<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_18_0749208</id>
	<title>Microsoft Bots Effectively DDoSing Perl CPAN Testers</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1263818880000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>at\_slashdot writes <i>"The Perl <a href="http://www.cpan.org/">CPAN</a> Testers have been suffering issues accessing their sites, databases and mirrors. According to a <a href="http://blogs.perl.org/users/cpan\_testers/2010/01/msnbot-must-die.html">posting on the CPAN Testers' blog</a>, the CPAN Testers' server has been being aggressively <a href="http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Microsoft-bots-perform-denial-of-service-on-Perl-Testers-906094.html">scanned by '20-30 bots every few seconds'</a> in what they call 'a dedicated denial of service attack';  these bots 'completely ignore the rules specified in robots.txt.'"</i>

From the Heise story linked above: "The bots were identified by their IP addresses, including 65.55.207.x, 65.55.107.x and 65.55.106.x, as coming from Microsoft."</htmltext>
<tokenext>at \ _slashdot writes " The Perl CPAN Testers have been suffering issues accessing their sites , databases and mirrors .
According to a posting on the CPAN Testers ' blog , the CPAN Testers ' server has been being aggressively scanned by '20-30 bots every few seconds ' in what they call 'a dedicated denial of service attack ' ; these bots 'completely ignore the rules specified in robots.txt .
' " From the Heise story linked above : " The bots were identified by their IP addresses , including 65.55.207.x , 65.55.107.x and 65.55.106.x , as coming from Microsoft .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>at\_slashdot writes "The Perl CPAN Testers have been suffering issues accessing their sites, databases and mirrors.
According to a posting on the CPAN Testers' blog, the CPAN Testers' server has been being aggressively scanned by '20-30 bots every few seconds' in what they call 'a dedicated denial of service attack';  these bots 'completely ignore the rules specified in robots.txt.
'"

From the Heise story linked above: "The bots were identified by their IP addresses, including 65.55.207.x, 65.55.107.x and 65.55.106.x, as coming from Microsoft.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808412</id>
	<title>Re:Typical of Bots</title>
	<author>jack2000</author>
	<datestamp>1263832800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Disallow a directory in robots.txt if anyone opens it have a link there along the lines of:
If you open this your ip will be blocked. Everyone that requests that link gets nullrouted for a week
if they do it again they get nullrouted forever.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Disallow a directory in robots.txt if anyone opens it have a link there along the lines of : If you open this your ip will be blocked .
Everyone that requests that link gets nullrouted for a week if they do it again they get nullrouted forever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Disallow a directory in robots.txt if anyone opens it have a link there along the lines of:
If you open this your ip will be blocked.
Everyone that requests that link gets nullrouted for a week
if they do it again they get nullrouted forever.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807380</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807868</id>
	<title>No problem</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263829860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ipchains -A input  -j REJECT -p all -s 65.55.207.0/24  -i eth0 -l<br>ipchains -A input  -j REJECT -p all -s 65.55.107.0/24  -i eth0 -l<br>ipchains -A input  -j REJECT -p all -s 65.55.106.0/24  -i eth0 -l</p><p>problem solved</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ipchains -A input -j REJECT -p all -s 65.55.207.0/24 -i eth0 -lipchains -A input -j REJECT -p all -s 65.55.107.0/24 -i eth0 -lipchains -A input -j REJECT -p all -s 65.55.106.0/24 -i eth0 -lproblem solved</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ipchains -A input  -j REJECT -p all -s 65.55.207.0/24  -i eth0 -lipchains -A input  -j REJECT -p all -s 65.55.107.0/24  -i eth0 -lipchains -A input  -j REJECT -p all -s 65.55.106.0/24  -i eth0 -lproblem solved</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30812070</id>
	<title>You forgot abusive and socially backward.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263806820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"Lazy, feckless, inconsiderate crooks."</i> You forgot abusive and ignorant and socially backward.

<br> <br>Don't you hate it when people are excessively positive about Microsoft?

<br> <br>Steve Ballmer has little technical knowledge, and any good people who were at Microsoft left long ago, I'm guessing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Lazy , feckless , inconsiderate crooks .
" You forgot abusive and ignorant and socially backward .
Do n't you hate it when people are excessively positive about Microsoft ?
Steve Ballmer has little technical knowledge , and any good people who were at Microsoft left long ago , I 'm guessing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Lazy, feckless, inconsiderate crooks.
" You forgot abusive and ignorant and socially backward.
Don't you hate it when people are excessively positive about Microsoft?
Steve Ballmer has little technical knowledge, and any good people who were at Microsoft left long ago, I'm guessing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806874</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30834110</id>
	<title>Network Solutions Domain Information</title>
	<author>DJRumpy</author>
	<datestamp>1264011240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.networksolutions.com/whois/results.jsp?ip=65.55.207.0" title="networksolutions.com">http://www.networksolutions.com/whois/results.jsp?ip=65.55.207.0</a> [networksolutions.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.networksolutions.com/whois/results.jsp ? ip = 65.55.207.0 [ networksolutions.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.networksolutions.com/whois/results.jsp?ip=65.55.207.0 [networksolutions.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30816644</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30816644</id>
	<title>Re:So how do we DDoS Microsoft?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263843960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This whole thing appears to be a fraud.  The IP address range 66.55.96.0 - 66.55.111.255 belongs to Funds Xpress Financial Network, Inc. in Austin TX. 66.55.192.0 - 66.55.223.255 belongs to Great Works Internet of Biddeford ME.

Who decided those IP addresses belong to Microsoft? Please check whois.arin.net</htmltext>
<tokenext>This whole thing appears to be a fraud .
The IP address range 66.55.96.0 - 66.55.111.255 belongs to Funds Xpress Financial Network , Inc. in Austin TX .
66.55.192.0 - 66.55.223.255 belongs to Great Works Internet of Biddeford ME .
Who decided those IP addresses belong to Microsoft ?
Please check whois.arin.net</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This whole thing appears to be a fraud.
The IP address range 66.55.96.0 - 66.55.111.255 belongs to Funds Xpress Financial Network, Inc. in Austin TX.
66.55.192.0 - 66.55.223.255 belongs to Great Works Internet of Biddeford ME.
Who decided those IP addresses belong to Microsoft?
Please check whois.arin.net</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808324</id>
	<title>Re:I've seen it before</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263832380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>One of the IPs that was running attacks against my server belonged to a Italian Linux website.</htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the IPs that was running attacks against my server belonged to a Italian Linux website .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the IPs that was running attacks against my server belonged to a Italian Linux website.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806860</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807380</id>
	<title>Typical of Bots</title>
	<author>jmaslak</author>
	<datestamp>1263826740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sure, it should not ignore robots.txt.  And if that's true, there's a problem - but I'd like MS's side of the story before assuming that it ignores robots.txt - who knows, maybe the robots.txt is malformed.</p><p>I'd also like to know what user agent string is the crawler using.</p><p>But all that said, this is not exactly news worthy.  I've run large, dynamic internet sites for years.  I've had problems with many, many different kinds of crawlers, from many companies (including companies like Google).  There's a ton of bots out there that do ignore robots.txt (there was a few hundred bots that scanned the site I used to run, back in 2001, that ignored robots.txt).  So it's something a programmer really needs to be ready to deal with.</p><p>Yes, these bots are rude, abusive, and inconsiderate of the site owners (go figure - most of the companies running them, the small bots, are pretty much unethical anyhow - anything for a buck).  But it's on the internet, just like spam and a bunch of other things we all get annoyed with.  You have to deal with it.</p><p>I suggest applications like mod\_bwshare to even out this type of behavior, traffic shaping at the network layer for known abusers you don't just want to block, etc.  Those are the tactics I use.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure , it should not ignore robots.txt .
And if that 's true , there 's a problem - but I 'd like MS 's side of the story before assuming that it ignores robots.txt - who knows , maybe the robots.txt is malformed.I 'd also like to know what user agent string is the crawler using.But all that said , this is not exactly news worthy .
I 've run large , dynamic internet sites for years .
I 've had problems with many , many different kinds of crawlers , from many companies ( including companies like Google ) .
There 's a ton of bots out there that do ignore robots.txt ( there was a few hundred bots that scanned the site I used to run , back in 2001 , that ignored robots.txt ) .
So it 's something a programmer really needs to be ready to deal with.Yes , these bots are rude , abusive , and inconsiderate of the site owners ( go figure - most of the companies running them , the small bots , are pretty much unethical anyhow - anything for a buck ) .
But it 's on the internet , just like spam and a bunch of other things we all get annoyed with .
You have to deal with it.I suggest applications like mod \ _bwshare to even out this type of behavior , traffic shaping at the network layer for known abusers you do n't just want to block , etc .
Those are the tactics I use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure, it should not ignore robots.txt.
And if that's true, there's a problem - but I'd like MS's side of the story before assuming that it ignores robots.txt - who knows, maybe the robots.txt is malformed.I'd also like to know what user agent string is the crawler using.But all that said, this is not exactly news worthy.
I've run large, dynamic internet sites for years.
I've had problems with many, many different kinds of crawlers, from many companies (including companies like Google).
There's a ton of bots out there that do ignore robots.txt (there was a few hundred bots that scanned the site I used to run, back in 2001, that ignored robots.txt).
So it's something a programmer really needs to be ready to deal with.Yes, these bots are rude, abusive, and inconsiderate of the site owners (go figure - most of the companies running them, the small bots, are pretty much unethical anyhow - anything for a buck).
But it's on the internet, just like spam and a bunch of other things we all get annoyed with.
You have to deal with it.I suggest applications like mod\_bwshare to even out this type of behavior, traffic shaping at the network layer for known abusers you don't just want to block, etc.
Those are the tactics I use.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807012</id>
	<title>Re:Probably just a bug.</title>
	<author>djupedal</author>
	<datestamp>1263823920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>&gt; <i>"I know everyone likes to assume that Microsoft is being evil here, but wouldn't the more realistic assumption be that they were just being incompetent?"</i>
<br>
<br>
We assume MS is evil...
<br>
<br>
We know they are incompetent.
<br>
<br>
We feel this is typical.
<br>
<br>
We pray they'd just go away.
<br>
<br>
We think this will never end...</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; " I know everyone likes to assume that Microsoft is being evil here , but would n't the more realistic assumption be that they were just being incompetent ?
" We assume MS is evil.. . We know they are incompetent .
We feel this is typical .
We pray they 'd just go away .
We think this will never end.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; "I know everyone likes to assume that Microsoft is being evil here, but wouldn't the more realistic assumption be that they were just being incompetent?
"


We assume MS is evil...


We know they are incompetent.
We feel this is typical.
We pray they'd just go away.
We think this will never end...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806910</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30810378</id>
	<title>Re:So how do we DDoS Microsoft?</title>
	<author>davester666</author>
	<datestamp>1263842040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And now we know why the web-crawlers are so slow to index small web sites for Bing.  They're spending all their time crawling open-source web sites in an effort to slow them down.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And now we know why the web-crawlers are so slow to index small web sites for Bing .
They 're spending all their time crawling open-source web sites in an effort to slow them down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And now we know why the web-crawlers are so slow to index small web sites for Bing.
They're spending all their time crawling open-source web sites in an effort to slow them down.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30809778</id>
	<title>Re:So how do we DDoS Microsoft?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263839280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've never liked that saying because of the implication that malice and stupidity are exclusive.</p><p>Dumb and mean are often found together.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've never liked that saying because of the implication that malice and stupidity are exclusive.Dumb and mean are often found together .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've never liked that saying because of the implication that malice and stupidity are exclusive.Dumb and mean are often found together.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808246</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807932</id>
	<title>Re:Probably just a bug.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263830160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I know everyone likes to assume that Microsoft is being evil here, but wouldn't the more realistic assumption be that they were just being incompetent?</p></div><p>Probably the work of the "best and brightest" from India.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I know everyone likes to assume that Microsoft is being evil here , but would n't the more realistic assumption be that they were just being incompetent ? Probably the work of the " best and brightest " from India .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know everyone likes to assume that Microsoft is being evil here, but wouldn't the more realistic assumption be that they were just being incompetent?Probably the work of the "best and brightest" from India.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806910</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807324</id>
	<title>Re:Probably just a bug.</title>
	<author>Xest</author>
	<datestamp>1263826440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, and I like the solution too- rather than contact Microsoft to find out what the fuck is going on, post it to Slashdot and get Slashdotted as well.</p><p>Pure genius.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , and I like the solution too- rather than contact Microsoft to find out what the fuck is going on , post it to Slashdot and get Slashdotted as well.Pure genius .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, and I like the solution too- rather than contact Microsoft to find out what the fuck is going on, post it to Slashdot and get Slashdotted as well.Pure genius.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806910</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808744</id>
	<title>Re:IP Spoofing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263834840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because you don't know what you're talking about?</p><p>Understand, then post.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because you do n't know what you 're talking about ? Understand , then post .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because you don't know what you're talking about?Understand, then post.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808492</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808468</id>
	<title>I can't wait till the MS bots index private data</title>
	<author>StuartHankins</author>
	<datestamp>1263833100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What happens when the MS bots (which apparently ignore the robots.txt file) start indexing some site which provides pay-per-view information? Can we expect a fix to the problem then? All it takes is to get some lawyers involved, you know how that snowball goes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What happens when the MS bots ( which apparently ignore the robots.txt file ) start indexing some site which provides pay-per-view information ?
Can we expect a fix to the problem then ?
All it takes is to get some lawyers involved , you know how that snowball goes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What happens when the MS bots (which apparently ignore the robots.txt file) start indexing some site which provides pay-per-view information?
Can we expect a fix to the problem then?
All it takes is to get some lawyers involved, you know how that snowball goes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806854</id>
	<title>Oh! *Literally* Microsoft bots!</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1263822780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Until I read the summary I thought it was another article about windows botnets and was wondering why the "microsoft" was tacked on since windows is the default OS assumption.  Of course it would be interesting if these were new CPAN mirrors that MS was settings up.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Until I read the summary I thought it was another article about windows botnets and was wondering why the " microsoft " was tacked on since windows is the default OS assumption .
Of course it would be interesting if these were new CPAN mirrors that MS was settings up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Until I read the summary I thought it was another article about windows botnets and was wondering why the "microsoft" was tacked on since windows is the default OS assumption.
Of course it would be interesting if these were new CPAN mirrors that MS was settings up.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808346</id>
	<title>Re:So how do we DDoS Microsoft?</title>
	<author>jc42</author>
	<datestamp>1263832500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>As said below, never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. (Insert lame joke about MSFT being full of stupidity here).</i></p><p>Yeah, though this particular sort of stupidity has been going on for a long time, and not just at Microsoft (though they seem to be the worst culprit).</p><p>I run a couple of sites that, among other things, has links to return the "content" in a list of different formats (GIF, PNG, PS, PDF,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...).  Periodically, the servers get bogged down by search sites hitting them many times per second, trying to get every file in every format.  The worst cases seem to come from microsoft.com and msn.com, though it happens with other search sites, too.  Actually, the first attempts I saw at "deep search" like this came from googlebots around 10 years ago, though they quickly backed off and haven't been a serious problem since then.  MS-origin "attacks" of this sort have been happening every few months, for nearly a decade.</p><p>I've generally handled them with a couple of techniques.  One is to check the logs for successive requests from the same address, and insert sleep() calls with progressively longer sleeps as more messages arrive.  The code prefixes the "content" with a comment explaining what's happening, in case a human investigates.</p><p>Another technique is to look for series of "give me this in all your output formats" requests, verify that it's a search bot, and add the address to a "banned" list of sites that simply get a message explaining why they aren't getting what they asked for, plus an email address if they want to get in contact.  So far nobody at any search site has ever used that address.  I did once get a response from a guy who was studying sites with such multi-format data, for a school project, to see how the various output formats compared in size and information content.  I took his address off the banned list, and suggested that he add a couple-second delay between requests, and he finished his project a few days later.</p><p>I suspect that the googlebot folks may have read my explanation of the delays and added code to spread their requests out over time, since that's what their bots seem to do now.  But I never heard from them.  They must have gotten complaints (and bans) from lots of web sites when they started doing this, so they probably realized quickly that they should add code to prevent such flooding of sites.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As said below , never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity .
( Insert lame joke about MSFT being full of stupidity here ) .Yeah , though this particular sort of stupidity has been going on for a long time , and not just at Microsoft ( though they seem to be the worst culprit ) .I run a couple of sites that , among other things , has links to return the " content " in a list of different formats ( GIF , PNG , PS , PDF , ... ) .
Periodically , the servers get bogged down by search sites hitting them many times per second , trying to get every file in every format .
The worst cases seem to come from microsoft.com and msn.com , though it happens with other search sites , too .
Actually , the first attempts I saw at " deep search " like this came from googlebots around 10 years ago , though they quickly backed off and have n't been a serious problem since then .
MS-origin " attacks " of this sort have been happening every few months , for nearly a decade.I 've generally handled them with a couple of techniques .
One is to check the logs for successive requests from the same address , and insert sleep ( ) calls with progressively longer sleeps as more messages arrive .
The code prefixes the " content " with a comment explaining what 's happening , in case a human investigates.Another technique is to look for series of " give me this in all your output formats " requests , verify that it 's a search bot , and add the address to a " banned " list of sites that simply get a message explaining why they are n't getting what they asked for , plus an email address if they want to get in contact .
So far nobody at any search site has ever used that address .
I did once get a response from a guy who was studying sites with such multi-format data , for a school project , to see how the various output formats compared in size and information content .
I took his address off the banned list , and suggested that he add a couple-second delay between requests , and he finished his project a few days later.I suspect that the googlebot folks may have read my explanation of the delays and added code to spread their requests out over time , since that 's what their bots seem to do now .
But I never heard from them .
They must have gotten complaints ( and bans ) from lots of web sites when they started doing this , so they probably realized quickly that they should add code to prevent such flooding of sites .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As said below, never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.
(Insert lame joke about MSFT being full of stupidity here).Yeah, though this particular sort of stupidity has been going on for a long time, and not just at Microsoft (though they seem to be the worst culprit).I run a couple of sites that, among other things, has links to return the "content" in a list of different formats (GIF, PNG, PS, PDF, ...).
Periodically, the servers get bogged down by search sites hitting them many times per second, trying to get every file in every format.
The worst cases seem to come from microsoft.com and msn.com, though it happens with other search sites, too.
Actually, the first attempts I saw at "deep search" like this came from googlebots around 10 years ago, though they quickly backed off and haven't been a serious problem since then.
MS-origin "attacks" of this sort have been happening every few months, for nearly a decade.I've generally handled them with a couple of techniques.
One is to check the logs for successive requests from the same address, and insert sleep() calls with progressively longer sleeps as more messages arrive.
The code prefixes the "content" with a comment explaining what's happening, in case a human investigates.Another technique is to look for series of "give me this in all your output formats" requests, verify that it's a search bot, and add the address to a "banned" list of sites that simply get a message explaining why they aren't getting what they asked for, plus an email address if they want to get in contact.
So far nobody at any search site has ever used that address.
I did once get a response from a guy who was studying sites with such multi-format data, for a school project, to see how the various output formats compared in size and information content.
I took his address off the banned list, and suggested that he add a couple-second delay between requests, and he finished his project a few days later.I suspect that the googlebot folks may have read my explanation of the delays and added code to spread their requests out over time, since that's what their bots seem to do now.
But I never heard from them.
They must have gotten complaints (and bans) from lots of web sites when they started doing this, so they probably realized quickly that they should add code to prevent such flooding of sites.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807138</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30809698</id>
	<title>Re:Probably just a bug.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263838980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I accidentally did an experiment once on my webserver.  I had no links pointing to a music directory but "just to be sure" I put an exclusion of that directory in my robots.txt file.  Sure enough, microsoft's bot comes along, reads robots.txt, and immediately started reading my music directory!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I accidentally did an experiment once on my webserver .
I had no links pointing to a music directory but " just to be sure " I put an exclusion of that directory in my robots.txt file .
Sure enough , microsoft 's bot comes along , reads robots.txt , and immediately started reading my music directory !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I accidentally did an experiment once on my webserver.
I had no links pointing to a music directory but "just to be sure" I put an exclusion of that directory in my robots.txt file.
Sure enough, microsoft's bot comes along, reads robots.txt, and immediately started reading my music directory!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806982</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30812382</id>
	<title>download locally first and then test indexing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263808140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bing should have used Wget first to download the articles to a local hard drive, and also to add a 2 to 3 second wait.  Let it run over the weekend.  Then test the search indexing algorithms on the local HTML files.  They were probably performing indexing tests.  I know they have smart people working for them, so it probably involved a contractor who didn't think about performance issues.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bing should have used Wget first to download the articles to a local hard drive , and also to add a 2 to 3 second wait .
Let it run over the weekend .
Then test the search indexing algorithms on the local HTML files .
They were probably performing indexing tests .
I know they have smart people working for them , so it probably involved a contractor who did n't think about performance issues .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bing should have used Wget first to download the articles to a local hard drive, and also to add a 2 to 3 second wait.
Let it run over the weekend.
Then test the search indexing algorithms on the local HTML files.
They were probably performing indexing tests.
I know they have smart people working for them, so it probably involved a contractor who didn't think about performance issues.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807034</id>
	<title>Re:Probably just a bug.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263824160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>There is such thing as criminal incomptence. If a script kiddie can be arrested for having a virus "out of control" I don't see why Microsoft engineers DDOSing a website couldn't be charged.<br> <br>By the way a philosopher once told that "evil" did not exist. That it was most of the time just a kind of hidden stupidity.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is such thing as criminal incomptence .
If a script kiddie can be arrested for having a virus " out of control " I do n't see why Microsoft engineers DDOSing a website could n't be charged .
By the way a philosopher once told that " evil " did not exist .
That it was most of the time just a kind of hidden stupidity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is such thing as criminal incomptence.
If a script kiddie can be arrested for having a virus "out of control" I don't see why Microsoft engineers DDOSing a website couldn't be charged.
By the way a philosopher once told that "evil" did not exist.
That it was most of the time just a kind of hidden stupidity.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806910</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807954</id>
	<title>Complain to Upstream Providers</title>
	<author>jchawk</author>
	<datestamp>1263830220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The CPAN folks could complain to their ISP and have them drop the traffic that's coming in to their boxes.</p><p>Most ISP's will work with you to correct DDOS problems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The CPAN folks could complain to their ISP and have them drop the traffic that 's coming in to their boxes.Most ISP 's will work with you to correct DDOS problems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The CPAN folks could complain to their ISP and have them drop the traffic that's coming in to their boxes.Most ISP's will work with you to correct DDOS problems.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807428</id>
	<title>Re:Probably just a bug.</title>
	<author>hairyfeet</author>
	<datestamp>1263827220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But MSFT is a corporation, which thanks to our corporate butt kissing congress and courts can just go "ooopsie", maybe cut a small check at most, and walk away scott free. </p><p>And as for your philosopher? I saw an interview with Joss Whedon on writing evil characters that I thought really hit the nail on the head. He said, and I paraphrase "The villain never sees himself or herself as evil. To them there is a perfectly justifiable reason for their actions. I have known some truly evil people, those that have intentionally hurt their fellow man out of pure malice, and to them their actions were justified and noble. They simply didn't see what they did as wrong."</p><p>

Which is how you get MSFT and Intel paying backroom deals to crush competition, or Jack Trammell and his "business is war" philosophy. To the ones making the decisions "the other guy would do it to us if they could, so why shouldn't we do it to them?". I'm sure that if you talked to Gates or the head of Intel you could never get them to believe that crushing your competition any way you can is wrong. To them that was/is business 101 and not evil. That is why I think Whedon was right, the villain always thinks they are noble.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But MSFT is a corporation , which thanks to our corporate butt kissing congress and courts can just go " ooopsie " , maybe cut a small check at most , and walk away scott free .
And as for your philosopher ?
I saw an interview with Joss Whedon on writing evil characters that I thought really hit the nail on the head .
He said , and I paraphrase " The villain never sees himself or herself as evil .
To them there is a perfectly justifiable reason for their actions .
I have known some truly evil people , those that have intentionally hurt their fellow man out of pure malice , and to them their actions were justified and noble .
They simply did n't see what they did as wrong .
" Which is how you get MSFT and Intel paying backroom deals to crush competition , or Jack Trammell and his " business is war " philosophy .
To the ones making the decisions " the other guy would do it to us if they could , so why should n't we do it to them ? " .
I 'm sure that if you talked to Gates or the head of Intel you could never get them to believe that crushing your competition any way you can is wrong .
To them that was/is business 101 and not evil .
That is why I think Whedon was right , the villain always thinks they are noble .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But MSFT is a corporation, which thanks to our corporate butt kissing congress and courts can just go "ooopsie", maybe cut a small check at most, and walk away scott free.
And as for your philosopher?
I saw an interview with Joss Whedon on writing evil characters that I thought really hit the nail on the head.
He said, and I paraphrase "The villain never sees himself or herself as evil.
To them there is a perfectly justifiable reason for their actions.
I have known some truly evil people, those that have intentionally hurt their fellow man out of pure malice, and to them their actions were justified and noble.
They simply didn't see what they did as wrong.
"

Which is how you get MSFT and Intel paying backroom deals to crush competition, or Jack Trammell and his "business is war" philosophy.
To the ones making the decisions "the other guy would do it to us if they could, so why shouldn't we do it to them?".
I'm sure that if you talked to Gates or the head of Intel you could never get them to believe that crushing your competition any way you can is wrong.
To them that was/is business 101 and not evil.
That is why I think Whedon was right, the villain always thinks they are noble.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807034</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30815428</id>
	<title>Re:Probably just a bug.</title>
	<author>Lotana</author>
	<datestamp>1263828120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If there was a way to mod a comment to +10 Insightful: This post is it.</p><p>Thank you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If there was a way to mod a comment to + 10 Insightful : This post is it.Thank you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If there was a way to mod a comment to +10 Insightful: This post is it.Thank you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807012</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806900</id>
	<title>Check the blog...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263823080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Looks like Microsoft's Bing managers are on it.  They'll make it worse in no-time flat.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>BTW, the difference between a DDOS and a Slashdotting?  You know why your site went down -- you got linked!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Looks like Microsoft 's Bing managers are on it .
They 'll make it worse in no-time flat .
: ) BTW , the difference between a DDOS and a Slashdotting ?
You know why your site went down -- you got linked !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Looks like Microsoft's Bing managers are on it.
They'll make it worse in no-time flat.
:)BTW, the difference between a DDOS and a Slashdotting?
You know why your site went down -- you got linked!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30815272</id>
	<title>Re:MS ineptitude?</title>
	<author>PAjamian</author>
	<datestamp>1263826200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They'll probably be asking specific questions, such as, "can we get a copy of your log entries so we can match the IPs and times to our own logs and see why this is happening?"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 'll probably be asking specific questions , such as , " can we get a copy of your log entries so we can match the IPs and times to our own logs and see why this is happening ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They'll probably be asking specific questions, such as, "can we get a copy of your log entries so we can match the IPs and times to our own logs and see why this is happening?
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30817544</id>
	<title>Here it is!</title>
	<author>LordAzuzu</author>
	<datestamp>1263899820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>Here it is another one from some minutes ago:<br><br>IPv4: 65.55.34.139 -&gt; 83.211.46.34<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; hlen=5 TOS=192 dlen=162 ID=46000 flags=0 offset=0 TTL=0 chksum=7990<br>Payload: Priority Count: 5<br>Connection Count: 6<br>IP Count: 7<br>Scanner IP Range: 78.130.238.2:212.90.12.134<br>Port/Proto Count: 7<br>Port/Proto Range: 80:40210<br><br>65.55.34.139 resolving to col0-omc3-s1.col0.hotmail.com</tt></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here it is another one from some minutes ago : IPv4 : 65.55.34.139 - &gt; 83.211.46.34       hlen = 5 TOS = 192 dlen = 162 ID = 46000 flags = 0 offset = 0 TTL = 0 chksum = 7990Payload : Priority Count : 5Connection Count : 6IP Count : 7Scanner IP Range : 78.130.238.2 : 212.90.12.134Port/Proto Count : 7Port/Proto Range : 80 : 4021065.55.34.139 resolving to col0-omc3-s1.col0.hotmail.com</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here it is another one from some minutes ago:IPv4: 65.55.34.139 -&gt; 83.211.46.34      hlen=5 TOS=192 dlen=162 ID=46000 flags=0 offset=0 TTL=0 chksum=7990Payload: Priority Count: 5Connection Count: 6IP Count: 7Scanner IP Range: 78.130.238.2:212.90.12.134Port/Proto Count: 7Port/Proto Range: 80:4021065.55.34.139 resolving to col0-omc3-s1.col0.hotmail.com</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807084</id>
	<title>Re:Probably just a bug.</title>
	<author>Lundse</author>
	<datestamp>1263824580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's a pretty rough translation!</p><p>You might be able to argue, that the latter saying is a corollary of the former, but in no way do they mean the same.</p><p>Occam says the simplest explanation is best - the better explanation is the one with least assumptions.</p><p>In this case, Occam affords us no help - we already know MS is both "evil" and incompetent. So the two explanations are equal in this regard. The "corollary" suggests, then, something else; namely that stupidity is a better explanation than "evil" in all/most cases (presumably because stupidity is more widespread).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's a pretty rough translation ! You might be able to argue , that the latter saying is a corollary of the former , but in no way do they mean the same.Occam says the simplest explanation is best - the better explanation is the one with least assumptions.In this case , Occam affords us no help - we already know MS is both " evil " and incompetent .
So the two explanations are equal in this regard .
The " corollary " suggests , then , something else ; namely that stupidity is a better explanation than " evil " in all/most cases ( presumably because stupidity is more widespread ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's a pretty rough translation!You might be able to argue, that the latter saying is a corollary of the former, but in no way do they mean the same.Occam says the simplest explanation is best - the better explanation is the one with least assumptions.In this case, Occam affords us no help - we already know MS is both "evil" and incompetent.
So the two explanations are equal in this regard.
The "corollary" suggests, then, something else; namely that stupidity is a better explanation than "evil" in all/most cases (presumably because stupidity is more widespread).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806984</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808642</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>darkpixel2k</author>
	<datestamp>1263834180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Bing?</p></div><p>
Ned?  Ned Ryerson?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bing ?
Ned ? Ned Ryerson ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bing?
Ned?  Ned Ryerson?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806842</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806830</id>
	<title>There's...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263822660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>probably a PERL script to handle that!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>probably a PERL script to handle that !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>probably a PERL script to handle that!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807924</id>
	<title>Re:So how do we DDoS Microsoft?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263830100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"as we need additional information to be able to track down the problem."</p><p>IP addresses aren't enough?  You're MS--if you can't fix the problem and IP addresses are given, damn, that's just sad.  You're freaking massive multi-billion dollar tech companies, and this is the best you can do?</p><p>No wonder Chinese hackers own our asses.</p><p>Then again, it took Comcast 9 months to fix a security hole in customer accounts (which would have required an s to http to make pages SSL'd), and the only reason it was "fixed" was because they did their annual website makeover and changed their entire system to something Flash based.  Then again, I had contacted a VP, VP's security, referred to web security, and talked to web security 3x, talked to a manager.  The last 3 groups verified the problem.  It was referred to their web applications team by that point, who sat on it.</p><p>Lovely world we live in.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" as we need additional information to be able to track down the problem .
" IP addresses are n't enough ?
You 're MS--if you ca n't fix the problem and IP addresses are given , damn , that 's just sad .
You 're freaking massive multi-billion dollar tech companies , and this is the best you can do ? No wonder Chinese hackers own our asses.Then again , it took Comcast 9 months to fix a security hole in customer accounts ( which would have required an s to http to make pages SSL 'd ) , and the only reason it was " fixed " was because they did their annual website makeover and changed their entire system to something Flash based .
Then again , I had contacted a VP , VP 's security , referred to web security , and talked to web security 3x , talked to a manager .
The last 3 groups verified the problem .
It was referred to their web applications team by that point , who sat on it.Lovely world we live in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"as we need additional information to be able to track down the problem.
"IP addresses aren't enough?
You're MS--if you can't fix the problem and IP addresses are given, damn, that's just sad.
You're freaking massive multi-billion dollar tech companies, and this is the best you can do?No wonder Chinese hackers own our asses.Then again, it took Comcast 9 months to fix a security hole in customer accounts (which would have required an s to http to make pages SSL'd), and the only reason it was "fixed" was because they did their annual website makeover and changed their entire system to something Flash based.
Then again, I had contacted a VP, VP's security, referred to web security, and talked to web security 3x, talked to a manager.
The last 3 groups verified the problem.
It was referred to their web applications team by that point, who sat on it.Lovely world we live in.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807138</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807098</id>
	<title>Ask the Chinese to do it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263824700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They know how.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They know how .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They know how.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807006</id>
	<title>Re:Probably just a bug.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263823800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>these bots 'completely ignore the rules specified in robots.txt.'</p></div><p>Microsoft ignoring standards is not incompetence, it's policy (NIH syndrome).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>these bots 'completely ignore the rules specified in robots.txt .
'Microsoft ignoring standards is not incompetence , it 's policy ( NIH syndrome ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>these bots 'completely ignore the rules specified in robots.txt.
'Microsoft ignoring standards is not incompetence, it's policy (NIH syndrome).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806910</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807476</id>
	<title>Send the lost bots home.</title>
	<author>N1ckR</author>
	<datestamp>1263827580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I redirect lost bots home, seems a polite thing to do.

301 www.microsoft.com</htmltext>
<tokenext>I redirect lost bots home , seems a polite thing to do .
301 www.microsoft.com</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I redirect lost bots home, seems a polite thing to do.
301 www.microsoft.com</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807150</id>
	<title>Re:Typical M$</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263825180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's not a troll.  That's common knowledge.</p><p>A more appropriate mod would be +5 Redundant.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's not a troll .
That 's common knowledge.A more appropriate mod would be + 5 Redundant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's not a troll.
That's common knowledge.A more appropriate mod would be +5 Redundant.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806874</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30814830</id>
	<title>Re:Probably just a bug.</title>
	<author>watergeus</author>
	<datestamp>1263822300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"By the way a philosopher once told that "evil" did not exist. That it was most of the time just a kind of hidden stupidity."</p><p>Who was that?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" By the way a philosopher once told that " evil " did not exist .
That it was most of the time just a kind of hidden stupidity .
" Who was that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"By the way a philosopher once told that "evil" did not exist.
That it was most of the time just a kind of hidden stupidity.
"Who was that?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807034</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30810146</id>
	<title>Microsoft being EVIL?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263840900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. (Insert lame joke about MSFT being full of stupidity here)."</i>

<br> <br>Insert true story about Microsoft being EVIL here, sometimes even unintentionally evil.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity .
( Insert lame joke about MSFT being full of stupidity here ) .
" Insert true story about Microsoft being EVIL here , sometimes even unintentionally evil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.
(Insert lame joke about MSFT being full of stupidity here).
"

 Insert true story about Microsoft being EVIL here, sometimes even unintentionally evil.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807138</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30811770</id>
	<title>Re:So how do we DDoS Microsoft?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263805560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's pretty stupid.  He says he needs information from the CPAN site?  He really shouldn't need any more information.  They should be able to download the robots.txt file from CPAN and compare it to their own rules, then catalog what bots are active.  From the sounds of things, the bots don't talk to each other, that's definitely a problem there.<br>Bottom line, Mr. Program Manager, you have all the information you need.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's pretty stupid .
He says he needs information from the CPAN site ?
He really should n't need any more information .
They should be able to download the robots.txt file from CPAN and compare it to their own rules , then catalog what bots are active .
From the sounds of things , the bots do n't talk to each other , that 's definitely a problem there.Bottom line , Mr. Program Manager , you have all the information you need .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's pretty stupid.
He says he needs information from the CPAN site?
He really shouldn't need any more information.
They should be able to download the robots.txt file from CPAN and compare it to their own rules, then catalog what bots are active.
From the sounds of things, the bots don't talk to each other, that's definitely a problem there.Bottom line, Mr. Program Manager, you have all the information you need.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807138</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30813214</id>
	<title>Re:So how do we DDoS Microsoft?</title>
	<author>budgenator</author>
	<datestamp>1263812340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The unobtainable fruit is always thought to be the sweetest.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The unobtainable fruit is always thought to be the sweetest .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The unobtainable fruit is always thought to be the sweetest.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30810476</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824</id>
	<title>So how do we DDoS Microsoft?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263822600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anyone know what sites on Microsoft's front-facing sites are most computationally intensive, and yet always dynamically generated?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone know what sites on Microsoft 's front-facing sites are most computationally intensive , and yet always dynamically generated ?
: D</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone know what sites on Microsoft's front-facing sites are most computationally intensive, and yet always dynamically generated?
:D</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30811178</id>
	<title>Looks like a simple bug to me</title>
	<author>MerlynEmrys67</author>
	<datestamp>1263846060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sadly not microsoft's though.  If I am doing this correctly <a href="http://www.cpan.org/robots.txt" title="cpan.org">Robots.txt</a> [cpan.org] seems to return a 404 error.  Looks like cpan removed their robots.txt file at least from where I am sitting.
<p>
Looking at another <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/robots.txt" title="microsoft.com">Robots.txt</a> [microsoft.com] file seems to return what I expect.
</p><p>
Let no rock remain unthrown when it shows Microsoft is in the wrong - even if they aren't</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sadly not microsoft 's though .
If I am doing this correctly Robots.txt [ cpan.org ] seems to return a 404 error .
Looks like cpan removed their robots.txt file at least from where I am sitting .
Looking at another Robots.txt [ microsoft.com ] file seems to return what I expect .
Let no rock remain unthrown when it shows Microsoft is in the wrong - even if they are n't</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sadly not microsoft's though.
If I am doing this correctly Robots.txt [cpan.org] seems to return a 404 error.
Looks like cpan removed their robots.txt file at least from where I am sitting.
Looking at another Robots.txt [microsoft.com] file seems to return what I expect.
Let no rock remain unthrown when it shows Microsoft is in the wrong - even if they aren't</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806910</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30811186</id>
	<title>Simple solution:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263846060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Add to your<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.htaccess file:</p><p>deny from 65.55.207.<br>deny from 65.55.106.<br>deny from 65.55.107.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Add to your .htaccess file : deny from 65.55.207.deny from 65.55.106.deny from 65.55.107 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Add to your .htaccess file:deny from 65.55.207.deny from 65.55.106.deny from 65.55.107.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807320</id>
	<title>Or both</title>
	<author>cheros</author>
	<datestamp>1263826380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>AFAIK, the one doesn't exclude the other.</p><p>However, assuming evil is more fun<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>AFAIK , the one does n't exclude the other.However , assuming evil is more fun : - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>AFAIK, the one doesn't exclude the other.However, assuming evil is more fun :-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806910</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30810364</id>
	<title>Microsoft just tries to compete with Google</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263841980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I believe soon we will see a new Bing feature - real time results. This will definitely beat Google</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe soon we will see a new Bing feature - real time results .
This will definitely beat Google</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe soon we will see a new Bing feature - real time results.
This will definitely beat Google</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807196</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>ozmanjusri</author>
	<datestamp>1263825600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Why? Bing?</i>
<p>
They have to have SOME activity.

</p><p>
Sounds like there's more traffic from their bots than customers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why ?
Bing ? They have to have SOME activity .
Sounds like there 's more traffic from their bots than customers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why?
Bing?

They have to have SOME activity.
Sounds like there's more traffic from their bots than customers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806842</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30810476</id>
	<title>Re:So how do we DDoS Microsoft?</title>
	<author>dimeglio</author>
	<datestamp>1263842460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That would be Ken(tm), if I recall correctly, G.I. Joe(tm) was not interested in Barbie(tm).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That would be Ken ( tm ) , if I recall correctly , G.I .
Joe ( tm ) was not interested in Barbie ( tm ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That would be Ken(tm), if I recall correctly, G.I.
Joe(tm) was not interested in Barbie(tm).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30826538</id>
	<title>Exploited servers</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1263905400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ya, give them an excuse to get away with it.  "it wasn't us attacking our competition, really"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ya , give them an excuse to get away with it .
" it was n't us attacking our competition , really "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ya, give them an excuse to get away with it.
"it wasn't us attacking our competition, really"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806860</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30811120</id>
	<title>Re:So how do we DDoS Microsoft?</title>
	<author>MikeFM</author>
	<datestamp>1263845760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah I complained about a similar issue with being aggressively scanned by bots that ignored robots.txt and didn't identify themselves with a user-agent and their answer was to first ignore my question and then to almost stop scanning my site altogether. Bing sucks.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah I complained about a similar issue with being aggressively scanned by bots that ignored robots.txt and did n't identify themselves with a user-agent and their answer was to first ignore my question and then to almost stop scanning my site altogether .
Bing sucks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah I complained about a similar issue with being aggressively scanned by bots that ignored robots.txt and didn't identify themselves with a user-agent and their answer was to first ignore my question and then to almost stop scanning my site altogether.
Bing sucks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807138</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806874</id>
	<title>Typical M$</title>
	<author>omb</author>
	<datestamp>1263822900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Lazy, feckless, inconsiderate crooks.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Lazy , feckless , inconsiderate crooks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lazy, feckless, inconsiderate crooks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806842</id>
	<title>Why?</title>
	<author>joel.neely</author>
	<datestamp>1263822660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bing?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bing ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bing?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30847864</id>
	<title>Re:No problem</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264097700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Um... why REJECT?  Better to use DROP. REJECT sends them a rejection notice. DROP just ignores the packet and dumps it in the bit bucket (/dev/null).</p><p>iptables -A INPUT -p all -s 65.55.207.0/24 -j DROP<br>iptables -A INPUT -p all -s 65.55.107.0/24 -j DROP<br>iptables -A INPUT -p all -s 65.55.106.0/24 -j DROP</p><p>Actually, for the last two, maybe iptables -A INPUT -p all -s 65.55.106.0/16 -j DROP, but I'd need someone who is better at iptables than I am to verify that this covers both the 106 and the 107 ranges.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Um... why REJECT ?
Better to use DROP .
REJECT sends them a rejection notice .
DROP just ignores the packet and dumps it in the bit bucket ( /dev/null ) .iptables -A INPUT -p all -s 65.55.207.0/24 -j DROPiptables -A INPUT -p all -s 65.55.107.0/24 -j DROPiptables -A INPUT -p all -s 65.55.106.0/24 -j DROPActually , for the last two , maybe iptables -A INPUT -p all -s 65.55.106.0/16 -j DROP , but I 'd need someone who is better at iptables than I am to verify that this covers both the 106 and the 107 ranges .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um... why REJECT?
Better to use DROP.
REJECT sends them a rejection notice.
DROP just ignores the packet and dumps it in the bit bucket (/dev/null).iptables -A INPUT -p all -s 65.55.207.0/24 -j DROPiptables -A INPUT -p all -s 65.55.107.0/24 -j DROPiptables -A INPUT -p all -s 65.55.106.0/24 -j DROPActually, for the last two, maybe iptables -A INPUT -p all -s 65.55.106.0/16 -j DROP, but I'd need someone who is better at iptables than I am to verify that this covers both the 106 and the 107 ranges.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807868</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807218</id>
	<title>Re:So how do we DDoS Microsoft?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263825720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As much spam as I get from ir@infousa.com , I wish that someone would DDOS that damned company. If I knew of a way to get extra spam to ir@infousa.com I would probably do it so that company could get a taste of its own medicine. ir@infousa.com sent me unsolicited spam and it drives me nuts. Thanks for nothing, ir@infousa.com . It makes me want to call the company at (402)593-4500 and complain, but I don't have time. I guess I'll email them at ir@infousa.com instead. maybe.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As much spam as I get from ir @ infousa.com , I wish that someone would DDOS that damned company .
If I knew of a way to get extra spam to ir @ infousa.com I would probably do it so that company could get a taste of its own medicine .
ir @ infousa.com sent me unsolicited spam and it drives me nuts .
Thanks for nothing , ir @ infousa.com .
It makes me want to call the company at ( 402 ) 593-4500 and complain , but I do n't have time .
I guess I 'll email them at ir @ infousa.com instead .
maybe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As much spam as I get from ir@infousa.com , I wish that someone would DDOS that damned company.
If I knew of a way to get extra spam to ir@infousa.com I would probably do it so that company could get a taste of its own medicine.
ir@infousa.com sent me unsolicited spam and it drives me nuts.
Thanks for nothing, ir@infousa.com .
It makes me want to call the company at (402)593-4500 and complain, but I don't have time.
I guess I'll email them at ir@infousa.com instead.
maybe.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808444</id>
	<title>Re:So how do we DDoS Microsoft?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263832920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.</p></div><p>Too true. But keep in mind that stupid actions increase everyone's risk of getting damaged, while malevolent actions are generally dangerous only to the target.

</p><p>Car analogy: If you are not his target, you are safer facing a vengeful man with a gun than if you are a bystander in the path of a speeding Hummer driven by stupidity.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.Too true .
But keep in mind that stupid actions increase everyone 's risk of getting damaged , while malevolent actions are generally dangerous only to the target .
Car analogy : If you are not his target , you are safer facing a vengeful man with a gun than if you are a bystander in the path of a speeding Hummer driven by stupidity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.Too true.
But keep in mind that stupid actions increase everyone's risk of getting damaged, while malevolent actions are generally dangerous only to the target.
Car analogy: If you are not his target, you are safer facing a vengeful man with a gun than if you are a bystander in the path of a speeding Hummer driven by stupidity.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807138</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808118</id>
	<title>Aggresive MS Bot</title>
	<author>badevlad</author>
	<datestamp>1263831120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah, in statistics of my site Microsoft bots are most active visitors. Really, they crawl site hundreds times more often than Googlebot.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , in statistics of my site Microsoft bots are most active visitors .
Really , they crawl site hundreds times more often than Googlebot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, in statistics of my site Microsoft bots are most active visitors.
Really, they crawl site hundreds times more often than Googlebot.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30825504</id>
	<title>Re:You've been Bing'ed</title>
	<author>Macrat</author>
	<datestamp>1263899940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Bing<br>
<br>
<br>
Bing</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bing Bing</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bing


Bing</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807138</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807376</id>
	<title>What the hell has become of the word "problem"?</title>
	<author>John Hasler</author>
	<datestamp>1263826740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...issues accessing their sites...</p><p>"Issues"?  What's wrong with "problem"?  "Issues" is marketing-speak.  Microsoft marketing-speak.</p><p>And yes, get off my lawn.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; ...issues accessing their sites... " Issues " ?
What 's wrong with " problem " ?
" Issues " is marketing-speak .
Microsoft marketing-speak.And yes , get off my lawn .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; ...issues accessing their sites..."Issues"?
What's wrong with "problem"?
"Issues" is marketing-speak.
Microsoft marketing-speak.And yes, get off my lawn.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808492</id>
	<title>IP Spoofing</title>
	<author>jkantola</author>
	<datestamp>1263833220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How's it possible that, on Slashdot of all sites, *I*, of all people, need to tell you that IP packets do not necessarily come from the address inscribed in their headers?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How 's it possible that , on Slashdot of all sites , * I * , of all people , need to tell you that IP packets do not necessarily come from the address inscribed in their headers ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How's it possible that, on Slashdot of all sites, *I*, of all people, need to tell you that IP packets do not necessarily come from the address inscribed in their headers?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808420</id>
	<title>Re:So how do we DDoS Microsoft?</title>
	<author>Alpha830RulZ</author>
	<datestamp>1263832800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know, it's easy to poke fun at the Microsofty, but is it possible that he was just trying to find out what was being hit so that he could figure out who in his organization he should contact?  Maybe there is some uber technical way he could have figured this out, or maybe he should have RTFB, but his response sounded well intentioned and responsive.  What would you prefer?  The microsoft of old?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know , it 's easy to poke fun at the Microsofty , but is it possible that he was just trying to find out what was being hit so that he could figure out who in his organization he should contact ?
Maybe there is some uber technical way he could have figured this out , or maybe he should have RTFB , but his response sounded well intentioned and responsive .
What would you prefer ?
The microsoft of old ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know, it's easy to poke fun at the Microsofty, but is it possible that he was just trying to find out what was being hit so that he could figure out who in his organization he should contact?
Maybe there is some uber technical way he could have figured this out, or maybe he should have RTFB, but his response sounded well intentioned and responsive.
What would you prefer?
The microsoft of old?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807138</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30813582</id>
	<title>Re:So how do we DDoS Microsoft?</title>
	<author>Fzz</author>
	<datestamp>1263814140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><ul>
<li>Step 1. Turn on HTTP Compression on your server (msnbot supports it).</li>

<li>Step 2. Write a little cgi script that checks if the agent is msnbot, and if so for every image on your web site, returns a really really large file of zeros.  It wont cost you any bandwidth because gzip will compress all the zeros to very little for transmission.</li>

<li>Step 3. Invest in shares of Seagate and Western Digital.  Short Microsoft.</li>

<li>Step 4. Profit!</li>
</ul></htmltext>
<tokenext>Step 1 .
Turn on HTTP Compression on your server ( msnbot supports it ) .
Step 2 .
Write a little cgi script that checks if the agent is msnbot , and if so for every image on your web site , returns a really really large file of zeros .
It wont cost you any bandwidth because gzip will compress all the zeros to very little for transmission .
Step 3 .
Invest in shares of Seagate and Western Digital .
Short Microsoft .
Step 4 .
Profit !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Step 1.
Turn on HTTP Compression on your server (msnbot supports it).
Step 2.
Write a little cgi script that checks if the agent is msnbot, and if so for every image on your web site, returns a really really large file of zeros.
It wont cost you any bandwidth because gzip will compress all the zeros to very little for transmission.
Step 3.
Invest in shares of Seagate and Western Digital.
Short Microsoft.
Step 4.
Profit!
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806908</id>
	<title>Re:So how do we DDoS Microsoft?</title>
	<author>SharpFang</author>
	<datestamp>1263823140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, we just make mistakes writing our Perl programs for automatic downloading stuff from MSDN. Like, download() unless success, and forget to set success=true;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , we just make mistakes writing our Perl programs for automatic downloading stuff from MSDN .
Like , download ( ) unless success , and forget to set success = true ;</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, we just make mistakes writing our Perl programs for automatic downloading stuff from MSDN.
Like, download() unless success, and forget to set success=true;</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30811162</id>
	<title>Re:DDoS? Really?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263845940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What do you mean you can't stop a DDoS with a simple regex? Ever tried<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.* ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What do you mean you ca n't stop a DDoS with a simple regex ?
Ever tried .
* ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What do you mean you can't stop a DDoS with a simple regex?
Ever tried .
* ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807666</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30813176</id>
	<title>Re:So how do we DDoS Microsoft?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263812220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey, great, sexism.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey , great , sexism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey, great, sexism.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30815872</id>
	<title>Re:So how do we DDoS Microsoft?</title>
	<author>fm6</author>
	<datestamp>1263832860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.</p></div><p>You'll pry my conspiracy theory from my cold dead hands!!!!!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.You 'll pry my conspiracy theory from my cold dead hands ! ! ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.You'll pry my conspiracy theory from my cold dead hands!!!!
!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807138</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30811590</id>
	<title>Re:So how do we DDoS Microsoft?</title>
	<author>gbjbaanb</author>
	<datestamp>1263847800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>IP addresses aren't enough? You're MS--if you can't fix the problem and IP addresses are given, damn, that's just sad. You're freaking massive multi-billion dollar tech companies, and this is the best you can do?</i></p><p>I've seen and used Vista. The answer to your question is "yes".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IP addresses are n't enough ?
You 're MS--if you ca n't fix the problem and IP addresses are given , damn , that 's just sad .
You 're freaking massive multi-billion dollar tech companies , and this is the best you can do ? I 've seen and used Vista .
The answer to your question is " yes " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IP addresses aren't enough?
You're MS--if you can't fix the problem and IP addresses are given, damn, that's just sad.
You're freaking massive multi-billion dollar tech companies, and this is the best you can do?I've seen and used Vista.
The answer to your question is "yes".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808224</id>
	<title>Re:So how do we DDoS Microsoft?</title>
	<author>Short Circuit</author>
	<datestamp>1263831780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A quick guess? Identifying unique sites by domain name, rather than by IP address, and either the bot or server not respecting HTTP 301 redirects.</p><p>With Rosetta Code, I once had www.rosettacode.org serving up the same content as rosettacode.org.  My server got pounded by two bots from Yahoo. I could set Crawl-Delay, but it was only partially effective; One bot had been assigned to www.rosttacode.org, while another to rosettacode.org, and they were each keeping track of their request delay independently. I've since corrected things such that www.rosettacode.org returns an HTTP 301 redirect to rosettacode.org, and have was eventually able to remove the Crawl-Delay entirely.</p><p>I've since worked towards only serving up content for any particular part of the site on a single domain name, and have subdomains such as "wiki.rosettacode.org" redirect to "rosettacode.org/wiki", and "blog.rosettacode.org" to "rosettacode.org/blog". Works rather nice, though it does leave me a bit more open to cookie theft attacks.</p><p>YMMV; As I said, that was a quick guess.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A quick guess ?
Identifying unique sites by domain name , rather than by IP address , and either the bot or server not respecting HTTP 301 redirects.With Rosetta Code , I once had www.rosettacode.org serving up the same content as rosettacode.org .
My server got pounded by two bots from Yahoo .
I could set Crawl-Delay , but it was only partially effective ; One bot had been assigned to www.rosttacode.org , while another to rosettacode.org , and they were each keeping track of their request delay independently .
I 've since corrected things such that www.rosettacode.org returns an HTTP 301 redirect to rosettacode.org , and have was eventually able to remove the Crawl-Delay entirely.I 've since worked towards only serving up content for any particular part of the site on a single domain name , and have subdomains such as " wiki.rosettacode.org " redirect to " rosettacode.org/wiki " , and " blog.rosettacode.org " to " rosettacode.org/blog " .
Works rather nice , though it does leave me a bit more open to cookie theft attacks.YMMV ; As I said , that was a quick guess .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A quick guess?
Identifying unique sites by domain name, rather than by IP address, and either the bot or server not respecting HTTP 301 redirects.With Rosetta Code, I once had www.rosettacode.org serving up the same content as rosettacode.org.
My server got pounded by two bots from Yahoo.
I could set Crawl-Delay, but it was only partially effective; One bot had been assigned to www.rosttacode.org, while another to rosettacode.org, and they were each keeping track of their request delay independently.
I've since corrected things such that www.rosettacode.org returns an HTTP 301 redirect to rosettacode.org, and have was eventually able to remove the Crawl-Delay entirely.I've since worked towards only serving up content for any particular part of the site on a single domain name, and have subdomains such as "wiki.rosettacode.org" redirect to "rosettacode.org/wiki", and "blog.rosettacode.org" to "rosettacode.org/blog".
Works rather nice, though it does leave me a bit more open to cookie theft attacks.YMMV; As I said, that was a quick guess.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807138</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806910</id>
	<title>Probably just a bug.</title>
	<author>tjstork</author>
	<datestamp>1263823140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know everyone likes to assume that Microsoft is being evil here, but wouldn't the more realistic assumption be that they were just being incompetent?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know everyone likes to assume that Microsoft is being evil here , but would n't the more realistic assumption be that they were just being incompetent ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know everyone likes to assume that Microsoft is being evil here, but wouldn't the more realistic assumption be that they were just being incompetent?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30810944</id>
	<title>Hanlon's Razor</title>
	<author>PPH</author>
	<datestamp>1263844800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808752</id>
	<title>hello?  firewall?</title>
	<author>v1</author>
	<datestamp>1263834900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>if it's a scan (TCP established stream, taxing the SERVERS, not the NETWORK) that's the problem, as opposed to a SYN flood etc, and the IP addresses are in a very small range, why aren't they just using a hardware firewall at the router and blocking the IPs?  There's not a whole lot to "distributed" when it's coming from a pair of C's.</p><p>Not saying they should be DOING it, but this is not a Denial of Service, it's a Denial of Stupid.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>if it 's a scan ( TCP established stream , taxing the SERVERS , not the NETWORK ) that 's the problem , as opposed to a SYN flood etc , and the IP addresses are in a very small range , why are n't they just using a hardware firewall at the router and blocking the IPs ?
There 's not a whole lot to " distributed " when it 's coming from a pair of C 's.Not saying they should be DOING it , but this is not a Denial of Service , it 's a Denial of Stupid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if it's a scan (TCP established stream, taxing the SERVERS, not the NETWORK) that's the problem, as opposed to a SYN flood etc, and the IP addresses are in a very small range, why aren't they just using a hardware firewall at the router and blocking the IPs?
There's not a whole lot to "distributed" when it's coming from a pair of C's.Not saying they should be DOING it, but this is not a Denial of Service, it's a Denial of Stupid.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808012</id>
	<title>Re:So how do we DDoS Microsoft?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263830580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Whatever, normally I'd be on the side opposite Microsoft here but the Perl guys have some serious karma issues. Let's not forget that Perl has enabled and/or encouraged the creation of some of the worst code ever written in the software industry. I have seen more sloppy code written in Perl than any other language, by far. Because its the language of sloppy, lazy programmers.</p><p>So, really, the Perl guys deserve to be on the receiving end of some shitty code for once.</p><p>I am positive that on this website, some angry Perl coders will mod me into oblivion (even though I only speak the truth). Hence AC.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Whatever , normally I 'd be on the side opposite Microsoft here but the Perl guys have some serious karma issues .
Let 's not forget that Perl has enabled and/or encouraged the creation of some of the worst code ever written in the software industry .
I have seen more sloppy code written in Perl than any other language , by far .
Because its the language of sloppy , lazy programmers.So , really , the Perl guys deserve to be on the receiving end of some shitty code for once.I am positive that on this website , some angry Perl coders will mod me into oblivion ( even though I only speak the truth ) .
Hence AC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whatever, normally I'd be on the side opposite Microsoft here but the Perl guys have some serious karma issues.
Let's not forget that Perl has enabled and/or encouraged the creation of some of the worst code ever written in the software industry.
I have seen more sloppy code written in Perl than any other language, by far.
Because its the language of sloppy, lazy programmers.So, really, the Perl guys deserve to be on the receiving end of some shitty code for once.I am positive that on this website, some angry Perl coders will mod me into oblivion (even though I only speak the truth).
Hence AC.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30811740</id>
	<title>Re:MS ineptitude?</title>
	<author>gbjbaanb</author>
	<datestamp>1263805380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wonder if it has something to do with fixing <a href="http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2010/01/microsoft-outlines-plan-to-improve-bings-slow-indexing.ars" title="arstechnica.com">this</a> [arstechnica.com]</p><p><i>We asked Microsoft how it was planning improve Bing's indexing problem. "We're always working to improve the crawler," a Microsoft spokesperson told Ars. "With our latest crawler release still in beta, we doubled our crawling capacity worldwide. We increased our sitemap URL size to 50K and we made it easier for webmasters to control the crawler's aggressiveness." </i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder if it has something to do with fixing this [ arstechnica.com ] We asked Microsoft how it was planning improve Bing 's indexing problem .
" We 're always working to improve the crawler , " a Microsoft spokesperson told Ars .
" With our latest crawler release still in beta , we doubled our crawling capacity worldwide .
We increased our sitemap URL size to 50K and we made it easier for webmasters to control the crawler 's aggressiveness .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder if it has something to do with fixing this [arstechnica.com]We asked Microsoft how it was planning improve Bing's indexing problem.
"We're always working to improve the crawler," a Microsoft spokesperson told Ars.
"With our latest crawler release still in beta, we doubled our crawling capacity worldwide.
We increased our sitemap URL size to 50K and we made it easier for webmasters to control the crawler's aggressiveness.
" </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806840</id>
	<title>The end is near</title>
	<author>Jorl17</author>
	<datestamp>1263822660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Run, Microsoft is coming to get you!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Run , Microsoft is coming to get you !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Run, Microsoft is coming to get you!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808298</id>
	<title>Re:What the hell has become of the word "problem"?</title>
	<author>FerociousFerret</author>
	<datestamp>1263832140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It depends on where you stand in the scenario.</p><p>In this case, for Microsoft, who is not directly affected, it's an <b>issue</b>.  For CPAN, it's a <b>problem</b>.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It depends on where you stand in the scenario.In this case , for Microsoft , who is not directly affected , it 's an issue .
For CPAN , it 's a problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It depends on where you stand in the scenario.In this case, for Microsoft, who is not directly affected, it's an issue.
For CPAN, it's a problem.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807376</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30815330</id>
	<title>robots.txt</title>
	<author>petit\_robert</author>
	<datestamp>1263826740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't see any requests for Robots.txt in my logs. It's always lower case<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:<br>

65.55.106.138 - - [19/Jan/2010:01:00:46 +0100] "GET<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/robots.txt HTTP/1.1" 200 30 "-" "msnbot/2.0b (+http://search.msn.com/msnbot.htm)"</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't see any requests for Robots.txt in my logs .
It 's always lower case : 65.55.106.138 - - [ 19/Jan/2010 : 01 : 00 : 46 + 0100 ] " GET /robots.txt HTTP/1.1 " 200 30 " - " " msnbot/2.0b ( + http : //search.msn.com/msnbot.htm ) "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't see any requests for Robots.txt in my logs.
It's always lower case :

65.55.106.138 - - [19/Jan/2010:01:00:46 +0100] "GET /robots.txt HTTP/1.1" 200 30 "-" "msnbot/2.0b (+http://search.msn.com/msnbot.htm)"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30809590</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30809590</id>
	<title>Re:MS ineptitude?</title>
	<author>ShecoDu</author>
	<datestamp>1263838440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I remember reading that the MSNBOT reads the "Robots.txt" file, but cpantesters has a lowercase filename:</p><p><a href="http://static.cpantesters.org/robots.txt" title="cpantesters.org">http://static.cpantesters.org/robots.txt</a> [cpantesters.org]</p><p><a href="http://static.cpantesters.org/Robots.txt" title="cpantesters.org">http://static.cpantesters.org/Robots.txt</a> [cpantesters.org] doesn't exist, so basically MSNBOT only respects the robots.txt on case insensitive operating systems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember reading that the MSNBOT reads the " Robots.txt " file , but cpantesters has a lowercase filename : http : //static.cpantesters.org/robots.txt [ cpantesters.org ] http : //static.cpantesters.org/Robots.txt [ cpantesters.org ] does n't exist , so basically MSNBOT only respects the robots.txt on case insensitive operating systems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember reading that the MSNBOT reads the "Robots.txt" file, but cpantesters has a lowercase filename:http://static.cpantesters.org/robots.txt [cpantesters.org]http://static.cpantesters.org/Robots.txt [cpantesters.org] doesn't exist, so basically MSNBOT only respects the robots.txt on case insensitive operating systems.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807138</id>
	<title>Re:So how do we DDoS Microsoft?</title>
	<author>jlp2097</author>
	<datestamp>1263825060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not necessary. A Bing Product Manager has already commented on the <a href="http://blogs.perl.org/users/cpan\_testers/2010/01/msnbot-must-die.html" title="perl.org">CPAN Testers blog entry</a> [perl.org] upon which the article is based:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Hi,<br>I am a Program Manager on the Bing team at Microsoft, thanks for bringing this issue to our attention. I have sent an email to barbie@cpan.org as we need additional information to be able to track down the problem. If you have not received the email please contact us through the Bing webmaster center at bwmc@microsoft.com.</p></div><p>As said below, never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. (Insert lame joke about MSFT being full of stupidity here).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not necessary .
A Bing Product Manager has already commented on the CPAN Testers blog entry [ perl.org ] upon which the article is based : Hi,I am a Program Manager on the Bing team at Microsoft , thanks for bringing this issue to our attention .
I have sent an email to barbie @ cpan.org as we need additional information to be able to track down the problem .
If you have not received the email please contact us through the Bing webmaster center at bwmc @ microsoft.com.As said below , never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity .
( Insert lame joke about MSFT being full of stupidity here ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not necessary.
A Bing Product Manager has already commented on the CPAN Testers blog entry [perl.org] upon which the article is based:Hi,I am a Program Manager on the Bing team at Microsoft, thanks for bringing this issue to our attention.
I have sent an email to barbie@cpan.org as we need additional information to be able to track down the problem.
If you have not received the email please contact us through the Bing webmaster center at bwmc@microsoft.com.As said below, never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.
(Insert lame joke about MSFT being full of stupidity here).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30818346</id>
	<title>Re:What the hell has become of the word "problem"?</title>
	<author>bipbop</author>
	<datestamp>1263910800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You can draw that distinction, if you like; but the word "issue" in this sense dates from the 14th century legal term "issue", and was used in this way long before you were born.  See here for a discussion of different uses of the word: <a href="http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2009/06/28/the\_issue\_with\_issues/" title="boston.com">The Issue with Issues</a> [boston.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>You can draw that distinction , if you like ; but the word " issue " in this sense dates from the 14th century legal term " issue " , and was used in this way long before you were born .
See here for a discussion of different uses of the word : The Issue with Issues [ boston.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can draw that distinction, if you like; but the word "issue" in this sense dates from the 14th century legal term "issue", and was used in this way long before you were born.
See here for a discussion of different uses of the word: The Issue with Issues [boston.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807376</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30810924</id>
	<title>bing is written in perl</title>
	<author>bingoUV</author>
	<datestamp>1263844740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Got it! Bing is written in perl. They do regular expression matching while crawling and forgot to have a \E<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... \Q escape sequence for the regex matching. They got so much perl code on CPAN, full of special characters, that somehow the crawler engine went into an infinite loop.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Got it !
Bing is written in perl .
They do regular expression matching while crawling and forgot to have a \ E ... \ Q escape sequence for the regex matching .
They got so much perl code on CPAN , full of special characters , that somehow the crawler engine went into an infinite loop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Got it!
Bing is written in perl.
They do regular expression matching while crawling and forgot to have a \E ... \Q escape sequence for the regex matching.
They got so much perl code on CPAN, full of special characters, that somehow the crawler engine went into an infinite loop.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30816060</id>
	<title>Re:MS ineptitude?</title>
	<author>Fnord666</author>
	<datestamp>1263834960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I remember reading that the MSNBOT reads the "Robots.txt" file, but cpantesters has a lowercase filename:</p></div>
</blockquote><p>

This is not likely to be the cause.  In the article the author states that "It seems their bots completely ignore the rules specified in the robots.txt," and that "I know this because I can see the IP addresses in the logs. ", one would have to assume that cpantesters have reviewed their logs and that they would have noticed if robots.txt was not being returned.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember reading that the MSNBOT reads the " Robots.txt " file , but cpantesters has a lowercase filename : This is not likely to be the cause .
In the article the author states that " It seems their bots completely ignore the rules specified in the robots.txt , " and that " I know this because I can see the IP addresses in the logs .
" , one would have to assume that cpantesters have reviewed their logs and that they would have noticed if robots.txt was not being returned .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember reading that the MSNBOT reads the "Robots.txt" file, but cpantesters has a lowercase filename:


This is not likely to be the cause.
In the article the author states that "It seems their bots completely ignore the rules specified in the robots.txt," and that "I know this because I can see the IP addresses in the logs.
", one would have to assume that cpantesters have reviewed their logs and that they would have noticed if robots.txt was not being returned.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30809590</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806984</id>
	<title>Re:Probably just a bug.</title>
	<author>mspohr</author>
	<datestamp>1263823560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Occam's razor (or Ockham's razor[1]), entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem, is the principle that "entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity" and the conclusion thereof, that the simplest explanation or strategy tends to be the best one.<p>
Rough translation: "Never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Occam 's razor ( or Ockham 's razor [ 1 ] ) , entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem , is the principle that " entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity " and the conclusion thereof , that the simplest explanation or strategy tends to be the best one .
Rough translation : " Never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Occam's razor (or Ockham's razor[1]), entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem, is the principle that "entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity" and the conclusion thereof, that the simplest explanation or strategy tends to be the best one.
Rough translation: "Never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806910</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808540</id>
	<title>Re:So how do we DDoS Microsoft?</title>
	<author>Jarjarthejedi</author>
	<datestamp>1263833460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's not uncommon at all, ever hear of a bug report? Different systems/setups exist everywhere, it's impossible to test your system on all of them, just the most common and wait to hear from people with oddball systems and problems.</p><p>Different system's doesn't really apply but what if the site's robots.txt is slightly different (different newlines or something) which is causing an unforeseen error?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's not uncommon at all , ever hear of a bug report ?
Different systems/setups exist everywhere , it 's impossible to test your system on all of them , just the most common and wait to hear from people with oddball systems and problems.Different system 's does n't really apply but what if the site 's robots.txt is slightly different ( different newlines or something ) which is causing an unforeseen error ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's not uncommon at all, ever hear of a bug report?
Different systems/setups exist everywhere, it's impossible to test your system on all of them, just the most common and wait to hear from people with oddball systems and problems.Different system's doesn't really apply but what if the site's robots.txt is slightly different (different newlines or something) which is causing an unforeseen error?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807640</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807666</id>
	<title>DDoS? Really?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263828780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm pretty sure the first "D" in DDoS stands for "Distributed."  <br> <br>If it was really a DDoS, you wouldn't be able to filter the IP out with a simple regex (like the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/^65\.55\.(106|107|207)/. from TFA).<br>
<br>To boot, TFA didn't even say DDoS.  Maybe that's too much to expect the editors to oh... I don't know...say... RTFA or Fact-Check it?<br> <br>I should drop my bar a bit, I suppose.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm pretty sure the first " D " in DDoS stands for " Distributed .
" If it was really a DDoS , you would n't be able to filter the IP out with a simple regex ( like the / ^ 65 \ .55 \ . ( 106 | 107 | 207 ) / .
from TFA ) .
To boot , TFA did n't even say DDoS .
Maybe that 's too much to expect the editors to oh... I do n't know...say... RTFA or Fact-Check it ?
I should drop my bar a bit , I suppose .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm pretty sure the first "D" in DDoS stands for "Distributed.
"   If it was really a DDoS, you wouldn't be able to filter the IP out with a simple regex (like the /^65\.55\.(106|107|207)/.
from TFA).
To boot, TFA didn't even say DDoS.
Maybe that's too much to expect the editors to oh... I don't know...say... RTFA or Fact-Check it?
I should drop my bar a bit, I suppose.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807188</id>
	<title>Incompetent?</title>
	<author>omb</author>
	<datestamp>1263825480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, Evil more so</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , Evil more so</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, Evil more so</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806910</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30815642</id>
	<title>CPAN webserver broken</title>
	<author>lpq</author>
	<datestamp>1263830700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The spec for robots.txt says that strings matched internally in the text file should be done in a case insensitive manner.</p><p>It would only make sense for a "reasonable person" to assume" that any web fetches for a file name for 'robots.txt' should also match in a case insensitive manner.</p><p>This sounds like Microsoft being used to Uppercasing the first letter of words -- which looks aesthetically pleasing, and not having it make any real difference on 70\% of the computers on the planet (running Microsoft) and (in my experience, on most webservers running apache).  Never noticed any case sensitivity.</p><p>This looks like a case of the perl guys being at fault.  They likely have a web-server written in perl and DIDn't do a case ignore when processing requests for 'robots.txt'.  This violates the intent if not the letter of the spec.</p><p>Check out <a href="http://www.robotstxt.org/orig.html" title="robotstxt.org">http://www.robotstxt.org/orig.html</a> [robotstxt.org].  It specifies that all of its strings should be matched in a case insensitive manner.  IT doesn't explicitly say that the filename 'robots.txt' should also be matched by the webserver, in a case insensitive manner, but if if specifies that all of the web-addresses in the file should be handled in a case-insensitive manner, doesn't it makes sense that the file name it-self should also be case insensitive?</p><p>People should use a little common sense before going off and blaming microsoft for doing something that is perfection natural and perfectly understandable, while the supposed victims should be a bit more robust in the design of the web server.</p><p>At least, that's how it appears to me -- anyone care to show me a sound reasoning why it should be otherwise or why one would expect otherwise?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The spec for robots.txt says that strings matched internally in the text file should be done in a case insensitive manner.It would only make sense for a " reasonable person " to assume " that any web fetches for a file name for 'robots.txt ' should also match in a case insensitive manner.This sounds like Microsoft being used to Uppercasing the first letter of words -- which looks aesthetically pleasing , and not having it make any real difference on 70 \ % of the computers on the planet ( running Microsoft ) and ( in my experience , on most webservers running apache ) .
Never noticed any case sensitivity.This looks like a case of the perl guys being at fault .
They likely have a web-server written in perl and DID n't do a case ignore when processing requests for 'robots.txt' .
This violates the intent if not the letter of the spec.Check out http : //www.robotstxt.org/orig.html [ robotstxt.org ] .
It specifies that all of its strings should be matched in a case insensitive manner .
IT does n't explicitly say that the filename 'robots.txt ' should also be matched by the webserver , in a case insensitive manner , but if if specifies that all of the web-addresses in the file should be handled in a case-insensitive manner , does n't it makes sense that the file name it-self should also be case insensitive ? People should use a little common sense before going off and blaming microsoft for doing something that is perfection natural and perfectly understandable , while the supposed victims should be a bit more robust in the design of the web server.At least , that 's how it appears to me -- anyone care to show me a sound reasoning why it should be otherwise or why one would expect otherwise ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The spec for robots.txt says that strings matched internally in the text file should be done in a case insensitive manner.It would only make sense for a "reasonable person" to assume" that any web fetches for a file name for 'robots.txt' should also match in a case insensitive manner.This sounds like Microsoft being used to Uppercasing the first letter of words -- which looks aesthetically pleasing, and not having it make any real difference on 70\% of the computers on the planet (running Microsoft) and (in my experience, on most webservers running apache).
Never noticed any case sensitivity.This looks like a case of the perl guys being at fault.
They likely have a web-server written in perl and DIDn't do a case ignore when processing requests for 'robots.txt'.
This violates the intent if not the letter of the spec.Check out http://www.robotstxt.org/orig.html [robotstxt.org].
It specifies that all of its strings should be matched in a case insensitive manner.
IT doesn't explicitly say that the filename 'robots.txt' should also be matched by the webserver, in a case insensitive manner, but if if specifies that all of the web-addresses in the file should be handled in a case-insensitive manner, doesn't it makes sense that the file name it-self should also be case insensitive?People should use a little common sense before going off and blaming microsoft for doing something that is perfection natural and perfectly understandable, while the supposed victims should be a bit more robust in the design of the web server.At least, that's how it appears to me -- anyone care to show me a sound reasoning why it should be otherwise or why one would expect otherwise?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30809590</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808288</id>
	<title>Re:Probably just a bug.</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1263832080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The most realistic thing to do, would be to not make <em>any</em> stupid assumptions at all, about things that you know nothing about.</p><p>But who cares for actualy facts, nowadays, right? As long as you strongly prescribe to a side... &ldquo;doesn&rsquo;t matter which, as long as it&rsquo;s mine!&rdquo;<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...you&rsquo;re good. Right.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p><p>This world depresses me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The most realistic thing to do , would be to not make any stupid assumptions at all , about things that you know nothing about.But who cares for actualy facts , nowadays , right ?
As long as you strongly prescribe to a side...    doesn    t matter which , as long as it    s mine !    ...you    re good .
Right. : ( This world depresses me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The most realistic thing to do, would be to not make any stupid assumptions at all, about things that you know nothing about.But who cares for actualy facts, nowadays, right?
As long as you strongly prescribe to a side... “doesn’t matter which, as long as it’s mine!” ...you’re good.
Right. :(This world depresses me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806910</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806906</id>
	<title>MS ineptitude?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263823140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From TFA:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Hi,<br>I am a Program Manager on the Bing team at Microsoft, thanks for bringing this issue to our attention. I have sent an email to nospam@example.com as we need additional information to be able to track down the problem. If you have not received the email please contact us through the Bing webmaster center at nospam@example.com.</p></div><p>I mean, what additional information is needed wrt "respecting robots.txt" and "not letting loose more than one bot on a site at a time"?</p><p>Bing. Meh.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From TFA : Hi,I am a Program Manager on the Bing team at Microsoft , thanks for bringing this issue to our attention .
I have sent an email to nospam @ example.com as we need additional information to be able to track down the problem .
If you have not received the email please contact us through the Bing webmaster center at nospam @ example.com.I mean , what additional information is needed wrt " respecting robots.txt " and " not letting loose more than one bot on a site at a time " ? Bing .
Meh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From TFA:Hi,I am a Program Manager on the Bing team at Microsoft, thanks for bringing this issue to our attention.
I have sent an email to nospam@example.com as we need additional information to be able to track down the problem.
If you have not received the email please contact us through the Bing webmaster center at nospam@example.com.I mean, what additional information is needed wrt "respecting robots.txt" and "not letting loose more than one bot on a site at a time"?Bing.
Meh.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808246</id>
	<title>Re:So how do we DDoS Microsoft?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1263831900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>As said below, never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.</p></div><p>Must be really easy to just beat you in the face, and say &ldquo;Ooops, I&rsquo;m sorry, I&rsquo;m so st00pid! *drool*&rdquo;<br>I call bullshit on that rule.</p><p>My rule: Don&rsquo;t make judgements at all (either way), about things that you just don&rsquo;t know.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As said below , never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.Must be really easy to just beat you in the face , and say    Ooops , I    m sorry , I    m so st00pid !
* drool *    I call bullshit on that rule.My rule : Don    t make judgements at all ( either way ) , about things that you just don    t know .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As said below, never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.Must be really easy to just beat you in the face, and say “Ooops, I’m sorry, I’m so st00pid!
*drool*”I call bullshit on that rule.My rule: Don’t make judgements at all (either way), about things that you just don’t know.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807138</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808190</id>
	<title>Re:So how do we DDoS Microsoft?</title>
	<author>WinterSolstice</author>
	<datestamp>1263831600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, your statement works better with 'INSERT LANG HERE'...</p><p>I'm always surprised by how people seem to think that any language has a monopoly of some sort on sloppy and/or lazy coders. Been doing IT a long time, and the one thing that never changes is the sloppy/lazy code issue. It even predates programming, you know - look at infrastructure around the world for examples of "just toss something out there, hope it works".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , your statement works better with 'INSERT LANG HERE'...I 'm always surprised by how people seem to think that any language has a monopoly of some sort on sloppy and/or lazy coders .
Been doing IT a long time , and the one thing that never changes is the sloppy/lazy code issue .
It even predates programming , you know - look at infrastructure around the world for examples of " just toss something out there , hope it works " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, your statement works better with 'INSERT LANG HERE'...I'm always surprised by how people seem to think that any language has a monopoly of some sort on sloppy and/or lazy coders.
Been doing IT a long time, and the one thing that never changes is the sloppy/lazy code issue.
It even predates programming, you know - look at infrastructure around the world for examples of "just toss something out there, hope it works".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808012</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30809000</id>
	<title>Re:Oh! *Literally* Microsoft bots!</title>
	<author>Trailer Trash</author>
	<datestamp>1263835920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Until I read the summary I thought it was another article about windows botnets and was wondering why the "microsoft" was tacked on since windows is the default OS assumption.</p></div></blockquote><p>I'm not sure these are mutually exclusive.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Until I read the summary I thought it was another article about windows botnets and was wondering why the " microsoft " was tacked on since windows is the default OS assumption.I 'm not sure these are mutually exclusive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Until I read the summary I thought it was another article about windows botnets and was wondering why the "microsoft" was tacked on since windows is the default OS assumption.I'm not sure these are mutually exclusive.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806854</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807468</id>
	<title>Re:Probably just a bug.</title>
	<author>CrazyDuke</author>
	<datestamp>1263827520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Something that bugs me about that statement:  Out of curiosity, since when does a lack of evidence amount to an adequate explanation?</p><p>And, also, how does malicious incompetence fall under that false dichotomy? Or, for that matter, what of reckless incompetence and plausible dependability?</p><p>Oh, and for the record:  Experience tells me such an outcome is often the result of a PHB or two and a few "I don't give a fuck anymore." engineers.  It's fun to dismiss PHBs as merely incompetent.  But, what they are competent in is convincing people their actions warrant promotion, regardless of the actual results of their actions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Something that bugs me about that statement : Out of curiosity , since when does a lack of evidence amount to an adequate explanation ? And , also , how does malicious incompetence fall under that false dichotomy ?
Or , for that matter , what of reckless incompetence and plausible dependability ? Oh , and for the record : Experience tells me such an outcome is often the result of a PHB or two and a few " I do n't give a fuck anymore .
" engineers .
It 's fun to dismiss PHBs as merely incompetent .
But , what they are competent in is convincing people their actions warrant promotion , regardless of the actual results of their actions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Something that bugs me about that statement:  Out of curiosity, since when does a lack of evidence amount to an adequate explanation?And, also, how does malicious incompetence fall under that false dichotomy?
Or, for that matter, what of reckless incompetence and plausible dependability?Oh, and for the record:  Experience tells me such an outcome is often the result of a PHB or two and a few "I don't give a fuck anymore.
" engineers.
It's fun to dismiss PHBs as merely incompetent.
But, what they are competent in is convincing people their actions warrant promotion, regardless of the actual results of their actions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806984</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808684</id>
	<title>Re:So how do we DDoS Microsoft?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263834420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If he was trying to find out what was going on, he was doing it wrong. The CPAN blog probably gives all the information the guys at CPAN have. As outsiders, they probably don't know which department at Microsoft is running those bots. Except that we all can guess at Bing because that is the Microsoft search engine.</p><p>As a Microsoft manager in that situation, I'd try to reach someone in Bing network administration first. That someone might not have the tools or network privileges to track down the offending bots himself, but should at least be able to direct the call to the right people.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If he was trying to find out what was going on , he was doing it wrong .
The CPAN blog probably gives all the information the guys at CPAN have .
As outsiders , they probably do n't know which department at Microsoft is running those bots .
Except that we all can guess at Bing because that is the Microsoft search engine.As a Microsoft manager in that situation , I 'd try to reach someone in Bing network administration first .
That someone might not have the tools or network privileges to track down the offending bots himself , but should at least be able to direct the call to the right people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If he was trying to find out what was going on, he was doing it wrong.
The CPAN blog probably gives all the information the guys at CPAN have.
As outsiders, they probably don't know which department at Microsoft is running those bots.
Except that we all can guess at Bing because that is the Microsoft search engine.As a Microsoft manager in that situation, I'd try to reach someone in Bing network administration first.
That someone might not have the tools or network privileges to track down the offending bots himself, but should at least be able to direct the call to the right people.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808420</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30812364</id>
	<title>Re:Probably just a bug.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263808080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The argument:</p><p>"the other guy would do it to us if they could, so why shouldn't we do it to them?"</p><p>can be invalidated by citing examples of humans who did not "do it" to anyone, when they had the power to.</p><p>Bishop Tutu: "But the process of forgiveness also requires acknowledgement on the part of the perpetrator that they have committed an offence." <a href="http://www.writespirit.net/authors/desmond\_tutu/desmond-tutu-on-forgiveness" title="writespirit.net" rel="nofollow"> http://www.writespirit.net/authors/desmond\_tutu/desmond-tutu-on-forgiveness</a> [writespirit.net]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The argument : " the other guy would do it to us if they could , so why should n't we do it to them ?
" can be invalidated by citing examples of humans who did not " do it " to anyone , when they had the power to.Bishop Tutu : " But the process of forgiveness also requires acknowledgement on the part of the perpetrator that they have committed an offence .
" http : //www.writespirit.net/authors/desmond \ _tutu/desmond-tutu-on-forgiveness [ writespirit.net ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The argument:"the other guy would do it to us if they could, so why shouldn't we do it to them?
"can be invalidated by citing examples of humans who did not "do it" to anyone, when they had the power to.Bishop Tutu: "But the process of forgiveness also requires acknowledgement on the part of the perpetrator that they have committed an offence.
"  http://www.writespirit.net/authors/desmond\_tutu/desmond-tutu-on-forgiveness [writespirit.net]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807428</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806858</id>
	<title>Testers blog link...</title>
	<author>flyingfsck</author>
	<datestamp>1263822780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sooooo, lets all go to the testers blog and DDOS that too.

Dumbass...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sooooo , lets all go to the testers blog and DDOS that too .
Dumbass.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sooooo, lets all go to the testers blog and DDOS that too.
Dumbass...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807224</id>
	<title>Re:So how do we DDoS Microsoft?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263825720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, with Barbie(TM) on the case, this should be quickly resolved (unless she's too busy with G.I.Joe(TM))</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , with Barbie ( TM ) on the case , this should be quickly resolved ( unless she 's too busy with G.I.Joe ( TM ) )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, with Barbie(TM) on the case, this should be quickly resolved (unless she's too busy with G.I.Joe(TM))</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807138</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807434</id>
	<title>Re:So how do we DDoS Microsoft?</title>
	<author>PetoskeyGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1263827280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why make things worse?  Block the ip address or range and notify the admins. This isn't a chan mob.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why make things worse ?
Block the ip address or range and notify the admins .
This is n't a chan mob .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why make things worse?
Block the ip address or range and notify the admins.
This isn't a chan mob.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808772</id>
	<title>I was just noticing this...</title>
	<author>faedle</author>
	<datestamp>1263835020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow, this article is prescient.</p><p>I was just noticing in my web logs that small, out of the way sites that I host that used to get 1,000 hits a month were suddenly getting 1,000 hits PER DAY.  Sure enough, anybody care to guess what netblock the 26,000 hits came from?</p><p>Microsoft.com just earned a ban.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , this article is prescient.I was just noticing in my web logs that small , out of the way sites that I host that used to get 1,000 hits a month were suddenly getting 1,000 hits PER DAY .
Sure enough , anybody care to guess what netblock the 26,000 hits came from ? Microsoft.com just earned a ban .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, this article is prescient.I was just noticing in my web logs that small, out of the way sites that I host that used to get 1,000 hits a month were suddenly getting 1,000 hits PER DAY.
Sure enough, anybody care to guess what netblock the 26,000 hits came from?Microsoft.com just earned a ban.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30809304</id>
	<title>Re:Probably just a bug.</title>
	<author>Silverlock</author>
	<datestamp>1263837180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not terrorism if you have a flag and it's not computer theft if you have a brand name.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not terrorism if you have a flag and it 's not computer theft if you have a brand name .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not terrorism if you have a flag and it's not computer theft if you have a brand name.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807034</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30814952</id>
	<title>Re:MS ineptitude?</title>
	<author>godless dave</author>
	<datestamp>1263823200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I mean, what additional information is needed wrt "respecting robots.txt" and "not letting loose more than one bot on a site at a time"?</p></div></blockquote><p>

To begin with, you would probably have to explain what robots.txt is.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean , what additional information is needed wrt " respecting robots.txt " and " not letting loose more than one bot on a site at a time " ?
To begin with , you would probably have to explain what robots.txt is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean, what additional information is needed wrt "respecting robots.txt" and "not letting loose more than one bot on a site at a time"?
To begin with, you would probably have to explain what robots.txt is.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807182</id>
	<title>Re:Probably just a bug.</title>
	<author>init-five</author>
	<datestamp>1263825480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I know everyone likes to assume that Microsoft is being evil here, but wouldn't the more realistic assumption be that they were just being incompetent?</p></div><p>how about both?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I know everyone likes to assume that Microsoft is being evil here , but would n't the more realistic assumption be that they were just being incompetent ? how about both ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know everyone likes to assume that Microsoft is being evil here, but wouldn't the more realistic assumption be that they were just being incompetent?how about both?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806910</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806884</id>
	<title>Re:So how do we DDoS Microsoft?</title>
	<author>Lennie</author>
	<datestamp>1263822960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>http://blogs.msdn.com/<br><br>I've seen it fail many times</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //blogs.msdn.com/I 've seen it fail many times</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://blogs.msdn.com/I've seen it fail many times</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808114</id>
	<title>Re:So how do we DDoS Microsoft?</title>
	<author>Penguinisto</author>
	<datestamp>1263831120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>As said below, never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. (Insert lame joke about MSFT being full of stupidity here).</p></div><p>Given the back-story on the whole <a href="http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2009/10/t-mobile-microsoftdanger-data-loss-is-bad-for-the-cloud.ars" title="arstechnica.com">Danger data loss affair</a> [arstechnica.com], stupidity is the FIRST thing I'd ascribe to Microsoft these days...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As said below , never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity .
( Insert lame joke about MSFT being full of stupidity here ) .Given the back-story on the whole Danger data loss affair [ arstechnica.com ] , stupidity is the FIRST thing I 'd ascribe to Microsoft these days.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As said below, never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.
(Insert lame joke about MSFT being full of stupidity here).Given the back-story on the whole Danger data loss affair [arstechnica.com], stupidity is the FIRST thing I'd ascribe to Microsoft these days...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807138</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806982</id>
	<title>Re:Probably just a bug.</title>
	<author>fish waffle</author>
	<datestamp>1263823560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I know everyone likes to assume that Microsoft is being evil here, but wouldn't the more realistic assumption be that they were just being incompetent?</i> </p><p>Probably.  But since incompetence is the plausible deniability of evil it's sometimes hard to tell.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know everyone likes to assume that Microsoft is being evil here , but would n't the more realistic assumption be that they were just being incompetent ?
Probably. But since incompetence is the plausible deniability of evil it 's sometimes hard to tell .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know everyone likes to assume that Microsoft is being evil here, but wouldn't the more realistic assumption be that they were just being incompetent?
Probably.  But since incompetence is the plausible deniability of evil it's sometimes hard to tell.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806910</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807664</id>
	<title>Re:Check the blog...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263828780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They're not "on it." They admitted they were powerless to solve their own problems without help from their victims.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're not " on it .
" They admitted they were powerless to solve their own problems without help from their victims .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're not "on it.
" They admitted they were powerless to solve their own problems without help from their victims.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806900</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806860</id>
	<title>I've seen it before</title>
	<author>LordAzuzu</author>
	<datestamp>1263822840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I manage some networks in my home city in Italy, and in the past year I've often seen strange traffic coming from some of their IP addresses.
Guess they have been exploited by someone long time ago, and didn't even notice it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I manage some networks in my home city in Italy , and in the past year I 've often seen strange traffic coming from some of their IP addresses .
Guess they have been exploited by someone long time ago , and did n't even notice it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I manage some networks in my home city in Italy, and in the past year I've often seen strange traffic coming from some of their IP addresses.
Guess they have been exploited by someone long time ago, and didn't even notice it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807640</id>
	<title>Re:So how do we DDoS Microsoft?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263828720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thank you MS for admitting to the world that you're completely incapable of fixing the problem on your own. How horrible are your employees at their jobs when they require the assistance of their victims to fix the problem?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thank you MS for admitting to the world that you 're completely incapable of fixing the problem on your own .
How horrible are your employees at their jobs when they require the assistance of their victims to fix the problem ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thank you MS for admitting to the world that you're completely incapable of fixing the problem on your own.
How horrible are your employees at their jobs when they require the assistance of their victims to fix the problem?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807138</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806904</id>
	<title>What's not?</title>
	<author>tjstork</author>
	<datestamp>1263823080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not like ASP.NET is the most efficient way to sling web pages to being with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not like ASP.NET is the most efficient way to sling web pages to being with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not like ASP.NET is the most efficient way to sling web pages to being with.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30816012</id>
	<title>Re:IP Spoofing</title>
	<author>Fnord666</author>
	<datestamp>1263834480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>How's it possible that, on Slashdot of all sites, *I*, of all people, need to tell you that IP packets do not necessarily come from the address inscribed in their headers?</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Maybe it's because most people here know how TCP works?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How 's it possible that , on Slashdot of all sites , * I * , of all people , need to tell you that IP packets do not necessarily come from the address inscribed in their headers ?
Maybe it 's because most people here know how TCP works ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How's it possible that, on Slashdot of all sites, *I*, of all people, need to tell you that IP packets do not necessarily come from the address inscribed in their headers?
Maybe it's because most people here know how TCP works?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808492</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30819338</id>
	<title>Re:So how do we DDoS Microsoft?</title>
	<author>bcrowell</author>
	<datestamp>1263917340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I run a couple of sites that, among other things, has links to return the "content" in a list of different formats (GIF, PNG, PS, PDF,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...). Periodically, the servers get bogged down by search sites hitting them many times per second, trying to get every file in every format.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
I've had sort of a similar issue, not with bots but with things known as "download managers" <a href="http://www.internetdownloadmanager.com/" title="internetdo...anager.com">(example)</a> [internetdo...anager.com] Apparently people install a plugin in IE that is supposed to make their downloads go faster. If I'm understanding correctly, it opens up multiple http connections in order to retrieve the same file. I suspect it's basically snake oil. I suppose it might help in cases where the bottleneck isn't your own ISP but the overloaded server on the other end, although then you'd essentially be screwing the other users on the site in order to get more than your fair share. My site has a lot of books that are in the form of large PDF files. I'll get these users hitting my site, and it utterly brings my server to its knees. My apache logs show these people using up 50 Mb worth of data flow in order to download a 5 Mb pdf file. The only solution I've been able to find is to write a perl script that goes through my logs every 15 min looking for this pattern of usage. When it detects it, it writes to the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.htaccess file to block that IP.
</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I run a couple of sites that , among other things , has links to return the " content " in a list of different formats ( GIF , PNG , PS , PDF , ... ) .
Periodically , the servers get bogged down by search sites hitting them many times per second , trying to get every file in every format .
I 've had sort of a similar issue , not with bots but with things known as " download managers " ( example ) [ internetdo...anager.com ] Apparently people install a plugin in IE that is supposed to make their downloads go faster .
If I 'm understanding correctly , it opens up multiple http connections in order to retrieve the same file .
I suspect it 's basically snake oil .
I suppose it might help in cases where the bottleneck is n't your own ISP but the overloaded server on the other end , although then you 'd essentially be screwing the other users on the site in order to get more than your fair share .
My site has a lot of books that are in the form of large PDF files .
I 'll get these users hitting my site , and it utterly brings my server to its knees .
My apache logs show these people using up 50 Mb worth of data flow in order to download a 5 Mb pdf file .
The only solution I 've been able to find is to write a perl script that goes through my logs every 15 min looking for this pattern of usage .
When it detects it , it writes to the .htaccess file to block that IP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I run a couple of sites that, among other things, has links to return the "content" in a list of different formats (GIF, PNG, PS, PDF, ...).
Periodically, the servers get bogged down by search sites hitting them many times per second, trying to get every file in every format.
I've had sort of a similar issue, not with bots but with things known as "download managers" (example) [internetdo...anager.com] Apparently people install a plugin in IE that is supposed to make their downloads go faster.
If I'm understanding correctly, it opens up multiple http connections in order to retrieve the same file.
I suspect it's basically snake oil.
I suppose it might help in cases where the bottleneck isn't your own ISP but the overloaded server on the other end, although then you'd essentially be screwing the other users on the site in order to get more than your fair share.
My site has a lot of books that are in the form of large PDF files.
I'll get these users hitting my site, and it utterly brings my server to its knees.
My apache logs show these people using up 50 Mb worth of data flow in order to download a 5 Mb pdf file.
The only solution I've been able to find is to write a perl script that goes through my logs every 15 min looking for this pattern of usage.
When it detects it, it writes to the .htaccess file to block that IP.

	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808346</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30816166</id>
	<title>Re:Probably just a bug.</title>
	<author>aralin</author>
	<datestamp>1263836700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There should be a way to mark posts as favorite or submit to hall of fame of comments or something. This comment spot on describes my relationship with Microsoft during the last 14 years.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There should be a way to mark posts as favorite or submit to hall of fame of comments or something .
This comment spot on describes my relationship with Microsoft during the last 14 years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There should be a way to mark posts as favorite or submit to hall of fame of comments or something.
This comment spot on describes my relationship with Microsoft during the last 14 years.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807012</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30810476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30813214
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806984
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807468
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807098
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807034
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30809304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30811178
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30810146
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30816166
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808114
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807320
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806904
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30847864
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807218
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807150
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808346
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30819338
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806984
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807084
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30809590
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30815642
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807932
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808444
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806860
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808324
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806860
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30826538
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30809590
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30815330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808224
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30812070
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808190
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30814952
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30811770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806900
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807664
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30811740
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808420
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808684
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808642
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807640
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808540
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30811590
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807434
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807376
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808298
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808246
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30809778
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807324
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807182
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30813176
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808412
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30816644
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30834110
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807006
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807666
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30811162
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30809590
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30816060
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30810378
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30809000
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30815272
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808744
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806884
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30809698
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807376
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30818346
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30816012
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30815872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30811120
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807034
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30814830
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807034
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30812364
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30813582
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807188
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30825504
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807196
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_18_0749208_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30815428
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0749208.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806842
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808642
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807196
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0749208.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807666
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30811162
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0749208.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806830
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0749208.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806824
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807098
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807138
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807640
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808540
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808114
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30825504
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807924
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30811590
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30816644
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30834110
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808346
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30819338
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808224
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808420
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808684
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30811770
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30811120
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807224
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30813176
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30810476
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30813214
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30815872
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808444
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30810146
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808246
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30809778
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807218
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30810378
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30813582
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806884
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806904
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807434
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806908
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808012
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808190
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0749208.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808468
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0749208.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806906
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30811740
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30809590
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30815642
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30816060
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30815330
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30814952
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30815272
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0749208.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806858
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0749208.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806900
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807664
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0749208.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806854
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30809000
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0749208.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807868
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30847864
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0749208.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807380
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808412
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0749208.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806874
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30812070
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807150
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0749208.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807376
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30818346
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808298
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0749208.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806860
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30826538
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808324
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0749208.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808492
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808744
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30816012
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0749208.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807476
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_18_0749208.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806910
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806982
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30809698
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807182
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30808288
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807932
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807012
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30816166
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30815428
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807034
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807428
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30812364
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30809304
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30814830
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30811178
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30806984
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807468
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807084
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807006
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807188
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807320
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_18_0749208.30807324
</commentlist>
</conversation>
