Does A Pentium 4 Need A Weapons License? 766
WindBourne writes "It appears to be that the U.S. house of Reps. want to classify Pentium 4 and above CPUs as weapons. This would mean that all these will require export licenses. Apparently, they have not heard about that the far east has developed large CPUs as well that are used in beowulf clusters." According to the article, this clause is unlikely to appear in the final version -- but stranger things have happened.
I tought... (Score:4, Interesting)
new? (Score:4, Interesting)
Playstation 2 anyone? (Score:3, Interesting)
How? (Score:5, Interesting)
Plant location (Score:3, Interesting)
Export Licensing is a Joke ! (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:How would this help? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:It's about time they catch up (Score:5, Interesting)
Ill concieved (Score:5, Interesting)
Anyone determined to launch a missile, develop a weapons program, or design a new figher jet, is going to get their hands on computing power and software very easily. All that will end up happening is exports will be stifled as Joe bloggs in RougeStateistan won't fork over cash to US companies to pay for that PC he wanted so he could send email, browse the web and type up documents. Instead he'll give it to a european or russian company.
You can see the reason for this. The Pentagon is annoyed that foreign governments are using clusters to build supercomputers. Which means that they could start snooping on Pentagon comms instead of the other way around.
Obviously someone dropped a line like, "Terrorists use Computers to build a-bombs", in the House of Representatives caffeteria. Cue the assembled polititions nodding in agreement and shuffling off to draft a law to "protect the free world".
Just before lunch was the best time to drop this as their next meal was only seconds away. They still can't think past it!
That was funny in 1999. (Score:1, Interesting)
"When the 3.2 GHz Prescott was overclocked to 3.57 GHz, the temperature of the Shuttle power supply hit 94 degrees Celsius, which killed it." -- TheInq
http://www.sfftech.com/showdocs.cfm?aid=494&pid= 1845
Re:Tech required for building a nuke (Score:5, Interesting)
1. Obtaining the materials. Uranium is very difficult and expensive to refine. The US has done their best to keep their process for refining out of foreign hands, but someone with a large enough industrial infrastructure could figure it out. One reason why third world countries have to steal U235 is because they lack the necessary infrastructure.
2. The only way to know if a bomb will fission properly (i.e. it will blow up and not just very hot) is to test it. This tends to show up on lots of spy satellites, seismic detection equipment, and radiation monitors. Thus enemies are generally prevented from completing any bomb they might be developing. The only known shortcut to this procedure is to use a computer to simulate the bomb. If the simulator results look good, they know they have a good chance that their bomb would work correctly during a live conflict.
Remember, the biggest trick for third world and terrorists parties is to keep the weapon secret. It's somewhat difficult to stop after you've used it, but if people hear of it ahead of time you're program (and possibly you) is dead.
Re:How would this help? (Score:5, Interesting)
1. US government make silly rules.
2. I start import/export co.
3. ???
4. Profit.
Cheers.
Re:Tech required for building a nuke (Score:4, Interesting)
Correction, number 1 is only a real problem for anyone who would actually USE an ABomb in today's world. Larger countries (who are capable of developing an ABomb) certainly wouldn't be looking to tangle with the US's HBomb and Neutron bomb arsenal.
for number 2 they just do the test, at a target... If it fails, it is still a dirty bomb, if it suceeds, well then they blew up a city...
Believe it or not, the US is not a primary target for terrorists who get nukes. Most terrorist organizations want us out of the way because we help Israel. If they actually DID acquire a nuke, then they'd want to use it on the Israelis. The only downside is that a nuke that fizzled would only anger Israel and produce the combined force of Israel, the US, and many European powers against the perpetrator.
If fact, a failed nuclear detonation on US soil would inspire extraordinary amounts of fear, a long the lines of "what if it works next time...?".
For a 3rd world nation, a sucessful test is exactly what they want, a big sign that says "don't fuck with us, we got the bomb".
Because they can already see that the US is going to roll over and let them keep "their bomb".
HELL NO! We'd nuke their sorry asses (bomb and all) out of existence before we allowed a credible threat to US soil. Geez, what do we look like over here? Children who are afraid of being spanked with a rod? Hell, I'd be the first in line to sign up for war if we had a real nuclear threat pointed our way!
Re:I tought... (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm sitting in my office, and the mail guy comes around, dropping a package on my desk. It's the latest version of Checkpoint Firewall-1, which includes a VPN. It's got a big huge sticker on the outside stating that it is illegal to ship this package to an outside country without whatever the exemption is that needs to take place, yadda yadda yadda. But guess where it was shipped from? Ramat Gan, Israel, sent DHL Worldwide Express.
Nuclear weopons development?? (Score:3, Interesting)
The computing power available to the US when we developed the hydrogen bomb was considerably less than what was available on a desktop even twenty years ago, so to consider fast or advanced processors to be nuclear weapons development technology seems a trifle absurd.
This article [gwu.edu] may demonstrate that these congressmen's fears may be justified, but it also demonstrates just how absurd the notion of controlling proliferation through limiting technology is. There's no need for a Pentium-IV (or even a computer) to develop nuclear weapons, and attempting to control the spread of computer technology through this kind of lawmaking is misguided and likely doomed to failure.
Re:Tech required for building a nuke (Score:3, Interesting)
HELL NO! We'd nuke their sorry asses (bomb and all) out of existence before we allowed a credible threat to US soil. Geez, what do we look like over here? Children who are afraid of being spanked with a rod? Hell, I'd be the first in line to sign up for war if we had a real nuclear threat pointed our way!
Pack your bags - N Korea has a nuke or three and the missiles to send them as far as Seattle. Did we invade them? No, we went after a third world pissant who was stabilizing his country.
Re:Tech required for building a nuke (Score:4, Interesting)
Obtaining the materials is easy. I for instance just drive over to Gera-Leumnitz (it's on the Autobahn between me and my parents) and dig in the hills there. If someone wants to see an Uranium mine from close, I may direct you
And the process itself is not that difficult. It's just very, very slow. Take any industry grade centrifuge (one to process dairy milk will do), coat it with something which doesn't get solved in Hydrofluorid (HF) (like porcellain, gold), solve the Uranium in HF to get UF6 (Uraniumhexafluorid) and start centrifuging. Because the weight difference between 235U and 238U is quite small (1%), it takes a very long time to enrich 238U, but it can be done. Everything else is patience.
Re:Tech required for building a nuke (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Tech required for building a nuke (Score:4, Interesting)
Absolutely nothing. Dirty bombs are primarily scare tactics. They're actual ability as a tactical weapon has been highly overrated. Here's a good write-up for you [llnl.gov].
Re:Tech required for building a nuke (Score:3, Interesting)
I think we're agreeing now. Someone who's just posturing does not yet pose a threat serious enough to start a war. Someone who pulls the trigger (or is in the process of pulling the trigger) with an intent to kill DOES pose a threat. It's kind of nice being on the side who can make glass parking lots, though...
Re:Tech required for building a nuke (Score:4, Interesting)
Any terrorist who gets ahold of a bomb had to have help from a patron Nation. Any such patron would get glassed.
Re:Tech required for building a nuke (Score:3, Interesting)
Oh? Suppose it does work. Then just how to you propose to figure out who "they" are, beyond a reasonable doubt? And if you do figure out who "they" are, how do you make an iron clad case that they have been sponsored at all? And most of all, iron clad case or not, how do you propose to "explain" that the US has destroyed a substantial part of some nation in response for what some criminal element (even if that includes the government, presumably in great secrecy so the citizens would not know it) has perpetrated?
Re:I tought... (Score:2, Interesting)
P4s are WMDs (Score:2, Interesting)
Anyone out there want to give a terrorist more ways to kill us?
Oh, wait, the terrorist would just smuggle them out of the country, through one of those wide open borders we have to Mexico, Canada, the coastlines, etc.
And he might steal them, instead of buying them, circumventing the tracking system companies have in place for proscribed exports.
Or get a job as a clerk at Fryes, and buy bunches at an employee discount.
So all this law does is slow down the law-abiding people and businesses, adding to our paperwork load, and undoubtedly increasing our taxes to pay for policing these WMDs, and catch the dumb crooks and dumb terrorists.
Leaving the market for WMD CPUs wide open for the Mafia and smart terrorists.
Great
Give the mafia something to export and make big profits off of, that drug sniffing dogs cannot smell.
This stinks.
AMD = better, and made in Germany (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm guessing the almighty demi-god Dubya will be forced to launch a pre-emptive first strike against Germany to destroy the AMD factories, and prevent the chance for the Germans to take a third stab at world domination in less than 100 years.
AMD! choice of der next Furher! zig hail!
Personally I think Dubya just wants to make some money exporting those crappy 1st generation P4's that totally sucked. By making them appear fobidden, they will be more desirable.
Makes sense (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:it's a flaw in the constitution (Score:3, Interesting)
What you're looking for is Article 1, Section 8, Clause 2 of the US Constitution [house.gov]
If you give politicians the power to borrow money eventually _SOMEONE_ will have to pay it back. It's like appointing the head of the Neighborhood Watch Program and then giving him the power to borrow money on the credit of the entire neighborhood. Does it sound like a recipe for disaster? I think so.
The debt was racked up by the many wars that we've undergone here in the US. In the Civil War the northern military had to borrow quite a bit of money in order to pay the soldiers. This money was happily lent to them by the northern bank conglomerates who were the driving interest behind the Civil War. In reality it had nothing to do with the morality of slave auctions, the slave trade, or human rights. The Civil War was about the _definition_ of slavery. The northern banks wanted very badly for every southern accounting ledger and business transaction to be made with _THEIR_ currency. Consequently they were happy to loan their currency to the northern army. Since the credit of the government, at the time, was backed by good solid gold the interest rates on these loans were probably reasonable. The government could afford to pay back the loan at any time by dumping a mound of gold into the banks who held the loans. The banks, of course, didn't want the gold. They wanted the business. They couldn't raise the interest rate through the roof because, if they did, the loan would simply be repaid and the business would be gone.
In the early 1900s the United States began to slip off of the gold standard. This made the situation far easier for the banks to exploit. I believe it was 1916 that the US formally exited the gold standard and sold out to the Federal Reserve. This was just in time for WW-I. Massive funding was needed for WW-I and the banks were only too happy to extend the credit. This time, however, the banks knew that the government could not repay the loan. The government had already put its gold in the banking pawn shop. This put the power in the hands of the banks. The government needed the money but had no real equity or credit left so the banks were free to adjust interest rates as they saw fit. What do you suppose happens when the lender is free to adjust or modify repayment terms at a whim?
I imagine, through some legal or accounting magic, that the US government was close to repaying the entire debt by 1929. If I remember my history studies well enough the stock market had boomed much like the
WW-II, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iraq again. It's all the same phenomenon. The banks control the credit rating of the USA. The USA needs money to fund these huge operations. The banks control the repayment plan. Our politicians have the legal authority to sign any loan and use our hard work as the backing equity.
There's little wonder that taxes keep going up.
Re:Tech required for building a nuke (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:it's a flaw in the constitution (Score:4, Interesting)
Thus, instead of electing people, they should all be apointed and forced to serve at the point of a gun.
Re:it's a flaw in the constitution (Score:2, Interesting)
You hit on a lot of high points, good post there, because I can see it's ad hoc. The Fed was created as a non governmental private central banking system in 1913, and it *barely* passed. They had to use the normal way they pass highly questionable things, wait for an opportune moment when people are distracted, then rush it through. happens all the time. Now they are even slicker, they have some huge whopper bill, named the "be kind to small dogs and children and in defense of apple pie act" and in the middle of it buried will be all this hideous stuff, so you can't be "against it" or you are a..whatever, bad person.
J.P. Morgan and a lot of his rich drinking buddies had executed a serious of paper money shuffles leading to currency runs, up to the panic of 07. This was done on purpose to scare people,plus they got to do a lot of punmp and dump in the markets, but it wasn't enough, greedy people by nature just get more greedy. so, they thunked up this scheme to satisfy that grteed, that insane lust, and to force the government into making them the grand poobahs of "money", so they could..well... rule then. Rule. Whomever controls the cash is the real authority, they dictate what REALLY happens. This political scene we have now is mostly psychodrama, it doesn't represent what really happens or who calls the shots, it's to keep people dumbed down and thinking they have any say in matters. The vote was right before christmas congressional vacation with not many voting on it, just the insiders who stood to profit the most from it, I forget now how many but very few. It was ridiculous. Wilson signed it anyway, because they threatened him with more artifical currency runs, leading to..bad news stuff.. The scheme to do this was concocted at a meeting at Jekyll Island Georgia by a handful of wealthy bakers and industrialists, including europaen bankers, who to this day still have a significant control over "our" fed and our government through both stock holdings and by literal marriage and kinship into the various banking establishments known as the Fed. The Fed was instructed they could only create "additional" debt notes to "loan" with interest, if they had at least 40% in gold to back them with. There has NEVER been an audit of the federal reserve 12 private bank consortiums vaults.
And yada yada, a lot of congames ever since, until finally NoXoN took us completely off any sort of real money economic system, in exchange for the combination of using debt as money-strike one, keynesian creation of artifical debt on a whim-strike two, and globalisation, which basically means centralise the capital in fewer hands all the time as you lie about it-strike three, you're out, they win. It's nuts. Makes a relatively few people though just wealthy beyond imagination, wealthy and powerful.
I wish more people would read about the creation of the Federal Reserve, and the IRS. We might have some serious constructive change for the better. Maybe anyway. Maybe not, people are afraid to say no, just brainwshed since birth to be servile and complacent. You are allowed to bitch about stuff, but that's it. You get to "vote" for congame supporter A or B, and if you don't, you are "wasting your vote
Re:Tech required for building a nuke (Score:3, Interesting)
1/ He didn't have the technology
2/ He didn't have the materials, imaginary Niger Uranium notwithstanding
3/ As a secular state in the middle east, with a Christian as second in command, extremist Islamic crazies hated him more than they hated the USA.
Nasty guy, nasty state but problably not stupid enough to give those that wanted his head on a plate a nuclear bomb.
Even North Korea is not stupid enough to do something like that, why give away your bargaining power?