , measurements,If everyone knows my measurement , why do I keep getting penis enlargement spam ?
! Because they know your measurements .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you don't want your name, address, phone, measurements,If everyone knows my measurement, why do I keep getting penis enlargement spam?
!Because they know your measurements.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388266</id>
	<title>To Facebook's Credit...</title>
	<author>WebmasterNeal</author>
	<datestamp>1260461640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When user's stage a revolt, much like this Slashdot posting is doing, they typically listen to the users and make some changes. All it takes a group or two with a few hundred thousand users (the site has 350 million) and they take notice.
<br> <br>
My only complain would be if Facebook listed me in the search engine results, which they currently allow me to disallow this. The reason being is I prefer my person website to rank 1st in Google over all these other sites I'm on.</htmltext>
<tokenext>When user 's stage a revolt , much like this Slashdot posting is doing , they typically listen to the users and make some changes .
All it takes a group or two with a few hundred thousand users ( the site has 350 million ) and they take notice .
My only complain would be if Facebook listed me in the search engine results , which they currently allow me to disallow this .
The reason being is I prefer my person website to rank 1st in Google over all these other sites I 'm on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When user's stage a revolt, much like this Slashdot posting is doing, they typically listen to the users and make some changes.
All it takes a group or two with a few hundred thousand users (the site has 350 million) and they take notice.
My only complain would be if Facebook listed me in the search engine results, which they currently allow me to disallow this.
The reason being is I prefer my person website to rank 1st in Google over all these other sites I'm on.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391524</id>
	<title>and cellphone numbers should be published too</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260472620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Seriously though, I have some friends from highschool that I wouldn't mind getting back in contact with and tried to look up [their cellphone numbers]. But with a common name like Mike Smith and no profile picture or friend information how are you supposed to find people? Maybe these people don't want to be found but that seems to be odd seeing as you have a [cellphone]. If you only want to have contact with people you are already in contact with something else would work, eg. email. [A cellphone] IMHO is meant to help people find people they've lost contact with. This is impossible with too much privacy on the site."</p><p>Dude -- if Facebook's primary reason for use was to help people find people they've lost contact with and communicating with people they are already in contact with, then why is MOST of Facebook's pages, code, etc. dedicated to communicating with people *after* you've friended them and only a little of Facebook's pages used to search for people?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Seriously though , I have some friends from highschool that I would n't mind getting back in contact with and tried to look up [ their cellphone numbers ] .
But with a common name like Mike Smith and no profile picture or friend information how are you supposed to find people ?
Maybe these people do n't want to be found but that seems to be odd seeing as you have a [ cellphone ] .
If you only want to have contact with people you are already in contact with something else would work , eg .
email. [ A cellphone ] IMHO is meant to help people find people they 've lost contact with .
This is impossible with too much privacy on the site .
" Dude -- if Facebook 's primary reason for use was to help people find people they 've lost contact with and communicating with people they are already in contact with , then why is MOST of Facebook 's pages , code , etc .
dedicated to communicating with people * after * you 've friended them and only a little of Facebook 's pages used to search for people ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Seriously though, I have some friends from highschool that I wouldn't mind getting back in contact with and tried to look up [their cellphone numbers].
But with a common name like Mike Smith and no profile picture or friend information how are you supposed to find people?
Maybe these people don't want to be found but that seems to be odd seeing as you have a [cellphone].
If you only want to have contact with people you are already in contact with something else would work, eg.
email. [A cellphone] IMHO is meant to help people find people they've lost contact with.
This is impossible with too much privacy on the site.
"Dude -- if Facebook's primary reason for use was to help people find people they've lost contact with and communicating with people they are already in contact with, then why is MOST of Facebook's pages, code, etc.
dedicated to communicating with people *after* you've friended them and only a little of Facebook's pages used to search for people?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388244</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388586</id>
	<title>Remember to block your information from Apps!</title>
	<author>TejWC</author>
	<datestamp>1260463320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is a stupid loophole that still exists where one of your friends can use an app which can access just about any kind of information about you and give it to a 3rd party without you knowing about it. Even if you make a customized setting where certain friends don't get to know certain kinds of information about you, a Facebook app could bypass your own setting and get that information ignoring your "friends" privacy settings.</p><p>So remember to go to your privacy settings, then "Applications and Websites", then "What your friends can share about you" and uncheck whatever you don't want strangers to know about you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is a stupid loophole that still exists where one of your friends can use an app which can access just about any kind of information about you and give it to a 3rd party without you knowing about it .
Even if you make a customized setting where certain friends do n't get to know certain kinds of information about you , a Facebook app could bypass your own setting and get that information ignoring your " friends " privacy settings.So remember to go to your privacy settings , then " Applications and Websites " , then " What your friends can share about you " and uncheck whatever you do n't want strangers to know about you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is a stupid loophole that still exists where one of your friends can use an app which can access just about any kind of information about you and give it to a 3rd party without you knowing about it.
Even if you make a customized setting where certain friends don't get to know certain kinds of information about you, a Facebook app could bypass your own setting and get that information ignoring your "friends" privacy settings.So remember to go to your privacy settings, then "Applications and Websites", then "What your friends can share about you" and uncheck whatever you don't want strangers to know about you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30392078</id>
	<title>The bigger issue is cloud computing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260474660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When we rely on digital information, we have some expectation that things will continue to work over time as they had in the past. For personal computing, we have the option of declining a software upgrade if we don't like the new terms of service or user interface.</p><p>Cloud computing is another story: the vendor can change the rules mid-stream and there's no recourse for a user who is dependent on these services. We are captive to the goodwill of the online provider, and at their mercy.</p><p>Facebook, and social networking, are only a manifestation of the larger issue.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When we rely on digital information , we have some expectation that things will continue to work over time as they had in the past .
For personal computing , we have the option of declining a software upgrade if we do n't like the new terms of service or user interface.Cloud computing is another story : the vendor can change the rules mid-stream and there 's no recourse for a user who is dependent on these services .
We are captive to the goodwill of the online provider , and at their mercy.Facebook , and social networking , are only a manifestation of the larger issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When we rely on digital information, we have some expectation that things will continue to work over time as they had in the past.
For personal computing, we have the option of declining a software upgrade if we don't like the new terms of service or user interface.Cloud computing is another story: the vendor can change the rules mid-stream and there's no recourse for a user who is dependent on these services.
We are captive to the goodwill of the online provider, and at their mercy.Facebook, and social networking, are only a manifestation of the larger issue.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30396270</id>
	<title>Re:Social networking is not about privacy</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1260447480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thank you Captain Obvious - it's so easy to make a prediction about how trustworthy a "social networking web site" is (as opposed to many other kinds of online services, such as email or IM), after the fact that it's happened.</p><p>No doubt if Google ever accidently leak people's details or messages, you'll be along here right after the fact to tell people how any information put into an email web site is bound to leak one way or another.</p><p>So the real question is, do you not reveal any information online? Well to be fair, since you don't even have a Slashdot account, at least you're consistent...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thank you Captain Obvious - it 's so easy to make a prediction about how trustworthy a " social networking web site " is ( as opposed to many other kinds of online services , such as email or IM ) , after the fact that it 's happened.No doubt if Google ever accidently leak people 's details or messages , you 'll be along here right after the fact to tell people how any information put into an email web site is bound to leak one way or another.So the real question is , do you not reveal any information online ?
Well to be fair , since you do n't even have a Slashdot account , at least you 're consistent.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thank you Captain Obvious - it's so easy to make a prediction about how trustworthy a "social networking web site" is (as opposed to many other kinds of online services, such as email or IM), after the fact that it's happened.No doubt if Google ever accidently leak people's details or messages, you'll be along here right after the fact to tell people how any information put into an email web site is bound to leak one way or another.So the real question is, do you not reveal any information online?
Well to be fair, since you don't even have a Slashdot account, at least you're consistent...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390062</id>
	<title>Who knew???</title>
	<author>mkilpatric</author>
	<datestamp>1260468000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who knew that a social website like facebook (and the quietly lurking but previously loud) and myspace would garner sooo much attention?  I mean come on, you have to wonder what our society is coming to that something like this would even be a blip on the radar of caring...  BUT, since we are now taking life direction from sites like this and privacy concerns, I am building a fortress of solitude that each of my friends and family can see through with special glasses, and none of you can see what I am doing.

There, rant for the day, on a techno-social-rant-news-thingie website.

MKilpatric
(6 ft 2)
(Male)
(Kansas)
(Brown Hair, Blue Eyes)
(Google me!)

Heh heh.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who knew that a social website like facebook ( and the quietly lurking but previously loud ) and myspace would garner sooo much attention ?
I mean come on , you have to wonder what our society is coming to that something like this would even be a blip on the radar of caring... BUT , since we are now taking life direction from sites like this and privacy concerns , I am building a fortress of solitude that each of my friends and family can see through with special glasses , and none of you can see what I am doing .
There , rant for the day , on a techno-social-rant-news-thingie website .
MKilpatric ( 6 ft 2 ) ( Male ) ( Kansas ) ( Brown Hair , Blue Eyes ) ( Google me !
) Heh heh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who knew that a social website like facebook (and the quietly lurking but previously loud) and myspace would garner sooo much attention?
I mean come on, you have to wonder what our society is coming to that something like this would even be a blip on the radar of caring...  BUT, since we are now taking life direction from sites like this and privacy concerns, I am building a fortress of solitude that each of my friends and family can see through with special glasses, and none of you can see what I am doing.
There, rant for the day, on a techno-social-rant-news-thingie website.
MKilpatric
(6 ft 2)
(Male)
(Kansas)
(Brown Hair, Blue Eyes)
(Google me!
)

Heh heh.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391990</id>
	<title>Re:Social networking is not about privacy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260474300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's like saying, "if you don't want to live, quit breathing!" There should not be a trade off between wanting to keep corporations from tracking everything about me and giving personal details to people I know and trust.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's like saying , " if you do n't want to live , quit breathing !
" There should not be a trade off between wanting to keep corporations from tracking everything about me and giving personal details to people I know and trust .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's like saying, "if you don't want to live, quit breathing!
" There should not be a trade off between wanting to keep corporations from tracking everything about me and giving personal details to people I know and trust.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389896</id>
	<title>Re:It was already public</title>
	<author>ztransform</author>
	<datestamp>1260467520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If I understand correctly</p></div><p>If you are not interested in your own privacy why add to this debate? Clearly you never checked out what options there were for controlling 3rd-party access to your details, you didn't care then and you don't care now.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I understand correctlyIf you are not interested in your own privacy why add to this debate ?
Clearly you never checked out what options there were for controlling 3rd-party access to your details , you did n't care then and you do n't care now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I understand correctlyIf you are not interested in your own privacy why add to this debate?
Clearly you never checked out what options there were for controlling 3rd-party access to your details, you didn't care then and you don't care now.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388612</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388930</id>
	<title>Summary is dead wrong!</title>
	<author>ericrost</author>
	<datestamp>1260464640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Click the little Change Settings button on the top of the page. Nothing is "irrevocably public" I have all my info other than send friend request set to "Friends Only". Users aren't so stupid, the submitter and editor seem to be though. This hyperbole crap is spreading across the web today/yesterday and those spreading it don't care to investigate the issue far enough to get anything resembling the truth.</p><p>Jeez I'm glad I look at things for myself...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Click the little Change Settings button on the top of the page .
Nothing is " irrevocably public " I have all my info other than send friend request set to " Friends Only " .
Users are n't so stupid , the submitter and editor seem to be though .
This hyperbole crap is spreading across the web today/yesterday and those spreading it do n't care to investigate the issue far enough to get anything resembling the truth.Jeez I 'm glad I look at things for myself.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Click the little Change Settings button on the top of the page.
Nothing is "irrevocably public" I have all my info other than send friend request set to "Friends Only".
Users aren't so stupid, the submitter and editor seem to be though.
This hyperbole crap is spreading across the web today/yesterday and those spreading it don't care to investigate the issue far enough to get anything resembling the truth.Jeez I'm glad I look at things for myself...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388144</id>
	<title>Our privacy is not their concern</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260461100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know it's a different company, but what did the CEO of Google say? 'If You Have Something You Don't Want Anyone To Know, Maybe You Shouldn't Be Doing It'.  I see Facebook has the same attitude.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know it 's a different company , but what did the CEO of Google say ?
'If You Have Something You Do n't Want Anyone To Know , Maybe You Should n't Be Doing It' .
I see Facebook has the same attitude .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know it's a different company, but what did the CEO of Google say?
'If You Have Something You Don't Want Anyone To Know, Maybe You Shouldn't Be Doing It'.
I see Facebook has the same attitude.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389886</id>
	<title>Re:If you want privacy then don't use</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260467520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This is hardly strange behaviour.</p></div><p>It's hardly strange, but it is <em>delusional</em>. I <strong>assume</strong> that <em>every piece of information</em> that I upload to <em>any</em> website has been read by <strong>everyone</strong> who works there, and possibly sent on to other people to chuckle over. To do differently is to live in a fantasy world. Sure, most people don't care about your data, and <em>no one</em> cares about <strong>most</strong> people's data. That doesn't help if you're the magical mystery motherfucker. Short form: If you want to keep data private, you need a local server, and to encrypt all outgoing communications.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is hardly strange behaviour.It 's hardly strange , but it is delusional .
I assume that every piece of information that I upload to any website has been read by everyone who works there , and possibly sent on to other people to chuckle over .
To do differently is to live in a fantasy world .
Sure , most people do n't care about your data , and no one cares about most people 's data .
That does n't help if you 're the magical mystery motherfucker .
Short form : If you want to keep data private , you need a local server , and to encrypt all outgoing communications .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is hardly strange behaviour.It's hardly strange, but it is delusional.
I assume that every piece of information that I upload to any website has been read by everyone who works there, and possibly sent on to other people to chuckle over.
To do differently is to live in a fantasy world.
Sure, most people don't care about your data, and no one cares about most people's data.
That doesn't help if you're the magical mystery motherfucker.
Short form: If you want to keep data private, you need a local server, and to encrypt all outgoing communications.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389512</id>
	<title>Re:If you want privacy then don't use</title>
	<author>kimvette</author>
	<datestamp>1260466500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You answered your own question.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You answered your own question .
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You answered your own question.
;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30392334</id>
	<title>Re:If you want privacy then don't use</title>
	<author>Gulthek</author>
	<datestamp>1260475500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The rest of us have a more subtle approach to social networking. Sometimes we want to share things with some people and not with others. This is hardly strange behaviour.</p></div><p>Ok, but a third party website is not the place. Especially not a for-profit third party website whose <em>product</em> is you and your data.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The rest of us have a more subtle approach to social networking .
Sometimes we want to share things with some people and not with others .
This is hardly strange behaviour.Ok , but a third party website is not the place .
Especially not a for-profit third party website whose product is you and your data .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The rest of us have a more subtle approach to social networking.
Sometimes we want to share things with some people and not with others.
This is hardly strange behaviour.Ok, but a third party website is not the place.
Especially not a for-profit third party website whose product is you and your data.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388312</id>
	<title>Give false info</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260461880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nothing they require is verifiable, so just make it up. After all it's an online medium so no-one cares what you look like, which city you sleep in or whether you wear dresses, or ties (or both - but not together: that's just weird).
<p>
Likewise, when sites ask for security questions such as pet's name, there's no obligation to give a truthful answer: just one that you will consistently give to that site when asked that question. It's the internet - you're not even a number here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nothing they require is verifiable , so just make it up .
After all it 's an online medium so no-one cares what you look like , which city you sleep in or whether you wear dresses , or ties ( or both - but not together : that 's just weird ) .
Likewise , when sites ask for security questions such as pet 's name , there 's no obligation to give a truthful answer : just one that you will consistently give to that site when asked that question .
It 's the internet - you 're not even a number here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nothing they require is verifiable, so just make it up.
After all it's an online medium so no-one cares what you look like, which city you sleep in or whether you wear dresses, or ties (or both - but not together: that's just weird).
Likewise, when sites ask for security questions such as pet's name, there's no obligation to give a truthful answer: just one that you will consistently give to that site when asked that question.
It's the internet - you're not even a number here.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391808</id>
	<title>Re:Social networking is not about privacy</title>
	<author>Turudd</author>
	<datestamp>1260473640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Exactly.
And also with a little social engineering, or perhaps just surreptitious behaviour you can find out anything you need about a person off the web too. Information has never been secure while a human is involved with it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly .
And also with a little social engineering , or perhaps just surreptitious behaviour you can find out anything you need about a person off the web too .
Information has never been secure while a human is involved with it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly.
And also with a little social engineering, or perhaps just surreptitious behaviour you can find out anything you need about a person off the web too.
Information has never been secure while a human is involved with it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389054</id>
	<title>Worse than that..</title>
	<author>maillemaker</author>
	<datestamp>1260465060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Worse than that, the pop-up menu option for more privacy was not listed as "keep private", it was listed as "old settings".  If you hovered over the "old setting" button a menu did pop up that said "private" or something like that, but clearly the menu was designed to entice users to reveal more private information.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Worse than that , the pop-up menu option for more privacy was not listed as " keep private " , it was listed as " old settings " .
If you hovered over the " old setting " button a menu did pop up that said " private " or something like that , but clearly the menu was designed to entice users to reveal more private information .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Worse than that, the pop-up menu option for more privacy was not listed as "keep private", it was listed as "old settings".
If you hovered over the "old setting" button a menu did pop up that said "private" or something like that, but clearly the menu was designed to entice users to reveal more private information.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389580</id>
	<title>Re:Social networking is not about privacy</title>
	<author>plague3106</author>
	<datestamp>1260466620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I suppose that works, if you have only two friends who live nearby.  But more people would consider that a pretty sad social life.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I suppose that works , if you have only two friends who live nearby .
But more people would consider that a pretty sad social life .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I suppose that works, if you have only two friends who live nearby.
But more people would consider that a pretty sad social life.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388668</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30397202</id>
	<title>Re:Social networking is not about privacy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260453240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Same goes for my bank records, right?</p><p>The point is that a company that promises to keep your data safe and then willfully reneges on that promise is a sleazeball.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Same goes for my bank records , right ? The point is that a company that promises to keep your data safe and then willfully reneges on that promise is a sleazeball .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Same goes for my bank records, right?The point is that a company that promises to keep your data safe and then willfully reneges on that promise is a sleazeball.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388134</id>
	<title>another upgrade</title>
	<author>lpaul55</author>
	<datestamp>1260461100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess it depends on what you want to use this for.  Me, I want more attention, so it's all good.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess it depends on what you want to use this for .
Me , I want more attention , so it 's all good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess it depends on what you want to use this for.
Me, I want more attention, so it's all good.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390366</id>
	<title>Re:Give false info</title>
	<author>Arthur Grumbine</author>
	<datestamp>1260468900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>After all it's an online medium so no-one cares what you look like.</p></div><p> <a href="http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20091123/facebook\_insurance\_091123/20091123/?hub=SciTech" title="www.ctv.ca">Indeed.</a> [www.ctv.ca]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>After all it 's an online medium so no-one cares what you look like .
Indeed. [ www.ctv.ca ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After all it's an online medium so no-one cares what you look like.
Indeed. [www.ctv.ca]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388312</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30393550</id>
	<title>Re:Our privacy is not their concern</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260437100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because I signed up whilst young and naive and they won't let me delete my fucking account.</p><p>And no, "deactivating it" is not an acceptable alternative.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because I signed up whilst young and naive and they wo n't let me delete my fucking account.And no , " deactivating it " is not an acceptable alternative .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because I signed up whilst young and naive and they won't let me delete my fucking account.And no, "deactivating it" is not an acceptable alternative.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388724</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30394498</id>
	<title>Photo Tagging</title>
	<author>SRHavoc</author>
	<datestamp>1260441000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So I might be wrong here, but I seem to remember you used to be able to "approve" being tagged in a photo before it showed up on your profile. I just looked through the help section and found that is no longer the case.</p><p>"Is there an option to approve a photo tag before I am tagged in it?<br>Unfortunately, the functionality of approving a photo tag is not currently available. When you are tagged in a photo by one of your friends, or they tag someone in one of your photos, the tag request will be automatically approved. Please note that you can set your notifications so that you always know when someone tags you in a photo or tags one of your photos. You can control this setting from the "Notifications" tab on the Account Settings page."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So I might be wrong here , but I seem to remember you used to be able to " approve " being tagged in a photo before it showed up on your profile .
I just looked through the help section and found that is no longer the case .
" Is there an option to approve a photo tag before I am tagged in it ? Unfortunately , the functionality of approving a photo tag is not currently available .
When you are tagged in a photo by one of your friends , or they tag someone in one of your photos , the tag request will be automatically approved .
Please note that you can set your notifications so that you always know when someone tags you in a photo or tags one of your photos .
You can control this setting from the " Notifications " tab on the Account Settings page .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So I might be wrong here, but I seem to remember you used to be able to "approve" being tagged in a photo before it showed up on your profile.
I just looked through the help section and found that is no longer the case.
"Is there an option to approve a photo tag before I am tagged in it?Unfortunately, the functionality of approving a photo tag is not currently available.
When you are tagged in a photo by one of your friends, or they tag someone in one of your photos, the tag request will be automatically approved.
Please note that you can set your notifications so that you always know when someone tags you in a photo or tags one of your photos.
You can control this setting from the "Notifications" tab on the Account Settings page.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30392496</id>
	<title>Re:HR loves you</title>
	<author>nysus</author>
	<datestamp>1260476160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, your future employers may not want to take a chance on an individual who reveals nothing about themselves. It would be better to create a false identity that paints you as a smart but soulless drone that's good at taking marching orders so the corporate masters will approve.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , your future employers may not want to take a chance on an individual who reveals nothing about themselves .
It would be better to create a false identity that paints you as a smart but soulless drone that 's good at taking marching orders so the corporate masters will approve .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, your future employers may not want to take a chance on an individual who reveals nothing about themselves.
It would be better to create a false identity that paints you as a smart but soulless drone that's good at taking marching orders so the corporate masters will approve.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391486</id>
	<title>Re:privacy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260472500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Some people want to be able to reconnect with people they've lost touch with, but don't want certain people finding them or to have all their basic info available to the public. They're willing to take sole responsibility for finding people they want to know, and willing to risk not being found by people they like in order not to be found by other people. There's no logical disconnect there at all, and I don't understand how the parent got modded insightful. (My name is apparently completely unique on the internet, so it's not as though I'm arguing from the perspective of someone for which the aforementioned approach is even possible.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Some people want to be able to reconnect with people they 've lost touch with , but do n't want certain people finding them or to have all their basic info available to the public .
They 're willing to take sole responsibility for finding people they want to know , and willing to risk not being found by people they like in order not to be found by other people .
There 's no logical disconnect there at all , and I do n't understand how the parent got modded insightful .
( My name is apparently completely unique on the internet , so it 's not as though I 'm arguing from the perspective of someone for which the aforementioned approach is even possible .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some people want to be able to reconnect with people they've lost touch with, but don't want certain people finding them or to have all their basic info available to the public.
They're willing to take sole responsibility for finding people they want to know, and willing to risk not being found by people they like in order not to be found by other people.
There's no logical disconnect there at all, and I don't understand how the parent got modded insightful.
(My name is apparently completely unique on the internet, so it's not as though I'm arguing from the perspective of someone for which the aforementioned approach is even possible.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388244</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30430128</id>
	<title>Re:If you want privacy then don't use</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260800880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because they noticed the 'cm' and converted to inches.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because they noticed the 'cm ' and converted to inches .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because they noticed the 'cm' and converted to inches.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389430</id>
	<title>The Bigger Problem</title>
	<author>professorguy</author>
	<datestamp>1260466200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Notice the link is now broken?  Here's the way it now works:
<br> <br>
Company asshole #1:  Let's put up a forum where customers can discuss our product.<br>
Company asshole #2:  It's working great, they're discussing our product!<br>
Company asshole #1:  Hey, they're saying some bad things!  Let's pull down those postings.<br>
<br>
And if you setup your own website to discuss their product, they hit you with a DCMA take-down because you mentioned their name which is a trademark you can't use.
<br> <br>
Fuck facebook.  Not for privacy bullshit, but rather for just being dicks.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Notice the link is now broken ?
Here 's the way it now works : Company asshole # 1 : Let 's put up a forum where customers can discuss our product .
Company asshole # 2 : It 's working great , they 're discussing our product !
Company asshole # 1 : Hey , they 're saying some bad things !
Let 's pull down those postings .
And if you setup your own website to discuss their product , they hit you with a DCMA take-down because you mentioned their name which is a trademark you ca n't use .
Fuck facebook .
Not for privacy bullshit , but rather for just being dicks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Notice the link is now broken?
Here's the way it now works:
 
Company asshole #1:  Let's put up a forum where customers can discuss our product.
Company asshole #2:  It's working great, they're discussing our product!
Company asshole #1:  Hey, they're saying some bad things!
Let's pull down those postings.
And if you setup your own website to discuss their product, they hit you with a DCMA take-down because you mentioned their name which is a trademark you can't use.
Fuck facebook.
Not for privacy bullshit, but rather for just being dicks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389930</id>
	<title>Oh come on</title>
	<author>jimicus</author>
	<datestamp>1260467580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is Facebook.  A site which has had privacy problems more or less since its inception - mainly because the idea that sure, there might be things you want to share - just not with the whole world, okay? - was never (and indeed AFAICT is still not) part of the original design philosophy.</p><p>Anyone who has actually attempted to use Facebook's privacy settings for more than about 5 minutes should have already figured that out.  Treat it (and indeed any similar site) like a dodgy pub with incredible acoustics full of big hairy neanderthals you don't like and gossips who can't keep their mouth shut and you won't go too far wrong.</p><p>Treat it like a private room in which you can share your innermost thoughts with your closest friends in complete safety and you are going to come unstuck sooner rather than later.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is Facebook .
A site which has had privacy problems more or less since its inception - mainly because the idea that sure , there might be things you want to share - just not with the whole world , okay ?
- was never ( and indeed AFAICT is still not ) part of the original design philosophy.Anyone who has actually attempted to use Facebook 's privacy settings for more than about 5 minutes should have already figured that out .
Treat it ( and indeed any similar site ) like a dodgy pub with incredible acoustics full of big hairy neanderthals you do n't like and gossips who ca n't keep their mouth shut and you wo n't go too far wrong.Treat it like a private room in which you can share your innermost thoughts with your closest friends in complete safety and you are going to come unstuck sooner rather than later .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is Facebook.
A site which has had privacy problems more or less since its inception - mainly because the idea that sure, there might be things you want to share - just not with the whole world, okay?
- was never (and indeed AFAICT is still not) part of the original design philosophy.Anyone who has actually attempted to use Facebook's privacy settings for more than about 5 minutes should have already figured that out.
Treat it (and indeed any similar site) like a dodgy pub with incredible acoustics full of big hairy neanderthals you don't like and gossips who can't keep their mouth shut and you won't go too far wrong.Treat it like a private room in which you can share your innermost thoughts with your closest friends in complete safety and you are going to come unstuck sooner rather than later.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391306</id>
	<title>Re:Friends List</title>
	<author>ronobot</author>
	<datestamp>1260471840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, it should still be possible to hide your friend list from your other friends. I was just looking at a couple of my friends' profiles, and I couldn't see their friend lists. I'm not sure how they did it though.
</p><p>
I was just doing a privacy experiment with a co-worker who wasn't on my list, and whatever it is that Facebook has changed, she was still completely invisible to me, and we even had three mutual friends. So that's a good thing.
</p><p>
On the other hand, they've apparently removed the option to hide the 'Add as a friend' link on your profile. For the past year, since I found that setting, I'd been happily avoiding getting unwanted friend requests. Now I can only limit it to 'Friends of friends' at best.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , it should still be possible to hide your friend list from your other friends .
I was just looking at a couple of my friends ' profiles , and I could n't see their friend lists .
I 'm not sure how they did it though .
I was just doing a privacy experiment with a co-worker who was n't on my list , and whatever it is that Facebook has changed , she was still completely invisible to me , and we even had three mutual friends .
So that 's a good thing .
On the other hand , they 've apparently removed the option to hide the 'Add as a friend ' link on your profile .
For the past year , since I found that setting , I 'd been happily avoiding getting unwanted friend requests .
Now I can only limit it to 'Friends of friends ' at best .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, it should still be possible to hide your friend list from your other friends.
I was just looking at a couple of my friends' profiles, and I couldn't see their friend lists.
I'm not sure how they did it though.
I was just doing a privacy experiment with a co-worker who wasn't on my list, and whatever it is that Facebook has changed, she was still completely invisible to me, and we even had three mutual friends.
So that's a good thing.
On the other hand, they've apparently removed the option to hide the 'Add as a friend' link on your profile.
For the past year, since I found that setting, I'd been happily avoiding getting unwanted friend requests.
Now I can only limit it to 'Friends of friends' at best.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388652</id>
	<title>so whats new?</title>
	<author>parallel\_prankster</author>
	<datestamp>1260463620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It is expected. Privacy does not work well with any social networking website. If you get on to a social networking website, they want you to make friends, more friends than you normally have. The more you network, the more they make money out of it. Its like the stock market, they dont like money at one place. It needs to keep rolling.
The trick to maintaining social networking websites is how little privacy can you maintain while keeping the website relatively safe and secure for users and increase opportunities for people to network. And they can do this only by exposing as much information about people as possible.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is expected .
Privacy does not work well with any social networking website .
If you get on to a social networking website , they want you to make friends , more friends than you normally have .
The more you network , the more they make money out of it .
Its like the stock market , they dont like money at one place .
It needs to keep rolling .
The trick to maintaining social networking websites is how little privacy can you maintain while keeping the website relatively safe and secure for users and increase opportunities for people to network .
And they can do this only by exposing as much information about people as possible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is expected.
Privacy does not work well with any social networking website.
If you get on to a social networking website, they want you to make friends, more friends than you normally have.
The more you network, the more they make money out of it.
Its like the stock market, they dont like money at one place.
It needs to keep rolling.
The trick to maintaining social networking websites is how little privacy can you maintain while keeping the website relatively safe and secure for users and increase opportunities for people to network.
And they can do this only by exposing as much information about people as possible.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389758
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388334
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388312
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391038
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388222
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388470
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390156
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30392130
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30392252
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30397202
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388114
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30397412
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390150
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30392776
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388244
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391486
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388502
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388668
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389580
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30393658
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30396930
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30429648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388244
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391524
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389886
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388114
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389144
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388144
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388724
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391204
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30394300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388254
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30393036
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388420
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391990
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388244
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30396640
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30392496
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388448
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388612
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391890
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30392334
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388244
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389476
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388144
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388934
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389512
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388428
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388144
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30393084
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391122
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388348
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388144
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388724
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389510
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388586
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390020
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388312
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388726
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391808
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388144
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388724
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30393550
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388312
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390366
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30398054
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391844
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388570
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30396936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30394134
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390014
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30430128
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390934
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388222
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389054
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388244
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30393470
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388114
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388366
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30396270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388930
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391696
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388222
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388460
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388550
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390782
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391294
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30395386
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389080
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1341220_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389406
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1341220.30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30394498
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1341220.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388152
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1341220.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388568
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1341220.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388150
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388224
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390014
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388502
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388348
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388214
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30392252
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30395386
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30430128
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390984
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30398054
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389512
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388550
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388200
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388496
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390934
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391844
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389886
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30392334
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389406
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390156
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30392130
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388420
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30394134
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30429648
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388254
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1341220.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390290
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1341220.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388134
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1341220.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388222
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388752
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388460
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388470
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1341220.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388670
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1341220.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388586
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390020
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1341220.29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388244
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391524
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30396640
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389476
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391486
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389986
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1341220.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388334
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388500
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1341220.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388266
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1341220.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388498
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1341220.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389150
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1341220.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389404
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30392496
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1341220.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388208
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390150
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389758
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388448
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389054
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388428
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1341220.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388490
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1341220.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388930
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391696
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1341220.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389240
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1341220.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390152
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1341220.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388114
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388366
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388372
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30397412
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389144
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1341220.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388612
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389896
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1341220.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388270
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1341220.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388144
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388724
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389510
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391204
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30393550
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30393084
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388934
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1341220.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389920
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1341220.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388570
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30396936
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1341220.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388484
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391122
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30396930
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30393470
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391890
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30394300
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391306
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390782
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1341220.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388312
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388726
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391038
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30390366
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1341220.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389430
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1341220.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388148
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391294
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391990
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30396270
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30393036
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30391808
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389080
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30397202
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388668
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30389580
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30393658
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30392776
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1341220.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1341220.30388320
</commentlist>
</conversation>
