Slashdot Mirror


Man Pleads Guilty To Selling Fake Chips To US Navy

itwbennett writes "Neil Felahy of Newport Coast, California, has pleaded guilty to conspiracy and counterfeit-goods trafficking for his role in a chip-counterfeiting scam. Felahy, along with his wife and her brother, operated several microchip brokerage companies under a variety of names, including MVP Micro, Red Hat Distributors, Force-One Electronics and Pentagon Components. 'They would buy counterfeit chips from China or else take legitimate chips, sand off the brand markings and melt the plastic casings with acid to make them appear to be of higher quality or a different brand,' the US Department of Justice said in a press release. The chips were then sold to Naval Sea Systems Command, the Washington, DC group responsible for maintaining the US Navy's ships and systems, as well as to an unnamed vacuum-cleaner manufacturer in the Midwest."

327 comments

  1. we still make vacumm cleaners? by Shakrai · · Score: 4, Funny

    That sucks ;)

    --
    I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
    We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    1. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Not only that, I read it as an unarmed vacumm manufacturer...

    2. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 4, Funny

      The chips were then sold to Naval Sea Systems Command, the Washington, D.C., group responsible for maintaining the US Navy's ships and systems, as well as an unnamed vacuum-cleaner manufacturer in the Midwest.

      Wait wait wait...

      Were the chips sold to both the NSSC and a Vacuum-cleaner manufacturer -

      Or is the NSSC responsible for maintaining the US Navy's ships, as well as a Vacuum-cleaner manufacturer?

      I think the ambiguity is amusing.

    3. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by CannonballHead · · Score: 2, Funny

      Wasn't there a President named Hoover? ...

    4. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      At least a vacuum cleaner that dies won't kill anybody.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    5. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by relaxinparadise · · Score: 1

      I could see a bad vac chip causing an electrical failure in which a fire starts and burns down the house with potential fatalities, a stretch for sure, but a cow caused a fire to burn down a city before so weird things do happen.

    6. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about that one from Maximum Overdrive?

    7. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by Naturalis+Philosopho · · Score: 3, Funny

      At least a vacuum cleaner that dies won't kill anybody.

      Yeah, if our targeting information was off and missile fell into the sea instead of hitting a house somewhere...oh, wait.

      Really, how many did the Navy buy? When we take deliveries we don't pay until we've tested that we've gotten what we've paid for and that's written into our purchase contracts.

    8. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by nomorecwrd · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So... nobody else thought that the so called "Midwest vacuum cleaner manufacturer" could be a cover for the CIA or NHS?

    9. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by nomorecwrd · · Score: 1

      I dont' like to reply to myself...but... wasn't J. Edgar Hoover related to the creation of the CIA?

      Just 2 cents thrown away by a chilean. :-)

    10. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by trentblase · · Score: 4, Funny

      The vacuum cleaner manufacturer is actually named Noiseless Sucking Appliances.

    11. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by snspdaarf · · Score: 1

      J. Edgar Hoover was the head of the FBI for years.

      --
      Why, without your clothes, you're naked, Miss Dudley!
    12. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by Sulphur · · Score: 1

      When you have seen one director of the FBI, you have seen them all. Martha Mitchell

      --

      Pardon the tofurkey.

    13. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by Cryacin · · Score: 1

      Not only that, I read it as an unarmed vacumm manufacturer...

      It wasn't as Hoover intended...

      --
      Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
    14. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by dwiget001 · · Score: 1

      Wait, if this is the case, then this would be a real "blow" to the operation of U.S. Navy ships in general.

      That really "sucks"!

    15. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by nomorecwrd · · Score: 1

      Well... not so "dark" as the CIA, but still a government related agency.
      Are their HQ located in the midwest BTW?

    16. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The problem is that the chips will work, but they won't work as well.

      Let's look at two amplifiers, a 741 and a 5534. They are both pin-compatible op-amps that do the same job. The LM is $0.56 ($0.13 in bulk) and the 5534 is $1.73 ($0.80 in bulk). The 5534 is a high-performance, low-noise amplifier.

      Now, these are both CONSUMER grade chips and two that I just happened to know off the top of my head. Frankly, chips don't get much cheaper than that but you can already see a large price discrepancy. ($670 per 1000 chips.)

      Performance under ideal conditions isn't the biggest issue here. They aren't subject to the military or aerospace standards for robustness. Hell, they're probably not even "industrial" grade. Will they withstand a 200G shock? How about extreme temperatures or humidity? Are these chips RoHS or not and marked differently?

      Systems using these fraudulent chips would be plagued by problems and would cause the vendors, contractors, and the Navy a huge amount of anguish. It puts people at risk, and the motherfucker should be tried for sedition.

      I have to ask, "why bother"? It's not like they wouldn't be making tons of cash from the contract in the first place.

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
    17. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by bxbaser · · Score: 2, Funny

      I work there, the chips where for our model BGM-109 Tomahawk

      Its our newest long-range, all-weather, subsonic Vacuum cleaner.
      It was designed as a medium- to long-range, low-altitude vacuum cleaner that could be launched from a submerged submarine.

    18. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It puts people at risk, and the motherfucker should be tried for sedition.

      It's quite likely that they threatened him with just that - a treason/sedition charge - and so he cut a deal to plead guilty in exchange for lesser charges.

    19. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by danlip · · Score: 4, Informative

      It puts people at risk, and the motherfucker should be tried for sedition.

      I think you mean treason. Sedition is encouraging insurrection. Treason is acts of disloyalty to one's nation. But in the US treason is narrowly defined by the constitution (to prevent abuses), so unfortunately they probably can't be prosecuted for treason.

    20. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      I think he was the first president that sucked AND blowed.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    21. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by blantonl · · Score: 1

      That.... was AWESOME. Not awesome, but AWESOME.

      --
      Lindsay Blanton
      RadioReference.com
    22. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by hey! · · Score: 1

      Actually, "*unarmed*" vacuum manufacturer would make more sense than "unnamed". I mean, if you were *unnamed*, what would your distributors write on the check they send to pay you for your product? Anybody would be able to fill their name in and cash it.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    23. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

          I ran into this at a computer store I worked at a long time ago.

          Some of the genuine Intel CPU's that we would install would be very unstable at their rated speed. We were specifically instructed to run the ones that would at their rated speed, and the remainder we would install in machines advertised as slower. For example a 166Mhz processor would be flaky, so we'd set it as 133Mhz, and it would be fine. So we'd sell the machine as a 133. Most end users never pulled the heatsink off, so they never knew.

          I didn't have any real evidence to say that they were counterfeit chips, but it would seem to fit the evidence. Sanding and restamping chips was pretty easy with the right equipment. For all I knew, they could have all been 100Mhz chips that overclocked to 133Mhz fine, but simply weren't stable at 166Mhz.

          I'm using those numbers as examples. It's been years, and I don't remember exactly which ones were being installed, other than they were Intel chips, and it was around the time that 133Mhz was very common to install.

          It's a shame they don't indicate *WHAT* chips were counterfeit. A few manufacturer names were mentioned in conjunction to the investigation, but it doesn't say that their equipment was actually involved, or if they just gave expert advice.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    24. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by scatterbrained · · Score: 1

      The reason to do this is the markup on mil-spec parts. I am working with a TI DSP, it costs around $8 for the commercial version, around $30 for the "Enhanced Plastic" version that goes from -55 to +125, and about $300 for the full spec part in a ceramic package. The availability is often low on mil-spec stuff, so that also plays into it - people will pay a premium to not wait 20 weeks for a production order to come through.

      It must be really cheap to remark things. I've run across counterfeit MOSFETS - the original part was only $0.50, but were in short supply. Purchasing bought some through a 'broker' (pretty much scumbags as far as I can tell).

      We kept blowing them up, and finally sent some off for failure analysis. The xray showed the replacement part was totally different and only had one bond wire in places where the real part had 3.

      --
      -- All that's left of me, is slight insanity, whats on the right, I don't know. -- Bob Mould
    25. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      In other words our new vacum overlords are 'armless.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    26. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      It can also be read as the unnamed vacuum-cleaner manufacturer was one of the things sold to Naval Sea Systems Command along with the chips.

    27. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...the motherfucker should be tried for sedition.

      Here's a nickel, kid. Get yourself a better dictionary.

    28. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by hardwarefreak · · Score: 1

      The vacuum cleaner manufacturer is actually named Noiseless Sucking Appliances.

      You mean No Such Appliance.

    29. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      We had some new, cutting edge (for the time), P233 machines at uni which had 2 large blanking plates at the front (no optical drives installed)...
      Someone removed the blanking plates, reached in and removed the cpus, and then replaced them with (much cheaper) p166 chips but left them clocked to 233mhz so noone would notice... This worked for quite a while, until the machines started failing one by one and being sent to the support dept for repair.

      Incidentally, if you bought chips that were unstable at their rated speed you should have returned them and demanded refund or replacement, chips that wont run properly at their rated speed are defective... That's assuming your boss didn't buy them from somewhere questionable...

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    30. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by Neoprofin · · Score: 1

      "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court."

      I think they could certainly make the argument that this constitutes aiding our enemies if they intentionally sold inferior products to the armed forces. The largest reason that treason is so rarely prosecuted is the requirement of witnesses, of which I can only imagine they could find a few here, which isn't required for espionage charges. That said, I don't think they'll charge them with treason, but I would argue that if they had a mind to there's nothing stopping them.

    31. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 1

      Sometimes I use the wrong verbs on purpose just so someone will correct me. It's like bumping into a stranger on the sidewalk just to get a hug.

      Thanks for the correction. *hug*

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
    32. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by danlip · · Score: 1

      Sometimes I use the wrong verbs on purpose just so someone will correct me. It's like bumping into a stranger on the sidewalk just to get a hug.

      Thanks for the correction. *hug*

      And I assume you said verb instead of noun on purpose too :-) *hug*

    33. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 1

      And I assume you said verb instead of noun on purpose too :-) *hug*

      ... yes.

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
    34. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      I think you mean treason. Sedition is encouraging insurrection. Treason is acts of disloyalty to one's nation. But in the US treason is narrowly defined by the constitution (to prevent abuses), so unfortunately they probably can't be prosecuted for treason.

      I thought the government just had to say it was terrorist-related, and they could pretty much do what they want with them, without having to bother about niceties like the constitution or the courts.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    35. Re:we still make vacumm cleaners? by Horny+Hot+Babes+Rule · · Score: 1

      Why would the National Honor Society need a cover for its name?

  2. Amusement du jour: by migla · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm imagining someone selling the Navy fake ships.

    --
    Some of my favourite people are from th US; Vonnegut, Chomsky, Bill Hicks.
    1. Re:Amusement du jour: by Tired+and+Emotional · · Score: 5, Funny

      Its worse than that. We've been firing vacuum cleaners at enemy aircraft.

      --
      Squirrel!
    2. Re:Amusement du jour: by The+Grim+Reefer2 · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'm imagining someone selling the Navy fake ships.

      I was thinking that someone had sold them Pringles.

    3. Re:Amusement du jour: by hrimhari · · Score: 4, Funny

      Latest US Navy project: Mega Maid.

      --
      http://dilbert.com/2010-12-13
    4. Re:Amusement du jour: by Thud457 · · Score: 2, Funny

      This sounds like "Our Man in Havana"

      come on guys, it had Obi Wan it it!!!

      --

      the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    5. Re:Amusement du jour: by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Its worse than that. We've been firing vacuum cleaners at enemy aircraft.

      Man, that....sucks. But the upside is that we don't have to clean up the wreckage.

    6. Re:Amusement du jour: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You almost hear the confusion now, "What is it? That sucks!"

    7. Re:Amusement du jour: by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      They did via the US Coast Guard's Deepwater http://www.cryptome.org/deepwater/deepwater.htm :)
      ..."ships that were delivered being the eight leaking cutters"

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    8. Re:Amusement du jour: by Tuoqui · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yep I suppose we're gonna get a whole bunch of these 'Counterfeit Goods' stories hitting the media in the next year or so to make people think we absolutely positively must pass the ACTA treaty the RIAA/MPAA have been working on in secret.

      --
      09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
      +2 Troll is Slashdot's way of saying groupthink is confused
    9. Re:Amusement du jour: by TimSSG · · Score: 1

      The Navy is really cleaning the enemy clocks. Or, winning when a dust up happens. Tim S.

    10. Re:Amusement du jour: by dmbasso · · Score: 1

      "Your Honor, I didn't realized I was selling them Preengles!"

      --
      `echo $[0x853204FA81]|tr 0-9 ionbsdeaml`@gmail.com
    11. Re:Amusement du jour: by cephus440 · · Score: 0

      Imagine the uproar from the Russian! No vacuum cleaners in Poland, you can easily change them to offensive weapons!

    12. Re:Amusement du jour: by drseuk · · Score: 1

      This is a *feature* of, not a bug in, the "Windows for Warships" ethniccleansing.dll. http://www.windowsforwarships.com/

    13. Re:Amusement du jour: by cephus440 · · Score: 0

      Can't I get a little score for that to get me out of the dog house?

  3. Treason by koan · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You know the penalty.

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    1. Re:Treason by Mononoke · · Score: 1

      I agree with this suggestion.

      --
      NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
    2. Re:Treason by NiceGeek · · Score: 4, Insightful

      http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/article03/

      "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort"

      Ripping them off isn't treason.

    3. Re:Treason by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I don't know. Knowing selling the Navy computer components you KNOW would fail, to me, would fall into "giving aid to the enemy". We could argue intention/motivation, but a crime is a crime, regardless what you meant.

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
    4. Re:Treason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The presidency?

    5. Re:Treason by NiceGeek · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What "enemy"?

    6. Re:Treason by couchslug · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Selling fake/incorrect components should be prosecuted as sabotage, because defective components can degrade vital systems and cause casualties.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    7. Re:Treason by jaymz2k4 · · Score: 1

      I don't doubt that these chips probably were much more likely to fail and be of in general far lower quality but it does sound like he was doing what many bar owners do with their vodka - buy the cheap one and sell it expensively to those that want that particular brand.

      This is of course totally wrong but I don't think the intention was to supply chips that would knowingly fail as an ultior motive. I think he was basically saying I get chip-X for $10, they want chip-Y that does the same thing but costs $50. If he's rebranding chips, they must've done the same job when in place. I don't think his motive was one of causing chaos, just money.

      --
      jaymz
    8. Re:Treason by hrimhari · · Score: 2, Funny

      Why, all of them, whoever they are!

      --
      http://dilbert.com/2010-12-13
    9. Re:Treason by Darkness404 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      For one, you didn't know that it was going to fail. This would be equivalent to me selling a VIA C7 as a Celeron D. Fraud, yes. But a VIA CPU is not more likely to fail than an Intel CPU. Its a cheaper, lower performance CPU, but I wouldn't call it treason to sell to the Navy.

      And for the other, who is the "enemy"? It doesn't give aid to the non-existent "enemy", it simply gives you more money. They should be prosecuted for fraud, not treason.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    10. Re:Treason by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      We could argue intention/motivation, but a crime is a crime, regardless what you meant.

      You are aware that laws are based on intention, right? Like how manslaughter and murder are different based on intention?

    11. Re:Treason by Runaway1956 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Old destroyer man here. Nature and the elements are one enemy that sailors battle every day. Not to mention Al Queda and assorted terrorists such as the ones who attacked the USS Cole. Pointing out that Iran is already geared up for war in the Strait of Hormuz, The Persian Guf, and the Sea of Oman is probably redundant.

      No, treason is probably not an appropriate charge against these idiots, but I felt it necessary to point out that the US Navy is never at "peace". There are always operations taking place in which men's lives are in peril. Some of the most dangerous things pulled of by destroyers and small craft never make the news at all. Shipboard equipment is tested to it's limits daily, and lives depend on that equipment operating properly.

      Care to step aboard an aircraft carrier? During flight operations, no matter how peaceful, there is more danger in one 24 hour day than most people can imagine.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    12. Re:Treason by QuoteMstr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      First of all, the charge of treason is obviously inappropriate. Fraud it is.

      But to your other point, using a low-spec chip can certainly lead to lower reliability. What if the ersatz chip has less forgiving temperature than the real thing? What if the software running on it assumes it can respond within 50us to an external input, but because the ersatz chip is running at a lower clock speed, the response time is 100us? That could be the difference between your anti-ship-killer-missile cannon hitting the target and you surviving, or it missing and you dying.

      This is serious.

    13. Re:Treason by Old97 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Which enemy?

      Fixed that for you.

      --
      Very often, people confuse simple with simplistic. The nuance is lost on most. - Clement Mok
    14. Re:Treason by geekoid · · Score: 1

      I would say selling fake chips used in military vehicles is aiding the enemy.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    15. Re:Treason by NiceGeek · · Score: 1

      Didn't mean to imply that it's not a dangerous business, but the "aid and comfort to the enemy" part would be pretty nebulous to hang a death sentence on.

    16. Re:Treason by Kral_Blbec · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That is a ridiculous comparison. Manslaughter, IMO, should not be a crime. Either it was murder or it was an accident, and accidents shouldn't be punished.

      Note that I consider accidents to be those things that you could not control, ie someone jumps in front of your car. Not your fault. If you were drunk and hit someone, however, then you made the intentional choice to get drunk. The consequences of getting drunk involved killing someone. You might not have intended to kill them, but you intended to get yourself into a state where you couldn't control your actions and thereby pose a threat.

      Sell bad hardware to the Navy, well you intended to commit fraud. The results of that fraud might not be intentional, ie failure of mission critical systems and death, but you started the chain reaction. I'm not saying it is treason either, but any damage as a result of his fraud is still his fault, intended or not.

    17. Re:Treason by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      I disagree. This is a perfect comparison. It doesn't matter if it was an accident, you still killed someone and should be held accountable. In this case, the defendant was financially motivated, not meaning to attack the country directly, and the charges should take that into account. I think circumstances would be different if his actions caused a critical failure of some sort, death, etc.

    18. Re:Treason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What "enemy"?

      Me look up enemy in dictionary. It mean:

      1. a person who feels hatred for, fosters harmful designs against, or engages in antagonistic activities against another; an adversary or opponent.

      If you not mean "what," you mean "which?"

      I'm just a simple caveman, your world frightens and confuses me!

    19. Re:Treason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Didn't mean to imply that it's not a dangerous business, but the "aid and comfort to the enemy" part would be pretty nebulous to hang a death sentence on.

      Well I suppose it could be possible to charge them with espionage against the Federal Government, which I think includes acts of intentional military sabotage. That way the scammers would be facing 15 years to life, without parole.

    20. Re:Treason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The" enemy.

    21. Re:Treason by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      Nope. It is fraud at best. You would have to show intent beyond greed for treason.
      Also fraud will be much easier to prove in court and get a conviction for.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    22. Re:Treason by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Knowing selling the Navy computer components you KNOW would fail, to me, would fall into "giving aid to the enemy"

      Unless he acquired chips specifically designed to fail in combat, no, it's just a ripoff.

      We could argue intention/motivation, but a crime is a crime, regardless what you meant.

      The consequences are measured by motivation. Trust me, you do not want the definition of treason to get fuzzy, unless you want to fear what you post on public forums.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    23. Re:Treason by Nadaka · · Score: 1

      A purely accidental death does not warrant a crime. The only question that should arise from such a slaying is if there was gross negligence involved in the death. Only then should someone be held to account.

    24. Re:Treason by ravenshrike · · Score: 1

      Ah, but he was ALREADY breaking the law. Completely different.

    25. Re:Treason by CannonballHead · · Score: 1

      The only question that should arise from such a slaying is if there was gross negligence involved in the death.

      Like knowingly selling faulty and/or "mislabeled" electronic components?

      If I knowingly drive a car that I know to malfunction on occasion and I hit you because it malfunctions, I can't blame it on the car.

      Or do you mean "purely incidental" or something like that? "Purely accidental" seems a little strong to apply in this case.

    26. Re:Treason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you were drunk and hit someone, however, then you made the intentional choice to get drunk. The consequences of getting drunk involved killing someone. You might not have intended to kill them, but you intended to get yourself into a state where you couldn't control your actions and thereby pose a threat.

      If 100 people make exactly the same thing (punch someone when drunk) with the same intention (wiping that annoying smirk off his face) it makes no sense at all that 99 of them won't be charged of anything serious (perhaps minor assault, usually not even that) and 1 will be charged of murder because his opponent happened to fall in a bit different way and break his skull.

      When 100 people do exactly the same thing with the same intention, they should be charged of the same crime, not depending on whether some random chance occured or not. Doing something either is illegal or is not.

    27. Re:Treason by DragonWriter · · Score: 2, Insightful

      don't know. Knowing selling the Navy computer components you KNOW would fail, to me, would fall into "giving aid to the enemy". We could argue intention/motivation, but a crime is a crime, regardless what you meant.

      No, actually, its not. Crimes general have a required mental state, and "what you meant" specifically is very often an essential component of the crime. What you meant (and when and why you came to mean it) can make the difference between Murder, Voluntary Manslaughter, Involuntary Manslaughter, and a non-criminal accident in which someone happens to have died.

      "a crime is a crime, regardless what you meant" would suggest that if, hypothetically, a group of passengers attempted to seize control of a commercial aircraft from hijackers attempting to use the plane as a weapon in a mass casualty attack aimed at a populated area, but caused the plane to crash in the process, and everyone on the plane was killed except for one of the passengers who tried to seize control of the plane back from the hijackers, that passenger would be as guilty of murdering everyone on the plane as he would have been if, instead, he had hijacked the plane and deliberately crashed it for the purpose of killing everyone on the plane. Intent, indeed, matters, both legally and morally.

    28. Re:Treason by speed+of+lightx2 · · Score: 1

      What if this happened in the Athlon/Pentium IV days? Maybe this guys were extremely patriotic and when the Navy demanded inefficient Pentium IVs they went to all this trouble to deliver them a chip that actually worked.

    29. Re:Treason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it can be said the there where no Terrorist attacks under George W then it can be said to be treason. Common logic and facts, in this day and age. That'll never get you a job at Fox son....... ;)

    30. Re:Treason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      There is a difference between fraud, where someone sells sells a chip rated at 2000 cycles day, but the machine in reality is inoperable, and treason where it impacts a country's national security.

      This is the same as murder versus regicide/assassination. Yes, the crime is the same, but the magnitude of whom it affects is greatly different. A murder will affect a family, friends, and co-workers of the victim, while an assassination can affect a whole nation.

      Same crime, far greater magnitudes of who is affected.

    31. Re:Treason by Tanktalus · · Score: 1

      Fraud, easily. Treason, with a great torture (no pun intended) of the laws (is this an act of war against the US? We'd have to prove some sort of intent). Gross (or criminal) negligience might be a much easier sell. IANAL, but I don't think it requires someone to actually die, merely contribute to the likelihood, recklessly. Not sure if that's on the books in the US (or the particular state involved here) though. Involuntary manslaughter is another option, but only if someone died and it can be (reasonably) tracked back to the subpar parts that were fraudulently sold to the military.

    32. Re:Treason by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      And if you think equipment is tested to the extreme on a tin can or bird farm - step aboard a submarine.

      I shudder to think what might happen if these chips were installed in, say, the atmosphere control system. Or the ballast and trim system controls. It wouldn't take much, the margin is razor thin down there.

    33. Re:Treason by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      Old destroyer man here. Nature and the elements are one enemy that sailors battle every day.

      (snip)

      Care to step aboard an aircraft carrier? During flight operations, no matter how peaceful, there is more danger in one 24 hour day than most people can imagine.

      Which is why locking him up in a room for a little counseling session with some A Gangers, a few Bosuns, and maybe a hull tech or two wouldn't be a bad start...

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    34. Re:Treason by hax4bux · · Score: 1

      I'll see you, tin can man and raise you a few hashmarks.

      This isn't treason, someone needs to lay off Fox and caffeine.

      Not everything is a combat system. And not every day at sea is filled w/tense drama. Actually, I could tell you everything of interest over the span of a six pack. The rest... well... tedium until discharged.

      The shipboard environment is more like a medium industrial setting (varies of course, a lot of difference between CIC and engineering).

      Mother Navy pays $$$ for stuff to spec, she should get full value. I'm glad to see NSSC is actually doing something about this.

    35. Re:Treason by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Industrial setting. Alright, if you say so, I won't argue that comparison.

      But, I have yet to see the industrial setting that I experienced in the winter of 1978 in the North Atlantic, the North Sea, and various bodies of water in and around Ireland, Scotland, Norway, etc. Everything was lashed down, to prevent it from becoming a missile hazard. Even a navsup pub can be hazardous, when the ship is tossing, bucking, and rolling violently in stormy seas. We lashed ourselves into our bunks, because being thrown from the top bunk could be fatal. In this kind of environment, dropping the load is likely to mean being capsized, and losing all hands aboard.

      Not everything aboard a destroyer is a combat system, true. But, there is nothing aboard ship that can't cost your life, or save your life, when the shit hits the fan.

      Maybe you accepted a career of tedium while you were in. Personally, I volunteered for anything and everything, and I intentionally chose commands that were most likely to see action. You'll probably admit there is considerable difference between tender duty, and duty aboard a leading desron's flagship.

      USS Richard E. Byrd DDG-23, DesRon 2

      I'm less proud of the USS Koelsch FF-1049. That was the tedium you seem to have in mind. The most exciting thing on that tub was when they asked the landing party to go ashore to verify some satellite intelligence. Dropping the load was almost routine, so it was never sent into the North Atlantic, and certainly not during the winter months.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    36. Re:Treason by Nyall · · Score: 2, Insightful

      huh?

      I do embedded real time programming and guess what? lower performance = fail. e.g. if a system is spec'd to be able to track/extrapolate position of 100 moving objects and it only tracks 80 because someone slapped in a lower performing cpu then you are failing to track 20.

      --
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification
    37. Re:Treason by Nyall · · Score: 1

      this is a slightly bad example because # of objects is dependant on ram size. A better example would be being able to track 100 objects with a constant 50ms update rate. If tracking them takes longer than 50ms then you've failed.

      --
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification
    38. Re:Treason by Kral_Blbec · · Score: 1

      The intention to punch them brings with it the responsibility of the outcome, regardless of how severe it is.

    39. Re:Treason by Kral_Blbec · · Score: 1

      I disagree. This is a perfect comparison. It doesn't matter if it was an accident, you still killed someone and should be held accountable. In this case, the defendant was financially motivated, not meaning to attack the country directly, and the charges should take that into account. I think circumstances would be different if his actions caused a critical failure of some sort, death, etc.

      You say you disagree, but I think we really agree more than disagree. We are both saying that:

      A) it isn't treason, its fraud
      B)any death/damage caused by the systems failure would be his fault

      The analogy is faulty, but the fundamentals we agree on.

    40. Re:Treason by Kral_Blbec · · Score: 1

      If you know it is malfunctioning, then yes you are responsible. If a kid runs out in the street to get a ball right in front of you, then you aren't. Big differences in the situation. This case is more like the former.

    41. Re:Treason by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 1

      Well I suppose it could be possible to charge them with espionage against the Federal Government, which I think includes acts of intentional military sabotage. That way the scammers would be facing 15 years to life, without parole.

      I think intent is important, here. If there was evidence of a deliberate attempt to degrade the capabilities of the military, on behalf of their alliegence to a foreign power, that would qualify as treason, I think. If their intent was simply to carve a larger margin by dubious practices, then a lesser charge would be appropriate. Might I suggest a jail term - in the brig of one of the destroyers they sold components to? Let them wear the same risk they asked of others.

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
    42. Re:Treason by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Take a world map, throw a dart...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    43. Re:Treason by blantonl · · Score: 1

      Bullshit.

      If I sold something that knowingly was designed to kill solders, than yes. Selling something to the military with degraded quality and attempting to defraud someone?. .. uh... I don't think so.

      Seriously, there are numerous military contractors out there that are "gaming the system" to provide to our troops overseas. We could start with Haliburt.... oh nevermind.

      Assholes? Yes! Illegal.. Yes!

      Treasonous? Sorry, I don't think so.

      --
      Lindsay Blanton
      RadioReference.com
    44. Re:Treason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In that case Microsoft should be shutdown and all assets seized given the catastrophic on-board failure of the computer system running Microsoft Windows and the ship's navigation system went wacko.

    45. Re:Treason by Stan92057 · · Score: 0

      terrorist are your friends?? There my enemy thats for sure.

      --
      Jack of all trades,master of none
    46. Re:Treason by radish · · Score: 1

      The most exciting thing on that tub was when they asked the landing party to go ashore to verify some satellite intelligence.

      You wouldn't call it boring if you were the guy who had to wear the red shirt!

      --

      ---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"

    47. Re:Treason by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      "But, I have yet to see the industrial setting that I experienced in the winter of 1978 in the North Atlantic..."

      Early eighties, 60 foot commercial fishing boat in Bass straight Australia, skippered by a large red-bearded terrorist who habitually walked around in nothing but his underpants. Swell was taller than the mast and blocked out the radar when the boat was in a trough, engine strained to climb the swell and raced when coming down the other side. We were fully loaded both below and above deck making the bow look like a surfacing submarine each time we came off one wave and onto the next. No ice on the rigging to contend with but the tidal rips, shallow water and abundance rocks balances that out. - Scary as hell but a great experience.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    48. Re:Treason by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      If you think like that, you could get most of the government for treason... High ranking members of the government siphon billions of the taxpayers money through the military and into their own pockets through awarding of contracts to suppliers related in some way to them... And anything else simply goes to the lowest bidder. If the government used a truly fair bidding system and properly evaluated the options, billions would be saved which the military could spend on other things.

      I've read stories in multiple media sources about soldiers in afghanistan and iraq being killed because they were inadequately equipped, while at the same time reading about inefficiently run military projects which are wasting huge amounts of money (pouring into a select few companies nodoubt)... That money should be buying proper equipment for the soldiers on the ground, not fattening the wallets of politicians and their friends. People are actually being KILLED as a result of this.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    49. Re:Treason by Kagura · · Score: 1

      North Korea captured the U.S.S. Liberty during "peacetime".

    50. Re:Treason by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Especially if the gross negligence was for the sole purpose of increasing profit, you effectively gamble with someone's life.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    51. Re:Treason by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      People have often committed treason for reasons of greed, it's not unheard of for people to sell their country out because an enemy promised them a large financial incentive. Greed is probably the worst reason and should be punished accordingly, other people may commit such crimes because they are being blackmailed or threatened.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    52. Re:Treason by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      True but there is intent.
      I will sell these crappy chips make some extra money and no one will ever know is fraud.
      I will take money from an other government to sell these chips that will cause ships to sink is treason.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    53. Re:Treason by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Nature and the elements are one enemy that sailors battle every day.

      Without wanting to sound picky, by that definition everyone (including children walking to school) is at war all the time, so that the concept becomes meaningless.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    54. Re:Treason by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      That is a ridiculous comparison. Manslaughter, IMO, should not be a crime. Either it was murder or it was an accident, and accidents shouldn't be punished.

      Note that I consider accidents to be those things that you could not control, ie someone jumps in front of your car. Not your fault. If you were drunk and hit someone, however, then you made the intentional choice to get drunk. The consequences of getting drunk involved killing someone. You might not have intended to kill them, but you intended to get yourself into a state where you couldn't control your actions and thereby pose a threat.

      Your second paragraph pretty much defines manslaughter, thereby negating your first paragraph's argument.

      Drunk drivers who kill as a rule get convicted of manslaughter, not murder, and this is a sensible reflection of the fact that being careless/stupid by drinking and driving is not as bad as a premeditated stabbing or shooting.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    55. Re:Treason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're full of shit, and your little life is meaningless. Obviously you've never been to sea, or if you have it was on a Caribbean cruise ship in the summer. GP describes a winter at sea near the Arctic Circle. The ship's master must monitor sea conditions every second, and respond appropriately. One wrong decision means death for everyone. Little children walking to school have the option of staying at home if the weather is bad, or Mommy can drive them to school. Neither their house nor their school is subject to foundering. Duhhh. I have a great idea for you. The next time you read of a disaster at sea, take your lame ass out participate in rescue attempts. A ferry capsizes somewhere in the world every six months it seems - use your next two weeks of vacation volunteering. THEN come back and tell us about your meaningless existence. The nearest you've have ever possibly come to facing the elements is if a tornado or a hurricane came through your town, and you don't sound as if that has ever happened in YOUR pathetic lifetime.

    56. Re:Treason by sarkeizen · · Score: 1

      Probably not in a useful sense of the word...but I can see you're more than a little stupid.

      It is possible, but not necessitated that some of the enemies of the USA *benefited* from this. But if *that's* the interpretation of "aiding" we must use "an enemy of the USA potentially benefited from this act" then this would apply to such a ridiculously wide variety of acts that a rational person could only conclude that your legal system is just one step closer to idiocracy than it was yesterday. The more likely case - is that you're wrong.

  4. Seriously? by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 1

    You thought you could get away with fraud while dealing with the government?

    Might as well as try robbing a police station.

    1. Re:Seriously? by elzurawka · · Score: 5, Funny

      You can get away with fraud when dealing with the government. It's the Vacuum company that got them in trouble. The government would have probably went on for a few more years buying them if it wasn't for these people getting greedy and going after the lucrative vacuum market.

      --
      -EL
    2. Re:Seriously? by SnarfQuest · · Score: 1

      They should have been suspicious when they were offered the option of barbeque or sour cream.

      --
      Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
    3. Re:Seriously? by Lally+Singh · · Score: 1

      I've heard some pretty amazing government fraud stories. The best so far is a guy just making a bill in Excel and sending it to the Navy. They ended up paying $3 mil before catching him.

      --
      Care about electronic freedom? Consider donating to the EFF!
    4. Re:Seriously? by Applekid · · Score: 1

      You thought you could get away with fraud while dealing with the government?

      Might as well as try robbing a police station.

      The trick was that not enough of the ill-gotten gains was winding up lining the pockets of government officials.

      --
      More Twoson than Cupertino
    5. Re:Seriously? by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      Like the ones that come out every four years or so?

      I heard a great piece on Mike Capuano today. He was mayor of the city I grew up in, never really paid him much mind. What caught my attention was that he helped reform House Ethics rules. Apparently, before he was put in charge of ethics reform, the ethics committee was pointless. The only person who could even bring an ethics complaint against a sitting representative was.... another representative.

      I mean seriously. This guy has been in the house for less than 10 years, and its only during his term that it was decided that maybe it would be a good idea if someone outside of the house could file ethics complaints against them? Were we actually expected to believe that they policed themselves? or that the ethics committee did next to nothing because they were such righteous and incorruptible people?

      -Steve

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    6. Re:Seriously? by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 1

      Sure you can, you just have to do it the right way like Goldman-Sachs. First you make some bribes, oops I meant campaign contributions, then you get them to hire your guys to run the place, THEN you defraud the government for trillions. Gotta spend money to steal money.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    7. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now that's an informed comment! If you want to have a long-running and successful career profiteering on the public purse, make darn sure you are kicking back enough to the decision makers. You want them on-side whenever things get sticky, and it's too late to butter them up after things go bad.

  5. Ron Paul!!! by BitHive · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    This is why the government shouldn't be allowed any more money than is needed to keep the lights on in the capitol, they always fuck things up! When will people learn to temper their bigoted distrust of the free market and private enterprise?

    1. Re:Ron Paul!!! by Duradin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Because it was the free market and private enterprise that was doing the scamming?

      And if they are willing to pull this on the gov't then it really doesn't bode well for the rest of us peons.

    2. Re:Ron Paul!!! by Katchu · · Score: 1

      Thank you Neil Felahy of Newport Coast, California for reminding us to trust you.

      --
      Keep Doing Good.
    3. Re:Ron Paul!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Isn't there some confusion here? This is the free market at work; if it wasn't, the Navy would have their own fabs and employ wafer process techs as well as sailors and airplane mechanics. This is outside the brief of the government, especially the Navy, hence the government buying the fake chips from a private contractor. They didn't do enough due diligence and got burned -- isn't that what's supposed to happen when there's an information imbalance in a market?

    4. Re:Ron Paul!!! by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Since when did they need real money from us? They either print their own or borrow it from China.

    5. Re:Ron Paul!!! by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      Was it not a private enterprise that sold these fake chips?

    6. Re:Ron Paul!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What happened is that they went with the cheapest (lowest bid) contractor. The other guys who bid on the contract probably had legit chips to sell and couldn't compete with the cheaters.

      This is why the government's practice of having to accept the lowest bid is just fucking dumb. They always get ripped off.

      Look at any of your local construction projects. The lowest bidder got that job. Now the job is over budget and behind schedule.

      They rarely go with the best, most qualified bidder.

    7. Re:Ron Paul!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, where do they get off thinking about defense of the homeland, disaster relief, and caring about the welfare of children that can't take care of themselves.

      The nerve!

    8. Re:Ron Paul!!! by FooAtWFU · · Score: 1
      It's Gresham's Law in action: Bad money drives out the good (or in this case, bad components). If no one can tell the difference, then people will substitute inferior products, and pocket the extra money (or use it to expand at the expense of those suppliers with superior products who can't make the same margins).

      I wouldn't say it's "how the free market is supposed to work" as that implies something positive and normative to be pursued; it's just an aspect of the free market (and many less-than-free markets which might seek to replace them, cf. nail quotas in Soviet Russia) that ultimately must be addressed by fixing the information imbalances.

      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
    9. Re:Ron Paul!!! by Jackie_Chan_Fan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The government is not at fault. The owner of those businesses is. The government looked for a seller within our free market, and that seller conspired to fool the government.

      If anything, this says more negative about the free market, and the willingness of people to do illegal things out of selfish greed.

      The government is the people. It is for the people, by the people. If the government is so "fucked up" as you say it is, than perhaps its just a reflection of our citizens.

      We need to be BETTER PEOPLE for ourselves, and our fellow Americans.

    10. Re:Ron Paul!!! by CTalkobt · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Huh?

      I don't think this is an issue of Due Diligence - blame the goverment blah blah blah - it's an issue of THEY LIED. They stated the chips were one thing / one grade and turned out they were another grade entirely.

      It's reasonable to expect regular consumers in the marketplace to perform due diligence but when a person claims the product is the product and it appears that way then the person has performed due deligence. Requiring the person to inspect fab plants and everything else for every manufacturer is not due diligence - it's a hassle.

      Let's get out of this blame the government mantra - the politico talking heads are having enough fun as it is. This is a criminal issue for which the company should be nailed pretty harshly. The goverment should get it's retribution through whatever means are most expedient.

      --
      There's a gorilla from Manilla whose a fella that stinks of vanilla and has salmonella.
    11. Re:Ron Paul!!! by willy_me · · Score: 1

      The free market does not really exist. It requires that everyone be honest and play by the rules. In reality, people cheat and lie all the time. For this reason, the free market does not exist in its idealized form. We still strive for a free market, but rules, regulation, and enforcement are required in the real world. The only real question is how much "rules, regulation, and enforcement" is required to minimize the loss that results from fraud? Republicans and Democrats have different answers to this question.

    12. Re:Ron Paul!!! by Sir_Sri · · Score: 1

      also due diligence isn't instant. These guys did get caught, eventually. If they were smart the first batch they sold was legit, then they just have until some regular or spot check review to sell the fake stuff.

      You cannot possibly inspect every piece of every thing you buy from everyone, and adequately test it, even as a big entity. You test some, and, as with any (pseudo random) sampling method it won't catch everything right away, and might never catch some things.

    13. Re:Ron Paul!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't remember if it was state, county, or local, but around here, they throw out the few lowest bids and pick the lowest of the ones they didn't throw out (as a defense against the whole "getting ripped off" thing).

      It works on the basis that, if you know that the very lowest bids will definitely not be picked, but you do not know what the other guys are bidding, then you'll actually make an honest bid.

      Also, monetary penalties may be applied for going over budget and/or behind schedule. That's not something I've heard of for local projects though, just something I'm always hearing about on any construction project that a program airs about on The History Channel.

    14. Re:Ron Paul!!! by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, companies make unrealistically low bids to get the contract knowing full well there is no way they can do the work for that price...
      It would be cheaper to have people sufficiently qualified and independent to evaluate the options in advance...
      There should also be severe penalties for failing to deliver on budget and schedule.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  6. uuuh by masshuu · · Score: 0

    whats wrong with sony, samsung, or intel. I'm sure they could produce chips for government related applications, not some shady business no ones heard of before.

    --
    O.o
    1. Re:uuuh by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Informative

      whats wrong with sony, samsung, or intel. I'm sure they could produce chips for government related applications, not some shady business no ones heard of before.

      Are you familiar with efforts to foster American small businesses in the United States by the government (note this is nothing specific to Obama)? If you want to get into government contracts, I suggest you start a small business owned by a woman who is a minority. You'd be amazed at how easily you can land contracts and subcontracts as the government and big contractors strive to make quotas.

      --
      My work here is dung.
    2. Re:uuuh by Shakrai · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I suggest you start a small business owned by a woman who is a minority.

      Why is it (properly, IMHO) called racism and/or sexism if someone gives favoritism to a white male but doing the inverse is just fine and dandy?

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    3. Re:uuuh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      That's why on the government forms I said I was multiracial I'm part Anglo and part Saxon. I didn't come form Caucasia so I never check that box.

    4. Re:uuuh by DigiShaman · · Score: 2, Funny

      This is Slashdot damnit! Logic has no reason here.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    5. Re:uuuh by Rogerborg · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      I suggest you start a small business owned by a woman who is a minority.

      Why is it (properly, IMHO) called racism and/or sexism if someone gives favoritism to a white male but doing the inverse is just fine and dandy?

      Asking that question is worse than anything that Hitler ever did. That's why.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    6. Re:uuuh by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why is it (properly, IMHO) called racism and/or sexism if someone gives favoritism to a white male but doing the inverse is just fine and dandy?

      2 generations ago: negros were riding on the back of the bus (1949)
      3 generations ago: women hadn't yet been given the right to vote (1919)

      The short version is: because we say so.
      The full version might have something to do with the long and storied
      history of racism, sexism, and exploitation throughout human history.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    7. Re:uuuh by CannonballHead · · Score: 1

      Hitler had a foreign accent.

      To most Americans (I am an American, by the way), anything stated in a foreign accent (especially British, for some reason) automatically has a better chance at being accepted as true.

      :)

    8. Re:uuuh by JonStewartMill · · Score: 1

      There's only two places where that question would be considered "insightful": slashdot and Fox News.

    9. Re:uuuh by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      Welcome to reverse discrimination.

    10. Re:uuuh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suggest you start a small business owned by a woman who is a minority.

      Why is it (properly, IMHO) called racism and/or sexism if someone gives favoritism to a white male but doing the inverse is just fine and dandy?

      Why was Microsoft convicted because it bundled Explorer with Windows, while Apple can do the same with Safari and Mac OS X with impunity?

      Hint: not being the top dog having a virtually complete hold over the market/society means that you get more perks in order to help the underdogs (in case of the market: to get healthier competition; in case of society: to get better representation of all of society throughout all of its levels, rather than concentrating some at the bottom and some at the top -- because time has shown again and again that this is a perfect recipe for civil unrest due to disillusioned people who no longer believe in the "everyone has equal opportunities" motto).

    11. Re:uuuh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, but do they take into account if a white man employs mostly minority women in the small business? Or if the minority woman employs mostly white men?

    12. Re:uuuh by inhuman_4 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The full version might have something to do with the long and storied
      history of racism, sexism, and exploitation throughout human history.

      I see, so this is just history repeating itself.

      For a moment there I thought two wrongs don't make a right.

    13. Re:uuuh by dasunt · · Score: 3, Insightful

      2 generations ago: negros were riding on the back of the bus (1949)
      3 generations ago: women hadn't yet been given the right to vote (1919)

      What were white men doing two or three generations ago?

      While some of them were probably benefiting greatly from institutionalized sexism and racism, others were part of the poor, downtrodden masses.

      Even today, there are places that are very white and very poor, where there is little opportunity, and crime and poverty runs rampant.

      So why do we assume all white men don't need any additional help?

      Is it because of the color of their skin and their gender?

    14. Re:uuuh by CannonballHead · · Score: 1

      So, basically, what you are saying is that it is an over-reaction?

    15. Re:uuuh by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      Because while stealing $100 from Bob and giving it to Bill is usually regarded as bad. Doing so after Bob had stolen $100 from Bill usually isn't.

      Or the underlying concept: two wrongs make a right.

    16. Re:uuuh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're making a primarily linguistic (and ultimately specious) argument, rather than a societal one that considers the actual issues at hand. The problem isn't racism or sexism per se; it's that our society is currently controlled (both fiscally and politically) by white males out of proportion to their actual representation in the population. Specifying quotas for procurement from minority suppliers is at least an attempt at a systemic answer to the economic side of the issue.

      But that's alright... you can just keep parroting the same tired bullshit that we've all heard a thousand times before. It's a lot easier than thinking.

    17. Re:uuuh by Shatrat · · Score: 1

      Nobody is more than 1 generation old.
      The full version might have a lot to do with money...

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    18. Re:uuuh by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      Why is it (properly, IMHO) called racism and/or sexism if someone gives favoritism to a white male but doing the inverse is just fine and dandy?

      Its not racism (or sexism) if someone gives preferential treatment to someone because they are a white male, its discrimination on the basis of race and sex. Racism is an attitude (as is sexism) that might reasonably inferred to be the (or part of the) motivation for the discrimination, depending on what other evidence of motivation is available.

      OTOH, when a bunch of people, mostly wealthy white men, get together and decide to provide limited preferential treatment to people who aren't white men (but who, as business owners, are, as a class, wealthier than average) with the stated purpose of advancing the economic position of people in groups that were disadvantaged by past formal and informal discrimination, there a wide number of motives to which the action could reasonably be ascribed (some noble -- such as accepting the stated motivation -- and some less so -- seeing it as tokenism that avoids dealing with the widespread results of discrimination) but "racism" (or "sexism") -- at least in favor of the groups receiving the preferences -- isn't as easy a case to make as it is in the case of white men discriminating against people who aren't white men.

    19. Re:uuuh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      3 generations ago: women hadn't yet been given the right to vote (1919)

      2 words for you: Women's. Suffrage.
      3 words for you: Worst! Mistake! Evar!

    20. Re:uuuh by jtownatpunk.net · · Score: 1

      So how does reversing that make everything better? We're supposed to have 2 or 3 generations where a white male can't get ahead? Then what? It's all good? We switch back to equality?

      And it's not like this reverse-racism works anyway. This may come as a shock to you but a huge number of these minority/woman owned businesses are actually RUN by non-minority males. The "owner" stays out the way and gets a check. I've even seen situations where the minority male who runs the show has the business in his wife's name because WBE gets more contracts.

    21. Re:uuuh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suggest you start a small business owned by a woman who is a minority.

      Why is it (properly, IMHO) called racism and/or sexism if someone gives favoritism to a white male but doing the inverse is just fine and dandy?

      You're a part of the problem here in the great United States; where it's become acceptable to be a sexist, and racist against the majority of the country. I'd like to extend a great big FUCK YOU in your general direction. It's absolutely ridiculous that an under-qualified minority would get favoritism simply because they are a minority.

      Other countries look to the US and wonder "What THE fuck???" Our governments, education systems, and economy has been utterly decimated them. Them being the hippy lesbians that turned the ERA movement into a fucking Gestapo-like regime, hell bent on castrating ALL men (homosexual men don't need testicles, after all,they can't reproduce anyway). Usurping non-white minorities along the way only adds momentum to their hate machine.

    22. Re:uuuh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      to quote a great man. "I offer no forgiveness for father's sins cast to his son." The white man put others down. Now it is the Black man's, and woman's turn to put the White Man's Sons down.

    23. Re:uuuh by CannonballHead · · Score: 1

      by white males out of proportion to their actual representation in the population

      You are assuming (let's just take the case of "white women") that men and women are inherently the same on the inside, even culturally... that is, that an equal amount of white women as white men actually WANT to run businesses and be politicians.

      I have met very few "white men" who want to be "stay at home dad's." I have met very many "white women" that want to be stay at home mom's. Unfortunately, the "thinkers" of today appear to invariably hold the premise that men and women are not different in any way, except physical appearance, thus we should have equal representation based on demographics in every job. Except jobs that women don't like, of course. And there isn't a huge social outcry about the discrimination against male secretaries/"administrative assistants." And when I've heard that argued, the answer seems to typically be that "well, women are better at doing those sorts of functions - phone answering, organization, etc." But it's sexist to say that men - on the whole/average is understood, of course - are better at anything. Except violence or something like that.

    24. Re:uuuh by FishOuttaWater · · Score: 1

      What if some unknown distant ancestor of Bill's took $100 from some ancestor of Bob's?

      Taking $100 from Bill and giving it to Bob doesn't seems much more like two wrongs than the kind of restitution you're describing.

    25. Re:uuuh by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      Then it is right to take $10,000 from Bill due to interest.

    26. Re:uuuh by FishOuttaWater · · Score: 1

      So it seems you value representative control rather than awarding work to the most capable. That really doesn't match what I value at all, but perhaps it's more complicated than that.

      I can see how there might be an old-boys network that would select the boys in the club instead of the most capable, and that ain't right either. Maybe we even need some kind of force pushing people to balance this more through the government.

      Really, the government approach seems crude and unfair, and I wish there were a better way.

      ...but you really need to look at the issues at hand instead of calling BS on people that look at it differently. Bring up the social issues instead of dismissing the rhetoric instead of complaining that they're not. You can bring the discussion to a higher level instead of a lower one.

    27. Re:uuuh by Quantumstate · · Score: 1

      I think the term would be "positive discrimination". At least that is what the government called it here in the UK. It sounds horribly similar to the kind of stuff which is in 1984.

    28. Re:uuuh by Shakrai · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The full version might have something to do with the long and storied history of racism, sexism, and exploitation throughout human history.

      Interesting. So I'm being punished because of the crimes of my fathers.

      Actually, scratch that. My family came to the states from Germany in the 1930s and laid down roots in the Northeast. So they had nothing to do with slavery, Jim Crow or the lack of female voting rights. So, I'm actually being punished for the crimes of dead people just because I have roughly the same melanin levels that they did.

      Yeah, that's totally fair and just.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    29. Re:uuuh by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      In other words, because quite a few years ago somebody who looked kinda like me did really horrible things to somebody who looked kinda like her. Yeah, that makes sense.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    30. Re:uuuh by Tanktalus · · Score: 1

      Welcome to straight-forward discrimination.

      FTFY

    31. Re:uuuh by gr8_phk · · Score: 1

      So why do we assume all white men don't need any additional help?

      We don't. We assume that a majority of black folks could use some additional economic help. This was true starting with the end of slavery and people do tend to end up in the same economic condition their parents were in (middle class breeds middle class, etc...) so you can't necessarily say "that was a long time ago" because it wasn't - yet. Just don't ask me at what point that changes :-)

    32. Re:uuuh by LinkX39 · · Score: 1

      I can personally vouch for that. I'm a State government employee and any time we contract work out (which is generally on construction projects in my department's case) there is a list of minority-owned businesses that we must go through and contact X number of for bids before we can make any decision. Should we decide on a company not minority owned we have to give a lengthy explanation of why they were chosen over the minority-owned companies. This isn't always as hard as it sounds though, since the vast majority of the numbers on the lists (that get updated yearly) are no longer in service (or as in at least one occasion in the past reused by sex hotlines, those are fun). I am all for using minority contractors when they are the best options, but not just because they are minority owned. But I guess that's what reverse discrimination is all about these days..... Oh, I'm sorry, I meant "equal" opportunity.

    33. Re:uuuh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In California, we call it "affirmative action" to conform to our political correctness directives.

    34. Re:uuuh by Cwix · · Score: 1

      nope just like i dont owe any money on my fathers house. It doesnt work like that

      --
      You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
    35. Re:uuuh by agnosticnixie · · Score: 1

      White males still get ahead easily everywhere, quit whining.

    36. Re:uuuh by agnosticnixie · · Score: 1

      Ah, so that's how libertarians justify opposition to land reform now that their ancestors have stolen the commons.

    37. Re:uuuh by willy_me · · Score: 1

      While I am in the same boat as you, there is some justification for how things are. Because you are caucasian, you do not have to worry about being discriminated against. You do not have stereotypes applied to you that would make it difficult to find work. You have an advantage - you have it good. I often find myself feeling lucky that I am an attractive, 6', caucasian, blue eyed male. Doors open easier for me then others - that's life and that isn't fair.

      If minority groups held seats of power (political and industrial) that represented their population then all would be good. No equal opportunity laws or policies would be required. Right now these laws exist because the sins of our fathers have to be corrected. And with racial tensions eased, life will be better for all - even people like you and me who already have it good and were not responsible for the problem in the first place.

    38. Re:uuuh by inviolet · · Score: 1

      Actually, scratch that. My family came to the states from Germany in the 1930s and laid down roots in the Northeast. So they had nothing to do with slavery, Jim Crow or the lack of female voting rights. So, I'm actually being punished for the crimes of dead people just because I have roughly the same melanin levels that they did.

      Indeed.

      I will gladly make reparations for slavery -- be it direct payments to the slaves' descendents, or preferential hiring policies, or AA policies at universities, or "race norming" of test scores, whatever. I'll pony it all up with a smile.

      Provided, of course, that I then get to own a slave.

      --
      FATMOUSE + YOU = FATMOUSE
    39. Re:uuuh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No one assumes that (at least no one I've read about).

      Affirmative action is supposed to equalize a perceived systemic discrimination.
      It's levelling the playing field, in theory, not putting it in anyone's advantage.

    40. Re:uuuh by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      Because you are caucasian, you do not have to worry about being discriminated against

      Bullshit. The topic at hand is institutionalized discrimination backed with the full power of the United States Government.

      You do not have stereotypes applied to you that would make it difficult to find work

      Citation needed. There are stereotypes for every race. Italians get stereotyped because of the mob. Germans get stereotyped because of the Nazis. The Brits are referred to as Limeys. Don't tell me that there aren't stereotypes that apply to Caucasians.

      minority groups held seats of power (political and industrial) that represented their population then all would be good

      They do hold seats of power. It's acceptable practice for Governments to draw legislative districts with the specific intent of electing minorities. Again with a nice double standard -- if you draw a district designed to elect a white guy it's called racism, but if you draw one designed to elect a black or latino it's called "progressive".

      Right now these laws exist because the sins of our fathers have to be corrected

      They weren't the sins of my father. Even if they were I seem to recall that the Constitution speaks out against the corruption of blood.

      And with racial tensions eased

      How do you ease racial tensions by disadvantaging an entire race because of crimes that were committed before most of them were born?

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    41. Re:uuuh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damnit Jim! The logic processor has malfunctioned and Spock is not available. I need at least 3 hours to swap out the inferior chip.

    42. Re:uuuh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IMHO (lol), It's complete and utter bullshit. Ok, here's the synopsis: Throughout all of human history, no one has been a bigger fucking panzy ass dipshit than the white males of the world over the past 300 years through to the present. With world domination firmly in their hands, the posterity of their sons and all the generations of sons to come as assured as the rising of the sun... they became their own only potential predator.

      It's been a gradual but steady decline up until today's point of complete idiotic faggotry. It's generally attributable to, first tolerating, then the flourishing of ideas leading to modern ethics and Humanism. It was all well and good in the "Quest for Eternal Truth", and yes, they're attractive ideas, but then infected those who entertained the ideas with the growing seeds of a self-loathing, guilt-ridden, whinny-bitch-ass, pathetic weakness we might generally reference as a haunting remorse over the conquests of their fathers & forefathers, and a regret for their inherited positions as the Masters of the Universe. So, they decided to be sure their white sons would not share in their "Despair", but rather that their future generations of white sons should be bent over and fucked up the ass for all eternity, in some self righteous homo-fucking-faggot fantasy land dream world where everyone is magically born "Equal" and have imaginary "Rights" (as if the Universe gives a flying fuck) that must be protected and enforced throughout the world.

      All I can say is thank-fucking-God the whole world doesn't buy into this faggot-ass bullshit.
      Personally, I can't wait to watch it all come crumbling down. Keep up the good work!

      BTW, I have nothing against women, black people or faggots. If there's one "Right" you have, it's to fight for you and yours. The problem is, YOU haven't won shit, and you wouldn't have jack-shit if it wasn't GIVEN to you.
      So, enjoy it while it lasts. Sooner or later, reality will roll around.

    43. Re:uuuh by blackest_k · · Score: 1

      Slavery wasn't just an American problem
      from
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abolition_of_slavery_timeline

      # 1807 Abolition in Prussia, Germany The Stein-Hardenberg Reforms.
      # 1808 United States--importation of slaves into the US prohibited after 1 Jan..

      In fact one of the most recent countries to engage in slavery was Germany

      1946 Fritz Sauckel, procurer of slave labor for Nazi Germany, convicted at the Nuremberg trials and executed as war criminal.

      votes for women
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women's_suffrage

      In the years before World War I, Norway (1913) and Denmark also gave women the right to vote, and it was extended throughout the remaining Australian states. Near the end of the war, various states gave women the right to vote, including Canada, Soviet Russia, Germany and Poland. British women over 30 had the vote in 1918, Dutch women in 1919, and American women in states that had previously denied them suffrage were allowed the vote in 1920. Women in Turkey were granted voting rights in 1926. In 1928, suffrage was extended to all British women on the same terms as men, that is, for persons 21 years old and older. One of the most recent jurisdictions to grant women full equal voting rights was Bhutan in 2008.

      Seems that historically Germany also shared similar practices as in America following a similar series of reforms.

      Secondly and perhaps more importantly by becoming American citizens your family accepted the choices made by the American government.

      You really shouldn't feel hard done by, especially since you still have the advantage of being white.

      There is still a long way to go before humanity ends discrimination on the basis of race, religion, color, gender, money.

    44. Re:uuuh by FishOuttaWater · · Score: 1

      Ohhhkaaay. My great grandparents were in eastern Europe at the time. Perhaps Bill's grandparents were half slave owners 1/4 slaves and 1/4 abolitionists. How do you propose to fairly apportion blame and restitution here? And for how many generations?

    45. Re:uuuh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's called statistics (yeah, i know - never trust one which is not faked by yourself)
      as long as the quota of minorities in positions like CEO or judge or geneneral does not match the percentage of that minority to the overall population it should be supported.
      If you want to start only if the last poor bastard will have had sufficient support then you will nerver start.

    46. Re:uuuh by Aris+Katsaris · · Score: 1

      "You're a part of the problem here in the great United States; where it's become acceptable to be a sexist, and racist against the majority of the country."

      Yes, I guess that's why there are only 17 women and only 1 black person out of a 100 senators. Because it's "acceptable" to be sexist against men and racist against whites.

      Please return to that argument when white men are actually underrepresented in politics or business, not while they remain grossly overrepresented.

    47. Re:uuuh by Aris+Katsaris · · Score: 1

      Please look at a grid I made at :
      http://ariskatsaris.deviantart.com/art/Political-grid-143752221
      (You can click on it for a bigger image)

      Meritocracy is all fine and dandy, but without solidarity strengthening the "egalitarian" axis, it just means that all future competition tilts towards the already successful rather than awarding the more capable.

      Solidarity has its own pitfalls ofcourse -- leaning leftwards, it may transform from "supporting the weak" into "group loyalty" instead, thus turning into a new privilege and a new aristocracy.

      But meritocracy alone can't stand. If it's not supported by egalitarianism it *will* make itself into aristocracy.

    48. Re:uuuh by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      And in 2 generations, whites will ride on the back of the bus..
      In 3 generations, men will lose the right to vote..

      Going for equality is one thing, but a lot of these efforts are going too far. A lot of people simply aren't satisfied being treated equally, and are demanding preferential treatment.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    49. Re:uuuh by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Bullshit, I have seen many situations where a white male has not got a job or not been promoted because someone equally or less qualified but who happens to be from a so called minority was available too.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    50. Re:uuuh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do you ease racial tensions by disadvantaging an entire race because of crimes that were committed before most of them were born?

      You don't, that is a recipe for disaster...

      The vast majority of whites have no issue with equality, but most do have issues with taking it so far as to put them at a disadvantage...

      Those few whites who do have a problem with equality (kkk, nazis, bnp etc) are generally a very small group who are ignored and derided by the majority of moderate whites...

      However, when you start pushing things too far and placing the average white man at an obvious disadvantage you will push large numbers of moderate whites towards the only people promising to help them - the extremists... This is precisely what happened with hitler, the average german was so unhappy with the situation that many supported the only party offering to do anything about it and hitler took advantage of the situation.

      Personally i support a level of healthy immigration in the name of diversity, but i do believe immigrants should blend in with the country they moved to... I hate the way countries are changing their customs and culture to accommodate immigrants... Give them exactly the same treatment as the native people, and expect them to mix in and get on with it.

      If you want to live in a country just like the one you came from, why did you leave?
      If the country you came from was bad enough to make you want to leave it, why are you now trying to make the country you moved to exactly the same?

    51. Re:uuuh by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      The problem is that a lot of people in these minority groups feel they're owed something...
      I have witnessed people bunking off school because they say they don't need it, they will be owed a job when they leave school and thus don't see the need to waste time learning anything.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    52. Re:uuuh by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      How many black men or women actually stand for election as senators?

      When resume's turn up applying for jobs (in IT) there are usually little or no women or blacks applying, the vast majority are white or asian males. Employers can only employ the people who apply for jobs that they are qualified to do.

      Another problem is that unqualified people will often get a job because they're a minority...

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    53. Re:uuuh by TubeSteak · · Score: 0

      I see, so this is just history repeating itself.

      For a moment there I thought two wrongs don't make a right.

      I see a lot of comments that basically boil down to "I didn't do this to them, it's unfair [to me]"
      All I can tell you is that, without looking at the historical context of affirmative action, your opinion is based on a myopic and incomplete set of facts.

      The course of civil rights and lynchings in America are a dark and shameful part of our history
      and I hope the deregulationists don't do to our society what they did to our economy.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    54. Re:uuuh by JustNilt · · Score: 1

      What were white men doing two or three generations ago?

      While some of them were probably benefiting greatly from institutionalized sexism and racism, others were part of the poor, downtrodden masses.

      Even today, there are places that are very white and very poor, where there is little opportunity, and crime and poverty runs rampant.

      So why do we assume all white men don't need any additional help?

      Is it because of the color of their skin and their gender?

      While the simple answer is "yes", the reality is far more complex. The reality is a minority in the same situation as a while male tends to have a more difficult time improving their lot. While this is stupid, sad and reprehensible it's also reality.

      I hate when I realize I used a particular word too often. I'm too lazy today to look up alternatives, however. :-P

      --
      You know the thing about UDP jokes? I don't care if you get it or not.
    55. Re:uuuh by Something+Witty+Here · · Score: 1

      > whats wrong with sony, samsung, or intel.

      Sony: rootkit
      Intel: an endless list of bugs and design problems,
      fdiv being one of the more infamous.
      Samsung: I give up, you tell me.

    56. Re:uuuh by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      If your father had a mortgage on said house, it doesn't disappear just because he dies.

    57. Re:uuuh by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      By their skin color of course. And for 12 generations.

    58. Re:uuuh by FishOuttaWater · · Score: 1

      Oh. Well, ok then. Is there an installment plan?

    59. Re:uuuh by Cwix · · Score: 1

      Your right, but when he dies, I dont have to pay it off, the estate does, I just get whats left over. So if i get nothing, well ya know what it wasnt mine to start with, it was his.

      --
      You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
    60. Re:uuuh by agnosticnixie · · Score: 1

      I've seen many situations where the white man in question was whining and blaming "AA" for his lack of skills, either work-based or social, and then finding people to nod in approbation. Your demographic is still in charge and seen as the default, so quite honestly, you can fuck off.

    61. Re:uuuh by agnosticnixie · · Score: 1

      So hm, I guess the english should start learning welsh.

    62. Re:uuuh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's also the Herrero genocide... oops, oh right, it was the bad mean empire, not the republic >.>

    63. Re:uuuh by Aris+Katsaris · · Score: 1

      How many black men or women actually stand for election as senators?

      Which kinda indicates the underlying problem...

      There were no non-white or female presidential candidates in either of the two major parties all the way up to 2004. Does that tell you *nothing* about racism or sexism in society in centuries past?

      Or are you gonna say that since they didn't stand for election, it doesn't mean anything that they weren't elected either?

      Employers can only employ the people who apply for jobs that they are qualified to do.

      Of course. And people can only become "qualified" by getting educated. And the rich have a significant advantage in securing education for their children. And the rich are predominantly white.

      Therefore in this self-reinforcing establishment black and Hispanic minorities will remain underqualified.

      Another problem is that unqualified people will often get a job because they're a minority...

      That's actually the least of the problem. Why don't you go a few steps further back and figure out *why* some minorities have fewer qualifications in the first place.

  7. Makes you wonder, though...what else? by romonster · · Score: 1

    Wonder what else our armed forces and government have purchased that is fake or just plain doesn't work the way it should...

    1. Re:Makes you wonder, though...what else? by couchslug · · Score: 1

      Plenty of stuff, I'm sure.

      With all the efforts at security, why did people with obviously Muslim names make it into the bidding process without triggering immediate investigation?

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    2. Re:Makes you wonder, though...what else? by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      So security = racism?

      Also useless security because if I was a terrorist I sure as hell would be changing my name to John Smith ASAP.

    3. Re:Makes you wonder, though...what else? by CannonballHead · · Score: 1

      Also useless security because if I was a terrorist I sure as hell would be changing my name to John Smith ASAP.

      Just like all the current Islamic-believing terrorists we've caught. They all had "white" names. To blend in.

      ...

      Seriously, though. Why is it racism to connect two points of information: (1) there is a current high number of people of a certain ethnic group (or religious group that is highly populated with people of a particular ethnic group) that want to kill the US, and (2) this person that wants to sell to the DoD [or something like that].

      It's "racist" in the sense that you are treating an entire group of people differently because of people in their ethnic group that have been consistently problematic. If we had a sudden influx of Spanish terrorists, I would say the same thing.

      It's no different than if (or when) the US did something bad to some small country and that small country now distrusts all Americans. But somehow, that's not "racism." That's "America getting a taste of its own medicine" or "justice" or whatever. Personally, I don't have a problem with it - if my country did something bad, or if my religious group, or if my ethnic group... then I expect to have to work much harder to show that I'm not like that.

      And there's a difference between mistreating and being cautions/careful. Unfortunately, we don't seem to notice there is a way to be careful without mistreatment.

  8. Kntel by feedayeen · · Score: 0, Troll

    If "Kntel's" chips are just as good as Intel's, why should the military care? If they don't, hold them responsible for the difference, financial loses if we had to order more and if anyone died because of malfunctions.

    1. Re:Kntel by Sulphur · · Score: 1

      Maybe it was Matel, and someone could not get the chip catalog.

  9. Can someone please explain the crossover here? by xpuppykickerx · · Score: 5, Funny

    The chips were then sold to Naval Sea Systems Command, the Washington, D.C., group responsible for maintaining the US Navy's ships and systems, as well as an unnamed vacuum-cleaner manufacturer in the Midwest.

    Has our Navy gone from suck to blow?

    1. Re:Can someone please explain the crossover here? by Dr.+Eggman · · Score: 1

      Nah, they're just the only two who fell for it (why else would the fakers keep needing new aliases?) In truth, the vacuum-cleaner manufacturer probably did know they were fake and didn't care.

      --
      Demented But Determined.
    2. Re:Can someone please explain the crossover here? by oldspewey · · Score: 1

      I think it's funny how the defence organizations are named in detail, while the vacuum-cleaner manufacturer must remain unnamed ... presumably due to security concerns.

      --
      If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
    3. Re:Can someone please explain the crossover here? by chord.wav · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's a typo. I'm sure they've meant "UNMANNED vacuum-cleaner" like the Roomba.

    4. Re:Can someone please explain the crossover here? by couchslug · · Score: 1

      "Has our Navy gone from suck to blow?"

      Don't ask, don't tell!

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    5. Re:Can someone please explain the crossover here? by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      Afaict fakes tend to get in under two main scenarios

      1: the customer is looking to do things on the cheap and goes to whoever is cheapest regardless of reputation
      2: the customer is desperate for a particular (often discontinued) part and cannot get it from any of thier regular supplies, so they are forced to deal with whatever suppliers happen to claim stock of that part.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    6. Re:Can someone please explain the crossover here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The chips were then sold to Naval Sea Systems Command, the Washington, D.C., group responsible for maintaining the US Navy's ships and systems, as well as an unnamed vacuum-cleaner manufacturer in the Midwest.

      Has our Navy gone from suck to blow?

      No, but vacuum-cleaner manufacturer secrecy is very important. Terrorism and all.

  10. Balls by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Scamming someone who can answer the question, "you and what army". Oh okay, so their answer is "not army, marines" but still. Takes guts.

    And with the US being involved in two wars, I think the sentence for this might actually be a cigarette, against a nice sunny wall. Blindfold optional.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:Balls by NiceGeek · · Score: 1

      Unless said counterfeiters were actually conspiring with our "enemy du jour", then this doesn't fit the Constitutional definition of treason.

    2. Re:Balls by Rogerborg · · Score: 1

      Dude, you are either with us, or with the terrorists. Didn't you get the memo?

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    3. Re:Balls by ChipMonk · · Score: 1

      Treason is not the only capital crime. But I think the rest of his natural life in Fort Leavenworth might be more appropriate in this case.

    4. Re:Balls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And with the US being involved in two wars

      Drugs and terrorism? I'm not sure if those count.

      Constant occupation of hostile areas isn't usually counted as waging war, even if those areas have freedom fighters.

    5. Re:Balls by rahvin112 · · Score: 1

      The amusing thing is this would be misdemeanor fraud had they not sold to the military. Now it's a federal felony and a Jury is going to throw the book a them for defrauding the one government agency that the vast amount of American's support and believe is responsible for their safety. Juries will see this as almost as bad as selling inferior fire hose to the fire department and they will absolutely throw the book at the people and I expect they will be soon enjoying long prison sentences at the one prison where you won't get paroled because they have plenty of capacity.

  11. Chips..? by Burning1 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Chips? Chips!?

    Common, this is Slashdot. Chips? The technical jargon in the summary is horribly confusing.

    For clarity, could we please use a more generic term, such as 'computer thingamajiggy?'

    1. Re:Chips..? by sajuuk · · Score: 1

      I know, I looked at the title and thought it was referring to FOOD.

    2. Re:Chips..? by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      This place's original title was - Chips and Dips - back in '97 when I first came across the place.

    3. Re:Chips..? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously, who thought of that word and applied it to deep fried sticks of potato..
      And why the hell are the thin crispy slices that come in packets called chips too?
      Now they are making them out of silicon too?? You can't eat silicon!!

      English language has morphed into shite.

      Suggestions for improvements:
      Give words one (standardized) meaning, and one meaning only. Come on, It's fun to make and learn new words..
      Get rid of all silent letters.
      Spell things as they sound.
      Differentiate between the letters G & J. G is hard, J is soft.
      Pronounce the letter C as ch, and get rid of the ch combination.
      Introduce a new single character for the sh sound.
      Kill PH.. F works fine.
      Stop using Y as a vowel.
      Call W something other than double-U.. seriously how do you spell vacuum out loud?
      Give the vowels some standardized accents instead of vowel-combinations to convey better and easier pronounciation.
      Get rid of any other double letters where they are not needed.
      Destroy all mobile phones with number only keypads. Teach kids to type AND spell.

      Bring on the English language revolution.

    4. Re:Chips..? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So would they get fake BSOD too ?

    5. Re:Chips..? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Come on, I resent being called common.

  12. MX missile guidance systems from Radio Shack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Way back there are accusations of ots parts from a retail radio shack that ended up in MX missile guidance systems. And it wasn't some mom and pop shop. It was one of the big boys.

    Maybe someone with knowledge would know how to fake a chip upgrade that would pass inspection. I suspect that not much auditing is going on in the input side and contractors big and small are exploiting the incompetence of the govt watchdogs. If they're even there at all.

    It makes you wonder how much of this sub milspec stuff is out there in critical areas.

    1. Re:MX missile guidance systems from Radio Shack by Volante3192 · · Score: 1

      Depending on what era Radio Shack those parts came from, I'd probably *prefer* the military using the Radio Shack kit.

  13. Re:Unconstitutional by Shakrai · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In other words the right to regulate chip counterfeiting belongs to your local State government, until you expand the Constitution with an amendment

    Wrong. This is actually a proper use of the Interstate Commerce Clause. Now arresting some poor bastard for growing pot for his own personal use on the other hand.......

    --
    I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
    We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  14. HOW??? by frozentier · · Score: 5, Interesting

    HOW does a man and his family sell ANYTHING to the Navy? Is the Navy getting their parts from eBay or Craig's List?

    1. Re:HOW??? by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 4, Informative

      Here's how. All government procurement has special programs for buying from small business, and in fact are required to spend a certain percentage at small businesses. Congress mandates it, 'cause it makes good press with the voters.

    2. Re:HOW??? by CannonballHead · · Score: 1

      with the voters.

      ... some voters.

    3. Re:HOW??? by NecroPuppy · · Score: 1

      The answer is pretty simple.

      The Department of Defense has what is called the "DOD E-Mall".

      If you're a registered vendor with it, you list your products, ARO times, costs, minimum order, etc.

      Included in there is if you're a minority owned company, small business, and a couple other equal opportunity things.

      Then, when a DoD user (who has taken and passed the necessary training) needs something, they can log into it, and if armed with the right search criteria (the search there is crap, unless you have a manufacturer part number), you get a list of all the vendors who have it.

      Then, armed with your list of who you're allowed to buy from (not specifically excluding any vendors, just things like - haven't purchased from them more than 3 times this month), you pick one and go to whoever in your area has the authority to use the credit card, and the purchase is made. After, of course, the requisite paperwork.

      It regularly works well, except for when the vendors forget to remove products they aren't carrying anymore, go out of business and forget to tell anyone, or change their ordering address / phone number.

      So if this guy was in the system as having these various chips, and he was the low cost option, he'd get picked a lot. Split through a number of codes (departments) he could see some regular sales.

      --
      I like you, Stuart. You're not like everyone else, here, at Slashdot.
    4. Re:HOW??? by Artraze · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You seem to be assuming that these parts are readily available. Most likely, they have been long obsolete are almost impossible to find, if not truly so. As replacing legacy systems is often very expensive (esp. for the military, where it often isn't an option), such chips can easily go for hundreds of dollars, if not thousands and are only purchased in small quantities. I worked for a small business that needed such replacements for maintenance on a military project, and we got fakes for approx $350 each. Luckily we knew about these scams, tested them, and then got the credit card company to do a charge back.

      So, this is rather unsurprising to me, at least for the Navy. Why a vacuum cleaner manufacturer would need such parts I don't know. However, I'm fairly certain these weren't $10 chips that are currently available by the thousand from the manufacturer

    5. Re:HOW??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      In fact, according to the Navy Times on display today at the Exchange, sailors are buying parts themselves, out of their own pockets, to keep shit working. The Navy's procurement system is not only so broken that it enables purchase of counterfeit components, it's so broken it can't necessarily supply even counterfeits. And this with a Trillion dollar deficit. Sheesh.

    6. Re:HOW??? by Eil · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yep, I have experience with this. I did autopilot repair in the Air Force and most of the systems I worked on were decades old. Most airplanes have a few non-essential parts that fail literally every few weeks because the manufacturing run was contracted out to some company that did a godawful job at re-engineering and manufacturing the part which was originally designed sometime in the 60's.

      Around 2000, we had a navigation system test bench that was controlled by a rackmount IBM 8086 PC. (The navigation system was considered "state of the art" then, if that tells you anything.) Well, we all know that hard drives die eventually but this thing lasted an incredible 25 years before a significant number of sectors started to become unreadable. Because the million-dollar bench was mostly useless without the PC, I took it upon myself to find a replacement disk. What a mistake that was... I managed to find one at GREAT expense to American taxpayers and it turned out that the replacement disk was in ever worse shape than the original. Produced another, same result. You just can't buy a new hard disk that old anymore and swapping out whole computer for something a little newer was non-trivial and was against many, many regulations. I finally managed to find one that was advertised as "never used," but I tell you I tried to stay as far away from that bench as possible after that. I sometimes wonder whether its still in use or if the system maintenance was simply contracted out.

    7. Re:HOW??? by Waveguide04 · · Score: 1

      Damn.... Good thing I stocked up on those Z80 chips back in the late 70's/early 80's. Those are going to be GOLD MINE!

  15. Why does the military buy from minor distributors? by reporter · · Score: 3, Interesting
    This story is surprising. Why does the military buy critical electronic components from minor distributors?

    The military spends billions of dollars and has the money to buy directly from known, reputable firms like AMD, Siemens, Mitsubishi, NEC, Toshiba, etc. Doing so would ensure the quality of the electronic components.

    Why is the military dealing with relatively unknown distributors of suspicious origin? This story is fishy.

    The military probably did not intend to use anything "purchased" from unknown distributors. This "purchase", from the onset, was intended to be a honey pot attracting unscrupulous businesses connected to hostile governments like Beijing. The purchased components were never intended to be used. The aim was to find such unscrupulous businesses, to determine the network that Beijing has established in the USA, and to shutdown American traitors who participate in such a network.

  16. Military spec vs commercial by viking80 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    The funny thing is that the chip manufacturers commit this same fraud daily. The same silicon is packaged in one package and labeled mil grade, and another labeled commercial grade. The price is often more than a magnitude different. Sometimes it is even the same package, just different print.

    Of course sometimes there is different silicone, sometimes it is different temperature bin.

    Funny that this is perfectly legal for the mfg. and when some clever reseller does the same it is fraud.

    BTW. Companies with military contracts are often required to give the military "best price". With a seperate label for military version of HW, this is really profitable.

    --
    don't cut it off www.mgmbill.org
    1. Re:Military spec vs commercial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not about silicon, it's about testing.

      If only 1 of the 100 chips can pass 2ghz milspec, 9 more can pass 2ghz civilian, and 90 can pass 1.8ghz civilian, you package and ship accordingly.
      No fraud was committed.

      If I then buy a 1.8ghz civilian, and relabel it 2ghz milspec without confirming that it passes the tests, I've committed fraud.

    2. Re:Military spec vs commercial by flyingfsck · · Score: 1

      Well, actually the packaging is exactly what makes the difference. Hermetically sealed ceramic packed chips last longer in harsh environments.

      --
      Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
    3. Re:Military spec vs commercial by soundhack · · Score: 2, Informative

      I would suspect that for certain chips, manufacturers do the same thing Intel/AMD do in terms of speed ratings. They make the chip, then test it at different conditions, and whichever chip passes the more stringent requirements gets labeled milspec. So the same silicon design could be designated different things.

    4. Re:Military spec vs commercial by epine · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The funny thing is that the chip manufacturers commit this same fraud daily.

      This is the strangest definition of fraud. Smacks of a mail order degree in popular economics with hand typed training materials.

      What a company is selling is a chip that conforms to its spec. sheet. If the military version has a different spec. sheet, they can charge any price they like for putting into effect the QC process which allows them to stand behind those claims.

      It's not even in the military's interest to squeeze these vendors on price. That would only result in niche products the military depends upon being discontinued faster than ever. There's real cost here. You've got to keep some old guy around who remembers details about products you rarely sell, in case the military comes calling. If a company fails to maintain this courtesy, it won't long find itself on the preferred vendor list for new designs.

      The way out of this price trap is for the military to toss their aircraft carriers onto the landfill at the same rate consumers dispose of their cell phones. Then they can quote for volume on parts rated for a short rough-and-tumble service life and only pay twice as much as the common man.

    5. Re:Military spec vs commercial by viking80 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Argumentum ad hominem abusive does not belong in civilized discussion. I thought this was taught in elementary school. Since you bring up, I am curious as to where you got your education? It appears you neither understand my comment, and you also do not understand the marketplace.

      It is common, and well documented that early production of ICs often have few chips in the highest performance bin. These chips are then sold at a high premium. Later the process matures, and often all chips go into the highest performance bin. To still get the premium price this bin used to command, many of these are now derated. There are also many other reasons manufacturers sell the same silicon with different rating printed on the part.

      BTW, I have negotiated and sold products for military and aerospace use for decades. This includes ASICs and other in-house developed silicon.

      Can you give any examples of any of your claims?

      --
      don't cut it off www.mgmbill.org
    6. Re:Military spec vs commercial by ZosX · · Score: 1

      Indeed, and research and money has been invested increasing the tolerances of said parts. That costs a lot of money for essentially limited returns since the runs are small. They need to recoup that somewhere. How exactly is this fraud? If you want something special you generally pay a premium on it. Why can't people understand that the more of something you make, it becomes inherently cheaper to produce? Once the initial startup costs in manufacturing are covered the margins go way up,

  17. Value Added Reseller by pavon · · Score: 5, Informative

    Government procurement is a bureaucratic mess, and a royal pain in the ass for both buyers and sellers. Because of this (and because of rules preferring "small" and "minority-owned" businesses), it is very common for government entities to buy though a middle man that knows how their procurement systems work, rather than getting product directly from a manufacturer, especially for low-cost COTS products.

    1. Re:Value Added Reseller by BlueBoxSW.com · · Score: 1

      Thank god for this (not the bureaucratic mess part, the small business part).

    2. Re:Value Added Reseller by pavon · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Except the only people that it helps are worthless middlemen that know how to game the system.

      In my experience I would split the companies into a few groups. First there are the ones that provide services - printing PCBs, building custom cables, assembling and testing racks of equipment, etc. These folks do good work and we would use them regardless of the rules - custom jobs are best done my small companies and even if there were only chains/franchises doing this sort of stuff, we would still choose between them based on the aptitude of whoever was running the local branch, rather than brand. All the rules do is make more hoops for us to jump through, and add cost to the contracting process.

      Next there are genuinely small shops/retailers that know their product well, and often offer better prices than the big box shops (like on standard computer cables etc). And of course there are inexpensive online retailers that we all know about. I would very much prefer to use the online sites when I have time to wait for shipping, and then these small local shops when I need something that day, or need to talk to someone.

      But the procurement rules make it too much of a damn hassle to use either. Instead we have to use these middle-men who don't know jack-shit about their product, but they know procurement process. I don't consider them to be either small or local either. They have zero local inventory. They only have a couple employees in town, and that is all they need because their entire job is to take our order and then place it with the manufacturer, often screwing it up in the process. So they are small in the sense that they have few employees, but process a huge amount revenue each year. Their sole purpose in existing is to fill the role of a middle man for the government procurement in town - they have no business with anyone else.

      These rules don't prevent/discourage anyone from buying from large companies, they just make you put a shim company in the middle when the best/only option is to purchase from big companies.

  18. Wait! by Shrike82 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Fuck the Navy, you mean my vacuum cleaner might have sub-standard chips in it?! THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!

    --
    You can advertise in this sig from as little as £99.99 a month!
    1. Re:Wait! by AioKits · · Score: 5, Funny

      Fuck the Navy, you mean my vacuum cleaner might have sub-standard chips in it?! THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!

      Are you a vacuum cleaner overclocker as well? Oh man, I thought I was the only one! I'm going to go home right this moment and make sure my Nortech N552BC-NED Dual Venturi 55G doesn't have these chips on it! And after all the time I spent adding that extra fine filtration with carbon and pin striping to it... Damnit all...

      --
      "Quote me as saying I was mis-quoted." -Groucho Marx
    2. Re:Wait! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Serious. The Navy just sails around, swabbing decks and blowing each other. My vacuum cleaner saves motherfucking lives.

    3. Re:Wait! by MiniMike · · Score: 1

      my vacuum cleaner might have sub-standard chips in it?

      No, the summary clearly states that the chips are not up to the standard for subs.

  19. Re:Why does the military buy from minor distributo by canajin56 · · Score: 1

    Yeah, or the minor distributors put in a lower bid. One or the other.

    --
    ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
  20. They're not just in trouble with the Navy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Something makes me think that MVP Electronics, Inc. and Red Hat, Inc. would like to have a chat with him about trademark infringement.

  21. since the summary was a little vague by Z1NG · · Score: 5, Funny

    apparently the fake chips are made with less than 50% potato, have a weird taste and are sold in a can.

    1. Re:since the summary was a little vague by Jello+B. · · Score: 3, Funny

      you forgot anal leakage.

    2. Re:since the summary was a little vague by snspdaarf · · Score: 5, Funny

      you forgot anal leakage.

      No, but God knows, I have tried.

      --
      Why, without your clothes, you're naked, Miss Dudley!
  22. which kind? by otterpopjunkie · · Score: 0

    Do they like Vinegar and Sea Salt or plain? Seriously, the Navy could be buying computer parts with backdoors if this is what goes on.

  23. What does counterfeit mean? by caseih · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Is this like "counterfeit" copies of MS Windows? Where these chips that acted and functioned the same (shadow shift production runs)? Seems like we need a better word as counterfeit implies that it looks the same but does not act the same. Maybe we should just be saying "copies produced without authorization?"

    1. Re:What does counterfeit mean? by DragonWriter · · Score: 2, Informative

      Is this like "counterfeit" copies of MS Windows? Where these chips that acted and functioned the same (shadow shift production runs)? Seems like we need a better word as counterfeit implies that it looks the same but does not act the same.

      No, it doesn't. A counterfeit is something that has been made or altered to appear to be something other than what it is, it may well act the same (indeed, "acting" the same under various tests is a key part of counterfeiting some things.)

      A counterfeit chip may well be one designed to perform the same function (e.g., in terms of logic), at least under normal conditions, but with different origins, QC, and/or range of designed operating conditions from the brand it is passed off as. Indeed, it would pretty much have to be not be noticed as soon as it was used.

      Maybe we should just be saying "copies produced without authorization?"

      "Copies produced without authorization" is quite a mouthful. If only there was an adjective that means that already, so the same idea could be expressed more concisely.

      Or, in short, in response to "what does counterfeit mean?" -- RTFDictionary.

    2. Re:What does counterfeit mean? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Two chips might perform the same function but still not be equivalent. They might differ in tolerance to heat and cold as well as to different chemical conditions, etc. So, with the approved chip, a device will function fine in all the conditions it's meant to. With some other chip, it may function in most of the conditions it's meant to, then suddenly fail on a cold day.

    3. Re:What does counterfeit mean? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These are not "shadow shift production runs". As far as I know such devices in the semiconductor market do not exist. Production for discrete components is almost always done in house. For digital IC's the foundry in question(there are not many) would be likly caught. There is significant post-production work after device fabrication that the foundry typically is not involved with.
          These are different designs being sold as genuine parts. In order to actually be cheaper then the part they are imitating they must cut corners somewhere so typically the operating tolerances are much less.
          MJ15003 devices are widely used for audio power amplifiers and as such are rarely run at maximum ratings for continuous periods. Initially the parts may work fine but 1 month later, they fail. A good article about this is here http://sound.westhost.com/fake/counterfeit-p1.htm

    4. Re:What does counterfeit mean? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Making a perfect copy of Windows is easy. Making a perfect copy of a Mil spec chip is not.

  24. We do that? by SnarfQuest · · Score: 1

    The chips were then sold to Naval Sea Systems Command, the Washington, D.C., group responsible for maintaining the US Navy's ships and systems, as well as an unnamed vacuum-cleaner manufacturer in the Midwest.

    Naval Sea Command is an unnamed vacuum cleaner manufacturer? You learn something new every day here on SlashDot.

    Isn't it a bit hard to sell something without a name, though? How could you ask the salesperson for it? "I want one of those vacuums that don't have a name." "The Midwest one or the African one?" "I want blue, no yellow!"

    --
    Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
  25. Horrible Food by murpium · · Score: 2, Funny

    I knew those couldn't have been real Doritos

  26. Re:Why does the military buy from minor distributo by Dr.+Eggman · · Score: 1

    For that matter, how can we even be certain they're even being used for critical applications? Maybe they had some piddling alt system or prototype to develop and they just wanted to save some money? I mean, if the other (known) purchaser of these electronics is a vacuum cleaner manufacturer, We couldn't exactly be talking high-performance electronics to start with...

    ...Unless the reason the vacuum cleaner manufacturer is unnamed is they were working on some sort of super powerful "Stealth" Vacuum cleaner. Or maybe an Unmanned Vacuum Cleaner (a "UVC" as it were.)

    --
    Demented But Determined.
  27. Wayback whoring by OzPeter · · Score: 1
    Two of his websites is in the wayback machine

    www.labrainc.com/

    www.rhdistributors.com

    --
    I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
  28. Must be one hell of a vacuum cleaner... by ewhenn · · Score: 2, Funny

    because the only chips in my vacuum cleaner are doritos that fell on the floor.

  29. Oh no... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A counterfeit jeans ring operating out of my car hole!

  30. I wonder how many of these quasi-mil spec... by AmazingRuss · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ... devices found themselves in things like reactor control systems, missile systems, and other catastrophically lethal stuff?

    Maybe the military should be making it's OWN components, instead of buying them from the people they have their guns pointed at.

    1. Re:I wonder how many of these quasi-mil spec... by NecroPuppy · · Score: 4, Informative

      They can't, unless certain, very specific criteria are met.

      And even if they are, it's usually cheaper to have purchased the data rights to an end of line product, and turn around and find another vendor who will make them to those specs.

      The US Military doesn't own large scale fabrication plants to "just make" whatever they need. And even if they did, Congress wouldn't let them use them, because it would be taking money away from US corporations.

      Let me give an example: There's a base that has SEABEE units. Naval Construction Battalions (CB -> SeaBee). It is not unknown that such a navy base might need, at some point, a new pier. This is the sort of thing that, when the SeaBees are sent overseas, that they build. But they can't do this at the base, even if they label it a "training exercise", because statutorally, the money has to go to contracted construction companies.

      --
      I like you, Stuart. You're not like everyone else, here, at Slashdot.
    2. Re:I wonder how many of these quasi-mil spec... by Waveguide04 · · Score: 1

      And even if they did, Congress wouldn't let them use them, because it would be taking money away from US corporations.

      Wow, and here all these years I thought that was called racketeering. Nothing against the US companies mind, but, c'mon, seriously, are we going to allow them to keep spending tax dollars on unproven product to 'companies' (yes, I have seen them and worked for them and the whole minority status thing gets WAY out of hand.) to make it fair? What is fair anyway? I was taught by my parents that fair was when you did your best and someone wanted to buy your product over your competitor's product. The customer did that because you sold a superior product for a good price, not because the customer was obliged to buy said product due to a contract quota or, cheapest wins or something. Two issues are in contrast here #1 Price and #2 Quality. Both are important in different ratios in military and industrial/consumer product. Why the contract is there to begin with is a different discussion.

  31. Political Correctness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Political Correctness

    1. Re:Political Correctness by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 1

      Buying from smaller businesses (which are more likely to keep some more of the money HERE in the U.S.) is Political Correctness???

    2. Re:Political Correctness by agnosticnixie · · Score: 1

      Everything is political correctness to the whiny AC

  32. Re:Why does the military buy from minor distributo by Raguleader · · Score: 1

    *ahem* The proper terminology is "Remotely Piloted Vaccuum" (RPV) ;-)

    --
    --Rags
    Life is like a burrito. Sometimes the beans go bad.
  33. Submarine semantics by BForrester · · Score: 1

    Not what they expected when the navy asked for "sub-standard" chips

  34. Re:Why does the military buy from minor distributo by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 1

    Because everyone knows all smaller distributors are untrustworthy. Come on.

    Huge Corporate-think is really seeded deeply now, isn't it.

  35. Re:Why does the military buy from minor distributo by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    The proper terminology is "Remotely Piloted Vacuum" (RPV)

    That nicely sums up most our middle eastern "conflicts" in 3 words.
         

  36. This explains a lot by kmankmankman2001 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    OK, now I have a better understanding of why my vacuum cleaner does such a lousy job . . . and why F-22's keep landing on it.

    --
    "The bigger the lie, the more they believe." - Det. Bunk
  37. Re:Why does the military buy from minor distributo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    The Military buys in far too small quantities for companies like AMD, etc. to care. While the military was once the bastion of forward looking electronics, it now focuses most of its energy on maintaining ailing fleets of old vehicles using technology that's 15+ years old (I know, I work for a company providing such support).
    The main reason for purchasing through companies such as that listed above is that there are obsolete devices that are required to maintain $100000+ systems, that can ocassionally be found in the "after-market" - i.e. someone had a stash in their warehouse that they didn't use. If it wasn't for unfortunate practices such as this, the miliary budget would need to be significantly larger to redesign and build new electronics systems for its vehicles every 5 years (or every 2 years when dealing with memory technology).

  38. Re:Unconstitutional by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't feed the name trolls.

  39. Counterfeits and adulteration too rampant by blind+biker · · Score: 1

    I have learned that 100% of SD cards and USB drives on eBay, if from China or Hong-Kong, are counterfeits, and you're lucky if they actually have the specified capacity. You're shit-out of luck if you hope to find a good quality SLC Flash-RAM component (be it SD, CF or USB drive) - they're all MLC.

    Another example: did you know that 90% of Indian Sandalwood on the market is either not Sandalwood (it's adulterated) or, if you're lucky, it's not Indian (rather Australian or New Caledonian, much lesser in quality and Santalol content)? Other essential oils' adulteration is rampant as well. There's at least twice as much Lavendel EO on the market, than there's world production.

    Olive oil adulteration is very common in Spain, Italy and Greece. Coconut oil adulteration is rampant as well. And this is stuff people _eat_! And then there are several Chinese milk scandals, where dozens of babies were killed.

    A strong consumer association should emerge and help sorting out the good stuff from the bad. I don't know the solution to the problem, frankly, but I know it's bad and getting worse.

    --
    "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
  40. Maybe you shouldn't bring charges against them by geekoid · · Score: 1

    just send a small group of highly trained men to pay them a visit.

    to parphrase Hanover Fiste:
    "They should be torn into little bitsy pieces and buried alive!"

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  41. Re:Why does the military buy from minor distributo by geekoid · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The military doesn't call people up and buy things. They announce a need and people bid. UIf a company doesn't bid then there isn't much they can do about it.

    Some larger companies won't deal with smaller contracts.

    This story isn't fishy, nore is the use of small companies unusual.

    It would be cool if it's a honeyu pot, but the odds of that is really low, and it would need to involve other agencies.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  42. Grammar Police (mod me down!) by ziani · · Score: 0, Troll

    "The government would have probably went on for a few more years . . ." should be rewritten as, "The government probably would have gone on for a few more years . . ."

    Thanks,
    GP

  43. Vacuum Cleaners from the Middle East? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    The names of the culprits suggest that they immigrated from the Middle East. Does anyone have information about their background?

    I have been using Bing to find their background, but I have not had any luck. Google provided even less information.

  44. Mission Accomplished by fluidbyte · · Score: 5, Funny

    What about that guy that sold them the fake "Mission Accomplished" banner for their aircraft carrier?

    1. Re:Mission Accomplished by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I must say I needed that. Good post

  45. consequence of lowest bidder system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Kind of funny this came up today- I work for semiconductor company and just sat through a talk yesterday about counterfeiting problem. I guess with the military stuff the problem is usually because they have to go to the lowest bidder. Authorized channels can't beat the fake stuff on price so the military gets fake stuff.

  46. Big Cojones by repetty · · Score: 1

    You've got to have pretty big cojones to cheat someone who can point missiles at your house.

    1. Re:Big Cojones by andy1307 · · Score: 1

      Unless...the missiles they can lob at your house have the fake chips you sold them.

  47. Unnamed vacuum maker? by mollog · · Score: 2, Funny

    I immediately thought of the quote about Microsoft; "the only time Microsoft will make something that doesn't suck is when they make a vacuum."

    Did anybody else catch the reference to NCIS? Life imitates art.

    --
    Best regards.
    1. Re:Unnamed vacuum maker? by negRo_slim · · Score: 1

      The Intellimouse mouse didn't suck...

      --
      On the Oregon Cost born and raised, On the beach is where I spent most of my days
    2. Re:Unnamed vacuum maker? by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 2, Informative

      Microsoft didn't invent that: it was invented by Goldtouch Technologies, from whom Microsoft simply ripped off the design which Goldtouch had shown them under a non-disclosure agreement to get Microsoft to license the mouse design. I actually used to have one of the old Goldtouch mice: the design was very similar. Check out http://news.zdnet.co.uk/hardware/0,1000000091,2070243,00.htm to see my point.

    3. Re:Unnamed vacuum maker? by dave420 · · Score: 1

      That link's a bit light on details :)

    4. Re:Unnamed vacuum maker? by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      That's true: groklaw wasn't around back then, and it would take some digging for material, the best of which is apparently under court seals.

    5. Re:Unnamed vacuum maker? by jaggeh · · Score: 1

      Goldtouch v. Microsoft Corp. (W.D. Tex.; Fed. Cir.; W.D. Wash.)
      In the Western District of Texas, Klarquist Sparkman obtained summary judgment that Microsoft did not infringe a patent asserted against Microsoft’s IntelliMouse® Pro and IntelliMouse® Explorer computer mice. See 102 F. Supp. 2d 722 (W.D. Tex. 2000). The Federal Circuit affirmed on appeal without opinion. In the Western District of Washington, Klarquist Sparkman obtained summary judgment that the Goldtouch mouse infringed two Microsoft patents.

      Microsoft was bullying a lot of small developers at that time.

      Not only did they lose their suit, but were found to be breaking two patents belonging to microsoft.

      --
      I would give everything i own for a little bit more.
    6. Re:Unnamed vacuum maker? by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      Thank you for the reference. it doesn't exactly address the issue of NDA violation, nor does it give enough details on what the other patents are. I'd like to dig further on that: I've been using that case as a reference to Microsoft's historical willingness to steal ideas from smaller companies and undercut or over-advertise the product into market dominance.

  48. Secret Police? by justinlee37 · · Score: 1

    Yeah, that's what we need, secret police. What could go wrong?

  49. Arthur Miller, anyone? by BlueBoxSW.com · · Score: 1

    All My Sons?

  50. Re:Why does the military buy from minor distributo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You have amazing powers of deduction.

  51. Cookies, actually. by d474 · · Score: 1

    Chips Ahoy!

    --
    Authority questions you. Return the favor.
  52. Re:Why does the military buy from minor distributo by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

    This story is surprising. Why does the military buy critical electronic components from minor distributors?
     
    The military spends billions of dollars and has the money to buy directly from known, reputable firms like AMD, Siemens, Mitsubishi, NEC, Toshiba, etc.

    Because Congress has written purchasing rules for the Federal Government that give preference to small and minority owned businesses. The same rules also give preference to buying the parts as cheaply as possible.
     
    The result is, when you are buying small quantities and/or unusual parts, you end up dealing with middlemen and minor distributors. The big guys are rarely interested in anything other than big and/or multi year purchase commitments.
     

    Why is the military dealing with relatively unknown distributors of suspicious origin? This story is fishy.

    Having been on both ends of the process (both as a purchaser for the Navy and working for a small electronics dealer who sold to Navy), I assure you there's nothing fishy at all about the story. When you're a buyer, if the price is right and the paperwork appears in order, you have no choice but to buy from the minor and unknown. You haven't the authority, or the time, to investigate.
     
    Regarding your 'honeypot' theory, I suspect you've been reading too much Clancy or watching too much NCIS. :) :)

  53. Re:Unconstitutional by shentino · · Score: 1

    Not to mention that it IS federal jurisdiction if you're doing business with the military.

  54. Absolutely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yep. Look around you, if you're in America. It's very easy for those who have always "had" to whine about perceived injustices (i.e., so-called 'reverse-racism'). However, what most American's don't understand is that Native Americans and African Americans are quite unique in their situation. One group had the land taken from them, and were slaughtered by the scores. The other group were taken from their land, and were enslaved by the scores.

    All other nationalities and races have come to this country of their OWN FREE WILL, and can proudly trace back their heritage and lineage, for the most part.

    I'll let you do the reading on that. In order to fully understand what you read, it would probably help if you WERE black or native American.

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

      Yes, the people that are direct ascendants of those that were NOT brought over to the US as slaves are so much better off right now in the various countries in Africa? Yes that is a pretty simplistic view.

      Bottom line... I was never a slave owner and no one in the US has been since the last one died probably 90 years ago. No one in the US is a slave and the last one that was probably died 90 years ago. My great grandparents met here in the US after they came here from Poland and Italy in the late 1800's. No one in my family was ever a slave owner. Don't blame me or claim that I owe anyone ANYTHING including an apology. We are all equal. giving people breaks or punishing people based on their skin color for things that happened in the past is not a way to fix something or get even.

      Side note. The last time I got promoted, my friend and co worker who is black made a comment that I thought was really odd. He said "Man, you white guys get all of the breaks." I know he was joking but I often wonder if he really felt that way.

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

      This doesn't just happen in the US, but in most white countries... And not just with people who were brought over as slaves, but also people who came later of their own free will. There are very few non white countries that would welcome large numbers of foreign immigrants, and certainly wouldn't be willing to adjust their culture and customs to make life easier for them, or to spend millions translating all their official literature into foreign languages for their benefit.
      Also, there is noone alive today in the US who had a direct hand in slavery... If you're going to punish people for what their ancestors did, go to germany where some people who were involved in the third reich are still alive, or only one generation away from them.

      I saw a commercial on TV in the US a few weeks ago which stated that on average blacks and hispanics are on average 2 years behind white or asian students in schools... Now consider this...
      Asians are not white, they are as susceptible to racism as any blacks...
      Hispanics are of european descent, just like most of the whites...

      So why is it that the asians can keep up, but the blacks and hispanics can't? It has nothing to do with racism, and everything to do with the way these people are brought up. Some blacks and hispanics do much better (look at obama) and they are generally raised in a way more similar to the whites or asians...

      I know a lot of young blacks who have been encouraged to rebel (against school), join gangs, take drugs etc and the end result is that they do poorly at school and never learn any skill that would earn them a decent wage... They generally think that the white man owes them something, when in reality they had the same opportunities as anyone else and simply chose to waste them. Plenty of white people do this too, but they have less of a belief that someone owes them anything and are generally realise it was their own fault.

      I also know several black men who worked hard in school, went to college and have respectable jobs that they actually earned rather than being placed there by "positive discrimination"..

  55. Rice vs Potato chips and anal leakage by syousef · · Score: 1

    Chips? Chips!?

    Apparently he sold them to some Admiral as potato chips but just as the admiral opens the packet and starts gobbling them he immediately notices that they are RICE chips. Not only that but they have a warning about anal leakage on the packet. Who puts anal leakage on their chips!?!!!?

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  56. We were burnt as well by aspelling · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In 2006-2007 it was a problem to get many parts in the reasonable quality - flash, op-amps, multiplexors.
    So we bought a few reels from the second-hand distributor.
    As a result flash marked as 32Mb was 2Mb inside, op-amps weren't up to the specs (manufacturer confirm that they were made of written-off dyes), multiplexors were sold as a particular brand with advanced features while indeed were jelly beans for $0.10 a piece.
    Thankfully we were able to rework boards before products hit the consumer market.
    That was a good lesson for us to never use Chinese distributors for parts

  57. AFNA by AllynM · · Score: 1

    NSSC = Naval Submarine Support Center
    Naval Sea Systems Command = NAVSEA

    --
    this sig was brought to you by the letter /.
  58. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 0, Troll

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  59. what an idiot by anonymous9991 · · Score: 0

    How did this idiot not think he was going to get caught?

  60. The true possiblilty of death by vacuum. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    well there is a type of vacumm chamber that could kill you a vacuum chamber, or the vacuum of spce, which either if it malfunctuned and int the highly unlikely chance a person was stupid enough to get himself locked inside while his asistant decided to start the expierment they were to be working on and o i don't know set it to a air pressure equal to I don't know 126 miles the edge of space that would really that would really suck to be that guy dieng of suffication as the water and oxygen is sucked from his body. That could be also considered a vacuum cleaner as the vacuum has just cleaned his body of his water and oxygen.

    Or just making it worse setting the air pressure equal to the bottom of an oceanic trench so vacuums can kill a person, and take that comment back but then again he'd make the a first place for the darwin award. don't think of those two very very very nasty ways to suck the life right out of one.

    Lesson of the story vacuums can kill, all very very very very painfull, don't get your self stuck unprotected in space, nor at the bottom of the ocean, or particullary with a horrible absent minded assistant and an expierement with a vacuum chamber, not to bring a very un cheery comment to this disscussion, carry on.

    1. Re:The true possiblilty of death by vacuum. by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 1

      well there is a type of vacumm chamber that could kill you a vacuum chamber, or the vacuum of spce

      Less caffeine or more sleep, guy.

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
  61. I just hope the screen doors are mil-spec. by AmazingRuss · · Score: 1

    nt

  62. Exit strategy? by Cur8or · · Score: 0

    I can understand the vacuum company, but try to dupe the Navy?

    --
    Winkey shortcut mapping for 64bit windows. WinKeyPlus
  63. Espionage? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about the espionage implications here? I mean, the chips are from China, right?

  64. hobbyists have this problem too by Eil · · Score: 1

    Electronic synthesizer makers/hackers/repairers have problems with counterfeit chips too. The Roland TB-303 has a number of transistors that have not been made in decades. Some have suitable modern replacements, but others do not. You have to be very careful buying transistors and chips to repair old synths (like the Juno) because it can be hard to spot fakes from looks alone. Chip counterfeiters can be very good at replacing a chip's markings. Sometimes you don't find out that it's a fake until you get it soldered into the circuit. Ebay is the most popular place for these kinds of scams, but occasionally a reputable electronics retailer will be duped into carrying them.

  65. France (eom) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    France.

  66. Not the first time. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

    A company back in the mid-20th century always seemed to be able to find the mil-spec chips needed for military contracts.

    Turns out they were pulling the same scam: Buying consumer- or seconds-grade chips (from Radio Shack even), grinding off the markings, and rebranding them to look like the mil-spec ones.

    The first space shuttle prototype was named the Enterprise, due to public pressure. It was used for things like testing the piggyback transport plane and what-have-you, and the results of such testing used in final design changes for the flying fleet. It is rumored that NASA DID examine whether they could upgrade it to flight status and end up with one more shuttle, rejected the option due to the cost (higher than building another one), and that a major factor in the decision was the need to replace all the electronics due to concern that those counterfeit chips had ended up in the assemblies.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  67. US by toxique · · Score: 0

    Is the Navy kidding? are they stupid? Why buy electronic components from unknown/obscure brokers who sell crap made in foreign countries? Why not buy directly from AMERICAN MANUFACTURERS, there are many: National Semiconductor, Freescale, Fairchild, just to mention. Or some other reputable manufacturers like Philips or Toshiba? Well, i'd rather buy from reliable american companies when national security is a major concern! It looks the Navy does not think so.

    --
    - This can't be... - Be what? Be real?
  68. Re:I know it makes me a horrible person for saying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If your goal isn't to support profiling then what exactly was the point of that post? Point out a system is flawed? That's practically the first few things a child learns.

  69. Oh god, those fake company names by Zangief · · Score: 1

    "Pentagon Components".

    That must have fooled some guy at the navy thinking he was buying parts to another branch of the government?!

    What's next? Not-counterfeit-R-Us?

  70. Oh princess... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    suck it up!

  71. Well I guess... by hesaigo999ca · · Score: 1

    Well I guess it goes to show our home pc cpus are just as good as the military brand cpus.
    I guess maybe thats why they now by ps3s for their cpu power cycles, instead of overpriced chips that are counterfeit anyways!

  72. Re:we still make vacuum cleaners? by nsaspook · · Score: 1

    We still make damn good ones. Say you need a vacuum for cleaning up ASH3 waste inside a semiconductor plant.
    Nilfisk has one and it's only $5000.

    http://www.nilfiskcfm.com/vacuum-applications/electronics-semiconductors.aspx

    --
    In GOD we trust, all others we monitor.
  73. Re:I know it makes me a horrible person for saying by tehcyder · · Score: 1

    If the US government had the policy of taking a closer look at or applying higher degrees of verification and checking (or outright denying positions of significant responsibility) to those who either are known to be Muslim or have a name that would tend to indicate so, then this would not have happened. Also, the Fort Hood incident would not have happened. Not to mention, a few other incidents.

    Because, as any fule kno, only Muslims have ever cracked and gone on a killing spree.

    --
    To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  74. Slashdot moderators continue to amaze and baffle by Old97 · · Score: 1

    So the parent here gets mod'd as insightful because he doesn't know that the U.S. has enemies. So I post a response pointing out in common /. style that the U.S. has many current and potential enemies (we have 2 active wars going on for God's sake and an inactive state of war with North Korea) and I get mod'd as "offtopic"? How can you be offtopic when you are directly challenging a post that has been mod'd as insightful? Explain that for me please.

    --
    Very often, people confuse simple with simplistic. The nuance is lost on most. - Clement Mok