Slashdot Mirror


Sensor Networks for NBC Threats

Nerdsville writes "Planet Analog have an article describing research into a nationwide sensor network that could provide a real-time early-warning system for chemical, biological and nuclear threats across the US. Researchers plan to use microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) and nanotechnology to create accurate biological and chemical sensors. Linked in an Internet-like peer-to-peer network spanning wireless, wired and satellite links."

251 comments

  1. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1, Funny

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  2. NBC threats? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Like that godawful Will and Grace show?

    1. Re:NBC threats? by SWTP_OS9 · · Score: 1

      Had to read the title three times!

      Could not figure out what NBC had done to prmote terror beyond there normal stuff!

    2. Re:NBC threats? by Igmuth · · Score: 1

      Well at least I'm not the only one who thought the title was about television...

  3. P2P? by faaaz · · Score: 3, Funny

    A P2P network eh? Now what are the xxAA going to bash, when they can't claim P2P is evil?

    --
    we come in peace / shoot to kill
    1. Re:P2P? by tlovie · · Score: 1, Funny

      I thought that all P2P networks were used for illegal activities.

    2. Re:P2P? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could that mean the government will supply everyone with a digital cable connection as long as they harbor a sensor?

    3. Re:P2P? by gdarklighter · · Score: 1

      They can't use P2P! Uploading a file to it would be illegal !

  4. The only threat from NBC by curtisk · · Score: 5, Funny

    is that Friends will continue for many, many years.

    --

    Sehr geehrter Toilettenbenutzer!

    1. Re:The only threat from NBC by jkrise · · Score: 2, Funny

      I thought without the MS connection, NBC by itself was quite harmless :-)

      -

      --
      If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
    2. Re:The only threat from NBC by Drathus · · Score: 1

      Nah, on it's own it was just more subversive. =)

    3. Re:The only threat from NBC by hrieke · · Score: 2, Funny

      You forgot that NBC is owned by GE, which besides making great products, also built nuclear weapsons at one time.

      Although I'd think that 'Friends' in it's own right should be considered a WMD.

      --
      III.IIVIVIXIIVIVIIIVVIIIIXVIIIXIIIIIIIIVIIIIVVIIIV IIVIIIIIIVIII...
    4. Re:The only threat from NBC by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 1

      No, the real threat now is going to be that bad American knock-off version of Coupling. My only hope is that people will discover that the real Coupling is on PBS and BBC America when they flip through the channel listings.

    5. Re:The only threat from NBC by H0NGK0NGPH00EY · · Score: 3, Funny

      There should be a moderation for [-1, Predictable]. :^P

      --
      Do not read this sig.
    6. Re:The only threat from NBC by curtisk · · Score: 1
      There should be a moderation for [-1, Predictable]. :^P

      hahaha, I agree...but sometimes you just have to do it :)

      --

      Sehr geehrter Toilettenbenutzer!

    7. Re:The only threat from NBC by pmz · · Score: 1

      You forgot that NBC is owned by GE...

      What's Microsoft's stake in NBC? After seeing MSNBC appear and seeing the link between Newsweek and MSN, I'm beginning to worry more and more about the integrity of the media.

      I wonder if the DOJ/FTC would ever allow Microsoft to buy out AOL/TW. If that happened, that would clearly and unmistakably mark the peak of the U.S.A. in history (if "Homeland Security" already hasn't)

    8. Re:The only threat from NBC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The only threat from NBC is that Friends will continue for many, many years.

      Yes, the network should censor it...


      (mod -1 "painfully bad pun")

    9. Re:The only threat from NBC by Golias · · Score: 1
      Actually, rumor has it that the NBC version of Coupling is going to use the exact same scripts, just with American actors and accents. So, rather than a knock-off, it will be more like the difference between the London and Broadway casts of an Andrew Lloyd Webber musical. Kind of like how "Whose Line Is It, Anyway?" on ABC is pretty much the same show, except with Drew Carey hosting instead of Clive.

      If it succeeds, they might have to write some original scripts, because TV seasons appear to be a little longer in the US.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    10. Re:The only threat from NBC by martyn+s · · Score: 1

      It's longer, but we just fill it in with more commercials here :)

  5. Early Warning System already exists by TrekkieGod · · Score: 5, Funny

    Nukes give out a big flash of light which will tell you when they've hit. You should then remember to duck and cover. The mushroom cloud should help to warn those outside the range of the flash.

    --

    Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.

    1. Re:Early Warning System already exists by SlayerofGods · · Score: 4, Funny

      Soilder: Theres something wrong with the sensor network! Officer: Whats wrong with them? Soilder: They were blown up by the nuke.

      --

      Technology, the cause of and solution to all of life's problems.
    2. Re:Early Warning System already exists by SlayerofGods · · Score: 0

      D'oh, should have turned off html formatting.

      --

      Technology, the cause of and solution to all of life's problems.
    3. Re:Early Warning System already exists by SlayerofGods · · Score: 1

      It was a joke, a nuke would destory any bio or chemical weapons on board.

      --

      Technology, the cause of and solution to all of life's problems.
    4. Re:Early Warning System already exists by mav[LAG] · · Score: 4, Funny

      Soilder

      Soilder? As in Soil Der Pants? I know I would if a nuke was incoming.

      --
      --- Hot Shot City is particularly good.
    5. Re:Early Warning System already exists by 2names · · Score: 1
      What we will really have to watch out for is 'false positives.'

      The last thing this country needs is a bunch of whackos starting to loot everything because of something they saw on TV...oh, wait, that happens already...nevermind.

      --
      "I'm just here to regulate funkiness."
    6. Re:Early Warning System already exists by SlayerofGods · · Score: 1

      Hey, are you making fun of a man's disability? (damn dyslexia)
      We all know that it should have been soldier.

      --

      Technology, the cause of and solution to all of life's problems.
    7. Re:Early Warning System already exists by MrScience · · Score: 1

      I don't think I was the only one to remember this previous story. :)

      --

      You quitting proves that the karma kap worked. The most annoying of the whores shut up. --CmdrTaco

    8. Re:Early Warning System already exists by Thing+1 · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Soilder? As in Soil Der Pants? I know I would if a nuke was incoming.

      I know this is a joke, but it's really interesting as to why we soil our pants in times of crisis.

      It's evolutionary: prey, when running from predators, would take a dump in order to "lighten the load" so to speak. It's not much, but every ounce counts when your life is on the line.

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
    9. Re:Early Warning System already exists by mav[LAG] · · Score: 1

      Blame it on my disability which often manifests itself in word association jokes at the expense of others...

      --
      --- Hot Shot City is particularly good.
    10. Re:Early Warning System already exists by sharkey · · Score: 2, Funny
      It's not much, but every ounce counts when your life is on the line.

      Plus, it's much more effective than a banana peel (and more close-at-hand) to drop to make your pursuer slip.

      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
    11. Re:Early Warning System already exists by Xerithane · · Score: 1

      Hey, are you making fun of a man's disability? (damn dyslexia) We all know that it should have been soldier.

      Yeah, but see, it was funny. What if they weren't a native english speaker, then it's ok to laugh. Lighten up.

      --
      Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.
  6. Headline by jpsst34 · · Score: 1

    I read the headline and thought, "Hmmm... So they're going to sensor CBS and ABC for threats against NBC. Or maybe they'll be sensoring NBC for threats against the others."

    --
    How are you going to keep them down on the farm once they've seen Karl Hungus?
    1. Re:Headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's because you're illiterate.

    2. Re:Headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You go to IHOP as well?

  7. Sensor Networks for NBC threats by American+AC+in+Paris · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Wow. CBS and ABC are gonna be all over this one...

    --

    Obliteracy: Words with explosions

  8. This isn't the only threat! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about invisible chemical, biological and nuclear threats across Irak?
    If this "nationwide sensor network" ready for Saddam's furtive weapons? :)

    1. Re:This isn't the only threat! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bet he's from The Reich. Because that's how the Krauts spell it.

    2. Re:This isn't the only threat! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well the Reich had the SS and now the Americans have the HS..namely Homeland Security. Where's the GEstapo when you need em.

  9. Will it warn us that Will and Grace are about ... by mindlessrabble · · Score: 1

    If it could warn us when NBC is about to put on one of its cheesy shows it would be worth it.

  10. NBC? by binaryDigit · · Score: 5, Insightful

    a real-time early-warning system for chemical, biological and nuclear threats

    Next time they should order the words the same as in the acronym (Nuclear, Biological, Chemical) so those of us who are not terrorism experts can stop wondering why the peacock network poses such a threat to our well being.

  11. What about RIAA threat sensors?? by jkrise · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'd like a sensor that sniffs the RIAA and update me via MSN!!
    -

    --
    If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
  12. American Grammar Gestapo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    "Planet Analog have an article..."

    Don't you mean "Planet Analog has an article..."?

    I don't care if you Brits sometimes word things like that, it still looks and sounds wrong.

    That's like "lift" instead of "elevator"... WTF is up with that??

    1. Re:American Grammar Gestapo by juan2074 · · Score: 1

      Chalk it up to a difference in usage of collective nouns.

  13. NBC Thursday by slackr · · Score: 2, Funny

    Must-See threats!

    --

    * Please do not read my signature.
  14. i wouldn't worry..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    it doesn't work. it's more of a powerpoint idea. best and worst thing about government work.. you don't ever have to do anything.

  15. grammar nazi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Planet Analog have an article

    No, Planet Analog has an article
    1. Re:grammar nazi by fgb · · Score: 2, Funny

      Unless, of course, Planet Analog are a hive mind. Then it would be grammatically correct.

  16. A tool for us or them? by oilisgood · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It seems to me that a terrorist could use this system to cause panic without ever using the agents on a large scale. They could just get some agents to deploy a very small amount at different sensors they identified throughout a metro area and that would cause enough panic to disrupt what they want to disrupt.
    How do they plan on concealing this?

    1. Re:A tool for us or them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I enlisted in the U.S. Army just before the 1st Gulf War and because of that had to go through more NBC training than most recruits. We learned how to donn our protective gear, decontaminate ourselves (including how to decontaminate your buddie's ass after he uses the latrine), and give ourselves injections against neurotoxins. But, privately, the Sergeants doing the training would tell you that NBC weapons are like lightning. You're either hit or you're not, and there's not a whole helluva lot you can do if you are, except kiss your ass goodbye. If you're going into an area that's been affected, then your MOPP gear does some good. Otherwise, they said, it's mostly there to give you courage and keep you from sneaking out the back way. And that's what this news is about. If you hear the sirens go off, you're okay. If you don't hear the sirens go off, you're either okay, or you're dead. So the information doesn't do you much good. It doesn't do the civil authorities a lot of good either. When the dead people start piling up and nobody can get anybody to answer a phone in NYC, it will eventually dawn on people what happened. Like so much post-911 action, this is like a doctor giving you a placebo to hide the fact that he either doesn't have a clue what's wrong or that he knows but can't fix it and doesn't want to fess up. Or maybe he's worried that you'll think the cure is worse than the disease.

    2. Re:A tool for us or them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      ...NBC weapons are like lightning.

      Nuclear has the capability to kill a million people outright but chemical and biological drift at whatever the windspeed is (usually 5-10mph).

      ...and nobody can get anybody to answer a phone in NYC, it will eventually dawn on people what happened.

      Although chemical weapons have been used to kill a lot of people, so have kitchen knives. In terms of whether a single chemical or biological weapon operated by a few people could be used to do significantly more damage than a conventional weapon (e.g. a bomb), the theoretical calculations are actually quite difficult, involving everything from chemical thermodynamics to atmospherics to toxicology to sociology. The basic calculations, however, make it clear that using chemical or biological weapons to take out all of NYC is way beyond the capabilities of any country except the United States and maybe Russia.

      The real concern should be building codes relating to ventilating systems. As the Russians demonstrated quite effectively in the Moscow theater hostage situation, it is relatively straight forward to flood something like a theater or a stadium with poison gas (flooding a big stadium with poison gas could take out over 100,000 people).

  17. They'll use something else by dorfsmay · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Terrorist will use use something else that governments aren't looking for. For example the US was ready for an invasion by planes missiles etc... but on Sept. 11, the terrorists used something nobody expected.

    I think the different governments should spend more money on trying to understand the causes of terrorism, and try to eliminate it at the source (which one could argue they already do with the war on terrorism).

    You'll notice the article only mentions airborne threat... What about water ?

    1. Re:They'll use something else by Anti+Frozt · · Score: 1

      I think it's pretty obvious to a lot of people that a part of the cause of terrorism is having others ideals forced upon you.

      IANAA (I am not an American), but I see enough American television up north to see why some of these groups do feel threatened. America is trying to enforce it's ideals on the rest of the world. Democracy and Capitalism. I'm all for democracy. I think it's a great system. But you don't see Canadians going off on a tangent and forcing their views on the rest of the world. On the contrary, we believe that people should be allowed to express themselves in a manner appropriate to soceity (read: Human Beings). America needs to understand that even though it's the biggest kid on the block, it doesn't have the right to police it. That's what the UN and, to a lesser degree, INTERPOL are for.

      If America wants to help eliminate terrorism in the World, they need to take a look at the policies of some of the other larger powers in the World, Canada being one of them. We are viewed throughout the world in a much better light than Americans, yet we have a lot of the same beliefs. We just don't force them upon the rest of the world.

      America needs to join the international community on this effort. Going it alone reduces the legitimacy of the effort and causes the rest of the world (with a few exceptions) view America in a similar manner as Iraq: An oppresive regime trying to force it's beliefs and policies. Only this time, they're forcing them on someone else.

      Note: When I refer to America, I mean more specifically, the American Government.

      --
      In C++, friends can touch each others private parts.
    2. Re:They'll use something else by SlayerofGods · · Score: 1

      They don't even need to use something new. Even with plans and strategies in place the government will never be truly prepared for any type of attack.
      And then basically these become the, oh crap, we're fucked sensors.

      --

      Technology, the cause of and solution to all of life's problems.
    3. Re:They'll use something else by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "the US was ready for an invasion by planes missiles etc... but on Sept. 11, the terrorists used something nobody expected"

      You say the US was ready for an invasion by planes, and then say that the terrorists used something that noboy expected.

      Dude, they used planes.

    4. Re:They'll use something else by pmz · · Score: 1

      I think the different governments should spend more money on trying to understand the causes of terrorism, and try to eliminate it at the source (which one could argue they already do with the war on terrorism).

      For 400 BILLION dollars, the U.S. could probably simply buy the countries in question, send all the suplus corn in Iowa, beef from Texas, pork/chicken from North Carolina, and water from the Coors factory to them (being sensitive to religious preferences, of course), and see how many "terrorists" suddenly develop stupid grins on their faces and quiet down. They're human, after all.

    5. Re:They'll use something else by iabervon · · Score: 1

      In fact, preparation for an attack on US soil is wasted effort, in any case, because nobody's going to try that again for a while.

      The goal of Al Queda is to get the US out of the middle east, both the US government and US corporate interests. Bin Laden is sufficiently clever to realize that the way to do this is to make it troublesome and dangerous for the US to be in the middle east. Thus, the attack on the USS Cole (making it clear that it's somewhat dangerous to refuel at some otherwise desireable ports), and the attack on the US business executive compound in Saudi Arabia. It's obvious that the US could escape attacks of the same sort by leaving the middle east. The goal of this whole campaign is for the US to decide that the middle east isn't worth the danger. The Sept 11 attacks, on the other hand, were on US soil and outlined a danger to the US without there being an obvious implication that the US could avoid the danger by leaving; they were therefore somewhat different from the usual pattern.

      Furthermore, they were a terrible failure. Rather than pushing the US to leave the middle east, they formed the impetus to overthrow Al Queda's puppet government and the beginning of the justification for occupation of a middle eastern country. They also generated world-wide sympathy for the US. They did kill a bunch of Americans (although not more than three days' worth of US smoking deaths), but that's not their end goal.

      Their test of terrorism on US soil failed. They've already gone back to attacks on US interests in the middle east. We won't see another attack on US soil at least until Sept 11 and the aftermath is entirely forgotten.

    6. Re:They'll use something else by Oscar_Wilde · · Score: 1

      and see how many "terrorists" suddenly develop stupid grins on their faces and quiet down.

      Good idea. We could all then sit back and wait for these people to notice that they were just given a short term solution that doesn't help solve the problem (in the long term).

      And if this solution was kept going we could all sit back and wait until some bright spark has the idea of charging these people for the goods (at a cheap price) on the condition that they not build their own farms and what not.

      Oh wait! The USA already does this kind of thing ("we'll give you money as long as you buy american goods" or "we'll fund your roads as long as you drive american cars and destroy your rail network")

    7. Re:They'll use something else by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Their test of terrorism on US soil failed.

      The other version is that Bin Laden wanted an end to the secular dictators in the Middle East and he wanted the US bases out of Saudi Arabia so the US took out Hussein (who was a secular dictator) in order to move it's bases out of Saudi Arabia.

      The way I see it, the only way to not give terrorists what they want is to ignore them.

    8. Re:They'll use something else by stupidsocialscientis · · Score: 1

      To paraphrase oliver wendell holmes, once you understand a new idea, it is very hard to go back to your original way of thinking. we can only hope that fundamentalists will see the light of day and begin to understand things such as reason and data, but that is unlikely. until they do, they are going to continue killing people because god/allah/jahweh told 'em to. even though i am a bleeding heart agnostic/humanist, i understand their rationale on an emotional level. there are many times i wish we could wipe out people with such a strong need for a dogmatic basis for living. but, then again, they feel the same way about me. too bad only one of the two sides recognizes that it is okay to live and let live.

      --
      Well, as far as Sig's go, Freud was a doozy.
    9. Re:They'll use something else by MrScience · · Score: 2, Funny

      No kidding. They'll probably use Water Striders.

      --

      You quitting proves that the karma kap worked. The most annoying of the whores shut up. --CmdrTaco

  18. Suck me, beautiful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Its called English because it is a language from England. You're the ones who are wrong, so get over it. If your educations system was any better, you'd never have started spelling "through" "Thru" and calling things like lifts the wrong name.

  19. the Standard acronym for that is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    CBRN

    Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear.

    From the let's-not-make-up-a-new-acronym-and-forget-what-it -really-means-afterwards department, aka the LNMUANAAFWIRMA dept.

    1. Re:the Standard acronym for that is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, call it

      NNB

      Nuclear, nerve agent, biological.

      No wait, that's repeating it. How about... etc etc.

    2. Re:the Standard acronym for that is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ACTUALLY NBC is the term they use it the military therefore it is government terminology. Just because you haven't heard it don't assume it isn't accurate.

      M.D. Inc.

    3. Re:the Standard acronym for that is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've heard it referred to as just CBR. I think Nuclear might fall under 'R' for Radiological.

    4. Re:the Standard acronym for that is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i didn't say it was 'innacurate'.

  20. Spoofing those sensor IP's for fun by 192939495969798999 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I can see it now: the 10 o'clock news reports that we've had the 3rd false nuclear threat, as sensors read a 69.69% jump in radiation levels at 4:20 this afternoon.... yeah, right!

    --
    stuff |
    1. Re:Spoofing those sensor IP's for fun by El_Ge_Ex · · Score: 1

      as sensors read a 69.69% jump in radiation levels at 4:20 this afternoon

      Damn, someone told me it was bad grass...BUT THIS IS RIDICULOUS!! :)

      -B

      To those who understand, I'll go hide in a corner now; to those who don't, go put on a Cheech and Chong record, or Black Sabbath at 78 speed. :)

  21. Re:Will it warn us that Will and Grace are about . by JUSTONEMORELATTE · · Score: 4, Funny

    If it could warn us when NBC is about to put on one of its cheesy shows it would be worth it.
    That's already done -- the network has agreed to limit crappy shows, they now will only air on days ending in "y"

    --

  22. "NBC" Threats by Christianfreak · · Score: 3, Funny

    When I first saw this I thought it might having something to do with protecting us from more Reality shows ....

    Maybe not.

  23. Misread Title by Flamed+to+a+Crisp · · Score: 5, Funny

    For some reason, I read the title as Censor NBC Networks for Threat

    Like you wanted us to censor the NBC TV network and then blackmail them or something.

    --
    It's... News for Nerds! Stuff that Matters! La-de-da-de-da-DE-da!
  24. Re:NBC? by fobbman · · Score: 2, Funny

    No shit. As they're ordered now it would be CBN, and then we'd have to weather a storm of jokes about Christian Broadcasting Network instead of the current storm of jokes about National Broadcast Corporation.

  25. Probably too slow anyway by Anonymous+MadCoe · · Score: 3, Interesting

    From what I've learned a long time ago in the army one of the biggest issues with NBC is that even if you get an alert in a lot of cases you're just in time to let people know they should have put on their suit and masks allready.

    So I wonder what a network like that could contribute.

    (I say I'm wondering, not that it can't be done... Any suggestions?).

    1. Re:Probably too slow anyway by Thng · · Score: 3, Interesting
      It may be too slow to save people from immediate exposure, but at least in the case of biologicals, it could act as a warning to contain the contamination and prevent further exposure, possibly same with radiological weapons.

      As a side note, my gf is working with a grad student who is trying to engineer an ornamental plant to be placed in public areas that will turn color when it's been exposed to various biological agents.

    2. Re:Probably too slow anyway by Anonymous+MadCoe · · Score: 1

      I get that, could/should be a usefull thing. But then I wonder is this an EARLY warning system, or just a warning system?

    3. Re:Probably too slow anyway by pmz · · Score: 1

      As a side note, my gf is working with a grad student who is trying to engineer an ornamental plant to be placed in public areas that will turn color when it's been exposed to various biological agents.

      That is actually a really creative use of genetic engineering. Good job, Mr./Ms. grad student!

    4. Re:Probably too slow anyway by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      ornamental plant to be placed in public areas that will turn color when it's been exposed to various biological agents.

      I've already invented weeds that turn yellow when exposed to Roundup. Maybe we should collaborate?

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    5. Re:Probably too slow anyway by HarmlessScenery · · Score: 1

      Kids with spraypaint are gonna love that :)

  26. Paranoia by lovebyte · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Where will American paranoia stop?
    Probably when government funding will.

    --

    I'll do it for cheesy poofs.

    1. Re:Paranoia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Moderated as Troll? I guess the truth must hurt!

    2. Re:Paranoia by spickus · · Score: 1

      I think the paranoia will stop when we stop findng video of terrorists killing dogs with nerve agents.

      http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/08/19/terror.tape.che mi cal/

      Or maybe when we stop finding ricin in Paris.

      http://cgi.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/europe/03/20/franc e. ricin/

      Or even after they stop trying to poison the water at our embassy.

      http://www.edie.net/gf.cfm?L=left_frame.html&R=h tt p://www.edie.net/news/Archive/5226.cfm

      This a short list. There are many other examples.
      I don't agree with everything my government has done or is doing but it's not paranoia if they really are out to get you.

      --
      Indecision is the key to flexibility.
    3. Re:Paranoia by lovebyte · · Score: 1

      Or maybe when we stop finding ricin in Paris.

      I rest my case. News media prefer to talk about terrorist "news" than follow up on them and
      find out (in French) that there was no ricin in Paris.

      Countries everywhere are (have been and will be) threatened by other countries or terrorist groups. There is nothing new here except that the USA government and media are pushing these "threats" to the extreme.

      --

      I'll do it for cheesy poofs.

  27. Poor sensors by noah_fense · · Score: 5, Interesting


    I can see it now: thousands of people fleeing the subway when a sensor trips because someone lit up a cigarette underneath one. Now every ignores it when a real NBC attack comes around, just like the tsunami early warning systems in the pacific.

    This IS a gov't project, and this one is only getting funding because of people who watch the news too much and are becoming exactly what terrorists want: afraid.

    Also, politicians are aching to to jump on the "spend money on homeland security" bandwagon. 2004 is just around the corner . . .

    -n

    1. Re:Poor sensors by Pionar · · Score: 1

      "This IS a gov't project, and this one is only getting funding because of people who watch the news too much and are becoming exactly what terrorists want: afraid."

      No, terrorists don't Americans to be afraid, they want us to be DEAD.

    2. Re:Poor sensors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Terrorist want to incite fear yes, but then these guys who we are actually afraid of Al-Qeada/Hammas/Islamic Jihad/etc... are not killing us to make us afraid. They want their fucking property back.

    3. Re:Poor sensors by n1nj4k3n · · Score: 1
      Having been through Operation Iraqi Freedom, the electronic 'sniffer' equipment that we used to detect an NBC attack wasn't that great. It would malfunction or give false positives quite often, sending us into a often-practiced gas mask donning drill. If too much dust got into the sensor, it would go off. If too much engine exaust got into the sensor, it'd go off. It seemed that if you looked at it wrong, it'd go off.

      If military grade equipment is like that, what kind of bugs are these designs going to have? How is the Department of Homeland Security going to verify that there isn't an attack? How much is it going to cost to maintain and monitor the system? It's going to be a major problem if there are as many false alarms as there were in wartime. And the big problem is that you can't ignore it, because it could be a real attack.

    4. Re:Poor sensors by Idarubicin · · Score: 1
      I can see it now: thousands of people fleeing the subway when a sensor trips because someone lit up a cigarette underneath one.

      Well, so far the radiation detectors in the New York subway system haven't caught any terrorists, but they do ensure that individuals receiving certain types of radiotherapy are being regularly strip-searched. As far as I know, the system isn't causing mass panic, just acute embarrassment.

      --
      ~Idarubicin
  28. snoooore..... by andy666 · · Score: 1

    i keep hearing about stuff like this since 9/11. has anyone actually seen some interesting new sensors, or is it all hype ?

  29. Cause of terrorism already identified by goldspider · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    "I think the different governments should spend more money on trying to understand the causes of terrorism"

    I know I'm going to start a holy war here (quite literally, too!) but we already know the cause here is radical Islamic fundamentalism.

    Now before you all jump down my throats, let's look at the facts.

    Radical Islamic fundamentalists believe that anyone who does not worship as they do are infidels, and therefore are legitimate targets of Jihad. A fundamentalist does not distinguish between "civilian" and "military" targets; they see only "enemy".

    Say all that you want about American involvement in the Middle East, especially in Israel. It all comes down to the basic belief by these fundamentalists that those who are different from themselves should either convert or die.

    I'm not going to pretend to know how to end this destructive mentality. I will submit, however, that the problem has been sufficiently identified.

    --
    "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    1. Re:Cause of terrorism already identified by DarthMaul · · Score: 1

      The cause is not radical Islamic fundamentalism per se but rather organized religion as a whole. Islam is just an extension of a much larger problem. Is my experience nearly all religions have promoted violence against someone or something that did not conform to its' belief system.

    2. Re:Cause of terrorism already identified by goldspider · · Score: 1
      That's a good point. That's why I refuse to involve myself in debates of a religious nature. I find that any group of people who are not even open to the possibility that their views and beliefs are incorrect is not worth the effort of an honest debate.

      For those who haven't seen the movie Dogma (all twelve of you), I recommend you rent it tonight.

      --
      "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    3. Re:Cause of terrorism already identified by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol!

    4. Re:Cause of terrorism already identified by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      So, you're saying that a group of radicals with weapons are dangerous? Were you expecting a fucking medal for that blinding flash of the obvious?

      I submit that religion is besides the point, that some people are ready to die for anything, that religion is not the problem, merely the excuse. It is the focus of idiocy, both from radicals like Osama to idiots like GW Bush.

    5. Re:Cause of terrorism already identified by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I have to post this as AC because the american audience here will murder my karma! American christian fundamentalists have the same insane beliefs, and bloodlust for infidels. As do Israeli Jewish fundamentalists. The only difference is that Islamic militaries are considered terrorists by americans, and american and israeli terrorists are considered millitaries by americans. It is all perspective. And yes Israeli soldiers and American soldiers quite often kill civillians without apology. Don't get me wrong here, I'm not defending terrorist actions(on any side) , I am quite against all these warlard puritans and zealots.

    6. Re:Cause of terrorism already identified by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      "Now before you all jump down my throats, let's look at the facts"

      No - YOU look at the facts, and history, you little shit. Start with Chomsky. Come back when you understand why he believes the US is the worlds leading terrorist state. Why not check out the US funding of Isreal for starters. Then perhaps check out it's interventions in central America. Perhaps you could then nip over to Vietnam. Next stop - Afghanistan, and the phony cold war against the Russians.

    7. Re:Cause of terrorism already identified by Anti+Frozt · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Funny that you don't see attacks against other countries who have similar beliefs to America, i.e. Canada.

      A lot of recent terrorist activities have been targetted at one country and one country alone. The United States. What is so different about their beliefs from those of others that has put them under the proverbial microscope?

      --
      In C++, friends can touch each others private parts.
    8. Re:Cause of terrorism already identified by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The worst and third worst terrorist attacks in recent American history were carried out by radical Islamic fundamentalists, yes. The second and fourth worst ... well, I don't think Timothy McVeigh or Eric Rudolph had spent much time listening to the imams. Pretty much all fundamentalism is bad, mmmkay?

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    9. Re:Cause of terrorism already identified by goldspider · · Score: 1
      I'll grant that while I respectfully disagree with your argument, it is a valid position.

      From my point of view, civilian casualties are a regrettable side effect of war. I think the difference here is that while civilians are killed on both sides, only one side is specifically targeting them.

      And for the record, anyone who picks up a weapon or straps on a bomb with the intent to use it/them ceases to be an innocent civilian.

      --
      "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    10. Re:Cause of terrorism already identified by Gauchito · · Score: 1

      It's probably a mix of things. You'll find that these groups use the religion more as a unifying factor to recruit people from various different parts of the world (with what else, besides religion, will you unite Western Africans, South East Asians, Arabs, etc., to fight under the same banner?).

      They don't kill because "we don't believe in their religion". Religion is a tool through which to kill, but their reasons are different. And I'd be willing to bet that the leadership's motives are very different from the motives of those they recruit. The recruits may believe the religious fluff, but the reason they want to believe it is what's important.

      Don't listen the spiel they spit out. There is something else that resonates with those few thousand (out of about 800 million Muslims, I think the figure was) that makes them willing to give their lives. Religion only makes it easier for them to do it.

    11. Re:Cause of terrorism already identified by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      "Pretty much all fundamentalism is bad, mmmkay?

      If ya read some of my other posts in this thread, you'd see that I 100% agree with that assertion.

    12. Re:Cause of terrorism already identified by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      "Religion is a tool through which to kill, but their reasons are different. And I'd be willing to bet that the leadership's motives are very different from the motives of those they recruit."

      A fair point; perhaps they just like the idea of killing Americans and Jews. The reason may be no deeper than that, but we don't have anything else to go on, do we?

    13. Re:Cause of terrorism already identified by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I didn't see Canada providing military and monetary support to various countries including Isreal, supporting the Iran/Iraq war, and the Northern Alliance warlords in Afghanistan or stationing thousands of troops in various friendly arab countries which the Islamic fundementalists consider infidels.

      For your information, targets have been identified and thankfully the attacks stopped in countries including the United Kingdom[1], Italy, Germany and France, not to mention Asian countries such as Bali.

      [1]: In fact, some of the September 11th hijackers were recruited from Mosques in London. There is also some pressure on Tony Blair over two suspects who are being held in X-Ray, because they are British subjects.

    14. Re:Cause of terrorism already identified by Ibix · · Score: 1

      Ann Coulter said:

      "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity"

      Thank God Christian Fundamentalists are nothing like those bastard Islamic ones...

    15. Re:Cause of terrorism already identified by Halthar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I didn't realize that abortion clinic bombings were carried out by Islamic fundamentalists. Did they also organize the Oklahoma City bombing?

      Terrorists come in all shapes, sizes, and colors (the purple ones are tasty). Unless that is recognized and dealt with this so called "War on Terrorism" is going to be just another buzzword-laden travesty of what it should be, much like the "War on Drugs".

      It is very important to understand the cause of the problem so that in trying to solve it, we dont create a larger one. My gut feeling based on my reading is that, unfortunately, the seeds of a larger problem have already been planted.

    16. Re:Cause of terrorism already identified by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Read my other posts. How many times do I have to repeat that ALL fundamentalism is inherantly unhealthy??

    17. Re:Cause of terrorism already identified by Deflagro · · Score: 1

      That's because you're a jaded american fallen into the propaganda your gov't feeds you. Canada had forces in Afghanistan and were in every conflict providing support. They just don't make war the focus of their country. When they are done with the job, they leave. Never lingering like a festering wound causing numerous more casualties.

      --
      Der Tod ist der einzige Weg hier raus!
  30. Acronym Jackass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Would it kill you to explain an abbreviation that most people are unfamiliar with?

    That reminds me of the "GSW" (Gun Shot Wound) that doctors use. Guess which one takes longer to say (more syllables)?

    Stop clinging to acronyms as esoteric bravado.

    1. Re:Acronym Jackass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ROFLMAO

    2. Re:Acronym Jackass by American+AC+in+Paris · · Score: 1
      That reminds me of the "GSW" (Gun Shot Wound) that doctors use. Guess which one takes longer to say (more syllables)?

      ...there's also the "GWPW", or George Washington Parkway, in Northern Virginia...

      --

      Obliteracy: Words with explosions

    3. Re:Acronym Jackass by FroMan · · Score: 1

      WWW == world wide web.

      Why don't you type worldwideweb.slashdot.org?

      Somethings are easier to type than others you know.

      --
      Norris/Palin 2012
      Fact: We deserve leaders who can kick your ass and field dress your carcass.
  31. Good script warning... by sammaffei · · Score: 1

    Acutally, the alarm will go off when "Friends" actually returns to being a watchable show. Don't worry, it will never happen...

    --

    Political correctness is the newest form of slavery.

  32. No money for health or education, then? by ChessHacker · · Score: 2, Insightful
    a nationwide sensor network that could provide a real-time early-warning system for chemical, biological and nuclear threats across the US.

    How much is it going to cost? How many attacks have there been in the US since 9/11? None. Nada. Zip.

    While the Federal government spends billions of dollars on anti-terrorism, homeland security, tax-cuts-for-the-rich (TM) and un-necessary wars, ordinary people are losing their jobs, have no decent health care and are suffering for inadequate funding of schools. This is progrsss?

    1. Re:No money for health or education, then? by DarthMaul · · Score: 1

      and how many attacks have been averted that we will never know about? I was unaware of the requirement that the Fed's hold a press conference everytime a sucessful mission is carried out...

  33. Re:NBC? by mystik · · Score: 3, Funny

    CBN? That'd have to be the CowboyNeal threat.

    Gotta watchout for that one.

    --
    Why aren't you encrypting your e-mail?
  34. And just as an afterthought... by goldspider · · Score: 1

    I am no way suggesting that all Muslims believe as these fundamentalists do. This is a relatively small (compared to the number of Muslims worldwide) but very vocal and active group of people I am talking about here.

    --
    "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
  35. NBC what???? by AtariAmarok · · Score: 1

    No wonder there are so many responses that are joking about the NBC television network. What does NBC mean here? I thought I knew acronyms, but not this one.

    While NBC is in the title, it is not in the story description, nor is it in the actual article. I'm guessing it is Nuclear something, but I do not know.

    --
    Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
    1. Re:NBC what???? by HaloZero · · Score: 2, Informative

      Nuclear
      Biological
      Chemical

      --
      Informatus Technologicus
  36. Re:Give it a rest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think you may have more problems than H1B visas buddy, it's "War on Terror" and "terror attacks". Although, I guess every war fought thus far has been a war on terra...

  37. Re:Ask Slashdot: Which is less gay? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Getting fucked with a strap on. It doesn't involve another man, therefore it's not homosexual which means it's NOT gay. Now with that said, would you like me to clean your cock with my mouth? Now that the sodomy laws have been stricken, it's possible for me to do this in any state without being worried about breaking the law. Yay!!! I can be gay without being illegal! Finally, normal gay sex is legal everywhere! :)

  38. Come on! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you're going to freenet troll, why not link to some Vampire Paedophelia?

  39. Right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sure, create a lot of warning systems and defence systems. Everyone feels safe.

    Than continue with stupid foreign policy.

    Everybody happy, including the no-brainers in politics.

    1. Re:Right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ( by the way, parent's comment is an invinite loop, forgot to mention )

  40. There are no defence systems in the US by AtariAmarok · · Score: 1

    " Sure, create a lot of warning systems and defence systems. Everyone feels safe."

    There are no defence systems in this country, except for de fence who tries to sell you de stolen goods.

    --
    Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
    1. Re:There are no defence systems in the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Give this non-native English speaker a break will ye? ;-) Try to write the Dutch word for defense, I bet you need to look it up ;-)

    2. Re:There are no defence systems in the US by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      Give this non-native English speaker a break will ye? ;-) Try to write the Dutch word for defense, I bet you need to look it up ;-)

      Actually, if you're Dutch, then you probably learned British English in school, in which "defence" is the proper spelling. Don't worry about it. The inconsistencies between British and American spelling are part of a carefully orchestrated trans-Atlantic conspiracy.

      1. Make your language the dominant language throughout the world.
      2. Come up with two very similar but subtly different versions to confuse the hell out of everyone else.
      3. ???
      4. Profit!!!

      Trust me. ;)

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    3. Re:There are no defence systems in the US by HarmlessScenery · · Score: 1

      British English ?!?!
      There's no such thing. It's ENGLISH - we invented the damned language, it's ours - ok? :)

      There's English and a bastardised American dialect.

      Trust me ;)

    4. Re:There are no defence systems in the US by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      Heh. Well, one could argue that there's English English, but also Scottish English, Welsh English, and Northern Irish English -- all of which sound somewhat different, but do share a common spelling. Thus "British English".

      And as well as American English, there's Australian English and Indian English, which I've heard is becoming the dominant form throughout southern Asia. Given the sheer numbers, that may be what most people think of as "English" eventually.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    5. Re:There are no defence systems in the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hehe :-)

  41. Letterman by nightsweat · · Score: 1
    Letterman used to give the NBC sensors fits.

    I mean, he'd carry in nuclear, bilogical, and chemical weapons in to the studio in his pants every day. When the pants came off, the sensors went wild.

    Now, of course he causes problems with the CBS sensors. His Cardiac Bypass Shunt cause all kinds of problems.

    Aren't acronyms fun?

    --

    the major advances in civilization are processes which all but wreck the societies in which they occur - A.N. White
    1. Re:Letterman by dentar · · Score: 1

      NBC isn't an acronym. An acronym has to be pronouncable as a word, like FUBAR, or FUD.

      NBC is just initials.

      --
      -- I am. Therefore, I think!
    2. Re:Letterman by nightsweat · · Score: 1

      Hey, maybe you don't call them "nibbick", but some of us do.

      --

      the major advances in civilization are processes which all but wreck the societies in which they occur - A.N. White
  42. Why not FOX? by ChessHacker · · Score: 1
    I feel more threatened by FOX TV.

    Not scared? You should be.

  43. Re:NBC? by RevDobbs · · Score: 0, Redundant

    If I only had mod points I'd make sure that ALL YOUR "NATIONAL BROADCAST COMPANY" COMMENTS ARE REDUNDANT.

    Truth be told, I'm just jealous that I was beaten to the punch.

  44. Re:NBC? by Xpilot · · Score: 1

    On /. CBN is CowboyNeal.

    --
    "Backups are for wimps. Real men upload their data to an FTP site and have everyone else mirror it." -- Linus Torvalds
  45. In one ear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    out the analog

  46. Trust me.... by borgdows · · Score: 1

    ...NBC are innofensive compared to MSNBC!

  47. Keep calm, the Reds are not out to get you by sien · · Score: 1
    Terrorists, terrorists everywhere! Relax and wise up.

    Read this and use your common sense and don't panic.

  48. George Bush = smart by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "George W. Bush: Too stupid to know any better."

    He's smart enough to know better than you.

    1. Re:George Bush = smart by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since I dont drive drunk I seriously doubt that.

  49. The way they've got it written by ProfessionalCookie · · Score: 1

    chemical, biological and nuclear

    The way they've got it written it acronyms out to CBN threats, which to me reads CowBoy Neal Threats. this is scary stuff man.

  50. What's the goal of terrorist attacks? by Rogerborg · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As September 11 2000 showed us, the most effective way of killing people is large and obvious amounts of energy (kinetic, potential, chemical). The NBC available to terrorists - dirty rather than fission, agents that can effect only a small area and number of people - are minor in comparison. Their primary effect is to create panic out of proportion to the actual effect.

    Sure, release Sarin in a subway station, you'll kill some people. But have a detector that screams "Sarin attack! Sarin attack!" and you'll kill just as many, perhaps more, in the stampede to get out.

    And if it turns out that the sensor was triggered by a new type of cologne? Well, we've just done the terrorists' job for them.

    As a further thought, how do you field test these things? Test them in the lab with real agents, sure. Test them in the field with harmless agents that produce the same effect (and hope that nobody finds out what those are), but how do you know with any confidence that you can actually detect a genuine attack in the field? False positives in a military situation aren't so bad - all that will happen is that the grunts will turn on the overpressure systems or put on their NBC suits, but in a civilian situation? We've seen what happens when large numbers of people panic in a small area. Deploying these in cities seems to me like a big gamble to take, for little potential reward, when the costs of false positives are so high.

    I'm not suggesting that we do nothing, but I am suggesting that reaction (which includes "preemptive strikes" against people that already hate us) isn't the way to go. Perhaps we could devote some of this energy to dealing with the causes of terrorism rather than the symptoms.

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  51. I'm all scared ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Having just seen Terminator 3, this almost gives me the creeps!

  52. The government has spent $0 on tax cuts for rich by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While the Federal government spends billions of dollars on..."tax-cuts-for-the-rich (TM)"

    First, it should be pointed out that the rich are a minority of those who get fair and proportional tax cuts under the Bush plan.

    Second, it is a lie to say that the government has spent any money at all on these tax cuts. It is not the government's money to spend.

    Is it "spending" by the mugger if he fails to swipe the $20 you have in your pocket?

  53. Can you read??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While NBC is in the title, it is not in the story description...

    Oh, no?

    "...chemical, biological and nuclear threats..."

    Nuclear
    Biological
    Chemical

    Just because the words are out of order, that completely throws you for a loop? Have you ever returned a bag of M&Ms as "defective" because half of the candies said "W" on them?

  54. Re:Will it warn us that Will and Grace are about . by dr_dank · · Score: 1

    If it could warn us when NBC is about to put on one of its cheesy shows it would be worth it.

    Agreed. If only there were some kind of publication available at newsstands that could give out this kind of information. *cough*cough*. :)

    --
    Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
  55. Uh oh by indros · · Score: 1

    Linked in an Internet-like peer-to-peer network

    Watch out! The RIAA will undoubtedly try to shut it down.

  56. Chomsky and facts: = never the two shall meet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "No - YOU look at the facts, and history, you little shit. Start with Chomsky."

    If you want to know what has happened or is happening, Chomsky is the last place to start (except when it comes to linguistics). His writings on other subject are blissfully fact-free, as he relies on his own bigotry, racism, ignorance, and talent for fiction.

    "Come back when you understand why he believes the US is the worlds leading terrorist state."

    He believes things that aren't true because he loves to make stuff up. (The US is in fact the leading anti-terrorist state. Chomsky loves genocideal terrorists from Ortega to Pol Pot to Ho, so no wonder he hates the US)

    The man is so deluded and out of touch that he can't deal with the fact that hardly anyone believes him, so he writes books and essays making up silly conspiracies which strive to keep him down.

    "Why not check out the US funding of Isreal for starters"

    You are probably a Nazi like Chomsky who wants the people there wiped out.

    " Then perhaps check out it's interventions in central America."

    Yes, where the US successfully helped the countries get rid of Soviet invaders.

    "Perhaps you could then nip over to Vietnam"

    Chomsky is one of those guys who supported the Hanoi regime, and he also supported Pol Pot next door. Call him Professor Killing Fields.

    "Next stop - Afghanistan, and the phony cold war against the Russians."

    For something that was "phony", it sure had a lot of participants. What next, WW 2 never happened either?

    1. Re:Chomsky and facts: = never the two shall meet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The man is so deluded and out of touch that he can't deal with the fact that hardly anyone believes him, so he writes books and essays making up silly conspiracies which strive to keep him down."

      I'm not interested in your criticisms of him as a person, simply his arguments. You`re not the first person to knock his character, but no-one who have done so have ever refuted a single fact. I suggest that these people lack the patience, logic, integrity and intelligence to attack his arguments head on, and so fall back on the tried and trusted ad-hominem attack.

  57. The object of terrorism by Anonymous+MadCoe · · Score: 1

    ... is to spread terror. I think you are right, it could be used to spread terror and fear, which is exactly the object of terrorism (as I see it)...

  58. BCNu by onjay · · Score: 1

    I know it's offtopic, but things are running 80% offtopic so far...members of the NBC network. And this is before the recent deregulation that one of the FCC's own condemns. (pdf)

  59. Re:FIRST FIREHORSE POST < -- RIGHT!! by Big_Ass_Spork · · Score: 0

    Good job, sir! I am a huge fan, well maybe just a fan with a big ass, any ways I wish to subscribe to your newsletter. You may also include me in any email lists you may run. I will not forward it automatically to deleted items, I promise.

    In conclussion, keep up the good work!

    Hugs and kisses,
    BAS

    PS - just realized I had subconsciencely co-opted Juan E.'s sig line up there... oh well, originality is for teh sux!

  60. Sept 11, 2000??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    What specifically happened on September 11th in the year 2000?
    I know something really big happened one year later on Sept 11 2001, but I'm not aware of what happened in 2000

    1. Re:Sept 11, 2000??? by borgdows · · Score: 1

      It was my birthday, you insensitive clod!

  61. I hope it's secure... by Mysticalfruit · · Score: 1

    I hope these devices aren't just sitting out on the internet, but that the government sets up a seperate secure network for all the sensors.

    The last thing we need is some [dipshit|terrorist|*] cracking the network and causing mayhem by tricking the system into thinking there are attacks all over the place.

    --
    Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
  62. At Oak Ridge National Labs... by nicodemus05 · · Score: 5, Informative
    in Tennessee, meanwhile, a team of researchers has been working for 18 months on an underlying network architecture for a national sensor network.

    I work at the Labs, right down the hall from these guys. I play soccer with a man named Panos Datskos. He recently finished building a cantilever based electronic nose that has the potential to detect a single molecule. Datskos is working on a "universal" sensor that shares many of the same processes of a gas chromatograph to identify any substance. As described in the article, it uses very basic technology (a CD laser). It's also very compact, the size and shape of a discman. The coolest thing about the technology is that it functions in the ambient environment. It does not, like most laboratory equipment, require a vacuum, extreme temperatures, or special shock absorbance to reduce vibration. This is the kind of device that they'll be deploying to airports, I believe.

    --
    while (!sleep){

    sheep++;

    }

  63. You know what you are talking about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I know I'm going to start a holy war here (quite literally, too!) but we already know the cause here is radical Islamic fundamentalism."

    Yes, you know what you are talking about.

    The cause is not any of the following:

    - US support for Israel? These people hate Jews and Americans no matter where they are.

    - The poverty of the third world? The terrorists are largely rich. (Osama and the Taliban strove to greatly increase poverty and despair in Afghanistan when they had the chance: no friends of the poor are they).

    - US foreign policy? Osama just makes stuff up: at once point he raved about the US having attacked countries with H-bombs.

    Yes, the root cause of these problems is a particularly genocidal, intolerant, and imperialist brand of Islam.

    1. Re:You know what you are talking about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "- US foreign policy? Osama just makes stuff up: at once point he raved about the US having attacked countries with H-bombs."

      You may want to study a little event called WWII

  64. Illegal... by Tsali · · Score: 1

    Based on this story
    right here, this would be illegal since its P2P.

    Jerks.

    --
    This space for rent.
  65. Re:Ask Slashdot: Which is less gay? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I agree. However, being fucked with a strap-on BY A MAN is definitively more gay than receiving a blowjob from him.

  66. Completely ignoring the rest of your post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are probably a Nazi like Chomsky who wants the people there wiped out.

    I'll leave the call of Godwins law to someone else, but this is exactly the sort of attitude which is unhelpful. Criticising Isreal or the U.S support of Isreal is just right out, because that must mean you don't like Jews, and if you don't like Jews you must be a Nazi, and what did the poor Jews ever do to you, you monster? No one can ever have an actual discussion conerning Isreal because of it, and Isreal and the U.S can carry on as they have before.

    Disregarding the argument of wether Isreal should or should not exist, whatever. Isreal does exist already, so the point is immaterial. The problem lies in Isreals treatment of Palestinians and the U.S' continued support of Isreal policies which have proved ineffective. Even the U.S is now begining to realise that the current situation cannot go on, and that Isreal needs to get its act together with Palistian; hence The Roadmap. Its a good start, but it isn't going to work if we still have idiots who insist on interupting every debate regarding Isreal with accusations of anti-Semitism.

  67. They want to steal property by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Al-Qeada/Hammas/Islamic Jihad/etc... are not killing us to make us afraid. They want their fucking property back."

    No, they want to steal property from others.

  68. Ignore the facts? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I'll leave the call of Godwins law to someone else"

    You were the one who brought it on with antisemitic statements. Hatred of Israel and its people is rooted in antisemitism.

    "Even the U.S is now begining to realise that the current situation cannot go on, and that Isreal needs to get its act together with Palistian;"

    Israel is not the problem, everyone knows that. It was forced to "occupy" these territories after being attacked from them, and there is no way it can leave until the aggression from within them stops.

    Go ahead and ignore the rest of the post you are replying to: the facts stand undisputed.

    1. Re:Ignore the facts? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, the original poster you were replying to was not me. I'm a different AC. So I never brought anything on with antisemtic statements. Thanks for proving my point though; you managed to read in anti-semitism into something which itself was not anti-semtic, mearly critical of Isreal.

      Isreal was forced to defend itself though, that is true. It has now managed to make peace with many of its neighbours, and with the fall of Saddam in Iraq things have just got a little more pleseant for Isreal overall. However, Isreal has rightly been criticised many times by the United Nations and individual countries over its treatment of Palistinian Arabs and its policies towards the occupied teratories. It has persued the exact same policies for decades, and they have failed to work. It is clear to everyone that Isreal must change its policies and start working towards real peace. The U.S realised this at the start of the 90's, and The Roadmap is one in a long line of attempted peace deals. Isreal has now finally realised this, and appears to be serious about The Roadmap too. However, people such as yourself, who throw accusations of anti-semitism everywhere at the drop of a hat, have historically not helped, are not helping now, and will continue to be a threat to The Roadmap by defending inflamatory action by Isreal.

      Like I said, I'm ignoring the rest of your post because I don't care about it. If the AC you were replying to wants to have a point by point argument with you about it, he's quite welcome. Whatever, I don't care.

    2. Re:Ignore the facts? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Hatred of Israel and its people is rooted in antisemitism"

      This sentence doens't make very much sense. I think what you`re trying to say is that you cannot dislike the existance of Israel - on land taken from other people - without being anti semitic. On this point you are incorrect. The argument lacks a certain intellectual honesty, typical of mud slinging. Quite how you believe anyone to fall for such an idea is laughable.

      "It was forced to "occupy" these territories after being attacked from them"

      If they hadn't been there in the first place...

  69. Found pictures! by Boatman · · Score: 1

    I found some photos of the devices.

    --
    --Just the place for a snark!
  70. I make these things - they will work better by siskbc · · Score: 3, Informative
    I can see it now: thousands of people fleeing the subway when a sensor trips because someone lit up a cigarette underneath one. Now every ignores it when a real NBC attack comes around, just like the tsunami early warning systems in the pacific.

    Two things - first, a decent sensor device made to detect specific things (like sarin, soman, etc, which are all chemically similar) won't be tripping on a cigarette. Pattern won't match.

    Second, that's the advantage of having a network - in addition to spacial information, you get redundancy. If there are a few sensors in the area, they can back each other up.

    Sensor networks like these are getting better all the time. Unfortunately, too often the scientists/engineers making them spend too much time creating the device and not enough time on the back-end signal processing that provides error correction and greater accuracy, not to mention false-positive protection.

    Put it this way - if I made a sensor network, it would not confuse a cigarette for a threat. And hopefully, the people making this one work similarly.

    Also, I was interested by something in the article:

    The goal for all the government efforts, perhaps three to five years out, is to deploy a highly accurate yet low-cost network of sensors "that in a couple of minutes could tell you if an agent is present, in what concentration and something about the agent. But the technology for that doesn't really exist yet."

    Yes it does. We can do it now. :P So it remains to be seen whether what is deployed is really state-of-the-art (or even state of 5 years ago, really).

    --

    -Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat

    1. Re:I make these things - they will work better by lommer · · Score: 1


      Two things - first, a decent sensor device made to detect specific things (like sarin, soman, etc, which are all chemically similar) won't be tripping on a cigarette. Pattern won't match.

      Second, that's the advantage of having a network - in addition to spacial information, you get redundancy. If there are a few sensors in the area, they can back each other up.


      Well, gee. That sounds an awful lot like what the CIA tried during the vietnam war: they set up an extensive network of fairly sophisticated sensors designed to figure out VC troop movements through the jungle. What did the VC do? they went through the jungles hanging buckets of piss on trees. These buckets produced enough odour to trip the chemical sensors and the entire multi-million dollar network was rendered useless.

      The point is that distributed, coherent, reliable sensor networks are in practice a lot harder to implement than theory would suggest.

  71. What does MSNBC stand for? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Monkeypox, Sars, Nuclear, Biological, Chemical.

  72. It was planned for by greenrd · · Score: 4, Informative
    For example the US was ready for an invasion by planes missiles etc... but on Sept. 11, the terrorists used something nobody expected.

    False.

    Sept. 11, 2001 - The National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), the federal agency that runs many of the nation's spy satellites, schedules an exercise involving a plane crashing into one of the agency's buildings. "On the morning of Sept. 11, 2001," according to a website advertising a homeland security conference in Chicago run by the National Law Enforcement and Security Institute, CIA official John Fulton and his team "were running a pre-planned simulation to explore the emergency response issues that would be created if a plane were to strike a building. Little did they know that the scenario would come true in a dramatic way." Fulton is the head of the NRO's strategic gaming division.
    From Oh Lucy! - You Gotta Lotta 'Splainin To Do by From the Wilderness

    ""We couldn't possibly have known this."
    "We didn't know that airlines are subject to this kind of attack."

    It's almost one year after the attack on America and we know that these kinds of statements had been a lie.

    The CIA and FBI were warned by at least eight secret services and had thirty to forty indices about a possible attack with planes. The FAA had sent out five warnings to the airports about possible hijacks or similar incidents.

    On August 6, 2001 the CIA delivered a memo to George Bush about a terrorist attack. On August 23 the FBI released an "urgent cable".

    But the most damning evidence that something was known was the enactment of at least eight to ten bio- or regular terrorist exercises during 2000 and 2001.

    The last big one took place in June 2001 and another CIA exercise was confirmed for the day of September 11th!

    From http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/AVE_STE.html

    It is beyond dispute now that Bush lied when he said the government had no idea this could happen. They had plenty of idea. This kind of idea had been speculated about for years.

  73. Re:NBC? by pmz · · Score: 3, Funny

    Christian Broadcasting Network

    Is that the Al Jazeera of the U.S.?

  74. Stupid by JahToasted · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Its just a PR gimmick so the politicians can say "Look we are doing something". A terrorist will never attack in a way that is unexpected.

    You want to know what the next terrorist will be like? Read up about the DC sniper case a few months back. Now imagine 20 snipers armed with rifles, and RPGs fanning out accross the nation. Yeah, eventually they'll be found and shot (martyred), but the terror it would cause both before and after (how do you know there aren't more?) would be immeasurable. How can you prevent it from happening? Well you can't, but that won't stop your leaders from turning the US into a police state because of it.

    1. Re:Stupid by valkraider · · Score: 1

      I have often thought of what could be next as well. How about blowing up *regular* apartment buildings or houses? Impossible to defend against - yet just a couple would scare the jeebies out of most of the nation. We insist on "protecting" dams and nuclear facilities - but ignore where people actually *are*.

      Here in Oregon we had a 90+ year old run over a family on a sidewalk. With that and the Santa Monica market - maybe Al Quaida has recruited our seniors and trained them to be an elite terrorist force?

  75. Sar�casm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    sarcasm ( P ) Pronunciation Key (särkzm)
    n.

    A cutting, often ironic remark intended to wound.

    A form of wit that is marked by the use of sarcastic language and is intended to make its victim the butt of contempt or ridicule.

  76. Israel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "It is clear to everyone that Isreal must change its policies and start working towards real peace."

    The real reason that there is a chance for peace now is that the current Palestinian leadership does not see everything as a means to the extermination of the Israelis. Arafat always did.

    Israel has held the same basic line for

    1. Re:Israel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, this is true also. However it does help when Isreal has stopped parking its tanks in front of Arafats headquarters. Notice also that Isreal softened its policy with regard to Arafat; originally they wanted him to step down and go into exile. This has not yet happened, although he is now simply being ignored by both Isreal and the U.S.

  77. that was awful! Pull my finger! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did you know that the the Japanese term "kamikazi" means " divine wind "?

  78. ratical lies, not Bush by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    " It is beyond dispute now that Bush lied when he said the government had no idea this could happen."

    There is no evidence that he has lied about anything.

    Assuming that the material you present from a conspiracy-laden nutjob web site is true (it probably is not: there are many falsifications at ratical.org, such as the one it makes up about the Martin Luther King assassination): this ignores the fact that such warnings have been given frequently all over the place, it is like "Crying Wolf", there was no way to tell which was real.

    Sure, the government had such warnings. It has had warnings about this and a wide variety of attacks and incidents that have not happened.

  79. Terrance and Philip? by arglesnaf · · Score: 1

    Heh heh, I'm from Ohio and CBN makes me think Canadian Broadcasting Network.

    It sounds like a movie I saw:

    Censor Networks target CBN threat. Bigger, Longer and Uncut.

    (Blame Canada!)

    1. Re:Terrance and Philip? by B3ryllium · · Score: 1

      Canadian Broadcasting CORPORATION. lol :)

      I've never heard of the Canadian Broadcasting Network, is it good? :)

    2. Re:Terrance and Philip? by arglesnaf · · Score: 1

      Doh. =)

  80. Re:NBC? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In this country , CBN stands for Christian broadcasting network, you hoser!

  81. Nanobots on P 2 P ?!?! by mr_z_beeblebrox · · Score: 1

    Researchers plan to use microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) and nanotechnology to create accurate biological and chemical sensors. Linked in an Internet-like peer-to-peer network spanning wireless, wired and satellite links.

    Sadly, though. If ever we are attacked the first thing that will happen is that the creators of these "P2P networks" will be sent to jail as these nanobots illegally load data to the P2P networks.

    "Wired news has an article about a new bill that would make it a felony to upload a file to a P2P network."

  82. Sounds vaguely familiar by whovian · · Score: 2, Funny

    Does this strike anyone else as "Skynet" in the making?

    --
    To-do List: Receive telemarketing call during a tornado warning. Check.
    1. Re:Sounds vaguely familiar by Carnivore24 · · Score: 1

      Sounds a little more like Michael Crightons "Prey".

  83. Re:NBC? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This makes me wonder what they have against Pat Robertson's Christian Broadcasting Network.

  84. FOR THE LAST TIME: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Israel is NOT spelled "Isreal"!

  85. Abuse of the "Flamebait" Moderation by goldspider · · Score: 1
    This has bothered me quite a bit lately, and it's time I brought it out.

    Exactly what is the purprose of the "Flamebait" moderation? Is it to hide posts that are intended simply to get people mad and produce predictable responses? That's already covered by the "Troll" moderation.

    So the only conclusion I can come to is that the purpose of the "Flamebait" moderation is to hide posts that moderators simply disagree with. Might I remind you that silencing opinions that differ from the majority is the very difinition of fascism.

    Whether you disagree with me or not, I think it's fair to say my post generated a genuinely positive discussion, not simply flame.

    I thank those who chose to engage me in an honest debate. To those who anonymously (and cowardly, I might add) sought instead to silence my dissenting opinion, shame on you!

    --
    "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
  86. It is not fascism: it is free speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Might I remind you that silencing opinions that differ from the majority is the very difinition of fascism."

    Might I remind you that Slashdot is the publication of Slashdot's owners and their designated moderators. Anything they do here is an expression of free speech: they are controlling their own publication. It no more fascist for them to express the opinion that something gets modded down than it is for USA-Today to refuse to print a letter from someone who says flouridation is a Communist plot.

    If you don't like this, you are free to start your own goldspiderdot.org moderated as you see fit.

    Never confuse editorial control of your own publication (the heart of what the First Amendment is supposed to protect) with fascism or censorship.

    1. Re:It is not fascism: it is free speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I respectfully disagree.

      Moderation was never intended to primarily give absolute editorial control over the content of the site to the editors. I wouldn't think an editor moderated this post anyway, so that's hardly the point.

      What I find disturbing is how the READERS of the site, supposedly educated and intellectually honest people, decided that people shouldn't argue my points, and shouldn't even read my post. I maintain that the moderation system, while very good in most respects, is in fact used by some to censor unpopular opinions.

      But I digress. My initial point was that it almost seems that the "Flamebait" moderation was created to be used to silence unpopular opinions. Why else would it have been created separately from "Troll"?

      I may just be arguing over semantics, but really, was my post that inflammatory and/or lacking in honest points?

    2. Re:It is not fascism: it is free speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Moderation does not stop anyone reading your posts. If they so choose the can set their preferences to -1, Nested, where moderation makes no difference. However, if they choose they can also set a higher limit and trust the judegments and biases of the various moderators. It is not censorship, it is volountery filtering.

  87. Peacock Network by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    How about a network of millions of peacocks? If you see one fall over dead, put on your gas mask and duck and cover!

  88. Duck and Cover by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The little 50's film from "Iron Giant" comes to mind...

    Duck and Cover
    Duck and Cover
    Get under the bed with your sister and your brother

    Duck and Cover
    Duck and Cover
    Kids who don't duck and cover will cease to be around

  89. MEMS for MEMS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of course this means we'll need MEMS to guard the MEMS, and MEMS to guard those MEMS, and MEMS to guard them, plus MEMS to guard those. You get the picture? At some point, somebody will still need to yell "LOOK OUT!"

  90. watch out for the RIAA by chargen · · Score: 1

    Because if it's a peer-to-peer network and they upload a file, they'll be federal criminals!

    AIEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!

    -Pete

  91. What about ABC ... ? by Uosdwis · · Score: 1

    At first I thought this was a real time system to send out bleeps during TV shows. How come we do not have a system to warn us about:
    Anthrax Birds Cancer ???
    Underpants Panties Noams ??
    Congressmen Businessmen Stupidity ??
    or crazy rich people from Autrallia: FOX ?

  92. Re:Ask Slashdot: Which is less gay? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Um... no parts? Kind funny isn't it? I mean considering that with a strap on there really aren't any parts. You know like "private parts". Hehehe... Good one. I wonder how come no one else has ever thought of this. I guess everyone else is too stupid. We're smart. :)

  93. Re:Ask Slashdot: Which is less gay? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But that's not what the original question asked. It asked if it's more gay to get a blow job from a guy or get fucked in the ass with a strap-on by a woman.

  94. SKYNET? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if consciousness is a side effect of networked sensors, memory and processes to enhance functionality.. would it not be safe to assume that this could be an artificial intelligence experiment?

  95. Anyone Else... by suwain_2 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Affiliate "Networks" and "NBC," and read "Sensor" as "Censor," assuming that the government was trying to censor networks like NBC? (And was anyone else... not surprised?)

    --
    ________________________________________________
    suwain_2 :: quality slashdot p
  96. Nanites by jinglecat · · Score: 0

    .[insert Nanites MST3K reference here]

    .[particulary insert Ned the Nanite reference here because he is Kute]

  97. The problem is that the israelis exist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "If they hadn't been there in the first place..."

    That's the real problem with you isn't it? That the Jews have been there in the first place, and they've been there for thousands of years. The only solution is the final solution, right?

    "the existance of Israel - on land taken from other people - without being anti semitic"

    Every country is built on land someone took from someone else long before.

    "
    " On this point you are incorrect. "

    No, you are incorrect. Referring to more recent history, Israel took land which was owned by the distant British empire.

    1. Re:The problem is that the israelis exist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "That the Jews have been there in the first place, and they've been there for thousands of years. The only solution is the final solution, right?"

      See what I mean. If anyone disagrees with you, they are a nazi. You`ve invoked Godwins Law - I win the argument.

      Now, fuck off, you ignorant cretin.

  98. Refuting Chomsky by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I'm not interested in your criticisms of him as a person, simply his arguments. "

    My criticism of him is of his arguments, which are quite nonfactual and delusional. Personal? He might be good to play tennis against, but who knows.

    "but no-one who have done so have ever refuted a single fact."

    You can't refute a fact that is not presented. However, it is easy to refute Chomksy's fiction. He lies about just about everything. One of the most disturbing is when he lied about Pol Pot.

    It is easy to see why little of what he says makes sense: he twists everything to fit the ideology of Marxist economics/etc, which is itself invalid and is more of a religion than any sort of intellectual discipline.

    1. Re:Refuting Chomsky by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "You can't refute a fact that is not presented. However, it is easy to refute Chomksy's fiction. He lies about just about everything"

      How much longer do I have to wait until you attempt to refute a single one of his facts?

  99. Wait! This'll be illegal! by casmithva · · Score: 1
    Linked in an Internet-like peer-to-peer network spanning wireless, wired and satellite links.

    So, would the feds' use of this network violate the new Conyers-Berman anti-P2P bill?

  100. will it even work? by juan2074 · · Score: 1

    It might calm some people to know that such a system is in place to detect certain terror-inducing chemical attacks or bioweapons, but it may not actually detect anything.

  101. Oh, stop it. by twitter · · Score: 1
    CIA official John Fulton and his team "were running a pre-planned simulation to explore the emergency response issues that would be created if a plane were to strike a building.

    I'd rather think that Ossama was a strategic master than someone taking all his ideas from the CIA. Some people just take the fun out of everything.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  102. Oh? by twitter · · Score: 1
    Two things - first, a decent sensor device made to detect specific things (like sarin, soman, etc, which are all chemically similar) won't be tripping on a cigarette. Pattern won't match.

    So what does your system make of mass food poisioning from a popular Taco Bell bad bean batch in Manhatan? Would airborn botulism trigger anything? It would be a bad day to ride the subway, but an evacuation might be overkill.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

    1. Re:Oh? by siskbc · · Score: 1
      So what does your system make of mass food poisioning from a popular Taco Bell bad bean batch in Manhatan? Would airborn botulism trigger anything? It would be a bad day to ride the subway, but an evacuation might be overkill.

      What are you talking about? I work on chemical, not bio, but botulism can be detected, I believe, and has a rather unique signature. If the concentration is high enough it might be dangerous. Either way it probably won't look like a cigarette.

      If it was my system, all I could do is provide information and a rough risk estimate. Making policy decisions isn't my job.

      --

      -Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat

  103. It would be good. by twitter · · Score: 1

    In the event of an actual nuclear attack, millions of sensors could cry out at once, "Duck and cover!" Ah yes, I feel better already.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  104. CBN? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well if you reorder it as CBN you get the Christian Broadcast Network - and then you are theoretically trying to get early warning of Pat Robertson.

  105. MEMS and NANOTECH?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Speaking as someone who got a PhD from making chemical and biosensors, MEMS and nanotechnology are NOT needed for a proposal such as this... in fact they would probably increase the cost significantly.

  106. Re:NBC? by martyn+s · · Score: 1

    No THAT's Fox News.

    Actually, while we're making fun of CBN and Fox News, I'd like to point out that Al Jazeera is actually acknowledged as being pretty fair. Sure, it shows stories from an Arab, Middle-Eastern perspective, but the don't just lie or make things up, and it's not just a propaganda network. They've often reported truthful things even though it upset the Arab population. In fact, I'd almost say that Al-Jazeera is MORE fair than Fox News.

  107. Fox News is fair by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fox News is known for being fair and balanced, especially in comparison with the left-wing media that dominates American television and the right-wing media that dominates AM radio.

    1. Re:Fox News is fair by martyn+s · · Score: 1

      Troll, you're new at this aren't you? It's gonna take something more clever than that to get me going.

    2. Re:Fox News is fair by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See the thing most people don't get is that Fox News is a news parody network kind of like the program "the daily show" is. There are a few clues that give this fact away, well aside from the "reporting", most noticable is the name. The Fox in Fox News is actually like the EZ in EZ-SCSI in that it plays off the common sound of saying the letters E and Z together as E,Z sounds like the word easy, similarly the Word "Fox" in Fox News actually refers to the French word Faux or in English False, Therefore the play on words that most people fail to grasp is that "Fox News" is really supposed to be interpreted as "Faux News" or translated "False News". I hope that clears up most of the confusion.

  108. Why does it always have to be high tech? by theolein · · Score: 1

    I am surprised that the CIA, FBI, NSA and SPCA always get upset about NBC weapons. Why should a terrorist who is intent on killing huge amounts of people always have to think like a second rate hollywood scriptwriter? 19 Highjackers killled many people with box cutters, some flight training and a good portion of fanaticism. Timothy McVeigh killed more than a hundred people with a truckload of fertiliser, some easily available bomb manuals and training provided by your friendly US Army, incidentaly putting him in the same boat as Osama and co.

    If someone fanatic enough to kill many people wants to do so, he doesn't need exotic weapons. All he needs is some fellow travellers and either readily available chemicals, such as Cyanide or some freely available rifles. If he wanted to bring down an airliner, him and his buddies would only have to take sufficient pot shots at a starting jumbo loaded with people and fuel.

    Tackling the source of terrorism, and I don't mean bombing and invading foreign countries, would bring more that spending millions on high tech gadgetry that wouldn't detect any threat until it was too late anyway.

  109. Most Damning Evidence: by lommer · · Score: 1

    You guys are missing the most damning evidence of all: In 1994, a group of islamic terrorists tried the exact same stunt by attempting to crash an Air France 747 into the eiffel tower! They were only stopped because the pilot managed to persuade them that it was neccesary to stop for fuel, and the plane was stormed on the ground.

    More info.

    1. Re:Most Damning Evidence: by greenrd · · Score: 1
      Actually, I think I can top that. When Bush visited Italy for the G8 meeting in summer 2001 (scene of the Genoa protests), the possibility of planes being used as terrorist weapons was mooted, and the airspace over Genoa was closed and anti-aircraft guns were put in place.

      And yet they expect us to believe that before September 11, no aerial defenses were in place to protect the Pentagon and the White House?

  110. -1 Redundant by yerricde · · Score: 1

    There already exists a (-1, Predictable) moderation in Slash; it's called (-1, Redundant). For more detailed information, please read my guide to moderation "reasons".

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  111. Why they're called "WMD" now. by yerricde · · Score: 1

    You were confused. Therefore, NBC TV has a case. In fact, I read somewhere that NBC had to threaten trademark action against CNN and Fox News in order to get them to switch from the "NBC" abbreviation to "WMD" for "weapons of mass destruction".

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  112. We've gotten a bit better since then by siskbc · · Score: 1
    Well, gee. That sounds an awful lot like what the CIA tried during the vietnam war: they set up an extensive network of fairly sophisticated sensors designed to figure out VC troop movements through the jungle. What did the VC do? they went through the jungles hanging buckets of piss on trees. These buckets produced enough odour to trip the chemical sensors and the entire multi-million dollar network was rendered useless.

    Good point, but I would say that the state-of-the-art is a damn sight better that 70's vintage stuff, though spoofing will always be a problem. Also, here we have the advantage of looking for truly foreign substances, like sarin. So people can put a bucket of piss next to the sensor all day, I can still smell sarin. And not many things smell like sarin. ;)

    The point is that distributed, coherent, reliable sensor networks are in practice a lot harder to implement than theory would suggest.

    Trust me, I know - I'm not dealing with tehory, but with practice. It certainly isn't easy, but by training the thing effectively and using some clever signal-processing techniques, false positives can be greatly reduced. Also, using a variety of very different sensors means that someone would have to spoof all the sensors - meaning that every sensor would have to believe the spoofing agent smelled like the target. For that to occur, they'd have to be almost identical. And there are VERY few nonlethal compounds that smell like sarin, and none of them occur naturally.

    --

    -Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat

  113. Ugh, god. Protect us from the clueless. by Mac+Degger · · Score: 1

    What always amuses me about these fearmongering projects is that they're useless, and demonstrably so to the point of having been demonstrated.

    One: these projects won't save lives; if the poison's been deployed, the 'early warning' isn't going to save those in the line of fir^H^H^H the mist. And as soon as those people drop, the authorities will have a clue something's up.

    Two: bacteriological and chemical attacks are notoriously ineffective. The gas attacks in WWI show this, as do the acts of that cult in Japan (who tried on numerous occasions to use B/C's , but always failed miserably...except in one case, the subway, but that was an enclosed space) and even what 'Chemical Ali' supposedly did. Fact is that to do damage you need to drench the area and hope the weather helps you a lot. And even then fatalities is severly limited.

    So what such a sensor net really is, is an attempt to gain some money from post 9/11 fears. FDR saw it coming when he warned of the military-industrial complex.

    --
    -- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
  114. Let's take this a step further by serutan · · Score: 1

    How about a bell that rings any time one of our corporations, or their subsidiary government agencies, gives somebody one more reason to hate the US?

  115. Yeah, but is it as good as a dog? by sn00ker · · Score: 1
    a cantilever based electronic nose that has the potential to detect a single molecule.
    That's fine, but can it do the job as well as a dog's nose? A book I read about working dogs (drug, arson, etc) was saying that a dog can detect, at a distance, concentrations of a part-per-trillion that electronic detectors are unable to detect at the source.
    --
    "God, root, what is difference?" - Pitr, userfriendly
  116. Civics lesson by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You have it backwards: the agencies control the corporations (through a huge number of burdensome regulations, and overtaxation)

  117. But there's still a long way to go. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, I am in this business as well, but you can't deny that if you use sensitive enough radiation sensors, like NaI scintillators, that every propane truck that drives by (Radon) or any truck heavily covered with winter road salt (Potassium) will give you several sigmas over background.

    Don't forget the medical uptakes. One I131 patient is enough to trip a good flat panel vehicular portal at 60 feet.

    I don't know whether there's enough Po-210 in a cigarette to trip a small scintillator were you to smoke underneath it.

    I won't even mention the challenges of preconcentration.

    I think we will make these a LOT better, but it is going to take some time. A lot of us are working on it.

  118. Real solutions to real problems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "One: these projects won't save lives; if the poison's been deployed..."
    This may be true for chemical attacks, but for biological attacks such as smallpox, symptoms won't show up for days or weeks. Radiological and chemical detectors may give us advance warning before the bomb goes off.

    "Two: bacteriological and chemical attacks are notoriously ineffective. "
    To date, yes. However, the problem is essentially a mass transport problem, and rather easily solved in enclosed spaces. As for weaponizing anthrax to deliver via crop duster, we simply don't know what technologies are out there.

    I am a researcher developing these bio sensor networks. They are highly sensitive and selective-we can detect single nucleotide mismatch. There are still may technical hurdles to overcome-it's quite difficult to crack an anthrax spore in the microscale. If research programs like this one are successful, sensor networks deployed in strategic locations-such as ventilation systems, etc-could detect pathogens before people were exposed.

    Anthrax and smallpox are real threats today. In the future the possiblilty of engineered pathogens is even more daunting. This research is not some crass exploitation of people's 9/11 fears but a critical need within the US. Spare us your arrogance.

  119. I hope.. by crusher-1 · · Score: 1

    there not using W2k3 to run it or we're in big trouble.

  120. How long do you have to wait? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "How much longer do I have to wait until you attempt to refute a single one of his facts?"

    A very long time: Professor Chomsky hardly ever provides facts to refute when it comes to his writings about world affairs. He does, however, provide many lies which are easily refuted.

  121. You invoked it first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "You`ve invoked Godwins Law - I win the argument."

    You brought it on first with your directly anti-semitic statements, including the recent implication that the root cause of the problem is the existence of Jews.

    Regardless, "winning" an argument has nothing to do with whether or not the Godwin's law is invoked, or who invokes it.

    Hitler and Nazi comparisons certainly are not out of place when someone proposes getting rid of huge numbers of Jews.

  122. Re:NBC? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's only less full of scum and scams then the Trinity Broadcast Network: "Send us $1000 and we will send you a pamphlet telling you what GOD will personally do to help your financial situation".

  123. Advantages to chem vs. rad by siskbc · · Score: 1

    That's true, I think my job's a bit easier - when you're dealing with chemical agents, *nothing* will look like sarin to 20 different sensors. On the other hand, you're right, there's no way to distinguish between a real radiation source hundreds of yeards away vs. a cancer patient sitting on the source. Maybe if you have a network you can triangulate? Still tough.

    --

    -Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat

  124. Thoughtcrime! by Deflagro · · Score: 1

    Beware, you've committed a thoughtcrime and will soon be taken up by the Department of HS without notice or warning. Thanks you and remember, Big Brother is your friend.

    --
    Der Tod ist der einzige Weg hier raus!
  125. Re:So... by jo42 · · Score: 1


    Only if it is a biohazard...

  126. Propaganda? No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    " That's because you're a jaded american fallen into the propaganda your gov't feeds you"

    First, there is no such thing as "propaganda". It is just information. "Propaganda" is merely a pejorative used for information that some hold in contempt or would like censored.

    Second, our government "feeds" us little. Unlike Canada, the UK, and other countries, our government-controlled media outlets are small and weak and watched or listened to by few.

    "They just don't make war the focus of their country."

    That is because Canada has relied on the United States to defend it, especially in the Cold War and now the war on terror.

  127. H-bombs used in WW 2? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "- US foreign policy? Osama just makes stuff up: at once point he raved about the US having attacked countries with H-bombs." You may want to study a little event called WWII"

    You are the one who needs to study it. If you did, you will find that there was nothing called the H-Bomb involved in it at all. The H-Bomb was in fact invented in 1948, years after World War II ended.

    I see the Usama is not the only guy who has no idea what he is talking about.

  128. Re:NBC? by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

    Wasn't it Atomic, Bio., Chem. before?

    --

    Lars T.

    To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck