Slashdot Mirror


Does A Pentium 4 Need A Weapons License?

WindBourne writes "It appears to be that the U.S. house of Reps. want to classify Pentium 4 and above CPUs as weapons. This would mean that all these will require export licenses. Apparently, they have not heard about that the far east has developed large CPUs as well that are used in beowulf clusters." According to the article, this clause is unlikely to appear in the final version -- but stranger things have happened.

155 of 766 comments (clear)

  1. I tought... by hummassa · · Score: 4, Interesting

    They were manufactured in Taiwan or someplace... ?! can anyone clarify this to me?

    --
    It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
    1. Re:I tought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      well.. another country to be liberated soon

    2. Re:I tought... by cynic10508 · · Score: 3, Funny

      They were manufactured in Taiwan or someplace... ?!

      How do you say "Beowulf" in Mandarin?

    3. Re:I tought... by VAXman · · Score: 4, Informative

      Most are manufactured in US; the only foreign countries where they are made are Ireland and Israel. They are packaged in various places around the world (Costa Rica, Malaysia, Philipines, etc.).

    4. Re:I tought... by Donny+Smith · · Score: 2, Informative

      Beowulf

      (www.linux.org.tw/CLDP/OLD/Beowulf-HOWTO-5.html)

    5. Re:I tought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If the final packaging of the raw chips into usable format is done in a 3rd world country with cheap labor, then people who want to 'smuggle' them will just do it from there rather than the US. The only people who will lose from this kind of export control would be US companies that assemble computers. And that is even assuming you can enforce this sort of thing in the US, which won't work very well. The gov't can't keep billions of dollars worth of illegal products from coming into the US, how will they keep things from going out?

    6. Re:I tought... by IWannaBeAnAC · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Doesn't AMD have a big fab plant in Desden, Germany?

    7. Re:I tought... by BeeRockxs · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes, afaik even it's most modern and biggest one.

    8. Re:I tought... by confused+one · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yes it does. "Fab 30" and "Fab 36" are in Dresden. They make the Athlons at "Fab 30". I'm not sure if "Fab 36" makes Athlons or Opterons.

    9. Re:I tought... by confused+one · · Score: 4, Informative

      You forgot Japan. Fujitsu makes Sparc's. NEC makes pretty good computers, at least the Earth Simulator seems to be fairly fast...

    10. Re:I tought... by SilentChris · · Score: 4, Funny

      Imagine a Beowulf cluster of US representatives. Never mind... that wouldn't produce much more work than one representative (0 x any number...)

    11. Re:I tought... by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 5, Funny

      How do you say "Beowulf" in Mandarin?

      Genghis Khan?

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    12. Re:I tought... by Shoten · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It doesn't matter where they're made, packaged, or whatever. I'll give an example from the "crypto is munitions" situation:

      I'm sitting in my office, and the mail guy comes around, dropping a package on my desk. It's the latest version of Checkpoint Firewall-1, which includes a VPN. It's got a big huge sticker on the outside stating that it is illegal to ship this package to an outside country without whatever the exemption is that needs to take place, yadda yadda yadda. But guess where it was shipped from? Ramat Gan, Israel, sent DHL Worldwide Express.

      --

      For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
    13. Re:I tought... by Bombcar · · Score: 4, Funny

      Is "Fab 4" in England?

    14. Re:I tought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Mk, so anyone moving out of the US or back into the US like myself due to the military needs an export and possibly import license for a computer that was considered fast in '99.

      Its irked me for years that people making laws have no sense as to what they are "protecting". I mean, give me a break - what idiot thinks that a computer from '99 on is going to threaten the US? The most threatening thing out right now is the internet due to access to information. Any 486 can still get online with the help of Linux for god sake. A 386 can still get online if you have a hell of a lot of patience... tards

    15. Re: I tought... by Mad+Bad+Rabbit · · Score: 4, Funny

      Or maybe BEI4 YAO3 WU2 FU2 [4ff6 302d 4ad3 3695], which (I think) means 'completely unfathomable vast big-head'.

      (however, I don't speak Mandarin, this is just from looking up syllables in the Unihan Database

      --
      >;k
    16. Re:I tought... by Mad+Bad+Rabbit · · Score: 2, Funny
      Is "Fab 4" in England?

      It was, but then Michael Jackson bought it and had it moved to his backyard (next to the roller-coaster).

      --
      >;k
    17. Re:I tought... by Biege · · Score: 2, Interesting

      According to a friend of mine who works as contractor in that fab (in Dresden), the wafers are manufactured here, then flown to Texas for testing and finally are cut into chips and packaged in Malaysia. The testing step may some day be performed in Dresden, so some stupid laws in the U.S. probably will not cut the supply of Athlons and Opterons from the rest of the world. (Until some EU politician is brib^H^H^H^H^H^H^H decides to adopt those laws, of course).

    18. Re:I tought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      --Texas? I hope so, poor oppressed misguided people.. Their mullahs make them worship strange things like cows and oblong balls. They have temples with over priced knick knacks they buy and give to each other as some sort of pagan ritual. Then they erect these strange skeleton looking towers all over. On their pagan holidays they get out of their mind on this "brew" stuff they have and just...fight and swear and do a lot of animal sacrafice. They wear funny shoes and hats, too, not anything like what normal people wear. All in all, yes, they need liberating and some enlightnment to get civilised.

    19. Re:I tought... by eRacer1 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Fab 30 currently makes all AMD CPUs (Athlon XP, Athlon 64, Opteron, etc.) Fab 36 is under construction next door to Fab 30, but won't even start limited production until H2 2005.

    20. Re:I tought... by Cybersonic · · Score: 2, Informative

      heh, it seems a ton of 'internet security' products are produced in Israel... Check Point, Sanctum, Aladdin are a few that come to mind.

      --
      Cybie! aka Ralph Bonnell
    21. Re:I tought... by Epi-man · · Score: 2, Informative

      AMD numbers their fabs based on the year they were built. AMD was founded in 1969, so Fab 25 in Austin came online in 1994 (25 years after the founding), Fab 30 in 1999, and Fab 36 is slatted for 2005, so right now Fab 36 isn't making much ;).

      I used to work at "Fab 15" although it was owned by Sony at the time. Boy do I miss it.

    22. Re:I tought... by obdulio · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Beowulf was a legendary warrior and king in the old saxonic tradition, much like Gengis Khan was in for the moguls (not the chinese mandarins)

      --
      PENAROL: Seras eterno como el tiempo y floreceras en cada primavera.
  2. Donno about Pentium 4 but Athlon is a weapon by Donny+Smith · · Score: 5, Funny

    Athlon is definitively a dangerous weapon - it can cause 3rd degree skin burns

    1. Re:Donno about Pentium 4 but Athlon is a weapon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      So that makes my G5 a... what? Weapon of Mass Computation?

    2. Re:Donno about Pentium 4 but Athlon is a weapon by JamesP · · Score: 2, Informative

      MOD pARENT TROLL

      Athlons have solved their overheating problems ages ago... Now, Prescotts, OTOH...

      --
      how long until /. fixes commenting on Chrome?
    3. Re:Donno about Pentium 4 but Athlon is a weapon by Carnildo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Athlons have solved their overheating problems ages ago... Now, Prescotts, OTOH...

      Athlons are as hot as ever. It's just that, compared to the Prescott, it doesn't seem so hot after all.

      --
      "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
    4. Re:Donno about Pentium 4 but Athlon is a weapon by basics · · Score: 2, Informative

      The article itself (what am I, new here?) mentions that the processing restrictions being proposed would affect any cpu >= ~600mhz pentium 3.

  3. Air travel by eggoeater · · Score: 5, Funny

    So can I still fly with my "weapon"?

    1. Re:Air travel by Solar+Limb · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You joke, but I can see the legislation now. The government idiots are idiot enough to make the classification and then have its agencies live and die by such a decree, now matter how stupid it is in the pragmatic world.

    2. Re:Air travel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      not with the 478 sharp objects attached to it...

    3. Re:Air travel by Short+Circuit · · Score: 4, Informative

      Doh! Quoth the article:

      Section 1404 of the appropriations bill would roll back the licensing equation to a level not seen since 1994.

      "The President shall require a license...for the export of goods or technologies included on the Militarily Critical Technologies List," Section 1404 of the House bill states. That list cites a level of 1,500 MTOPS as being militarily critical.

    4. Re:Air travel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, fellow idiot, schools instituted "no tolerance" rules to keep students from using those bad illegal drugs, and guess what?!?!? Now students are being expelled for bringing over-the-counter drugs to school. We have a case here where an honor student was seen taking a Motrin tablet for her PMS cramps and the school officials want to send her to an alternative school. They also had the option of expelling her.

      Anytime a law or rule is made, you have to think about the EXTREME application of it because the people enforcing it tend to be idiots like you.

    5. Re:Air travel by duffel · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, because you might put the pilots to sleep by solving complex differential equations at them with your weapon.

      Do not underestimate the soporific power of indiscriminate maths!

    6. Re:Air travel by shadowcabbit · · Score: 5, Funny

      Do not underestimate the soporific power of indiscriminate maths!

      I'd be more worried about the indiscriminate use of weapons of math destruction.

      --
      "Why Subscribe?" Good question...
    7. Re:Air travel by GigsVT · · Score: 5, Insightful

      From the article:

      "You cannot control anything that is made by the millions and which you can put in your pocket."

      -Seymore Goodman, professor of International Affairs and Computing at the Georgia Institute of Technology

      It's too bad more people don't realize this, we could end this silly "war on drugs".

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    8. Re:Air travel by catch23 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well at least you can sniff out drugs. How do you sniff out processors? Are we going to train dogs to sniff out pcb's and other electronics too? I wonder if the dog could tell the difference between a 1.7Ghz Celeron and a 3.2 P4 Extreme Edition processor? That would be way cool.... I could get the dog to find me "repackaged" celeron chips that I could overclock to 3.2Ghz....

    9. Re:Air travel by screwballicus · · Score: 3, Informative

      We have a case here where an honor student was seen taking a Motrin tablet for her PMS cramps and the school officials want to send her to an alternative school.

      Here's a link to that story for those interested.

    10. Re:Air travel by Eraser_ · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You would be surprised at how no tolerance rules get thrown out the window for asthma inhalers, especially albuterol ones (fast acting). While most schools have (or had) functions in place for students to be allowed to carry their drugs with them, some do not, all pending a doctor signing the right forms.

      I had a few teachers who tried to write me up for huffing and puffing into my inhaler, most failed when presented with the option of having to write me passes whenever I needed to use my inhaler, or calling an ambulance to deal with the problem. PMS drugs can be harder, but a lot of doctors will sign off on a Rx for midol "as needed" for girls to be able to keep the drug at school. Your insurance might also pick up the tab on that $10 bottle of drugs, or you can likely not pay sales tax on it.

  4. I'm sure they have P4's in Iraq by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    ..so perhaps we were justified going in there after all.

  5. How would this help? by AKAImBatman · · Score: 5, Informative

    Foreigners could simply obtain SPARC or MIPS specs and fab a multi-GHz version of those. Since these chips are better designed for multi-processing, foreign powers could scale them just as high as a PIV cluster, and run their nuclear simulations. Time to worry more about refined Uranium-235 and Plutonium-239.

    1. Re:How would this help? by ch-chuck · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah, but since they can't run Windows® it would be not ready for the desktop.

      If it sucks, say it sucks

      --
      try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
    2. Re:How would this help? by Wesley+Felter · · Score: 4, Interesting

      VIA is based in Taiwan, but its C3 processors are designed in Austin, TX and manufactured in Taiwan and New York. I wonder how the export laws apply in cases like this.

    3. Re:How would this help? by onion2k · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Better yet, as I'm a Brit I can make a killing buying these chips and sellng them on to countries that my government doesn't have silly rules against. Exactly the same way Europeans used to buy IBMs and sell them to Russia during the cold war.

      1. US government make silly rules.
      2. I start import/export co.
      3. ???
      4. Profit.

      Cheers.

    4. Re:How would this help? by spamchang · · Score: 2, Funny

      I suggest the name of the company as 'Universal Exports.'

      (surely someone here gets the joke)

  6. It's about time they catch up by jokell82 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Back when the fastest x86 chip was a Pentium 2, the G3 received this same classification. Apple even ran ads that proclaimed their "weapons grade" status. Looks like Intel is finally catching up with an Apple chip that's two revisions old. :o)

    --
    I dunno who it is
    but it prolly is fhqwhgads.
    1. Re:It's about time they catch up by goMac2500 · · Score: 5, Informative

      It was actually the G4 because it was the first processor that could pull a gigaflop.

    2. Re:It's about time they catch up by jokell82 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Ah you're right. I dunno why I though it was the G3. In any case, you can watch the ad here, labeled "Supercomputer.mov."

      --
      I dunno who it is
      but it prolly is fhqwhgads.
    3. Re:It's about time they catch up by mikeee · · Score: 2, Funny

      And I thought it was Itanium that was the gigaflop...

  7. Typical technical ignorance by setzman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This ignorance is often displayed by many politicians, regardless of political orientation. Anything we can do to change it? I really don't think so. Politicians just want to do what they can to get (re)elected.

    --
    C:\>
    1. Re:Typical technical ignorance by drooling-dog · · Score: 4, Insightful
      This ignorance is often displayed by many politicians, regardless of political orientation.

      Ignorance is only part of the problem. You're assuming that most of these politicians even care whether the measures they propose are practical, effective, fair, or even needed. They don't. What they do care about is getting some publicity, and being seen as strong and proactive by constituents that are even more ignorant than themselves.

    2. Re:Typical technical ignorance by tsg · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Is it ignorance, or it is fear?

      It's fear based on ignorance.

      --
      People's desire to believe they are right is much stronger than their desire to be right.
  8. new? by hennar · · Score: 4, Interesting

    xboxes are already illegal to export(from the US) to certain countries, and Dell also has an export statement when you order

  9. new way of waging wars? by kalpol · · Score: 4, Funny

    So are wars gonna be decided with Unreal Tournament now?

    --
    12:50 - press return.
  10. uh oh by ak3ldama · · Score: 5, Funny

    being in a large room full of developers sitting unhappily at cubicles is bad enough, but no we are all armed with weapons, ahhhh!!!

    --
    "but money is the God of Algiers & Mahomet their prophet." - Rich. O'Bryen June 8th 1786
  11. Re:fp by CrudPuppy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I guess what I find amusing about this is that very few of the CPUs nowadays are manufactured in the USA. Taiwan, Germany, etc.

    So we bring them here when complete and then decide they can't leave the country?? heh.

    --
    A year spent in artificial intelligence is enough to make one believe in God.
  12. Personally, I think by GillBates0 · · Score: 3, Funny

    my keyboard, in it's current condition, should be classified as a WMD.

    --
    An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
  13. Playstation 2 anyone? by kidgenius · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I remember when the Playstation 2 was qualified as such (or so I remember) and it couldn't be exported to certain countries because it could be used in weapons or some BS like that.

  14. beowulf cluster by stang7423 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Can you imagine a beowulf cluster of congressman...

    It would be the only cluster in the world to slow down as you add nodes.

    1. Re:beowulf cluster by jasno · · Score: 3, Funny
      From here:

      Bradley's Bromide: If computers get too powerful, we can organize them into a committee -- that will do them in.
      --

      http://www.masturbateforpeace.com/
    2. Re:beowulf cluster by 4of12 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Can you imagine a beowulf cluster of congressman...

      Easily - if there's a lobbyist in the middle, or perhaps Fanne Fox (for those old enough to remember Wilbur Mills...)

      --
      "Provided by the management for your protection."
    3. Re:beowulf cluster by Paulrothrock · · Score: 2, Funny

      So that's why the space shuttle has such slow computers!

      --
      I'm in the hole of the broadband donut.
  15. Get it right... by HardCase · · Score: 4, Informative

    It wasn't "the House of Representatives", it was Representative Duncan Hunter, a San Diego Republican who makes Rush Limbaugh look moderate...and that's coming from a registered Republican!

    The amendment will never leave the House.

    -h-

    1. Re:Get it right... by savagedome · · Score: 4, Funny

      The amendment will never leave the House

      Famous last words

    2. Re:Get it right... by mopomi · · Score: 5, Informative
      From the article:

      The dramatic tightening of export regulations is included in the National Defense Authorization Act, an annual military funding bill that has already passed the U.S. House of Representatives. Though the proposed rules are only a tiny portion of the 630-page bill, they could have a devastating impact on the computer industry.

      Emphasis mine. It's already left the house.

  16. Weapons of Mass Destruction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    So, now we can finally identify the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq!

    I was beginning to get worried that my beloved president was wrong.

  17. Thanks for the info. now go to jail. by PsiPsiStar · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now we're going to have to arrest you for disseminating this information.

    Sincerely,

    The Feds

    --

    ___
    It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
  18. Is a weapons license necisarry? by theJerk242 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Does A Pentium 4 Need A Weapons License?

    Sure, if you throw one hard enough.

    --
    Red Bull gave me wings and I flew into the ceiling fan.
    1. Re:Is a weapons license necisarry? by GoRK · · Score: 3, Funny

      I was thinking more along the lines of "Incendeary Device"...

  19. Concealed weapon... by k4_pacific · · Score: 4, Funny

    Does this mean I need a CCW permit to stick a P4 in my pocket?

    --
    Unknown host pong.
  20. Is this sponsored by AMD? by Vlad_the_Inhaler · · Score: 4, Funny

    AMD would presumably love this - their Opterons are produced in Dresden and I can't see the Germans joining in on this.

    --
    Mielipiteet omiani - Opinions personal, facts suspect.
    1. Re:Is this sponsored by AMD? by sumdumass · · Score: 2, Informative

      I believe the export restriction would encompas anything the company made and sold within the US. This means that even though it is produced in a foreign country, the distrobution would still be limited if the company continues to operate withing the US.

      I also think that if they stoped selling in the US, they would have penatlies included to any other portion of the company that would still operate within the US. It is technicaly inclusive so a companiedoesn't just decide to operate outside the boundries of the US and then import instead of following the rules.

    2. Re:Is this sponsored by AMD? by Tackhead · · Score: 2, Funny
      > AMD would presumably love this - their Opterons are produced in Dresden and I can't see the Germans joining in on this.

      There's a firebombing joke in there somewhere.

  21. Already happened to Apple by jeriqo · · Score: 2, Informative

    Well, this already happened to the Powermac G4 back in 1999, since it was considered as a "super computer".

    More infos here.

    --
    Alexis 'jeriqo' BRET
  22. How? by Quixote · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Given the fact that many P4s are made in Malaysia (among other countries), how exactly is the US going to enforce this?

    1. Re:How? by sumdumass · · Score: 2, Informative

      The export restrictions would include the chips manufactured over seas. It would lay criminal penalties against the company and the executives if they knowingly sold to restricted countries even though they were manufactured in another country. The operations still conducting buisiness inside the US would encompass all it's foreign entities. If they pulled up and moved completly out of the ocuntry, then they wouldn't be allow to import again and there would still be a pending charge against them.

      This is what has happend with a couple of other technoligies and i belive that someone was actually extradited from a Europe country because they moved and continued to develope thier technoligy and allow forbiden countries to access it. I forget the name and exact place but it was durring the coldwar, Reagan erra. I Think it was somethign that Isreal got ahold of too.

  23. moores law and all that by machine+of+god · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Even if it did make sense, what's the point?

  24. A weapon? Heh! by Anonym1ty · · Score: 5, Funny

    The use of a Pentium 4 or better as a weapon can easily be avoided by running any Windows variant on it.

    1. Re:A weapon? Heh! by Jesus_666 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Why? I can clearly see many brains suffering damage from prolonged exposure to Windows. Machines running Windows should be classified as violations of the Geneva Protocol, fast or not.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
  25. Brilliant! by macdaddy357 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Everybody knows that all computers, and parts thereof are made here in the good old US of A, so if we don't export them, the moozlim ayrab terrorists can't get them. Our congressmen and senators are geniuses!
    /sarcasm

    --
    How ya like dat?
  26. finally by scaaven · · Score: 3, Funny

    while they're at it, they need to punish the overclockers for making their weapons run faster

    --
    I know I'm going to be modded up on this
  27. Re:When you sit down and think... by nothingtodo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    well, just remember that the Saturn V rocket had a guidance computer that was even simpler than my Apple ][

    --
    -- After all is said and done, more is said than done.
  28. Plant location by Fruny · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Obvious question: what fraction of Intel's chip manufactures is actually located in the USA?

    1. Re:Plant location by sepluv · · Score: 3, Informative
      --
      Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
      [This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
  29. Okay dude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    This is a stick-up. Give me all your money.

    No seriously, I'm packing a P4 3,4ghz. You do NOT want to fuck with me.

  30. Pentium 4 and above? by 56ksucks · · Score: 2, Funny

    This means every AMD chip on earth after the K6 is a weapon.

    --

    ---- "Excuse me. Where's the children's gun section?"

  31. I knew it! by sirgoran · · Score: 5, Funny

    Right before the election Dubya will announce that he's found the missing Weapons of Mass Destruction.

    They're sitting in boxes at the Bagdad CompUSA store marked "Intel inside"!

    Nice work!

    -Goran

    --
    Carpe Scrotum - The only way to deal with your competition.
  32. Good thing I've got a CCW permit. by raider_red · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'd hate to have to leave my laptop at home when I go to the coffee shop. Of course the part about concealing it could be difficult.

    --
    It's good to use your head, but not as a battering ram.
  33. simple solution by at_kernel_99 · · Score: 2, Funny

    All they have to do is require that the faster chips ship with Longhorn. There won't be enough cycles left for advanced weapons design!

  34. There's only one known OS by the_skywise · · Score: 4, Funny

    Proven to disable a US Destroyer.

    Windows NT.

    I suggest that we make it export tariff free and make sure it gets distributed far and wide.

    Because that makes about as much logical sense as this legislation.

  35. Export Licensing is a Joke ! by cbelt3 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So what ? Export licensing has been, and will always be, a hell of a joke. If other nations want our tech they can either buy it through third parties, steal it outright, or buy it through the very lossy and buggy 'export license' process. When I worked in defense, it was amazing how easily people could get licenses for all kinds of stuff. Example: ICBM development technology to Pakistan and India in the 1980's. (Sure, they bought their main missle tech from China and the USSR, but they bought a lot of tech from the US of A too.) It was licensed for 'civilian space exploration' and 'satellite launch'. Yeah, right. It's just another potential trade barrier to US goods. Your Tax Dollars at Work !

  36. Waiting periods, NICS, californians disarmed. by knisa · · Score: 3, Funny

    I feel for California. If this goes through, they'll have legislators pushing for registration, fingerprinting, five day waiting periods, closing the "computer show loophole" and the like. I recommend burying half of your high end computer hardware now so that you can have it available when the government starts confiscating.

    --
    This space for rent.
  37. What about: Gaming consoles, pda, cell phones by marnargulus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "That level is currently set to the equivalent of a computer using a Pentium 3 processor running at 650MHz, state of the art in 1999 but considered feeble today. " That will also mean any of the current generation of gaming devices as well wouldn't it? If I recall the xbox has 800 or 850 mHz, and the gamecube and ps2 aren't far behind. I imagine PDA's would also fall in this area, and some of the newer generation of cell phones?

  38. Would have no effect anyway. by Leomania · · Score: 2, Informative

    Laws like this are silly; they don't stop other parties from getting their hands on the export-controlled product. Period.

    Kind of reminds me of the laws on bottles of inseciticide which state "It is unlawful to use this product in a manner inconsistent with its labelling." or something to that effect. What does my "professional" landscaper tell me? "Oh, I mix these two together in double the concentration to really zap the weeds!" (And no, I didn't let him do that). The law is basically unenforceable. And let's not even talk about posted speed limits! (Guilty as hell on this one). Yes, much more enforceable, and still not all that effective at preventing the behavior (talking percentages here).

    To think the law would do anything useful just goes to show how out of touch some of our elected officials are. Is there really nothing else they can think of doing with their time and position of authority?

    Sheesh.

    - Leo

    --
    You don't use science to show that you're right, you use science to become right.
  39. Congress Is In Session... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Congress is in session, and across this great land of ours, many a village is missing its idiot.

  40. Ill concieved by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The idea of restricting CPU's, or ANY form of computer software for that matter, is completly without justification. States do not require Pentium IVs to launch nuclear missiles or detonate nuclear bombs. These systems were deployed in the seventies with primitive CPUs and little memory or storage space.

    Anyone determined to launch a missile, develop a weapons program, or design a new figher jet, is going to get their hands on computing power and software very easily. All that will end up happening is exports will be stifled as Joe bloggs in RougeStateistan won't fork over cash to US companies to pay for that PC he wanted so he could send email, browse the web and type up documents. Instead he'll give it to a european or russian company.

    You can see the reason for this. The Pentagon is annoyed that foreign governments are using clusters to build supercomputers. Which means that they could start snooping on Pentagon comms instead of the other way around.

    Obviously someone dropped a line like, "Terrorists use Computers to build a-bombs", in the House of Representatives caffeteria. Cue the assembled polititions nodding in agreement and shuffling off to draft a law to "protect the free world".

    Just before lunch was the best time to drop this as their next meal was only seconds away. They still can't think past it!

    --
    May the Maths Be with you!
    1. Re:Ill concieved by mqx · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "The idea of restricting CPU's, or ANY form of computer software for that matter, is completly without justification."

      Completely untrue. For a long time, the Wassenar agreements have prohibited exports of "dual use" technology, and this includes advanced technology. Naturally, as time goes on, the state of the art changes, so what was advanced technology yesterday, is not today. Continual review is needed.

      But, it is without doubt the restricting supplies of advanced technologies does make things harder. Try design and simulation of advanced materials without the use of computing tools. Sure, you can do it, but at a snails pace. I mean, the simple example is that I'll set up a research lab with pentium based computing hardware and software, and you'll set up a lab using i386 based. Tell me who is going to be more productive ?

      I see no problem with restricting supplies to "rogue states", but I do see lots of problems with identifying what are the rogue states, viz. the WMD fiasco with iraq.

  41. WTF? by Raven42rac · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This has to be the goofiest shit I have ever heard coming out of Washington. I take it all our other problems are solved? A computer by itself is not a weapon. It could, however, be used as one, as could a pencil or a brick.

    --
    I hate sigs.
  42. Tech required for building a nuke by TamMan2000 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Q: What did it take for the US to build it's first nuclear weapon?

    A: Several brilliant people and a hell of a lot less computing power than a single P4 (you could run all the programs they ran on a palm pilot in under a day).

    It would take even fewer brilliant people now, since it has been done before... Trying to keep the computing power to build a nuke out of the wrong hands is futile at best.

    --
    "I'll have a Guinness, no wait, make that a Coors Light" -Grad student I work with, who shall remain anonymous...
    1. Re:Tech required for building a nuke by AKAImBatman · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Generally there are two barriers to building a nuke:

      1. Obtaining the materials. Uranium is very difficult and expensive to refine. The US has done their best to keep their process for refining out of foreign hands, but someone with a large enough industrial infrastructure could figure it out. One reason why third world countries have to steal U235 is because they lack the necessary infrastructure.

      2. The only way to know if a bomb will fission properly (i.e. it will blow up and not just very hot) is to test it. This tends to show up on lots of spy satellites, seismic detection equipment, and radiation monitors. Thus enemies are generally prevented from completing any bomb they might be developing. The only known shortcut to this procedure is to use a computer to simulate the bomb. If the simulator results look good, they know they have a good chance that their bomb would work correctly during a live conflict.

      Remember, the biggest trick for third world and terrorists parties is to keep the weapon secret. It's somewhat difficult to stop after you've used it, but if people hear of it ahead of time you're program (and possibly you) is dead.

    2. Re:Tech required for building a nuke by TamMan2000 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      number 1 is the only real problem for a terrorist group.

      for number 2 they just do the test, at a target... If it fails, it is still a dirty bomb, if it suceeds, well then they blew up a city...

      Knowing that it will fission it not necisarry for using the weapon. If fact, a failed nuclear detonation on US soil would inspire extraordinary amounts of fear, a long the lines of "what if it works next time...?".

      For a 3rd world nation, a sucessful test is exactly what they want, a big sign that says "don't fuck with us, we got the bomb". They don't want secrecy, they want publicity.

      --
      "I'll have a Guinness, no wait, make that a Coors Light" -Grad student I work with, who shall remain anonymous...
    3. Re:Tech required for building a nuke by confused+one · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Yes, but there's a flaw in that logic. If a third world country sponsors terrorist who "test" a nuclear weapon in a US city... even if it doesn't work (dirty bomb)... we might be tempted to show them how a real one works.

      I'm not saying I condone this; that it's politically or morally correct. You have to admit it's a real possibility.

    4. Re:Tech required for building a nuke by AKAImBatman · · Score: 3, Interesting

      number 1 is the only real problem for a terrorist group.

      Correction, number 1 is only a real problem for anyone who would actually USE an ABomb in today's world. Larger countries (who are capable of developing an ABomb) certainly wouldn't be looking to tangle with the US's HBomb and Neutron bomb arsenal.

      for number 2 they just do the test, at a target... If it fails, it is still a dirty bomb, if it suceeds, well then they blew up a city...

      Believe it or not, the US is not a primary target for terrorists who get nukes. Most terrorist organizations want us out of the way because we help Israel. If they actually DID acquire a nuke, then they'd want to use it on the Israelis. The only downside is that a nuke that fizzled would only anger Israel and produce the combined force of Israel, the US, and many European powers against the perpetrator.

      If fact, a failed nuclear detonation on US soil would inspire extraordinary amounts of fear, a long the lines of "what if it works next time...?".

      For a 3rd world nation, a sucessful test is exactly what they want, a big sign that says "don't fuck with us, we got the bomb".


      Because they can already see that the US is going to roll over and let them keep "their bomb". ...

      HELL NO! We'd nuke their sorry asses (bomb and all) out of existence before we allowed a credible threat to US soil. Geez, what do we look like over here? Children who are afraid of being spanked with a rod? Hell, I'd be the first in line to sign up for war if we had a real nuclear threat pointed our way!

    5. Re:Tech required for building a nuke by TamMan2000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Because they can already see that the US is going to roll over and let them keep "their bomb". ...

      HELL NO! We'd nuke their sorry asses (bomb and all) out of existence before we allowed a credible threat to US soil.


      Why have we not turned North Korea into a parking lot by now if that is the case?

      We know it would be a blood bath for both sides if we invaded, and a nuclear preemptive strike would be completely unacceptable (plus they might actually be able to nuke Seoul in the time between becoming aware of our attack and impact). It is easier to let them have their deturant as long as they know that using it means they get nuked. It is a mini cold war.

      Geez, what do we look like over here? Children who are afraid of being spanked with a rod?

      A nuclear weapon is a lot more than a rod.

      --
      "I'll have a Guinness, no wait, make that a Coors Light" -Grad student I work with, who shall remain anonymous...
    6. Re:Tech required for building a nuke by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 2, Interesting

      HELL NO! We'd nuke their sorry asses (bomb and all) out of existence before we allowed a credible threat to US soil. Geez, what do we look like over here? Children who are afraid of being spanked with a rod? Hell, I'd be the first in line to sign up for war if we had a real nuclear threat pointed our way!

      Pack your bags - N Korea has a nuke or three and the missiles to send them as far as Seattle. Did we invade them? No, we went after a third world pissant who was stabilizing his country.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    7. Re:Tech required for building a nuke by Sique · · Score: 3, Interesting
      1. Obtaining the materials. Uranium is very difficult and expensive to refine. The US has done their best to keep their process for refining out of foreign hands, but someone with a large enough industrial infrastructure could figure it out. One reason why third world countries have to steal U235 is because they lack the necessary infrastructure.


      Obtaining the materials is easy. I for instance just drive over to Gera-Leumnitz (it's on the Autobahn between me and my parents) and dig in the hills there. If someone wants to see an Uranium mine from close, I may direct you ;) You have a nice view on the Koenigstein mine near Dresden, if you go to the Koenigstein Fortress.

      And the process itself is not that difficult. It's just very, very slow. Take any industry grade centrifuge (one to process dairy milk will do), coat it with something which doesn't get solved in Hydrofluorid (HF) (like porcellain, gold), solve the Uranium in HF to get UF6 (Uraniumhexafluorid) and start centrifuging. Because the weight difference between 235U and 238U is quite small (1%), it takes a very long time to enrich 238U, but it can be done. Everything else is patience.
      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    8. Re:Tech required for building a nuke by confused+one · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Mod me flamebait if you want... but think about it for a minute. What would have happened, in the heat of the moment, if instead of crashing a plane into the Pentagon, they detonated a small, dirty nuke.

    9. Re:Tech required for building a nuke by Jedi+Alec · · Score: 5, Funny

      Read Tom Clancy for the answers to all this...and while you're at it, marvel at his ability to predict the Bush presidency...

      --

      People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
    10. Re:Tech required for building a nuke by fnj · · Score: 4, Informative

      The only way to know if a bomb will fission properly (i.e. it will blow up and not just very hot) is to test it.

      Well, it's the only way to know 100%, but if competent engineers build a Little Boy (Hiroshima) gun-type bomb, they can be very, very confident without bothering to test it.

      The Little Boy bomb design was never tested because it was such a no-brainer that it would work. Built as a back-up to the Fat Man (Nagasaki) implosion type bomb, it was always taken for granted that it would work, while no one was that confident about Fat Man, which was why the design was tested in the Trinity test.

      In a gun-type bomb, you take a slug of fissile material with a hole in it, and build a gun into the bomb to literally shoot a fissile projectile into the hole. Nothing could be simpler in principle. You need precision and competence in the design, and you need to know that projectile will assemble into the slug, but not fly right through it, and you need to tend to some details I'm not going to enumerate, but that is pretty straightforward engineering.

      Little Boy was not very efficient. It had an 85 lb slug of U-235 and a 55 lb projectile of U-235, with what IIRC was a modification of a common 3" gun to shoot it. Only 1.38% of the U-235 actually fissioned, but that was enough to produce an explosion equal to 15,000 tons of TNT.

      Little Boy wasn't very "little" either (10 feet long, 9700 lb). But that isn't much of a package requirement to take out a city with a very high assurance factor.

      It always escaped me why the US (or someone else) didn't simply mass produce gun-type bombs, rather than apply the tremendous amount of science and engineering to perfect the implosion assembly type, of which Fat Man was the first design of many.

    11. Re:Tech required for building a nuke by AKAImBatman · · Score: 3, Interesting

      What would have happened, in the heat of the moment, if instead of crashing a plane into the Pentagon, they detonated a small, dirty nuke.

      Absolutely nothing. Dirty bombs are primarily scare tactics. They're actual ability as a tactical weapon has been highly overrated. Here's a good write-up for you.

    12. Re:Tech required for building a nuke by AKAImBatman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      For me the answer depends on the situation. If there its lead flying all around (a war is already started), I would shoot, but if nobody has fired yet (just posturing), I would hold my fire.

      I think we're agreeing now. Someone who's just posturing does not yet pose a threat serious enough to start a war. Someone who pulls the trigger (or is in the process of pulling the trigger) with an intent to kill DOES pose a threat. It's kind of nice being on the side who can make glass parking lots, though...

    13. Re:Tech required for building a nuke by dmaxwell · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I think Afghanistan would be glowing in the dark right now; and we probably wouldn't have stopped there. The US policy if a WMD is used on us is to answer with WMDs. Since we don't use chemical or biological weapons, what does that leave?

      Any terrorist who gets ahold of a bomb had to have help from a patron Nation. Any such patron would get glassed.

    14. Re:Tech required for building a nuke by fnj · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes, but there's a flaw in that logic. If a third world country sponsors terrorist who "test" a nuclear weapon in a US city... even if it doesn't work (dirty bomb)... we might be tempted to show them how a real one works.

      Oh? Suppose it does work. Then just how to you propose to figure out who "they" are, beyond a reasonable doubt? And if you do figure out who "they" are, how do you make an iron clad case that they have been sponsored at all? And most of all, iron clad case or not, how do you propose to "explain" that the US has destroyed a substantial part of some nation in response for what some criminal element (even if that includes the government, presumably in great secrecy so the citizens would not know it) has perpetrated?

    15. Re:Tech required for building a nuke by |/|/||| · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I don't think it's that simple to establish that a nation "sponsored" the terrorist organization. What if the bomb was built/detonated by terrorists within the US, funded by some US based cult or something? Do we nuke ourselves? What if they're based in Canada? Does that automatically make Canada their "Patron Nation?"

      Building a nuke doesn't necessarily require extraordinary financing - you don't need a huge plutonium refinement factory to produce 1 bomb, you just need a source of refined plutonium.

      This gets a bit OT, though. The issue under discussion - controlling computing hardware as weapons - is obviously asinine. Any general purpose tool can be used as a weapon, or at least to produce weapons.

      --
      [javac] 100 errors
    16. Re:Tech required for building a nuke by Open_The_Box · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I reckon that's unlikely. The moment you start answering nukes with nukes you're in serious overkill trouble. Who's to say whether a reactionary neighbouring country that HAS WMDs won't take umbrage at your setting off some nuclear weapons next door. Retaliation leads to retaliation and so on and so forth.

      A patron nation will contain innocents. Because a small group of people (and I mean small in the same way that a football stadium full of people is small compared to the population of a country) perpetrate an act that kills thousands, doesn't mean you can go and nuke thousands of innocents in a patron nation. Will it make you feel better? Maybe, yeah. Will it all end in tears? Well, probably a big firey death for all concerned but, yeah.

      Sure, terrorism is wrong. I don't think anyone here would seriously dispute that. But it doesn't give us the right to commit acts of terror in retribution. We're meant to be better than that.

      --
      If you can't think of something nice to say then don't say anything at all. No, REALLY.
    17. Re:Tech required for building a nuke by John+Harrison · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The North Koreans have enough conventional firepower aimed at Seoul to reduce it to rubble in a few minutes without the use of a nuclear weapon, and I would guess that they have a few of those aimed at Seoul as well. I wouldn't be shocked if they have an atomic bomb already sitting in Seoul waiting to be set off.

      To top it off, their leaders are nuts and would probably love to go down in flames.

      That is why we basically leave them alone. A war of the Korean Peninsula would be devastating in the first five minutes alone.

    18. Re:Tech required for building a nuke by Sique · · Score: 2, Informative

      You were right :) I just got the wrong key on the numberblock :) 5 and 8 are pretty close.

      Centrifuges are quite simple things, basicly large dishes powered for instance by an electro engine. They have some facilities to get the stuff in the center out of the dish parted from the stuff at the rim. You even could use spoons, which are not really high tech. Even the gold miner's bowls from the pioneer's days in the mid 19th century are basic centrifuges. Of course with them you don't get much productivity.

      No, the real challenge is to get hold of Uranium ore (Germany has much ore, Central Africa is another place, India has its own ressources...) and the financial and organisatorial effort to sustain the Uranium enrichment. The german group around Heisenberg in Haigerloch in World War II needed one year of processing to create enough 235U for their experiments.

      There is still another way: If you take slightly enriched Uranium with still pretty high 238U, you can start a controlled chain reaction by shielding it with cobalt or another neutron reflecting metal, moderate it with water or anthracid and putting in neutron radiation. Part of the 235U will split and send out alpha radiation, which, if caught by a 238U core, will turn it into 241Pu (Plutonium) (and a proton). If the 235U level has sunk beyond a certain level and the chain reaction stops, you can separate Uranium and Plutonium via chemical means, and you get weapongrade Plutonium. This seems to be the process North Corea is using in its nuclear weapons program. Big advantage: You need much less Uranium ore than with pure centrifugation.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    19. Re:Tech required for building a nuke by evilviper · · Score: 2, Informative
      What would have happened, in the heat of the moment, if instead of crashing a plane into the Pentagon, they detonated a small, dirty nuke.

      I've never heard of anything like a "dirty nuke"... Perhaps you mean a dirty bomb (radialogical)?

      In that case, assuming a good-sized explosive, in a busy area of NY, the outcome would have been something like 100 killed (how ever many are killed by the conventional bomb), a few dozen people with their hair falling out, and a multimillion dollar clean-up happening around New York.

      Frankly, I wish they would have taken that route. Less loss of human life. Less economic damage. So on.

      "Dirty" bombs aren't very destructive... They just became the news media's buzz-word for a month because the administration wanting the fear of terrorism to keep up for a while, so they could get everything they wanted.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    20. Re:Tech required for building a nuke by Zordak · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The U.S. does not have a "First Strike" doctrine for its nuclear weapons. If Al Qaeda were a sovereign nation and carried out even a low-level nuclear attack against the U.S., then it might get the favor returned, but it isn't. In fact, while serving the very important purpose of deterring strikes from other nuclear-capable nations, our nuclear arsenal is a really lousy deterrant for terrorist organizations precisely because they know we will not use them. The highest priority right now is protecting our nuclear arsenal from potential terrorists who might like to get their hands on the material (though even if they did, the safety mechanisms would damage the fissile core beyond usefulness anyway). If we want a credible threat against terrorists, we need to deploy an arsenal of non-nuclear strategic weapons. For example, take the decomissioned Peacekeepers and deploy them on either coast, except instead of putting 10 300-kT warheads on the top, put 10 non-nuclear vehicles. Then we have the ability to hit any target on the planet within 30 minutes with what amounts to basically 10 small meteors with some conventional explosives for a little extra punch. We wouldn't be so hesitant to launch these, so when we find an Al-Qaeda training camp and learn the Osama is hiding out in it, 30 minutes later it's been pounded to dust, everybody in it is dead, and there's no fallout to worry about. That's the strategic weapon of the future.

      --

      Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
    21. Re:Tech required for building a nuke by HeghmoH · · Score: 4, Informative

      It always escaped me why the US (or someone else) didn't simply mass produce gun-type bombs, rather than apply the tremendous amount of science and engineering to perfect the implosion assembly type, of which Fat Man was the first design of many.

      The gun design requires a lot of refined material, which is expensive. It also doesn't scale. You can make implosion bombs use fantastically small amounts of material, or you can scale their yield up greatly, or use them as the trigger to a fusion bomb, and they will be cheaper to produce (even if more expensive to design) than the gun design. When you're making thousands of them, using less material is a significant gain. When you're planning on using thousands of them in a full-scale war that you want some people to survive, using less material is also a significant gain. And when you want to stick them on top of missiles or inside bombers to launch them at your enemies, making them as small and as light as possible is yet another significant gain.

      --
      Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
    22. Re:Tech required for building a nuke by dbIII · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I think Afghanistan would be glowing in the dark right now; and we probably wouldn't have stopped there
      Hmm, one nuke in every steep mountain valley (big mountains there - miles high, we're not in Kansas anymore) - since the guys in the next valley would just see big flash of light and the guys in the caves miles away would just feel a tremour. That's a really expensive way to kill a few goats, some unlucky farmers, and a couple of dozen crazies with guns each time - assuming that the intelligence is up to date enought to know if those dozen crazies are in that valley.
      Any terrorist who gets ahold of a bomb had to have help from a patron Nation
      While it sounded nice as a distraction to have Saddam look as if he would be the guy who would do this, the reality was -

      1/ He didn't have the technology

      2/ He didn't have the materials, imaginary Niger Uranium notwithstanding

      3/ As a secular state in the middle east, with a Christian as second in command, extremist Islamic crazies hated him more than they hated the USA.

      Nasty guy, nasty state but problably not stupid enough to give those that wanted his head on a plate a nuclear bomb.

      Even North Korea is not stupid enough to do something like that, why give away your bargaining power?

  43. Somewhere in Iraq by bl8n8r · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Colonel Look, A whole stack of Pentium 4s!"
    "Good work private. We've finally found those WMDS."

    --
    boycott slashdot February 10th - 17th check out: altSlashdot.org
  44. This won't stop the dedicated by Stevyn · · Score: 2

    I am assuming this is to prevent terrorists and rogue nations from developing super computers that would...do something bad? Alright, maybe some nuclear weapons simulations? Here's the problem, any country or group of people can get their hands on pentiums if they tried hard enough. I think that the past few years has shown us that a country or terrorist group can accomplish a lot of they are dedicated. This is one of those typical laws that just makes it difficult for the ligitimate people who follow the rules.

    I'll bring up an example every slashdotter can relate to. Microsoft's activation didn't prevent piracy one bit. The corporate version or crack patches that would disable activation got around it easily. All it did was inconvienence people who went to the stores and bought the software legally and honestly.

  45. No by Sloppy · · Score: 5, Funny
    I don't think you should need a license, provided that you carry your Pentium 4 openly where everyone can see it. A society with everone walking around displaying their Pentium 4, would be a polite society, and sane people would think twice before starting any shit.

    I would be more worried about people with concealed Athlons. You're minding you're own business, and then some nut with an overclocked Athlon without so much as a fan or heatsink, suddenly produces it in his asbestos mitten, brandishing it at you. You feel the heat coming off it, looking down at death itself. You think of reaching for the P4 holstered at your side, but he's got the drop on you. That would suck.

    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  46. Re:When you sit down and think... by pixelpusher220 · · Score: 2, Funny

    yeah...simpler and *MUCH* more spectacular crashes!

    --
    People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people :-D
  47. Re:SIGH! Here we go again. by thrillseeker · · Score: 2, Funny
    You see, it's called a joke. Perhaps you've heard of them?

    Congress? But, you repeat yourself ...

  48. Hacked computers by PitaBred · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Great, so they can't get them locally... what'll they do, hack a ton of Windows machines that have fast processors that are almost totally unused by the thumbless muppets that own them (done) and then upload some programs to do the processing remotely? Welcome to the WWW and the Internet, senator.

  49. Nuclear weopons development?? by qtp · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It seems odd that the excuse being used is that these machines will help countries to develop nuclear weapons.

    The computing power available to the US when we developed the hydrogen bomb was considerably less than what was available on a desktop even twenty years ago, so to consider fast or advanced processors to be nuclear weapons development technology seems a trifle absurd.

    This article may demonstrate that these congressmen's fears may be justified, but it also demonstrates just how absurd the notion of controlling proliferation through limiting technology is. There's no need for a Pentium-IV (or even a computer) to develop nuclear weapons, and attempting to control the spread of computer technology through this kind of lawmaking is misguided and likely doomed to failure.

    --
    Read, L
    1. Re:Nuclear weopons development?? by cr0sh · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Actually, we don't have computers on our desktops that are more powerful than what was available to develop the hydrogen bomb.

      Up until late 60's or so, a lot of development work was done with live tests of nuclear devices. As test-ban treaties were made, these tests were moved to underground tests, then finally - no (sanctioned) tests at all. However, you still need to be able to "test" your devices before, during, and after you build them. So, what do you do?

      You simulate them, on a computer. Actually, you simulate them on very fast parallel processing vector computers, which is *not* something we have on the desktop, nor is it something that is easily built. A beowulf (or other) cluster is *not* a vector parallel processing machine. Fast vector machines need special purpose CPUs, ultra-fast interconnects to memory, etc.

      That isn't to say that some design work or simulation couldn't be done on such machines (using older or current technology). It most certainly can. Nor am I saying nothing can be done with a desktop machine - there is a lot that could be done - but large scale detonation simulation is not one of them.

      I agree with your sentiments and logic, though - attempting to stop the tech won't do any good. We developed the H-Bomb using good-ole fashioned 60's tech, with plenty of above ground and other nuclear detonations. The test-ban treaties mean nothing to countries that didn't sign them - they will test whenever, whereever they want to. Plus, any legislation as shown ignores the fact that other countries are jsut as capable as us in developing the technology needed (as needed - its a big jump to just get an atomic bomb, and one would think that would be enough, but the next stage is even harder to attain).

      Ultimately, our lawmakers (whatever country they reside in) need to get past this idea that countries are somehow isolated in the world based on those damn lines on a map, and come to terms with the fact that we are all on one big rock. We need to learn how to live with each other, how to accept each other, how to understand each other, and how to help each other. Somehow, we are able to (mostly) do it in each of our "petty" countries - why is it so damn difficult to do the same worldwide? If we don't learn to do this, we run the great risk of wiping ourselves off this planet...

      --
      Reason is the Path to God - Anon
  50. Thats politics for you by CormacJ · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I saw an Intel pro 100/s network card - it has encryption on it.

    On the card was a big sticker warning about export restrictions etc etc.

    The chip that actually was doing the encryption that resulted in the sticker: Made in Japan.

    So we are importing hardware we then can't export.

    Thats politics

  51. third world pissant who was stabilizing his countr by dpilot · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There are two answers to Iraq, at the moment.
    One is that they really were building WMD, were going to attack the US with them, were linked with Al Quaeda and the 9/11 attacks, and GW Bush was completely justified in invading.
    The other is "No, we went after a third world pissant who was stabilizing his country."

    IMHO, the answer is between these extremes, and well away from either of them. I don't like GW Bush's policies, but my dislike of his policies in no way makes me think Saddam Hussein was a 'good man and leader.'

    Occasionally life throws difficult problems at us, with no clear-cut right and wrong. This is one of them, and it happens to have (at least) two wrongs.

    --
    The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
  52. Wrong generation by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    weapons of math destruction

    That would be those ancient Pentiums with the FDIV bug.

  53. hilarious.. by Suppafly · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Especially considering that my last computer was built and shipped to me from one of the countries that they want to ban the export of computers to (China). Don't they realize that computers come from there and arrive here, not the other way around??

  54. Weapons? by ro_coyote · · Score: 2, Funny

    "It appears to be that the U.S. house of Reps. want to classify Pentium 4 and above CPUs as weapons."

    But only if you ship them with free copies of Microsoft Windows.

  55. P4s are WMDs by rcamans · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I thought the whole idea was that these cpus were smart enough to fly cruise missiles or smart bombs.
    Anyone out there want to give a terrorist more ways to kill us?
    Oh, wait, the terrorist would just smuggle them out of the country, through one of those wide open borders we have to Mexico, Canada, the coastlines, etc.
    And he might steal them, instead of buying them, circumventing the tracking system companies have in place for proscribed exports.
    Or get a job as a clerk at Fryes, and buy bunches at an employee discount.
    So all this law does is slow down the law-abiding people and businesses, adding to our paperwork load, and undoubtedly increasing our taxes to pay for policing these WMDs, and catch the dumb crooks and dumb terrorists.
    Leaving the market for WMD CPUs wide open for the Mafia and smart terrorists.
    Great .
    Give the mafia something to export and make big profits off of, that drug sniffing dogs cannot smell.
    This stinks.

    --
    wake up and hold your nose
  56. it's a flaw in the constitution by zogger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    well, a few flaws, but the two main ones are, we have no top end cut off point for new laws. They are under mandate to always create new laws, that's ALL they are supposed to do, so that's what they do, year in and year out. There's no automatic provision for removing old laws, so they add up. I sincerely doubt now there is a single "legal" human inside the US, everyone is guilty of something now, and it will keep getting worse. Even little babies are born into guilt, before they have done much of anything they "owe" a buncha rich guys a lot of money. How they racked up that debt is beyond me, but it's supposedly the "law" someplace.

    The second one is we should have made it completely illegal for a lawyer to be elected to congress, it's a clear cut case of conflict of interest. They have *no* incentive to make government simpler, cheaper, less complex. They have *every* incentive to create as many and as convulted and complex laws as possible.

    here's every campaign speech boiled down, any party addressing any demographic.

    "vote for me, I will help to make government more complex and expensive, except for YOU though, because YOU are special and we need to make the other guys pay for whatever YOU want"

    So that is what happens, and people keep voting for them.

    1. Re:it's a flaw in the constitution by geoffspear · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Um, by your argument we shouldn't allow anyone to be elected to any position, because they're clearly going make laws that would benefit their own positions.

      Come to think of it, maybe it should be illegal for anyone to be elected to Congress.

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
    2. Re:it's a flaw in the constitution by darkmeridian · · Score: 2, Informative

      This is not true on any count. Laws do die. There are "sunshine" provisions to automatically expire laws. Laws get changed: witness what the USA PATRIOT ACT did to all these other laws. Look at all the weird immigration laws that get revised all the time.

      And laws are necessary, despite what the parent might think. It keeps a country together to know what rights we each have. But a large country requires a lot of laws. Just think about how much you use each day, from the IP that resulted in your computer to the insurance laws that protect your life, and the traffic laws that keep you alive, presumably. It is complicated and perhaps bad in some instances but definitely necessary. Anything else would be literal anarchy.

      Why not lawyers? We need more lawyers in legislatures because they can draft specific bills. Legislatures untrained in the law is the current norm. Look what they have created. Lawyer/legislators are susceptible to the same grafts and pork barrel but perhaps are in a better shape to understand the ramifications of their drafting, vis a vis the Constitution and such. (Witness the COPA, Child Online Protection Act that the Supremes recently knocked down.)

      So basically, we need laws. Laws must be complicated to cover all exigencies. Lawyers understand these complexities. Lawyers are suited to writing these complexities.

      --
      A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
    3. Re:it's a flaw in the constitution by maximilln · · Score: 2, Interesting
      How they racked up that debt is beyond me, but it's supposedly the "law" someplace.

      What you're looking for is Article 1, Section 8, Clause 2 of the US Constitution

      Section. 8.

      Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power ...

      Clause 2: To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

      If you give politicians the power to borrow money eventually _SOMEONE_ will have to pay it back. It's like appointing the head of the Neighborhood Watch Program and then giving him the power to borrow money on the credit of the entire neighborhood. Does it sound like a recipe for disaster? I think so.

      The debt was racked up by the many wars that we've undergone here in the US. In the Civil War the northern military had to borrow quite a bit of money in order to pay the soldiers. This money was happily lent to them by the northern bank conglomerates who were the driving interest behind the Civil War. In reality it had nothing to do with the morality of slave auctions, the slave trade, or human rights. The Civil War was about the _definition_ of slavery. The northern banks wanted very badly for every southern accounting ledger and business transaction to be made with _THEIR_ currency. Consequently they were happy to loan their currency to the northern army. Since the credit of the government, at the time, was backed by good solid gold the interest rates on these loans were probably reasonable. The government could afford to pay back the loan at any time by dumping a mound of gold into the banks who held the loans. The banks, of course, didn't want the gold. They wanted the business. They couldn't raise the interest rate through the roof because, if they did, the loan would simply be repaid and the business would be gone.

      In the early 1900s the United States began to slip off of the gold standard. This made the situation far easier for the banks to exploit. I believe it was 1916 that the US formally exited the gold standard and sold out to the Federal Reserve. This was just in time for WW-I. Massive funding was needed for WW-I and the banks were only too happy to extend the credit. This time, however, the banks knew that the government could not repay the loan. The government had already put its gold in the banking pawn shop. This put the power in the hands of the banks. The government needed the money but had no real equity or credit left so the banks were free to adjust interest rates as they saw fit. What do you suppose happens when the lender is free to adjust or modify repayment terms at a whim?

      I imagine, through some legal or accounting magic, that the US government was close to repaying the entire debt by 1929. If I remember my history studies well enough the stock market had boomed much like the .com bubble. The banks saw that their prime customer was about to get out from under the hoof and the collapse was engineered. What followed was a version of the three-cup disappearing pea trick. The banks claimed they had lent the money to investors. Investors claimed that they put the money into businesses. Businesses claimed that they paid the money out to distributors and clients. Distributors and clients claimed they paid the money to workers. Workers claimed they had put the money back into the banks. Suddenly, there was no more money. A sham, for certain. Just like late 1999. Anyone with a close eye on the market saw it beginning to deflate long before 2001.

      WW-II, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iraq again. It's all the same phenomenon. The banks control the credit rating of the USA. The USA needs money to fund these huge operations. The banks control the repayment plan. Our politicians have the legal authority to sign any loan and use our hard work as the backing equity.

      There's little wonder that taxes keep going up.
      --
      +++ATHZ 99:5:80
    4. Re:it's a flaw in the constitution by maximilln · · Score: 4, Funny

      Um, by your argument we shouldn't allow anyone to be elected to any position, because they're clearly going make laws that would benefit their own positions

      SHHHHH! Don't tell anyone. They might figure it out.

      My other response is: NO KIDDING! BRILLIANT!

      --
      +++ATHZ 99:5:80
    5. Re:it's a flaw in the constitution by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      There is the argument that if anybody wants a position of power, they are automatically incompetent to hold a position of power.

      Thus, instead of electing people, they should all be apointed and forced to serve at the point of a gun.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    6. Re:it's a flaw in the constitution by 2short · · Score: 2, Insightful


      "There's little wonder that taxes keep going up."

      But they don't. They go down while our spending goes up, which is why our debt goes up ever faster.

      And while your history of the national debt is informative, and your analysis somewhat interesting, you're ignoring an important fact: Of the current debt, almost all of it was incurred by just two administrations: Reagan and GW Bush.

    7. Re:it's a flaw in the constitution by zogger · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The thing is, they violate their own laws. They borrow debt instruments, federal reserve "notes", notes being a legal term for a debt, an IOU, which are created out of thin air. They are supposed to coin money, and use that to conduct the nations business, or only borrow money, which although in general terms can be anything, in our US law has specific meaning, which they vioplate with the act. We can never repay these loans of debt, because we are trying to repay it with another loan, made up of debt. it's a catch 22 physical impossibility to ever pay off this so called debt. Also a great congame for those who profit from it. It was also illegal and unconstitutional as all get out, under a number of previous laws, but it has stuck to this day because they also control the guns and the guys they hire to carry them.

      You hit on a lot of high points, good post there, because I can see it's ad hoc. The Fed was created as a non governmental private central banking system in 1913, and it *barely* passed. They had to use the normal way they pass highly questionable things, wait for an opportune moment when people are distracted, then rush it through. happens all the time. Now they are even slicker, they have some huge whopper bill, named the "be kind to small dogs and children and in defense of apple pie act" and in the middle of it buried will be all this hideous stuff, so you can't be "against it" or you are a..whatever, bad person.

      J.P. Morgan and a lot of his rich drinking buddies had executed a serious of paper money shuffles leading to currency runs, up to the panic of 07. This was done on purpose to scare people,plus they got to do a lot of punmp and dump in the markets, but it wasn't enough, greedy people by nature just get more greedy. so, they thunked up this scheme to satisfy that grteed, that insane lust, and to force the government into making them the grand poobahs of "money", so they could..well... rule then. Rule. Whomever controls the cash is the real authority, they dictate what REALLY happens. This political scene we have now is mostly psychodrama, it doesn't represent what really happens or who calls the shots, it's to keep people dumbed down and thinking they have any say in matters. The vote was right before christmas congressional vacation with not many voting on it, just the insiders who stood to profit the most from it, I forget now how many but very few. It was ridiculous. Wilson signed it anyway, because they threatened him with more artifical currency runs, leading to..bad news stuff.. The scheme to do this was concocted at a meeting at Jekyll Island Georgia by a handful of wealthy bakers and industrialists, including europaen bankers, who to this day still have a significant control over "our" fed and our government through both stock holdings and by literal marriage and kinship into the various banking establishments known as the Fed. The Fed was instructed they could only create "additional" debt notes to "loan" with interest, if they had at least 40% in gold to back them with. There has NEVER been an audit of the federal reserve 12 private bank consortiums vaults.

      And yada yada, a lot of congames ever since, until finally NoXoN took us completely off any sort of real money economic system, in exchange for the combination of using debt as money-strike one, keynesian creation of artifical debt on a whim-strike two, and globalisation, which basically means centralise the capital in fewer hands all the time as you lie about it-strike three, you're out, they win. It's nuts. Makes a relatively few people though just wealthy beyond imagination, wealthy and powerful.

      I wish more people would read about the creation of the Federal Reserve, and the IRS. We might have some serious constructive change for the better. Maybe anyway. Maybe not, people are afraid to say no, just brainwshed since birth to be servile and complacent. You are allowed to bitch about stuff, but that's it. You get to "vote" for congame supporter A or B, and if you don't, you are "wasting your vote

  57. What is the full story on legislation? by superyooser · · Score: 2, Informative
    I've looked up HR 4200 (search results are temporary; don't bother linking), National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005. There are four versions of the bill, three of which have Section 1404. Here is the full text:
    SEC. 1404. LICENSING REQUIREMENT FOR EXPORT OF MILITARILY CRITICAL TECHNOLOGIES.

    (a) LICENSING REQUIREMENT- The President shall require a license under the Export Administration Regulations of the Department of Commerce (15 C.F.R. part 730 et seq.) or the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (22 C.F.R. part 120 et seq.), as the case may be, for the export of goods or technologies included on the Militarily Critical Technologies List.

    (b) DEFINITION- In this section, the term `Militarily Critical Technologies List' means the list required to be developed by the Secretary of Defense pursuant to section 5(d)(2) of the Export Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C. App. 2404(d)(2)), as such list was effect on January 20, 2004, and includes any goods or technologies that have been added to the list after that date.
    Yeah, so what? That doesn't tell me anything. Where does say anything about computers? And where is the complete list of countries have the export restrictions mentioned in the article? How do I look this up?
    1. Re:What is the full story on legislation? by sexylicious · · Score: 2, Informative

      Look in some documents called FAR. Federal Acquisition Regulations. The FARs should have something in there about export restrictions. I say that only because there is a list of import restrictions.

      The other place that may have the list is here:
      http://www.access.gpo.gov/uscode/index.html

      Title 22, Chapter 39 may be useful.

  58. And now, the 11 o' clock news at 10 by Jesus_666 · · Score: 3, Funny

    At 9:13 AM two CPUs crashed into the Sears Tower, killing a dog when it tried to eat them. Terrorist organization al BM has declared that they were responsible for this horrible strike against the western world.
    President William Gates III. has announced that the terrorists have been located "somewhere around Europe or something" and that two ICBMs (InterContinental Beowulf Missiles) with a payload of 32x4 GHz have been launched somewhere at Europe's general direction.

    Our hearts are with the owners of Fido, who choked on the deadly weapons which crashed into the Sears Tower. Officials suspect them to be Pentium-type processors, but cannot say it before they have been retrieved from the dog's stomach.
    The Sears Tower seems to be out of imminent danger of collapsing, but, as some random government suit said: "only a few hundred chips more and they might have smashed a window."

    I other news, Apple Defense Systems (ADS) has just finished their new G2000 RISC (Really Incredible Stuff-based Computer) line of ultra-expensive and extremely hip weapons of mass destruction. President Gates has announced that the USA will be saving money for the next five years, hoping that this will generate enough money to actually afford an Apple-brand WMD (or iWMD, as Apple calls them).

    This were the 11 o' clock news at 10, with Tejas Barton.

    --
    USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
  59. Bought a USA made computer by Enquest · · Score: 2, Funny

    I bought a Dell. Dell asked me because they where an Amerikan company. Are you going to use this computer for(no joke) Nuclair weapons? Biologic weapons? Mass murder? chemical weapons? Any terrorist activities we don't now of... ... Ofcourse as a honest terrorist I answerd to them all YES!!!. Afterall I was expecting to play C&C... I don't know where Americans find there politicians. But you U.S.A. people should start looking harder!

  60. AMD = better, and made in Germany by GISGEOLOGYGEEK · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So what are those damn US politicians going to do when one of them bothers to figure out that AMD's main CPU making plants ... FAB30 and FAB36 are in Dresden Germany? ... and that many people consider AMD processors to be as good or better than Pentium 4s?

    I'm guessing the almighty demi-god Dubya will be forced to launch a pre-emptive first strike against Germany to destroy the AMD factories, and prevent the chance for the Germans to take a third stab at world domination in less than 100 years.

    AMD! choice of der next Furher! zig hail!

    Personally I think Dubya just wants to make some money exporting those crappy 1st generation P4's that totally sucked. By making them appear fobidden, they will be more desirable.

    --
    George Bush + Linux = "I will not let information get in the way of the fight against Windows"
  61. Re:China's gonna love this by anubi · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Yes... I think I and every other slashdotter are puzzled at this whole charade.

    Most of us have far better understandings of physics and the inevitable outcomes of actions that it predicts than, say, politics, which appears mostly a marketing scheme selling "leadership skills".

    As anyone whose taken a marketing class knows, the whole idea of marketing skills is "perceived value" to a human mind, not "quantitative value" as the laws of physics would account.

    So, here we are, glut of laid-off high tech people right here in the United States. I have a resume that reads like an encyclopedia and *I* have trouble finding jobs!

    Here's my problem: I am specialized in design for manufacture... and we don't manufacture in America much anymore. Outsourcing.

    I am watching imported electronics come in to the local arcade with absolutely amazing realtime rendering engines. God only knows the effectiveness of using such advanced fast technology for nefarious purposes. Although the powers that be may think of it only as a game for children, I see very powerful CPU's driving extremely sophisticated rendering engines... and know the difference between a game and reality is only in the hardware interface.

    So, we outsource our high tech and somehow Congress thinks US is gonna remain a world leader?

    Foreign countries are now developing the technologies of the future while our own technical people languish in the unemployment office?

    How much does a good engineer go for these days?

    Is a politician more valuable?

    How much value is, say, 20 years of training by actually working in the field?

    I think the idea the politicians can keep the cat in the bag by simply passing laws is gone. "How to Make Fire" is now public knowledge... the entire world knows how to make matches now. We do not have a monopoly on it anymore. And it looks like we won't even have match factories anymore... and we think we are gonna remain a world power?

    My feeling is we are heading straight for the poorhouse.

    I see this latest collapse of interest rates as one of the dying gasps of our economy, as the last bastion of the American economy - the solidity of the dollar itself - is sacrificed by dilution of the money supply so that sufficient numbers of dollars can be generated for the balance sheets - irrespective of any "value" that the dollar is to represent. I feel soon the dollar will be just a number... meaningless as a measure of wealth. Just a number. Congress can print as many as they want to wipe out past debts. Something else has to evolve as a standard unit of wealth, as holding a dollar is like holding ice on a hot day.

    Its gonna be interesting when the power of foreign game consoles exceed the power of our best military chips, driven by the economics of worldwide purchases of entertainment compared to a country whose military budget depends on collecting income taxes from its laid off citizenry.

    Only a Congressman could be so smart.

    --
    "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]

  62. Re:WMD Revisited by narcc · · Score: 2, Funny

    More like weapons of math instruction...

  63. Ancient? by tgd · · Score: 2, Funny

    Now I feel old.

  64. Makes sense by butane_bob2003 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Most supercomputer and mainframe parts could be designated as weapons components. Systems and components made by Siemens have had this designation for a long time, since have been used in many weapons systems for years. Intel has been making a big dent in that market as well, so it's components can fall under the same designation. I've heard that Kraftwerk was using machines with Siemens components (this was a long time ago). They had trouble touring internationally because the same components they were using to make music were also components of many weapons systems. There was also concern that powerful computers could be brought into the country and used to hack the defense network (not likely, but hey, why not?).

    --


    TallGreen CMS hosting
  65. My Cold, Dead Hands! by CygnusXII · · Score: 2, Funny

    New Bumper Sticker campaign...

    You can have my Laptop (PIV), when you pry it, from my cold dead, Hands.

    --
    My cat's picked up a Hammer. HEY! Put down that Hammer. Put Down that Hamm...THUNK!
  66. Re:Beer w/ Dresden Semi Cleanroom Folk [Re:I tough by Slashamatic · · Score: 2, Informative
    rust the smugglers - CIA/NSA/MI-5 (or is it 6? no 42!) like to trick smugglers into smuggling broken stuff (e.g. gas pipeline control equipment that goes unstable causing tremendous non-nuclear explosion at Siberia gas liquification facility)
    This story is fiction. I worked with the company that built the TransSib telemtry control system. The explosion was due to a train of LPG going up. Nothing to do with the telemetry control system.

    The story comes from a cold-warrior who is selling a book based of tall stories that was then plugged by a dubious journo called William Safire.

    As for the rest of it, well it depended on where you were. The East Germans were quite good at making chips (optical expertise) - it isn't a coincidence the AMD fab is there. As for training and troubleshooting expertise, whatever wasn't available from the west through the front door often came out of the back.

  67. oh well..... by zogger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    there aren't that many sunshine provisions on the really important laws. Just a few. Easy to prove. How many laws on the books in 1904, compared to now? Were we freer then, or are we freer now? Did government run with balanced books then, do we now? What was the individual income tax rate in 1904? What is it now?

    I could go on, but I think the point is made.

    And it's still a conflict of interest. The lawyers lobby & guild LOVES laws, oodles and bunches and boatloads, as complex, wordy, involved, complex, obscure and arcane as possible, to cover every bit of human minutiae they can think of. We even have a noun for it, called "legalese" a sarcastic noun, meant to ridicule how atrociously wordy and..stupid it is. This gig of letting them create new laws by the thousands every term makes them MONEY. It makes them wealthy and powerful. It KEEPS them wealthy and powerful. It's job security, job #1, "if you are in the law business,make new laws". And government, being an accumulation of law writers, administrators and enforcers, LOVES laws, well beyond what is truly necessary, because then they get to expand and expand and expand to administer and enforce all the new laws. So then they can say "wow, look at all these laws, well, guess we need bigger government then, we toldyaso. Umm, well, it *will* cost a few more dollars, or we can always put YOU in debt for it"

    This is just so obvious.

    Anyway, if he was around, you could argufy with this guy,himself one of the guild, you might have heard of him, Thomas Jefferson:

    "It is the trade of lawyers to question everything, yield nothing, and to talk by the hour. "

    "Whenever a man has cast a longing eye on offices, a rottenness begins in his conduct. "

    "That government is best which governs least, because its people discipline themselves."

    "And to preserve their independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude."

    "Whenever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force."

    ""Unless the mass retains sufficient control over those entrusted with the powers of their government, these will be perverted totheir own oppression, and to the perpetuation of wealth and power in the individuals and their families selected for the trust.

    Whether our Constitution has hit on the exact degree of control necessary, is yet under experiment."

    --I think he nailed it. It was an experiment, with a lot of good qualities to it. Some bad though. The constitution was a good attempt, but has become corrupted by weak and greedy men over the years. Now, look at the demographics of who is in congress, what is the number one profession? Look at the corrupt judges, who wouldn't know a constitution if it bit them on the ass, what were they before? How about presidents? Look at the government, is it really working? Or has it betrayed the trust, has it gotten to the point that "these will be perverted to their own oppression, and to the perpetuation of wealth and power in the individuals and their families selected for the trust."?

    I'd say that is a "roger" on that last one.

    He nailed it. It's human nature. Power corrupts. It gets out of hand. It got out of hand because of a simple conflict of interest basically. Yes we need people who can *understand* the law to write laws, but we don't need professional lawyers who *profit* from those laws to write them. Two entirely completely different things there. It started out OK, as an experiment, it has gone steadily downhill to the point we have it today, which is basically a two class technofuedalistic society, those above the law, the aristocracy, although they won't admit to it, and those who are subservient to it, and to the dictates of the aristocracy, although they won't admit to it either. Not readily anyway.

    last quote for this subject

    "I love to see honest and honorable men at the helm, men who will not bend their politics to their purses nor pursue measures by which they may profit and then profit by their measures."