Slashdot Mirror
Iran Builds Supercomputer From Banned AMD Parts
Stony Stevenson writes with the news that, despite a ban on US PC hardware, Iranian techs have built an enormously powerful supercomputer from 216 AMD processors. The Linux-cluster machine has a 'theoretical peak performance of 860 gig-flops'. "The disclosure, made in an undated posting on [the University of] Amirkabir's Web site, brought an immediate response Monday from AMD, which said it has never authorized shipments of products either directly or indirectly to Iran or any other embargoed country."
When's the last time AMD motherboard and CPUs have been manufactured in the US? AFAIK, they're all fab'd in Taiwan or China. These parts may never have entered of left the United States at all.
This is just one more instance of US foreign policy failing in its purpose and then acting to hurt America.
Iran and Iranians can get their computers now and always have. You might as well have American companies making the money.
Same thing with Cuba.
Trade and diplomacy work much better than sanctions and war. You want Castro to fall? Flood Cuba with American tourists and artists.
To just buy a cluster of Playstation 3s, especially since they do have Gigabit ethernet and Linux toolflows.
Test your net with Netalyzr
This tells me that there are university professors and students who are passionate about hi-tech. That passion is a productive alternative to the other model we have of Iran as a bunch of wild eyed fundamentalists who want to bomb the world back to the 8th century. Perhaps this competing force of moderation in Iran will grow its influence through hi tech and universities.
Tell that to the Somali's who just got invaded twice, first by Iranian funded and trained agents. (Yes, Eritrea is a proxy state for Iran) and then by the Ethiopians, who aren't going to get surrounded by them. Note that most of the Muslim terrorists outside of Al Quaeda have been trained and funded by the Iranians. Oh yeah, and they're winning; there are 10 times as many Muslim governments as there were 20 years ago.
The purpose of this machine is forecasting and meteorological research, which imho is a reasonable thing for the nation of Iran to do. Granted this just what they say the computer is for, but we only know about it because they announced that they built it. If it was a computer that designed nuclear weapons (or whatever), we can assume they wouldn't tell anyone about it.
Democracy Now! - your daily, uncensored, corporate-free
The greatest revenge in life is massive success.
Last I heard, it was Iran that threatened to "wipe Israel off the map" and Iran's parlementry sessions ending in "Death to America". Sure, it's saber rattling on Iran's part, but at least Israel isn't talking about conquest. The fact they have a nuke and have been on the defensive should speak volumes about their intentions. IE, Israel will prolly never use the nuke they have. If they do, it will be purely as a retaliatory strike.
Seriously, just who do you trust more? Iran, or Israel. That answer should be so bloody obvious!
Life is not for the lazy.
It doesn't take the entire nation willing to suicide themselves, it just takes the small core of people in charge of the nuclear arsenal willing to take it on themselves to make that decision for the rest of the nation. Maybe Iranian government isn't as full of jihad-crazies as we're led to believe, but even if they're only a little jihad-crazy, I'm sure they would have no problem creating an "accidental" loss of one or more bombs to terrorists. Smuggling the leaked bomb into the U.S. wouldn't be an issue, just detonate the bomb in N.Y. harbor before you even reach the dock.
It should be illegal to say that freedom of speech should be limited.
you wrote "I'm getting tired of governments who are scaring their citizens about Iran's threat to this world"
Now lets explain something to you...
Iran is a threat to the world because of their DEMONSTRATED support of terrorist organizations. (do a little reading to confirm this)
Now about the NIE which everyone is using as justification to let their guard down. It says that IRAN stopped their weapons program in 2003... Well, that is absolutely absurd.
to build an effective nuclear capability, you need three things.
1. The bomb itself (minus the fisile material)
2. The Fisile material.
3. A delivery system.
3. Iran already has a delivery system. (long range ballistic missiles)
1. Just about any college physicist can accomplish the building of the bomb. All they have to do is choose a wasteful design. (The same design as little man)
In other words, an implosion device is VERY hard but a bullet device is VERY VERY EASY!!!
2. This is by far the hardest part of building a nuclear bomb.... There are two ways to get the material 1. extract plutonium from a nuclear reactor 2. enrich uranium. Look... IRAN's PRESIDENT has publicly stated that his country is enriching uranium.... THAT MEANS... he is working on the only hard part that his country has left which will enable them to build an atomic bomb.
It is crazy to me that people don't understand this... I guess my PH.D. in physics has given me an insight that most people don't have.
Of course that doesn't matter here in the USA where we are a "Christian-based" nation. The more you can make the better.... Right?
Oh, and as far as Muslim nations not charging interest???? Yeah right. They caved as well. Though I will say that they generally charge less interest than here in the US or in the EU. But interest, charge, do they.
I tried to quote some text from the Qur'an, but for some freaky reason, my companies firewall blocked everything. I work for a big company here in SC USA. I am from the NE (Philly area) and have never seen such strict firewall/proxy blocking since I moved down here.
Anyway, I am sure others can post quotes on usury/interest from the Qur'an for us all, so we get a fair cross-religious look at usury.
General, you are listening to a machine! Do the world a favor and don't act like one.
So sick of this misconception and ignorance, I really want to insult you somehow, but since that probably won't help much, I'll explain:
There are a few religious radicals in Iran in the lower to mid levels of the government, but they are significantly outnumbered by the other group.
Wanna know who this other group is? Please read on, till the end...
I start with someone you are familiar with; do you consider Dick Cheney a radical Christian or a ruthless businessman which uses religion or any other tool as a means to make profit? like when he talks about supporting the troops does he really care about the troops or he has an agenda of his own?
Well, Cheney is one of the members of the "Other Group", the businessmen, except he is American.
In Iran we have our own businessmen. Since the 'Islamic' revolution of 1979, these people have taken over the government in a country where 90%+ of the economy is owned and operated by the government.
A clear example, is the largest of these business entities: Islamic Republic Revolutionary Guards (IRGC), most recent bogeyman on CNN/FOX. While the American media focuses on the 'military' part of IRGC's operation, they neglect to mention the much much bigger side of IRGC.
Revolutionary Guards is the single biggest business entity in Iran, they build all the dams, bridges, tunnels and roads, railroad, they operate civilian airports all across the country, they do the largest mining operations, they own many of the largest and most profit generating financial institutions in Iran and this list goes on forever.
Almost half of the members of the current parliament are former IRGC members, Ahmadinejad himself made his way to being Tehran's Mayor and later, Iran's president through IRGC.
Another example is Mesbah Yazi, a mid-level clergy, known as the mentor of Ahmadinejad, the biggest fucking piece of shit I know in Iran. Plays the same role to Ahmadi Nejad as Dick plays to Bush. But there's another side to this guy, he is also known as "Sultan of Sugar" in Iran. He controls import, distribution and sale of all Sugar in Iran. Believe me, in a country of 70 million population a monopoly on sugar is better than a monopoly on gold mines. He also says that the 'Zionist regime' of Israel is doomed, however nuking them means end of the sweet sugar business for him.
Former president Rafsanjani, former parliament speaker Nategh Noori and many others are businessmen too. They don't give a fuck about religion unless in public when preaching people.
In conclusion, I just want you to think, what benefit does nuking Israel which guarantees a much much harsher reaction from Israel bring to these ruling businessmen? See, that's why Iran, even with nukes is no threat at all to any other country?
All that matters to these people is survival of their business, they are not religious zealots, they don't believe in the second coming or afterlife or crap like what they preach to people. If a day comes where wiping their asses with pages of Quran helps them keep control of their business, then that's what they WILL HAPPILY DO.
Thanks for reading my rant.
I don't know if Iran ever commented on either situation, but:
Your second point, about extreme forms of Islam advocating things like suicide bombing, really aren't that interesting. Extreme groups within Christianity and Judaism have surfaced in the past and continue to do so doing much the same thing. You might want to look at the history of a certain little province of the United Kingdom called Northern Ireland for some examples.
Iran is a country with a poor colonial/imperialist history which has resulted in a society with massive hostility to the West. The overthrow of the Shah in the 1970s was Iran throwing off the last vestiges of Western influence in its affairs, and you don't need to political scientist to see how a revolution based upon anti-Western hysteria might still have some influence decades later. In most countries, the religion is more influenced by the people supposedly under its influence than vice versa. Most people looking at the situation from outside are misidentifying what constitutes the tail, and what constitutes the dog.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Technically, what they have is not precisely a despotic regime, although it not really democratic either. Iran's constitution is designed to be as democratic as possible, without quite being democratic.
Essentially, there are two halves of the government, one of which consists of the Majlis (parliament) and the Presidency, which is elected in a straightforward fashion and is responsible for most day to day government work. The other half of the government consists of the Supreme Leader, Guardian Council and Assembly of Experts. That half doesn't so much do things as stop things from happening. It is empowered to interfere in any government or political process, including in extreme cases disqualifying candidates it does not like for standing for the election to the Majlis.
In theory the Supreme Leader is indirectly elected: the people elect the Experts, and the Experts elect the Supreme Leader. However the Supreme Leader appoints the Guardians, who determine who may stand for election as an Expert. Therefore the Supreme Leader is in a position to indirectly disqualify any potential Expert who might vote against him.
The system is much too cumbersome to be despotic, although it has despotic elements. It is certainly more democratic than the old Soviet political system, and there are a number of curious ironies in how it operates. For example, the chairman of the Assembly of Experts, Ali Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani, is relatively speaking a political moderate and compared to the popularly elected president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, he is considered pro-western.
Overall, the term "Islamic Republic" seems apt. A western republic is as democratic as it can be without encroaching on the prerogatives and liberties of the individual. Iran's government is as democratic as possible without encroaching on the prerogatives and authority of authorities in Islamic law.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Getting good performance out of cluster machines requires some work, but that's what open source software and spare grad students are for. You can't use them for every kind of problem, but they're pretty flexible, and they're certainly good enough for most kinds of nuke design or fluid flow.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
I still like Noam Chomsky's summary of Iran - Iran is a democratic utopia compared to Saudi Arabia (who the US fully supports).
No, simple interest is a rate too. Compound interest is when the interest charged to date is rolled into the principal for the next period, while simple interest is when the interest amount per period is calculated based on the original principal. For example, say you've got a loan for $100 at 10% interest for 5 periods (could be months, years, whatever). With simple interest, you'd be charged ($100 * 10%) = $10 interest for the first period, $10 for the second, $10 for the third, etc. With compound interest, you'd be charged ($100 * 10%) = $10 interest for the first period, ($110 * 10%) = $11 for the second, ($121 * 10%) = $12.10 for the third, etc.
But that's not the point. The point is that either way, you're paying interest per period. If you pay back the loan after 1 period (say, with the simple interest example), you pay $110. If you pay it back after 5 periods, you pay $150. You pay more for the privilege of not having to pay the loan back for a longer time. You're essentially renting the money. In the West (where usury is legal and common practice), this is the mechanism that encourages people to pay the loans back. Otherwise, why would they? If they pay $110 whether they "rent" the money for 1 month or 50 years, why not go for the 50 years? Why ever pay it back?
That's what I don't get about the O.P.'s description of Islamic money-lending. I suspect the answer is something simple, like "pay it back in X amount of time, or we cut your hands off." But that's just a guess, and I was asking so that I could learn the real method.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
And I'm saying it's a silly thing to worry about. We don't want Iran to go nuclear, period. Supercomputers might make the difference between, say, 50 kiloton and 100 kiloton warheads. Who cares? If they can get a decent stockpile of 50 kiloton warhead missiles, it's not like we're going to care if supercomputers turns 'em into 100 kiloton warheads. The deterrent is virtually identical.
Now, what someone else said about being able to simulate tests without actually performing them (thus hiding the fact that they have nukes)... that might be a reason to worry about supercomputers. *Might*. More likely, Iran will want to advertise their nuclear capabilities in order to use it as a bargaining chip or a deterrent.