Slashdot Mirror


Space Shuttle Spy Gets 15 Years

goG writes "A Chinese-born engineer was sentenced Monday to more than 15 years in prison for hoarding sensitive information about the US space shuttle with the intent of giving it to China. US District Judge Cormac Carney called Chung's crimes a matter of national security, saying he had committed a breach against the trust Boeing and the country had placed in him. Attorney Greg Staples said, 'The [People's Republic of China] is bent on stealing sensitive information from the United States and shows no sign of relenting. Only strong sentences offer any hope of dissuading others from helping the PRC get that technology.' Staples also 'noted in sentencing papers that Chung amassed a personal wealth of more than $3 million US while betraying his adopted country.'"

79 of 402 comments (clear)

  1. If only... by Dr_Terminus · · Score: 5, Funny

    If only the shuttle was run by Google, they'd have a better chance of gaining access...

    1. Re:If only... by TrisexualPuppy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      ...but let the Chinese have the secrets and dump money into their program. We were getting out of the Shuttle program anyway because it is outdated and has enormous cost. At $700+ million per launch, why not just let the Chinese waste a little money?

    2. Re:If only... by maxume · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The booster rockets are still pretty valuable technology regardless of the payload they are attached to.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    3. Re:If only... by Talderas · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm going with a literal interpretation. The article says information on the space shuttle, not the boosters.

      Further, going to Boeing's page on the space shuttle, all I can tell is their involvement is strictly limited to the orbiter, not the rocket boosters.

      This leads me to the conclusion of why China would want the shuttle? Maybe there's a few secrets in the orbiter worth having, but the value of the boosters is not necessarily within Boeing's possession.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    4. Re:If only... by khallow · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The rumour was that the US chose the shuttle instead of better alternatives, because it can steer orbits, much better than an ICBM.

      ICBMs don't orbit.

    5. Re:If only... by ultranova · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If you loaded the shuttle up with nukes it would be much more effective than a 'dumb' ICBM.

      How much does it cost to launch a shuttle, vs. launching a bunch of ICBMs? And how many warheads can the shuttle carry and drop (remember, it takes some energy to launch them on targets)? I'm pretty sure that carpet-bombing with ICBMs would be more cost-effective on megatons delivered somewhere where it hurts per dollar, even if we assume that the shuttle would get back intact.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    6. Re:If only... by mrxak · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As far as I'm concerned, it's rocket science, and that's worth keeping a lid on. Any kind of rocket science, unless you can buy a kit in the mail or a hobby store, has pretty serious potential applications. China getting their hands on space shuttle plans doesn't mean they'll build their own shuttle, it means they take some tiny piece of it and improve some military application like a missile or airplane.

      In any case, China is trying to get every scrap of technology they can get their hands on, regardless of its potential applications or obsolescence level. Some stuff may be useful immediately, others may be stepping stones to other technologies. Shuttle tech is stuff we improve on to develop new technologies. It's better, from our national security standpoint, for them to be stuck starting from scratch than from getting an idea of where our technology is headed and what we're starting with.

    7. Re:If only... by Dare+nMc · · Score: 2, Interesting

      technology has advanced to the point where it could be shot out of the sky now.

      I am not so confident of that. True china can hit a satellite going a few thousand mph in a consistent orbit that is not weaving or avoiding, similar for our rockets, they can break up stuff flying horizontally in low earth orbit. I am not so sure if the space shuttle, once in it's higher orbit, could be caught so easy. IE the shuttle has the energy of orbit to make small changes that would take it out of range of any detected launch of anything attempting to catch it in orbit altitude. If it went on a kamikaze straight down mode no fuel, I doubt anything currently known would be both maneuverable enough, and pack enough punch to destroy the shuttle and payload falling straight down from the sky, at say Mach 10+. Hit it, sure, but break everything into small pieces before landfall?

    8. Re:If only... by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why? they can get it from the Russians. They have had most of the details to the shuttle program for decades. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buran_program

      Honestly, I'm betting they will sell all their info to china for cheap low prices!

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    9. Re:If only... by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because there is value in forcing the Chinese to make all of our mistakes as well. If they have exact specs on what works, they don't need to run through the host of mistakes it took us to get to this technology. Outdated or not, it's still a valuable stepping stone.

      --
      Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
    10. Re:If only... by greyhueofdoubt · · Score: 2, Funny

      They do orbit, it's just that their perigee is beneath the earth's surface.

      -b

      --
      No offense, but I've stopped responding to AC's.
  2. 15 years? by TheDarkMinstrel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Send him to Gitmo, then death penalty. No New York trials. He's a spy, stealing information that can be used against us. When are we going to acknowledge that we are at (cyber) war with China, have been for years, and start acting accordingly?

    1. Re:15 years? by Spazztastic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Send him to Gitmo, then death penalty. No New York trials. He's a spy, stealing information that can be used against us. When are we going to acknowledge that we are at (cyber) war with China, have been for years, and start acting accordingly?

      Sad thing is that you're modded funny, when you should be insightful. If China caught an American spy, they would execute him after quick trial.

      --
      Posts not to be taken literally. Almost everything is sarcasm.
    2. Re:15 years? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Didn't you know? We're at war with Eastasia, we've always been at war with Eastasia.

    3. Re:15 years? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "If China caught an American spy, they would execute him after quick trial."

      So PRC should be emulated?

    4. Re:15 years? by vxice · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Which is why we are supposed to be better. Anyone who argues that spies/terrorists/whatever crime you really don't like/think is horribly immoral should receive any less legal protection than the next guy is actively working to undermine our liberties and founding values no better than the terrorists/ whatever they claim to be fighting.

      --
      every anarchist is a baffled dictator. Benito_Mussolini
    5. Re:15 years? by TheDarkMinstrel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If they even bothered with a trial... A US spy, if that clearcut, would just disappear, so no press coverage.

      Instead, we imprison with cable TV and free health care. I hear our prisons are lavish compared to the standard of a normal Chinese citizen. Might not be up to the $3M lifestyle "on the outside", but still better than his ancestors.

    6. Re:15 years? by LordLimecat · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Isnt treason supposed to come with the death penalty?

    7. Re:15 years? by Nathrael · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why do we imprison them instead of killing them right away? Spy exchange. You may not hear it on TV, but it's pretty likely that they capture one of ours every now and then just as well, and what'd be a better resource to trade in for our spies than their spies?

      --
      A good education is a bit like a STD - it makes you unsuitable for a lot of jobs and gives you a desire to spread it.
    8. Re:15 years? by mcgrew · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not before a trial. But come to think of it, the way some legislators (and even judges) trash the constitution, maybe they should be tried for treason as well?

    9. Re:15 years? by TheCarp · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I tend to be anti-death penalty for various reasons (what ever happened to redemption?) however, punishment? Sure.

      There is an element of hypercriticality to this...when the US runs their own spys (something which I, as a citizen, do not support, and firmly believe the CIA should have been disbanded forever after the MKULTRA affair)

      In short.... Punish the spys.... ALL OF THEM. Every single one of them, no matter who they work for, is a criminal in some way.

      -Steve

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    10. Re:15 years? by Kartoffel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It would only be treason if the spy had been a US citizen. You can't commit treason against a foreign country.

      TFA doesn't specify the guy's current citizenship status, only that he was says the guy was originally born in China. He's also 74 years old and in poor health. A 15 year sentence is pretty close to a death sentence at that rate.

    11. Re:15 years? by TheDarkMinstrel · · Score: 2, Informative

      He had a trial and was found guilty. Then sentenced to 15 years... instead of the death penalty.

    12. Re:15 years? by gtall · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And if we all close our eyes and click our heels, we'll be back in Kansas.

    13. Re:15 years? by Publikwerks · · Score: 2, Insightful

      He is a naturalized US citizen according to bloomberg

    14. Re:15 years? by JoshuaZ · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually, the treason clause in the Constitution says nothing at all about needing to be a US citizen. However, the Constitution does say that "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort." It goes to say that a conviction of treason can only occur based on the testimony of two witnesses to an "overt act" or a confession in open court. Since we are not in a state of war with China, it would be very hard to classify China as an "Enemy" for this purpose. And there's no way you'd have the two witnesses in this case (incidentally, the two witness requirement is one of the very few examples of Biblical influence on the Constitution which otherwise shows largely more Roman, Greek and later ideas as the primary influence). We have separate laws against spying for a reason. So we don't need to try to get people for treason which is (correctly) next to impossible to do.

    15. Re:15 years? by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 2, Informative

      From wikipedia:

      Under the law of the United Kingdom, high treason is the crime of disloyalty to the sovereign amounting to an intention to undermine their authority, or the attempt to do so. Offences constituting high treason include plotting the murder of the sovereign; having sexual intercourse with the sovereign's consort, with his eldest unmarried daughter, or with the wife of the heir to the throne; levying war against the sovereign and adhering to the sovereign's enemies, giving them aid or comfort; and attempting to undermine the lawfully established line of succession. Several other crimes have historically been categorised as high treason, including counterfeiting money and being a Catholic priest.

      Very broad, and historically a means of keeping down democrats. In the United States, treason was defined narrowly, so as to forestall abuses. The crimes of sedition and espionage have been used to fill the void, though if Michelle Obama wanted some action on the side, that would be her business, not the state's.

    16. Re:15 years? by mrxak · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeeeeaaaahhhh.....

      The idea that they're all criminals is kind of silly. Most spies operating abroad actually work with diplomatic immunity, gathering relatively public information and doing analysis. There are spies, working with that immunity, who go about trying to recruit assets like Mr. Chung... somebody disaffected, or somebody who has a reason to feel a stronger tie towards another country, or merely somebody who can be bought. They're the criminals, but they're a fairly small portion of the intelligence community as a whole. They're the ones who take the biggest risks, and the ones who get the biggest rewards for their work, if they do it well.

      Unfortunately, we live in a world that's not all that friendly. Without spies, there'd be a lot more chaos and death in the world. Spies are the ones that allow leaders to go into a meeting with another leader and tell them "we know you're doing x, so cut it out" and lets military powers stay balanced enough that nobody gains a massive advantage and goes to war. Basically, spies allow for diplomacy to flourish, and they prevent conflicts. China is fully justified in wanting to spy on us and build up technologically and militarily in order to ensure their interests are satisfied. We're equally as justified in wanting to stop them from doing that so our own interests are satisfied. As a patriot, I want my own nation to have the best spies and maintain or achieve superiority in all things. As a rational human being, I'm not going to begrudge any other nation the same desire.

      I'm against the death penalty on moral grounds, but treason/spying cases are pretty much the only time when I hesitate to rule it out entirely. The cost of spying against my nation should be prohibitive, and I wouldn't be terribly upset if other nations followed suit. That's the risk assets take.

    17. Re:15 years? by Hadlock · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Arguing death penalty (which I'm generally against, btw) is like arguing abortion on the internet. It's a moral issue, and it's not worth arguing unless you're going to post some well reasoned articles (not sound bytes) that are well documented and researched. I'm not kidding when I say I'd be very interested to see a well written argument against the death penalty for treason. I still hold that his actions fit the generally accepted definition of treason.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    18. Re:15 years? by TheCarp · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Maybe we aren't talking about the same people...

      I seem to remember them working illegal deals for arms through third parties, helping to ship cocaine into the US, doing mind control experiments on people in New York City (Operation Midnight Climax), Kidnapping people (and being sloppy about it), Torture. Let's not forget that they attempted to assassinate one world leader enough times to get him into the guiness book of world records (add multiple counts of attempted murder).

      Exactly the sort of sociopaths I want on the payroll that I pay my taxes into.

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    19. Re:15 years? by magarity · · Score: 2, Informative

      The PRC don't execute all American spies they catch...See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hainan_Island_incident
       
      Whoa there; in international treaties "spies" are people pretending to be innocent while stealing secrets at night. The uniformed military personnel who crash landed on Hainan Island were certainly conducting military surveillance but there wasn't anything clandestine about what they were doing. They weren't "spies" except in sensationalist media reports. Heck, the day after they were released the Navy started re-flying that exact same route with jets the Chinese couldn't intercept.

  3. Ha, he should get a medal by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Letting China waste billions of dollars building one of those money sinks, plus $700 million per launch, would probably be the worst thing we could do to them.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:Ha, he should get a medal by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think we learned that trick from the Russians

    2. Re:Ha, he should get a medal by TheDarkMinstrel · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Except that we've saved them billions by letting them learn from OUR mistakes...

    3. Re:Ha, he should get a medal by guruevi · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not really, the only reason the US wasted billions of dollars is because of bureaucracy (later years) and initial research (earlier years). If the PRC doesn't have to do the research, that takes a big chunk away and then if the bureaucracy is replaced with a set of people that hardly get paid for the work, you save another few billions.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    4. Re:Ha, he should get a medal by vxice · · Score: 2, Insightful

      When will people realize that China is keeping its currency value low and attracting manufacturing jobs to its land to slowly accumulate wealth and technology and once it is in strong enough position will call back on its debt and consume what it produces itself to raise its own peoples standard of living and eventually push us to the sideline. China is spending money on its future, we are spending money from the future. Globalization only benefits all when countries work as equals, protectionism is not the way to go but we need to ensure that American companies and Chinese companies are working on even footing. Just seriously propose that we stop importing unless fair labor standards are enforced and if not then cut off access to our markets but we would rather have a dozen tube socks for a dollar.

      --
      every anarchist is a baffled dictator. Benito_Mussolini
    5. Re:Ha, he should get a medal by LWATCDR · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually the SSME are still some of the most advanced liquid fueled engines flying today. The ET uses ALLI alloy and also very advanced and the SRB are the most powerful solid fuel boosters ever flown.
      Throw in the fact that the Shuttle probably has the most hypersonic flight time of any vehicle and you have a really treasure trove of useful information.
      Yes the Shuttle was too expensive per flight but really is a technological marvel an one that has produced a lot very useful knowledge.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    6. Re:Ha, he should get a medal by LarrySDonald · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And this is a bad thing how? We've saved billions by having them make our.. nearly everything. It's about time to start working on getting on the same page with China. We'll have to start sliding a little more toward cooperation, they'll have to start sliding a little more toward competition. With any luck, we can sort of meet in the middle.

    7. Re:Ha, he should get a medal by DerekLyons · · Score: 3, Informative

      Throw in the fact that the Shuttle probably has the most hypersonic flight time of any vehicle and you have a really treasure trove of useful information.

      By the time of STS-5, the Shuttle had accumulated more hypersonic flight than all other US programs to date combined. Even with the test programs run since then, the Shuttle still represent better than 99% of our hypersonic flight experience according to an aerodynamicist I know.

    8. Re:Ha, he should get a medal by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Informative

      No they learned it from us...

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buran_program

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    9. Re:Ha, he should get a medal by mrxak · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They're not going to build their own space shuttle if they get their hands on our space shuttle plans. They'll learn from our designs and build something else like a missile, or use the material science for some new fighter jet. It's better they start from scratch than get a leg-up from our designs. The shuttle may be obsolete, but what do you think we use to learn from and improve on?

    10. Re:Ha, he should get a medal by elrous0 · · Score: 2

      What good is a new missile going to do them when they already have enough nukes to wipe any other country in the world off the map? What, are they going to build one that will cause a nuclear armageddon a few minutes quicker?

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  4. He got away with it. by Majik+Sheff · · Score: 4, Insightful

    He's 74 years old, he'll never see the end of this sentence. He lived what appears to be a good life living in the country he was betraying (about 3M worth of good life from TFA). His nursing home arrangements are less than desirable but he'll still have better care than many seniors in this country.

    --
    Women are like electronics: you don't know how damaged they are until you try to turn them on.
    1. Re:He got away with it. by ShadowRangerRIT · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I've never fully understood why we don't impose financial death penalties in cases like these. If all of his existing assets would not exist save for the quasi-treasonous offense (I recognize that it doesn't meet the technical definition for treason unless we've declared war on China while I wasn't looking), then take all of his assets. Every penny, every investment, every stick of lumber, every square centimeter of land. If you allow him or his family to profit from this in any way, then you've provided a reason for potential spies to begin spying in the future.

      --
      $_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
    2. Re:He got away with it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you set that precedent, the same law could potentially be turned against rich Americans that commit crimes. Lawyers are good at pointing at "cases like these" to seek damages in unrelated cases. That is why we don't impose financial death penalties: Protect the rich.

    3. Re:He got away with it. by WindBourne · · Score: 2, Informative

      If somebody is arrested, then they will either be held, or be released. If released, then they will be either released on their own, OR they have to post a bail. The bail says that if you skip the process, that you forfeit the money. Now, families can chose to put up the car, the house, etc for the bail. BUT, if that person skips out, then those things are forfeit. That is NOT making somebody else responsible for the sins. That is somebody else saying that I took responsibility and did not do a good job. And NO, they do not arrest other family members or make things up.
      OTH, ACs on /. LOVE to make things up. Obviously you are one of those. Basically, you have shown that you have no sense of ethics. I am guessing that you are a registered neo-con.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  5. Re:I've been saying it for years... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Yes. But you're Chinese, so we didn't trust you when you said that.

  6. Jsut make it open by JustNiz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In my opinion it would be a better for everyone if public-funded research bodies like NASA( and the equivalent in every other country) made their non defense-related information freely available to all anyway.

    1. Re:Jsut make it open by elhondo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think that just leaves Tang, actually.

    2. Re:Jsut make it open by SirGarlon · · Score: 3, Informative

      The space shuttle is defense related. It's been used in about 10 classified missions, presumably having something to do with spy satellites.

      Moreover I would speculate that the avionics systems, materials, high-pressure pumps, and other technology that went into the space shuttle would be both non-obvious and directly applicable to military aircraft and/or missiles.

      --
      [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
  7. That's not strong by redalien · · Score: 3, Insightful

    China won't consider 15 years a strong sentence when they're happy to execute people left right and centre.

  8. i'm going to get modded troll... by nycguy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...but I've known quite a few Chinese Americans, both from the mainland and from Taiwan, who despite having become citizens here seem to be more concerned about their former homeland than their new one. I remember when the American spy plane had the collision with the Chinese fighter jet in 2001, almost every Chinese person I knew, despite being US citizens, was adamant that the US should apologize. During the Tibet unrest, many Chinese Americans I know accused the US media of bias--begging the question why they care so much about how China is portrayed if they're now Americans. Maybe this is no different than past waves of immigrants, and maybe it's no different than some Jewish Americans (even born here) who show more support for Israel than they do for the US. It's also no different than Muslim immigrants to Europe who show more allegiance to their religion and the ummah than their adopted nations. Nevertheless, it would be interesting to see if anyone else had any thoughts or experiences in this matter. In short, in today's world, what are the real loyalties of an immigrant population? This story obviously shows one--money--but the question is whether there's anything beyond that.

    1. Re:i'm going to get modded troll... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Nevertheless, it would be interesting to see if anyone else had any thoughts or experiences in this matter. In short, in today's world, what are the real loyalties of an immigrant population?

      As an immigrant myself, I can tell you that it depends on the reasons why one leaves his homeland. When it's money alone, loyalty usually doesn't change (it's not really something that can be bought for money). But when one is genuinely dissatisfied with the overall direction of his original society, it's another story.

      Of my fellow Russian immigrants, I've seen both kinds. Some come here (Canada) for higher quality of life, but generally try to disassociate from the local culture, and do the same for their kids - their primary social circle is all-Russian, they force their kids to speak Russian first and foremost (even though kids readily pick English first, because they use it more in school) etc. Quite often, such people return as soon as they feel that the quality of life back home has improved enough for them; sometimes, their kids do when they grow up. I've met a few such returnees from U.S. back in Russia as well, and all were rather derisive about American culture and societal norms.

      Others come here to settle down first and foremost, and they generally try to integrate, even though it's nigh impossible for the first generation (too old to re-learn everything). The parents usually still have a mostly-Russian social circle, but they try to reach out beyond it. Their kids, though, consider themselves Canadians first and foremost, and their language preferences (they know both, usually, but they prefer English) and behavioral patterns are mostly local.

      In conflicts of interest such as the one described in TFA and by you, consequently, the first group would tend to align themselves with their country of origin, while the second group would support their country of residence.

    2. Re:i'm going to get modded troll... by JerryLove · · Score: 3, Funny

      Recall that China officially and overtly indoctrinates it's citizens to be pro-Chinese-government. It's like wondering why a Baptist is republican.

    3. Re:i'm going to get modded troll... by Bieeanda · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I don't think you're a troll, but I do think that conflating national affiliation with cultural identity doesn't work.

  9. Why not the death penalty? by onyxruby · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In many countries spying results in the death penalty, why not in this case? Spying is a grevious crime against one's country and has been handled by the death penalty across countless cultures since before recorded history. For that matter, if your in a position of trust (vs just sneaking around) than it isn't spying, but treason. With a sentence of 15 years we appear to be weak, not strong from the eyes of someone who could consider the crime.

    Certainly a spy that was caught by China would receive the death penalty, so nothing new there. Nothing against the Chinese (vs another nationality), but this business of pandering to foreign governments that spy against us has got to end.

    1. Re:Why not the death penalty? by ph1ll · · Score: 5, Insightful
      The death sentence for "economic espionage" [from TFA]?

      That seems a bit harsh....

      As I understand it, the guy was working for Boeing - which is not the same thing as working for the government. Sure, it was on an outsourced government project. But if the information really were that essential to national security, why the f--- would you outsource it?

      (Or am I being somewhat naive about the "military industrial complex" bogeyman, where Boeing and the US Government become synonymous...?)

      --
      --- "We've always been at war with Eastasia."
    2. Re:Why not the death penalty? by L3370 · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's not so easy to carry the death penalty for treasonous crimes here in the U.S. because treason has to be witnessed and confirmed by no less than 2 people. Treason was one of crimes that the US founders decided to go heavy with detail. They understood the treason argument was an effective tool for tyrants, so they wanted to be very clear on the subject.

  10. Let them have the plans by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I say let him go and let China do something with the plans if they so wish. Its not as if the shuttle program is continuing after this last flight or that NASA is going to do anything useful with the plans, other than let them gather dust or get lost. They don't have much of a budget anymore to even create a suitable replacement at this point. As a fan of the shuttle (despite the cost issues), it would be nice to see someone wasting their money on keeping the dream alive.

    I know this is probably not a popular viewpoint in the USA, but I just want someone to get us to the moon again, somehow in my lifetime.

    --
    Jumpstart the tartan drive.
  11. This will not stop spying by DaMattster · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Judge Carney is being very short sighted if he expects that this "strong sentence" will dissuade people from stealing technology and giving it to China. I would be less likely to want to steal secrets from the Chinese Government because, if caught, I could be tortured and subject to unthinkable brutality. Note that this is not a suggestion that we implement torture. But another slashdotter noted that Chung's retirement in Federal Prison will give him better healthcare options than many Americans that have been good, law-abiding citizens will have access to. And, these Americans have worked hard for all of their lives. Honestly, a better punishment would be to strip Chung of his citizenship and deport him to China and finally to sanction the Chinese Government.

    1. Re:This will not stop spying by WindBourne · · Score: 2, Insightful

      He would be given a million dollars and treated as a hero there. THAT is what you want to do? Yeah, please do not throw me in the briar patch.

      But we SHOULD sanction the Chinese gov. These are active spies since this is a cold war with us. We are insane for allowing this.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  12. What could possibly be new about the shuttle? by tjstork · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's interesting that as much as we Americans deride the terrible space shuttle, only the Russians were able to build anything like it, but only the Americans were ever able to operate one.

    Kinda makes you wonder, that, if we are not going back to the moon, can we at least keep these shuttles flying, or gasp, build a more modern one. I mean, the whole point of the new NASA way is to perfect in orbit assembly, and it seems we're kinda doing that now with the space shuttle and...

    maybe we just need to make a new space shuttle that can be boosted farther into deep space, if we need to.

    --
    This is my sig.
    1. Re:What could possibly be new about the shuttle? by LWATCDR · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I don't think the Shuttle is terrible It just should have been replaced. It has been flying for about 30 years now.
      Building a more modern Shuttle. I would would really like to see that. The X-33 was supposed to be a shuttle replacement but it got canned for what I think where not good reasons.
      Also you don't want to boost the shuttle farther. What you want is a space tug that takes payloads higher. That was supposed to be part of the shuttle program but it got canceled.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    2. Re:What could possibly be new about the shuttle? by TheKidWho · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Terrible reasons actually... If they had just decided to use Aluminum tanks instead of the(at the time) troublesome composite tanks they could have had the X-33 flying...

    3. Re:What could possibly be new about the shuttle? by vlm · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Terrible reasons actually... If they had just decided to use Aluminum tanks instead of the(at the time) troublesome composite tanks they could have had the X-33 flying...

      Way too heavy. The whole X-33 project depended on a bunch of exotic technologies simultaneously succeeding. Linear aerospike, metallic heat shield "tiles", exotically structural materials... May as well have bet the farm on a warp drive and computer AI, too.

      Reusable SSTO does not appear to be technologically or economically viable at this time. Its like demanding Christopher Columbus wait until he can fly a supersonic Concorde across the pond instead of using his wooden sailboats.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    4. Re:What could possibly be new about the shuttle? by vlm · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It was an X program. That is the entire point of and X program. It is too push technology.

      I think the problem is the X-33 didn't fit the X program very well. The X-15 had an equation, every pound of vehicle weight means X lower top speed and/or X lower altitude. With the X-33 orbiter, its orbit or don't orbit. I think it would have been a PR disaster if it didn't quite make it. Thus either it'll suck, or they'll push the limit too far and blow it up and that'll suck. Perhaps they beat the vegas odds and get everything to work perfectly, in which case it'll suck when people ask why spend all that cash when multistage disposable boosters are a much cheaper program. Kind of a no-win situation.

      No one remembers the X-3 very fondly, although it was an interesting aircraft and provided valuable results.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
  13. Promoting their agenda using others' advances. by rdmiller3 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Chinese government wants to promote their own agenda. Let them do so using their own advances, not by stealing the advances built by cultures which actually encourage advance.

    Let the culture which reveres "ancient wisdom" prove its value by using feng shui to launch their space vehicles.

  14. Aboard by pgn674 · · Score: 4, Funny
    I was definitely more excited when I read that as

    A Chinese-born engineer was sentenced Monday to more than 15 years in prison for hoarding sensitive information aboard the US space shuttle with the intent of giving it to China.

  15. Concorde vs. Concordski by rarel · · Score: 5, Interesting

    A funny thing happened in the 60's during the development of Concorde, the USSR was of course spying on the Europeans as they were also workin gon their supersonic Tupolev. One of the (numerous) big issues was that of the rubber with which to make the tyres, as it had to be solid enough to resist the speed and whatnot. In a documentary from 99, one of the European engineers said they had noticed spies collecting material on runways after tests, so they created a sort of unusable goo and pasted it on the runways for them to collect. He said he'd have given anything to see the Russians' faces while trying to make sense of the stuff to create tyres with it...

    1. Re:Concorde vs. Concordski by dunkelfalke · · Score: 3, Interesting

      More often than not the data collected by the Soviet agents was only used to doublecheck the work of Soviet scientists and engineers.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    2. Re:Concorde vs. Concordski by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ironically, Concorde's tires proved to be fatal.

    3. Re:Concorde vs. Concordski by Sir_Lewk · · Score: 3, Funny

      That's what I tried to tell my math teacher when she caught me looking at another students test in class. Strangely enough it didn't go over to well...

      --
      "linux is just DOS with a UNIX like syntax" -- Galactic Dominator (944134)
    4. Re:Concorde vs. Concordski by chrysrobyn · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ironically, Concorde's tires proved to be fatal.

      While a stray piece of titanium from a previous jetliner may have shredded the tire and caused the fuel tank to puncture, I think I could more readily argue that the fuel tank having insufficient protection is the real problem. I would prefer to have any kind of tire event keep all passengers, structural elements and fuel tanks intact. Judging from the amount of abuse subsonic jetliners have sustained over the last 40 years, and the fact that Concordes were retrofitted with better tank protection before the economy tanked and they were all grounded, I really have a hard time blaming the tires.

  16. Web 2.0 why not Cold War 2.0 by kenp2002 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ahh nothing gets a people's mind off their own corruption and failing nation like a good old fashion cold war.

    People are easily united against a common foe.

    Nothing like calling up China and saying, "Hey that Cold War thing with Russia was real good for the economy. Wanna play the bad guy for a generation or two?"

    --
    -=[ Who Is John Galt? ]=-
    1. Re:Web 2.0 why not Cold War 2.0 by rsborg · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Nothing like calling up China and saying, "Hey that Cold War thing with Russia was real good for the economy. Wanna play the bad guy for a generation or two?"

      Amusing, but you forget, unlike the USSR, the P.R. of China owns several trillions of dollars of our collective asses... and you can thank the past four administrations for that situation (especially "W").

      --
      Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
  17. Re:I've been saying it for years... by Ja'Achan · · Score: 3, Funny

    Well, I, for one, didn't know the GP was Chines :+

  18. Let them have the secrets by mdm-adph · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If it'll help launch a new space race, I'm almost for letting them have it all.

    I want to see the Chinese do something completely wild, like launch an 180-day orbit mission to Mars or something, completely blowing away anyone's expectations of what they're able to do, a la 2010.

    That'll restart the space race.

    --
    It is by my will alone my thoughts acquire motion; it is by the juice of the coffee bean that the thoughts acquire speed
  19. Re: ancient wisdom of the day by BForrester · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Too bad that the use of spies is not at all part of Chinese "ancient wisdom."

    "Hence it is only the enlightened ruler and the wise general who will use the highest intelligence of the army for purposes of spying and thereby they achieve great results."

    -Sun Tzu, the Art of War. (6th century BC)

  20. Bravo! by zogger · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That's the best, one sentence global economic over view I have read. "China is spending money on its future, we are spending money from the future."

      Nailed it. And I don't blame them for doing that, because our own domestic economic traitors handed that opportunity to them on a silver platter, the Chinese would have been 'tards to turn it down. It was completely logical what they did and are still doing, building up their own nation, "protecting" themselves, adding to their real economy, etc. Of course they would take that deal, free stuff. And how it happened is we let those wall street pirates and bribed off politicians cook this whole scheme up, then they hard sold it all over, to great success, they sold that con and got most to "believe" in it, and now they are extorting trillions in bailouts on top of that. *Extorting*.

    The Chinese guy is sort of a spy, I'm not all that concerned about him because I imagine he is merely one of tens of thousands in a similar (barely hidden) tech transfer situation. Because that's been the business of the US since they started this con job, transfer as much manufacturing tech as possible.

        The real economic and security damage has been from the short term mega profits crowd who destroyed, in a single generation, sold it off cheap for a fat skim, what it took multiple generations to build up in the US, all that wealth creation manufacturing infrastructure, all of it, from A to Z. All those value added jobs..all mostly poofed now, so multi millionaires could become billionaires and another flock of corrupt politicians could get re-re-re elected, so they could keep accepting more bribe money, all the time spouting off all these economic and social promises to the US people that they knew in advance could never be met. And they are still doing it, and tons of people asre still falling for that noise.

        They sold this global wealth transference con with massive credit expansion, got almost everyone faked out that credit=produced wealth, like it is the same thing. Something to keep the peons amused while their bank accounts, retirement savings, etc all got evaporated away, and will continue to evaporate away.

    On a small scale they call it corporate raiding. A hostile take over, sell off all the assets cheap, gut the workforce, etc. Massive short term profits are the result, wall street loves it, politicians love it, they all get rewarded for their "hard work" of gutting companies, then they bail out with golden parachutes, leaving a company in mostly name only. Everyone has seen this happen and knows exactly what that is.

      But do the exact same thing on an entire national scale, all of a sudden there's this mass blindfold gets slapped on, people *refuse* to see the situation for what it is, go into complete denial over it, claim it is something other than that. We are supposed to believe these national scale wall street/ DC politician corporate raiders that what they are doing isn't corporate raiding. They just call it something else and say it is a "good deal".

      They have been saying that for near 25 years now, and if it WAS such a good deal, why all the recent economic meltdown? Could it be, that manufacturing really is the big kahuna when it comes to creating real wealth, and not phony IOU and credit crap so called "wealth"? I say yes, it is. And we let them crooks sell it off cheap for their fat middleman skims, now we are seriously hosed, and are borrowing against our future generations, which is a pure bogus abomination, we should have never had to do that. It wasn't necessary until we let them sell off/transfer all that good tech and generations of hard work and massive investment in R&D.